|
|
French |
German |
Spanish |
Portuguese |
Norwegian |
FreeTranslation.com
|
Disclaimer: The informations provided on
this page are for general guidance only! The reader should always
consult his doctor before starting any workout or diet program.
ADVANCED COURSE IN RADIESTHESIA (1/4)
USING A PENDULUM IS A NORMAL PHENOMENON
By definition Radiesthesia includes Radionics,
which is a method of diagnosis and treatment employing highly
accurate instruments which are operated and controlled through
the agency of human sensitivity
It was obvious that whatever scientific explanation there may
be for pendulising, in practice it becomes an expression of the
whole person. Once more the whole person comes in here, one man
or woman does it one way, one does it another, one uses a certain
pendulum, one uses a different one, which means that the pendulum
is nothing in itself but is an expression of the person who uses
it. Some people walk about swinging pendulums all the time. I
never do. To me a pendulum is an extension of my person. Some
people wear glasses so that they can see a bit further. With a
pendulum I can feel a bit further.
Using a pendulum is a perfectly normal phenomenon, there's
nothing special about it at all. Almost everyone can use it to a
degree, and what you achieve with it depends on how you work at
it, but it is just a pendulum and the methods you use are your
own. I discovered after many years of work that my method was
exactly the same as that of a dead Hindu. There were thousands of
miles and thousands of years' culture between us, yet here were
two men working on identical lines. It shows how the pendulum
reflects the mind of a person, the whole of the person.
I believe the use of the pendulum to be the extension of a human
faculty and, as I know more clearly today, no two people see,
hear, feel, smell, taste things the same, so why should they
pendulate the same? Some people think that we all see alike, that
if we all look at the same thing we all see the same thing, but
we don't. If I want to confuse somebody I say that with my left
eye I see things red and with my right eye I see them pink, if I
look with both eyes at the same time I see something in between.
So what is truth to me? This is of course a much more complex
thing that appears at the moment, but there is non denying that
no two people ever see the same thing in the some way, nor do
they pendulate in the some way.
I soon found that medical dowsing applied to homoeopathic
principles had some important variations, again depending upon
the operator. Some operated at very material levels, always using
a material witness, some needed a new personal sample every time,
some operators used less and less of these appurtenances. Some of
course used psychic divining, and this psychic divining to my
surprise is frowned upon by quite a number of people.
As we heard last night, putting limitations upon yourself stops you doing
things, and this applies not only to the pendulum but to the
whole of life. With everything we do in life we restrict
ourselves by the concepts we put in our minds, but when we use a
pendulum our life begins to develop and it is most important to
keep it open and free. I have reached the stage now where I don't
need samples at all. I just switch on, my mind picks up, goes
into gear, I am tuned in to the patient and can leave my mind to
choose a particular remedy. The whole thing follows a developed
pattern.
Anyone who works consistently over a number of years can develop
these skills but, having been an accountant, I don't trust
anybody or anything when I am working. Somebody said last night
over dinner that he doubted the results of the pendulum.
I don't doubt it, but if I get an answer that doesn't seem to make sense
I do it in two or three different ways, as they do in accountancy
work. If I don't get the three answers coming all the same there
must be something wrong with that concept, not with the pendulum.
Caution is, of course, always necessary, but as you become
consistently cautious, consistently certain, you will find that
the pendulum, which is after all yourself, won't let you down.
The radiesthetic instrument generally used for precision testing is the pendulum,
which may be made of whalebone, ivory, plastic or wood. A cotton reel suspended by a
fine thread makes quite a good pendulum and one that is fully sensitive.
Anyone who has never used rod or pendulum before might try as a first experiment
suspending a cotton reel over different articles of food, sweets, chocolate, tea,
coffee, etc., and their own brand of cigarettes. It is best to place each article in
turn on a clean sheet of white paper.
Individual reactions are not always the same, but generally it will be found that
the pendulum will gyrate in a clockwise direction if the food (or whatever it is) suits
the person in question, in an anti-clockwise direction if it is unsuitable, while if it
is neither good nor bad, the pendulum will oscillate in a straight line. It is suggested
that the reel should be suspended with a length of thread of 4 to 6 in.
Usually we teach George to give
a positive reaction by clockwise reaction of the pendulum, this means
that the food or other product agrees with the person, while an
anti-clockwise reaction is negative.
We are told, and have every reason to believe, that "what is
one man's meat is another man's poison," but we do not
always know which is the meat and which is the poison.
Radiesthesia can give us indications in this respect, and the
method is a simple one. We will assume that you have a plate of
food in front of you. Adjust your pendulum over the food, and
when it is gyrating hold your left hand, palm downwards, between
it and the food.
The normal reaction to the back of your left hand should be
oscillation, but if the pendulum continues to gyrate it shows
that there is harmony between you and the food and that it is
therefore good for you. Should the gyrations change from positive
to negative, however, it shows that the food is definitely bad
for you. If the pendulum changes to oscillation, its normal
reaction, it would mean that the food is not particularly
suitable for you.
To test water for purity, and therefore potability, is quite a simple matter.
Hold your pendulum over a cup full of water: if it gyrates positively the water
is pure and fit to drink, but nega-tive or anti-clockwise gyrations indicate that
the water is in some way polluted and unfit to drink.
In order to carry this test a stage further fill half a dozen cups with water and
place them in a row on your table. Now get someone to put a tablespoon of kitchen
salt into one of the cups but ask him not to handle the cup or cups if it can be avoided.
You should, of course, not be in the room at the time, so as to obviate the possibility
of your knowing which cup contains the salt. Apply your pendulum in the usual manner
to each cup in turn and you will find that it will gyrate negatively over the cup
containing the salt.
Here I will sound a word of warning, because you have established something which
might be mistaken for a "parlour game." Your friends and relations will, without doubt,
want you to do it again, after they have mixed up the cups. If you agree you are
almost certain to fail in v our second attempt, because your friends, although they
are unaware of it, have fixed their own radiations with those of the samples.
Leave the cups alone for several hours, however, and you will get the same results as
you did at first.
Notwithstanding the advertisements we see regarding beer, Radiesthesia reveals
water as the first beverage, provided it is of good quality, and as far as foods
are concerned it places meat last, as a necessity, on a long list of comestibles.
- 1. Excerpts from Using a pendulum is a normal phenomenon,
a talk given by Franklin A. Callaby - Journal of the Brithish Society of Dowser,
Vol. XXVI, sept. 1978, pp. 201-202.
- 2. Excerpts from An Introduction to Medical Radiesthesia and Radionics, p. 14.
by Vernon D. Wethered, B.sc. The C.W. Daniel Company Limited, London, 1974.
- 3. Excerpt from Elementary Radiesthesia and the Use of the Pendulum, by F. A. Archdale.
- 4. Ibid.
|
|