Re: Step V - a few questions (cont)

["votangreen" <votangreen@...>]

First of all I am glad that were having this discussion.
Second I am in complete understanding of Ravns comment about 
creation an unbalance by persuing the possible instead of continuing 
with the sufficient. 
The issue here was if it was an actual requirement for proceeding to 
step 6 or not. And my personal curiosity about the degree of 
students who passed step 5 who was able to do that kind of 
manifestations.

A question for Rawn: you say that the visualisation of an object in 
step 2 hasn´t got to be as clear as if it was physical? What degree 
is sufficient then? I been having a slight problem as well since my 
respective eyes tends to view the object separately. Different 
angles etc..strange experience. I suppose it it just to keep going 
until i got a good binocular picture I guess.

respectfully 
//Johannes

--- In BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Scott" <rscott@p...> 
wrote:
> Dear Rawn
>  
> RE: Step V - a few questions (cont)
>  
>