Rory, Thanks for stimulating my thinking further! Do you have a
reference for the Margaret Newman paper on parts you mentioned? I'm not
familiar with it, and I'd love to read it! Also heard from Dee Krieger,
who mentioned Dora Kunz' Personal Aura book, and the book Dee published
from Dora's lectures, Spiritual Aspects of TT. Returning to those is
also helping my process--and I am struck even more by the parallels
with Dora Kunz descriptions based on seeing, and Martha Rogers' work. I
commend them for finding words and sharing them with us, and you all
for helping as I struggle to find my words. It reminds me of trying to
catch a soap bubble in the palm of my hand, without breaking it!
On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:34 AM, RorryZ@... wrote:

> Dear Dottie:
> I have struggled with the same issue when trying to explain aspects
> of a
> phenomenon. John Phillips was always very helpful and I really like
> Margaret
> Newman's paper on parts published a few years ago. I think it is
> important for us
> all to grapple with the issue of parts. Its very difficult to discuss
> a
> phenomenon-devise a theory -- study a process without looking at the
> aspects --
> dimensions etc. I do like the term dimensions that you used. Phases
> is another term
> in a process -- sometimes I believe we have to fracture our view in
> order to
> better understand the whole -- the unitary nature.
> I hope there is a good dialogue about this on our list. This would
> also make
> an interesting paper of several contributors?
>
> I also tried to send an announcement about the Arts and Healing
> conference at
> FAU this fall. They said I wasn't a member -- oh well try that again
> and I
> hope this gets through as a result.
>
> Best to you
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>