I read some books by Matthew Manning in my teens, and they – along with other books by Fritjof Capra, Jes Bertelsen, Ken Wilber, Jung and others – helped shift my conscious worldview from a conventional atheistic and materialistic view to one that’s more open and embraces more.
Yesterday, I went to a healing circle with him in the neighborhood. It was powerful, and I still notice the effect in me.
Some things I noticed:
It seems that his healing happens mostly (?) in the part of the spectrum that’s closer to the physical. I saw and sensed a very strong (non-physical) light in and around us, and in me even now. He seemed very clear and straightforward, was clear that it may or may not work for any one person, and admitted that he doesn’t know how it works, and also that he doesn’t need to know.
It also reminded me of what’s available to me here. I see energies and auras. I can often pick up what’s going on medically with others. And I can invite in healing. For me, the healing seems to happen more towards the “Spirit” end of the spectrum, perhaps at the blueprint level. (That may be why, for me, distance doesn’t matter and it’s often easier to do it at a distance.) And that’s not any worse or better than any other form of healing.
Also, since my teens there has been a question for me here. I am most drawn to finding love for what’s here, and recognize it as love and Spirit, no matter what’s it’s called and how it appears in a conventional view – whether it’s what a thought may call illness, pain or something else. That is the real “healing”. And at the same time, not everyone is interested in it, and a temporary relief is also very valuable. And that means that inviting in healing in a conventional sense is beautiful too, especially when done with respect, after asking the person if it’s OK, and giving it all over to Spirit.
So, in a sense, there are several forms of healing.
(a) One is the healing of perception. It’s a healing of identifying with images and words. A healing of our tendency to identify with images and words. A finding of genuine love for this tendency. (Which releases identification.) Seeing through the dynamics of this tendency. This is addressed by any spiritual tradition, and also some forms of meditation and inquiry.
(b) Another is the healing of our stories of what’s going on. A healing of perception of wrong. This is addressed by different forms of inquiry, including the Living Inquiries, The Work, cognitive therapy and more.
(c) And yet another is healing of what may initially appear as the problem, the problem “out there”, such as physical illnesses, life circumstances and more.
Each of these have their place. They fit together. They address the apparent problem at different levels, and none is really more or less important than the other. It’s all a matter of what we are drawn to. For me, the two latter are not enough, so I am naturally drawn to include the first one. And for others, it’s sometimes the same, and sometimes different. And that’s OK. It’s all part of life’s diversity. It’s all part of Life (Spirit, God, Buddha Mind) exploring and experiencing itself in as much diversity as possible.
(a) One is the healing of perception in a very basic sense. It’s finding love for the tendency to identify with images and words. It’s a healing of identifying with images and words, creating the appearance that we are an object within our field of awareness with a wider world “out there”. This is a healing of the tendency to identify. A healing of having been blind to the trance. A healing of – as some say – mistaken identity. (Addressed by the essence of any spiritual tradition, Living Inquiries, The Work, etc.)
(b) Another is the healing of our stories of what’s going on. A healing of perception of wrong. (The Work, Living Inquiries, cognitive therapy etc.)
(c) And yet another is healing of what may initially appear as the problem, the problem “out there”, such as physical illnesses, life circumstances and more