| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 358.1 | Reality is just a collective hunch (Tomlin) | VINO::EVANS | | Mon May 04 1987 16:41 | 26 |
| Yes, indeed. Facts are facts. However, I think the "creating your
own reality" thing is geared more to how we _feel_ about facts that
what the facts really are.
With the TV's how the customer felt about the RCA brand may have
been the point - a sales ploy. And I'd be willing to be that some
(many?) customers would've reacted differently if encountering problems
with the set depending on whether they believed it was made by RCA
or Fly-by-night TV, INC.
But to get more to my point. When I taught school, there was a study
making the rounds - may have been called "Pygmalion in the classrom"
. Anyway, The deal was, kids' records were altered, then given to
the teachers. High achievers and low achievers were identified as
exactly the opposite to the teachers. Guess what? The kids performed
in direct rlationship to how they were treated. I believe this is
because of not only the teachers' encouragement/lack of encouragement,
but also the way the students viewed themselves - their _reality_
bacuse of it. Expectations altered what had been "reality".
We all do it - or CAN do it. How we look at our experiences doesn't
change the facts. But our view of reality - or our creation of reality,
if you will, _can_ change how we treat ourselves, the stress level
we live under, etc.
Dawn
|
| 358.2 | Yes and no. | PBSVAX::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Mon May 04 1987 19:00 | 15 |
| RE: .1
I agree with you about that interpretation of "creating your own
reality", I agree with Steve that there are people who interpret
it in a much more fundamental way.
By the way, the study you mention has been replicated (I think by
Feather and White, but I could be wrong) as a *parapsychology*
experiment. Substitute teachers were given evaluations of children
and a quiz with completely arbitrary (random) answers. The children
whom the teachers expected to do better got more of the answers
"correct" even though nothing the children could have known would
have helped them.
Topher
|
| 358.3 | #1, #2 or #3 | NEXUS::MORGAN | Walk in Balance on the Earth Mother | Mon May 04 1987 23:08 | 17 |
| Reply to all,
This is also being discussed in Philosophy, note #30, YCYOR.
I have identified at least three segments to the worm:
1) Those that believe that they create all things by their being.
2) Those that believe that perception and expectation heavily influence
reality, to the point of creating a new reality.
3) Those that believe that action, expectation and perception influence
reality to the point of creating a new reality.
It would appear to me that #1 is unsupportable. #2 and #3 are more
likley as they seem to be born out in everyday life. #3 is where
I'm at.
Mikie?
|
| 358.4 | | MANTIS::PARE | | Tue May 05 1987 12:38 | 4 |
| Mikie,
On what node is that conference located?
Thanks,
Mary
|
| 358.5 | | MLFS1::DALPE | | Tue May 05 1987 12:49 | 6 |
| Mary,
It's on DSSDEV.
paul
|
| 358.6 | Just a thought | ORION::HERBERT | What a long strange trip its been! | Tue May 05 1987 15:06 | 37 |
| Well, this may have already been said in a different way...so I'll
say it again then, differently...
On some level, we could all be connected, and all be aware of the
truth or non-truth that we are choosing to see. On some level, we
may actually agree with other beings as to what we will believe in
and participate in to create positive or negative experiences.
I have accepted other people's beliefs and claims (of the truth)
while deciding to ignore the flash of thought I got telling me it
wasn't true for me. By ignoring that insight I had, I was choosing to
go along with the other person's claims. But I blocked the awareness
of having had the insight at all...and then much later, I might
remember. It seems that as we learn to avoid blocking our awareness,
by using various "self-improvement" and "enlightenment" techniques,
the more knowledge we're able to stay in touch with. But that
knowledge has always been there...available for us at any time we
choose to experience it. We just usually choose to put it at the
_end_ of some path.
We may know everything that's going on, everywhere, all the time...on
a different level of our awareness. Those school children who were
tested (without their knowledge), may have really known what was going
on at a deeper level, although not consciously. Their so-called
"unaware" performance brought about positive results. Why are we
so quick to assume that it was a clever test that they had no control
over? Does our current perception see even a fraction of our full
capabilities as beings in this universe?
We may all be infinite beings with incredible perception and power
that we choose to open up to at a certain rate, and after a set of
particular experiences we call "growth", in an effort to have an
interesting experience called "life".
But I don't know.
Jerri
|
| 358.7 | Life is an incredible opportunity...LIVE IT! | PUZZLE::OPER | | Wed May 06 1987 04:36 | 91 |
| I just left 316.71 because this picks up at the point that that
reply got us to. I tend to agree with much of what Jerri says and
completely disagree with Steve Jr. Some of the others in between
seem to be on a path similar to my approach. You know, most of
us in the collective unconscious have "bought into" the idea of
an all-powerful GOD of which we are a small, insignificant little
puppet. For me the sentence "you create your own reality" did not
exist until about six years ago...it was contrary to everything
I had believed (I think.) What I have learned in the past six
very diligent years has been enough not only to believe it but to
complete understand how it cannot be any other way. Too many of
us are so wrapped up in the intellectual pursuit of life that we
lose track that there are three other aspects to our beingness:
emotions, intuition and carnate body. It is imperative to listen
to those aspects as well. Why? Because if it's true that only
intellect has meaning, we'd die and leave machines in our place.
If only intellect has validity, then why get upset when someone
says something negative about you? If only intellect has value,
then why bother with all the cemetery stuff or paranormal or all
the other "woowoo" stuff of our psyche? And why bother to have
good health or good sex? Science and scientific experiments ARE
NOT going to get it for us! YES! We create our realities and not
just a little bit, but 100%. (Where would we draw the line if it
were to be only a little? 1% for me, maybe 4% for him...she wanted
to be a princess and she got it so maybe it's 26% for her...where
do we draw the line? If we don't create at all, then why bother
living for some cruel and unfair "GOD" who demands so much {according
to religious tenets}?) I'm afraid that if you don't believe it
then you just haven't "done enough homework." I cannot budge from
this position...I CAN, however, readily admit that we have very
little awareness of this incredible power that I am hereby claiming
we have. Where did this power go? Well, most of us have turned
it over to "God" or to our government or to our job or to any of
a huge array of belief systems, none of which will DO OUR LIFE for
us. Systems have not worked! They have failed and failed miserably
since the beginnings of our "recorded history." Science is only
a system. Don't buy it! How do you explain the paranormal? How
do you explain "miracles"? How come things happen for which "no
rational explanation exists?" Why not come to an understanding
that we can make anything happen that we truly believe in and start
changing this reality to reflect the positivity and love that should
no doubt be there instead of the negative crap that so many of us
seem to get our jollies from? Do we really need to create cancers
in our bodies first? (from suppressed anger) or immune deficiencies
(from feelings of helplessness or hopelessness?) Why turn your
power over to a science or a god or a devil or some other equally
inane hiding place...because YOU REALLY ARE HIDING behind one of
these systems if that's what your pattern is. Wake up! Start
FEELING!! Some of you "intellectuals" never express any real emotion,
are you aware of that? When you do, it's not so positive. Understand,
that mongoloid child has created his/her reality to experience
something that we can't grasp (perhaps to experience patience or
to focus on only a few limited thoughts, etc.) Why did you not
do it yourself? Maybe you did, in some other lifetime...dare you
be so presumptuous as to think all lifetimes are experienced as
all-good, all-wise being (if any other lifetimes exist at all in
your beliefs?) Don't encourage the limited thought of our educational
teachers (who forced us to conform as a manipulation in order to
not be a bother to them or society.) Break out! Be free! It's
so incredible once you understand the power that you have!! It's
the most liberating feeling I have ever had! I have been able to
come to grips with death (and life)...both tenets that I pondered
and worried over most of my life. Not only is it freeing to understand
(and not just intellectually) but it will also make you more
responsible towards the reality you are creating. Sure, you could
turn your back...doing so would only cause self-destruction, however,
and most of us aren't into that (until we believe that we should
die)...but understanding this ability to act (the definition for
the word POWER) truly does force you to pay attention to the world
in which you live and to work at changing your beliefs (from which
are manifested the results that you see--not from some voodoo
"scientist" who tells you that 4.3 glasses of water a day make this
or that happen.) As Mike pointed out in 316 somewhere...you telling
me what a rose smells like is worthless to me until I smell it.
MY THOUGHTS are the ONLY ONES THAT ULTIMATELY MATTER to me. If
I don't believe it, it doesn't exist. That you see it differently
is only because you BELIEVE otherwise. Therefore, your world or
your REALITY will ALWAYS support your beliefs. If you believe in
the devil, surely he/she will show up...(somewhere, on some level,
in some other manifestation of your imagination.) Ultimately, as
I've already stated, beliefs disintegrate and your are left with
the only things that are REAL---emotions! Yes, by all means, continue
to think!! But also start FEELING! And along the way, pay attention
to the messages from both your intuition and your body. Let's create
the positive reality that we're capable of and let's not repeat
the miserable pasts that continue to haunt us. I'm working to do
so...I welcome your support and clear intent to do similarly.
Frederick
|
| 358.8 | | INK::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Wed May 06 1987 12:17 | 49 |
| Re .7:
The ultimate form of solipsism is the actual belief that only the
believer actually exists.
Why a such a diatribe? The "paranormal," which most who read and
all who participate in this conference, is a legitimate area of
study, _not_ because it "flies in the face of reality," but because
it's an aspect of reality that hasn't been fully understood yet.
Note I say "yet."
> ... You know, most of
>us in the collective unconscious have "bought into" the idea of
>an all-powerful GOD of which we are a small, insignificant little
>puppet. ...
I don't know what "collective unconscious" you're talking about,
but I suspect throughout the world, that statement would be denied.
The JudeoChristian perspective, for instance, is that we have free
wills, and thus aren't puppets; the classical GraecoRoman perspective
is that there are many gods, who contend with each other; the Khemite
(ancient Egyptian) perspective is even odder, with gods having
overlapping functions. Some oriental religions are multideistic.
Facts _are_ facts. "Creating ones reality" to the exclusion of
facts is dangerous.
For a _reductio ad absurdum_ case, let's suppose that each one of
us has his or her "own" reality, that seem nearly identical, through
concensus. Now one of us decides to create a separate reality.
If he or she succeeds, and the reality is "different" enough, that
person would merely vanish from "our" reality. [I don't really
believe this is the case, but just want to show the logical conclusion
of that train of thought.]
More likely, the more one investigates one _aspect_ of whatever
ultimate "reality" is ("Aha! The elephant is just like a snake!")
the more he or she might convince her- or himself that he or she
has stumbled on The Final Answer. However, one cannot dismiss
something known to be true (e.g., who actually manufactures television
sets for Sears Roebuck) by saying it's just because we're all fooling
ourselves!
Life is an incredible opportunity that ought to be lived. But one
will get a lot more out of life if one lives it with one's eyes
open.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.9 | Thank You, Steve! | BCSE::WMSON | Illegitimi non carborundum | Wed May 06 1987 16:44 | 1 |
|
|
| 358.10 | Here, there, all the same? | ORION::HERBERT | What a long strange trip its been! | Wed May 06 1987 17:22 | 90 |
| Re: .7
Hi Fred. In note 316.69, you wrote:
> It is my goal to leave the physical and astral planes completely
> upon my death...never to return. Why? Because there is so much
> joy and beauty beyond those levels. The "high" of most drugs, the
> joys we experience...they all just touch on it.
Now, I can relate to this because this is what I thought I wanted.
I'm not sure anymore, and I'd like to tell you why.
It is my opinion that if we think something, ANYTHING, "better" lies
beyond where we are right now, whether it be on another planet or
another plane, then we cannot experience the full joy and beauty of
this place right now. And perhaps if we got there, we would realize
it's all the same anyway.
I agree with you, that when drugs are used constructively for a
particular purpose, they can enable you to experience highs you
wouldn't normally. However, I agree with another recent reply in
this notesfile that this is just because it's a tool that helps you
break the chains binding you to your limited reality. Whatever...it's
useful for some, not useful for some, and abused by others...like
anything.
It has been my desire to reach those "highs" you speak of, without the
aid of outside sources. I have succeeded and experienced very
prolonged wonderful feelings that are hard to describe in words. But
I can also say that I seem to have a limit for how much of that
happiness I can tolerate in this form for an extended amount of time.
I come crashing down eventually. The crash always seems more
devastating than any before it, but then, my "highs" are much higher
than any before them.
I think I crash because somewhere in my beliefs and perceptions, I think
that's the way it has to be. Some people believe you have to experience
both extremes for a balance...but I'm interested in determining that the
extreme experiences are not necessary to have the balance. That you can
be more in control of the extremes. For instance, instead of flying and
crashing...you can change to floating. (In fact, that's even my license
plate: FLOATN. :^) Anyway, I'm still trying to figure that one out and
evolve with it.
But one thing, Fred, that I think I've learned is that we can be totally
and perfectly happy where we are. This is not just a simple statement...
it could easily span time, space, everything! I don't believe that
the goal is to shoot for other levels or planes...it just doesn't matter.
You'll be there when you're there and it will be just fine and wonderful...
like being here is just fine and wonderful. I think that WHEREVER you
are, you have the ability to make it wonderful or horrible. If you didn't,
it would be damn boring. So, even when you have incredible power and
wisdom on some other level, you can still screw up in ways you would never
have imagined.
Have you ever had the experience of reading some "positive writing" of
some sort, being blown away by the truth of it, then later seeing it as
very "simple" and therefore determining that you must have been simple
then too, and then much later seeing it again and having it blow you away
again on an even deeper level? I have had that experience many times,
and I think it's very interesting. What does that tell us?
I think that we ALL can get so caught up in things that we stop seeing.
Even the most admirable goals and "advanced" beliefs. Eventually, if
you're flying too high without your pilot's permit for that area of the
sky, you'll crash. :^) You HAVE TO (because of the way you've set it up)
in order to keep learning and growing, something you became blocked to in
your great realization of discovering THE truth or THE answer. Also,
when you become obsessed with being over THERE, the part of you that's
still HERE is going to pull you back to complete what you're neglecting.
It's not a ladder or a mountain or a path to go from beginning to end.
It's simply a matter of being FULLY wherever you ARE. Then, you're
everywhere.
I've had many experiences of "climbing" what I thought were fantastic
peaks, and then I got knocked down by what I thought was a gentle breeze.
I'll probably forget this lesson again. But I can share it with you right
now since I've just stood up and brushed myself off again. We NEVER stop
learning, growing, and changing. I think Lazaris said that too. It's no
better to be "there", or somewhere else, than here. When I die, I just
want to continue being...and experience wonderful things wherever. I'm
trying not to look and plan ahead more than that...it always changes
anyway.
These are just my beliefs and thoughts. I was sharing them with you,
Fred, because some of your's sound similar.
Have a floating day,
Jerri
|
| 358.11 | Would you like to share my reality? | REGENT::WAGNER | | Wed May 06 1987 17:43 | 60 |
| This topic sparked interest in me, enough to add my two cents worth.
kWhat's wrong with the concept of creating one's own reality at
least to the extent that it affects minimally, the reality of those
around me.
The word phrase "consensus reality" was mentioned. That's a
few more than a mere thousand or so people believing in something
to make it happen I think it's an assumption on .0 's part to believe
as he does, that if a thousand people sharing a sincere belief that
something is not as others believe it is. It's probably a safe
assumption and getting the experiential evidence may be quite
overwhelming. I think it takes more than "sincere belief" It actually
takes "knowing" it will be so. In my mind there is considerable
level of power above "sincere belief" that is involved in "knowing"
that someething is so. and I'm not refering to the Webster definition
of knowing which sells the concept short.
Let's take this on a smaller scale: for instance my own personal
reality of which I am just getting the hang of manipulating. After
many years of struggling with others wanting to control my reality
for me, I've finally managed to get my life nearly totally under
my own control and have created a rather comfortable reality for
myself-not extravagent just comfortable.
For the right to be rigid and dogmatic, We all do create our
own reality, and usually end up in misfortune by passing over the
responsibility of our own lifes to others that interact with our
own personal realities. I can say this from experience because
i have spent a considerable long time gaining back the power that
i gave others to control my life.
in response to .3
your point number 1 might not be supportable as you suggest.
but it just might be experiential. As one gains back the power
that was passively given away to others and creatively reconstruct
owns own life, the person gains the power to realize an increased
ability to affect the reality of those around oneself. Hopefully
that person has achieved the wisdom to not interact negatively.
as i indicated before, this is experiential on my part.
It takes many people quantum leaps to come to belief with the
third point of the reply, but this is just the starting point.
actually points 3 and 1 are not all that far apart conceptually:
is there much difference between creating a new reality as suggested
in point 3 and every one that exists creating a "a universe wide
consensus reality as implied in point 1.
on reply .8
Your logic is self serving. Why do you assume that if one creates
a "different enough reality, that person will dissapear. Different
enough from what? from your conception of that person's reality?
is that why we thought lightning was sent from the gods centuries
ago-because it wasn't part of our concept of reality?
Yes steve life is an incredible opportunity and fantastic journey
to boot. (to paraphrase you) but one will get a lot more out of
life if one lives it with one's eyes open and the willingness to
"see beyond the surface."
----------------------
|
| 358.12 | | INK::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Wed May 06 1987 18:26 | 42 |
| Re .11:
My logic wasn't intended to be self-serving. I believe that a clear
perusal of that section of my reply will show I was doing a _reductio
ad absurdum_ exercise based on two premeses: a) a solipsistic world-
view, and b) an extension-to-the-limits of "concensus reality,"
as per the "collective subconscious" suggestion made previously.
Your example about lightning and the gods is a marvelous example
of exactly what I mean. There was a _sincere_, _solid_ belief
[knowledge] that lightning was the province of the gods. As learned
a scholar as Paracelsus indicated that lightning and thunder were
physical evidence of the existence of demons. Benjamin Franklin
thought otherwise, based primarily upon actual observations
and, in a careful experiment, determined that lightning was _not_
supernatural. And that we understand many of its machanisms makes
it not much more controllable than when Franklin developed the
lightning rod. Did the fact that virtually every person in the
world _knew_ that gods controlled lightning (a "concensus reality,"
if I ever heard of one) mean that the gods _did_ control light-
ning? And that somehow, Ben Franklin's experiment (which was not
general public knowledge) altered "reality" significantly? _Really?_
Let's get "reality" straight, too. (There are several notes on
this, also.) Let's say you're human and I'm a cat: we both see,
but you see better in the violet-to-red spectrum; I see less violet
and down a little into the infrared. If I'm a bee, I won't see
the way you do, but I'll see into the ultraviolet (no red) and I'll
see the way light is polarized. If I'm a dolphin, my vision will
be punk, but my hearing will be far richer than anything you have.
A dog, and my vision's not so hot, but my hearing is acute (not
as good as a cetacian), and my sense of smell is so remarkable that
I'll know that a lady dog more than a mile away is interested in
having puppies.
You infer that I don't look below the surface of things. Friend,
that's _your_ perception; not mine. :-)
Steve Kallis, Jr.
P.S.: "Creating ones reality" is the sense of personal interactions
is something else entirely. But that's more psychology than parapsychology.
|
| 358.13 | This is just a cosmic game. | PUZZLE::OPER | | Thu May 07 1987 04:27 | 62 |
| re: 358.11 Beautifully said!
For clarification: The collective UNCONSCIOUS holds every thought
that has ever been held in any all and all lifetimes in the physical
realm. The SUBCONSCIOUS holds only the information filtering through
this current lifetime (from both the unconscious or the higher
conscious). The collective subconscious would be your filter and
my filter and everyone else's filter, too. The conscious mind,
the subconscious mind and the unconscious mind all reside within
the higher consciousness of this particular lifetime.
re: .10
What you are not acknowledging Jeri, is the incredible dichotomy
which exists. YES, by all means be happy here...that does not mean
vegetate, however. Also look for the pull of the most idealistic
future you can imagine. For it's the future which creates the present
against the backdrop of the past. I am looking for happiness and
joy here but I also look forward to the exponential joys to be found
in the "higher levels". As for balance, it's okay to want to soar...
fear of crashing is not sufficient reason for avoiding it. Why
settle for just floating? As long as you are WILLING to crash you
cover yourself...it doesn't mean that you HAVE TO crash. The extremely
important word here is WILLING!
As for making life wonderful or horrible...that is precisely
the nature of this topic. We have a choice! We can make it any
way we want it. We create it that way! Yes, things do change.
But we are the ones who are doing it.
re: .8
No, Steve, I don't agree with you on the world's consensus.
How often do you hear "The lord almightly must have wanted it that
way?" or "We'll do it because ALLah demands it so!" or some other
such statement? The world DOES capitulate to some big, vindictive
and self-serving GOD (or gods as you pointed out.)
Facts are NOT facts!! That is PRECISELY (right on the head!)
of what I wrote about last night and what .11 is saying. Who said
they're facts? YOU? Einstein? Hitler? To whom are they facts?
"FACTS" change constantly. You may remember something in your past
as being a certain way until someone else (a co-creator, to use
appropriate terms, here) points out something new...you then take
as a belief the new "fact"...until yet another points out more and
once again you change (Jeri?) No, you created that reality RIGHT
THIS MOMENT and you can change it again the very next moment. You
create the future, the present and the past...you do them all THIS
MOMENT. As soon as you change your thoughts, your reality shifts.
Is changing facts dangerous? You've got to be kidding with that
one! People vanish from our realities all the time. Were they
really there? The point is that this is not only creating of one's
reality in the personal interaction sense. You responded quite
voraciously in 316 to the quantum physics theme. Don't you remember?
Thought makes the very substance of our molecular structure change.
If thought changes subatomic particles, then doesn't thought change
the atomic and molecular and cellular components as well? Whether
you have awareness or not is not relevant here. The point is that
this is the nature of he beast. We make it happen and on all levels.
Reread .11 and .3 to get words that are different from mine. You
have an incredible capacity for intellectual matters...don't let
the limitations of "human thought" stand in your way (as .11
suggested.)
Frederick
|
| 358.14 | Well, maybe it's a word game ... | INK::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Thu May 07 1987 12:01 | 16 |
| Re .13:
Hmm. "Facts are NOT facts"? You indicate that I wrote "voraciously"
about quantum physics in 316. A perusal there shows that I mentioned
"wavicle" and the late Louis de Broglie. Short reference. Both
Topher Cooper and Earl Wajenberg wrote long noted about the Copenhagen
Interpretation and allied subjects. Both scholarly men.
Is it a "fact" _I_ wrote "voraciously"? The trouble with creating
your own realities. ;-)
Steve Kallis, Jr.
P.S. In my base note, I subtitled it "Truth may be only so variable."
I wonder whjat the limits are....
|
| 358.15 | Looking ahead...where's that? | ORION::HERBERT | What a long strange trip its been! | Thu May 07 1987 19:17 | 69 |
| Re: .13
Alright, to be more to the point re:
> It is my goal to leave the physical and astral planes completely
> upon my death...never to return. Why? Because there is so much
> joy and beauty beyond those levels.
I wonder what you are doing *here*. If you are so interested in
going somewhere else, completely, never to return...it would seem to
me that waiting for your death (in order to do it) might make you
impatient sometimes. I guess I'm just surprised that you are so
adamant about where you want to go to. I may seem very naive to you,
but I would think that trying to choose now, planes to be on, or not
be on, in another existence, would be limiting. I don't know.
Re:
> YES, by all means be happy here...that does not mean vegetate,
How do those two things relate? Perhaps you think that being
satisfied means vegetating. I don't think vegetating automatically
follows being satisfied. It's just another choice. I will always be
reaching for more even though I'm satisfied with what I have. I'm
satisfied...but I'M NOT DONE!!!
If you believe that people create their reality, then this is the
reality I created for right now and DAG-NAB-IT, I'm going to enjoy
every bit of it! I don't feel I need to think about what I'm going
to do when I die because if I created this, then I will create
whatever it is I want to experience next. I will create it then,
when I'm ready, and I don't need to think about it now. What I do
want to think about now is how I can perfect myself. I'll concentrate
on that, and when I'm ready to move on, I'll see what I want to do.
I don't think there is anything wrong or bad with this reality. I
don't think it's less than Lazaris' reality. To me, it's JUST
different. I may be "wrong" but I know I_can_be_anywhere_any_other_
being_is_in_this_universe. Believing that, I'm perfectly content to
be right here right now. Being somewhere else just doesn't matter.
This may be dead-wrong, off-track, far-fetched, whacko, ridiculous,
and whatever else anyone would like to call it. But I feel comfortable
with it and it has brought me a lot of peace, happiness, and what I
consider to be "understanding" for myself. It's just my trip, and
yours is just yours (in my opinion). In my opinion, anyone can do
whatever they want because it's just an experience and a set of
choices and it doesn't really matter.
Re:
> Why settle for just floating?
You are choosing to call it "settle". Besides, what's "wrong" with
floating? It's all in your perception.
Re:
> As long as you are WILLING to crash
Very true. I've quoted one of my favorite sayings in this file before:
"Happy are those who dream dreams and are willing to pay the price to
make them come true." I am "willing" to crash...I thought I said that
I just wanted to learn how not to.
Frederick, I enjoy tossing this around with you. I hope you are
enjoying it too.
Jerri (Naive? Probably. You can judge if you'd like.)
|
| 358.17 | My simplistic view | MTBLUE::PUSHARD_MIKE | | Fri May 08 1987 04:47 | 33 |
|
I have enjoyed reading everyones comments in this topic as well
as others.I believe we all want to share with each other our feelings
thoughts,dreams,etc.That is,we all have our own personal realities,each
one different,that we are willing to share with another.Otherwise,
how could we grow if we had nothing to share?All that we experience
is a part of us.Our destiny is not set for us.We can choose for
ourselves,but,be willing to accept the results of our choices and
then decide what we will choose to do about it.I believe all that
happens to us or around us is the result of these choices that we
have made or that someone else has made.I believe we who are here
on this level of conscienceness,made the initial choice of being
here.If noone ever chose to fight then would there be war?If noone
chose to live where they could not produce enough food would there
be starvation?Which just shows that no ones perfect.We all make
poor choices at times,but,why should we do nothing about it?We can
do something about our poor choices,we can choose to try to correct
it.
If all that i experienced was a "high" then how would i know it?I
might think it wasnt anything special at all.I like variety in
everything.Even the simple pleasure of food, for example.I may like
a certain food a lot,but,if i have all i want anytime,It loses some
of its flavor.Have you ever fasted for a day and discovered how
much more you enjoy eating that first meal?Again,if you are constantly
filled then you miss the joy of being filled.
All for now.Take care.
MIKE
|
| 358.18 | Validation from outside sources can be fun! | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Sat May 09 1987 02:58 | 40 |
| re: .14-.18
Very nice replies, all of you! A personal note before I
continue...I have been working for DEC in a limited, temporary
capacity and my time is about to end. If I suddenly disappear,
you can wonder if I ever existed at all, but on my end it will be
simply that I've moved elsewhere. I will say that this has been
of great fun for me...hopefully you have gained from me as I have
from you. I wish I could do something about accessing this forum
away from DEC.
re: .14
I want to apologize for confusing you with Topher...you two
"sound" alike and your names are everywhere. I didn't take the
time to sort you out (in regards to 316.) I also thank you for
the tone of your last reply...it reads as though perhaps you've
had a shift "in your reality" (however small.) In fact, there was
a noticeable absence of "negative ego" in all .14-.17.
Great subtitle, by the by.
re: .17
That was a wonderfully appropriate, truthful and eloquent response
(for my money.) How nice of you to have expressed yourself that
way. I hope that comes from the heart, because it is certainly
in the right direction, from my vantage point.
re: .15
Ah, Jerri! How lovely are some of the things you say! If
you do just one thing, keep expanding on your confidence! There
is virtually nothing you said in .15 that I disagree with (except
that you aren't naive and I will attempt to make no judgments.)
Especially relevant is your text involving choices. Very astute
of you, I think.
I wish to elaborate more but especially I want to respond to
.16. I will do that in a note to follow this one (I almost made
it last night...as I was about to file, the system crashed.)
This is so I can get these "kudos" out.
Frederick (last name is not OPER.)
|
| 358.19 | Responsibility is the greatest freedom--LAZARIS | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Sat May 09 1987 03:43 | 79 |
| re: .16
What wonderful questions you ask! They are very profound,
in my opinion, and can be laborious to answer adequately, but I'll
do the best I can in this short space and time.
Let me start by saying that my friend Lazaris has said that
we are all here to experience individuated and mostly unique events
or feelings (much as what .17 said) but that you must first realize
that your higher self can be seen to be kind of like a motion picture
studio. It decides it wants to make movies and lots of them and
to have a great time by so doing (I'm interpreting what he's said.)
So, for all of us we all have the same first two focuses (as he
prefers to say---as opposed to purpose, which has a different
connotation.) The first focus is to have FUN. The second is to
CONSCIOUSLY CREATE SUCCESS. Think about them for a while. Even
drama and horror can be "entertainment" can they not? Do you suppose
that we create drama and horror, and all the things you mention
in your first paragraph, Paul, for this reason? Could be, huh?
In addition to these focuses, there are many others with which you
enter into a lifetime. He likes to add five more (he likes the
number 7.) For me, one of mine is exploration and another is love.
You see, if you have many other lifetimes, (and Lazaris says most
of us have had thousands,) we've already experienced most of the
emotions (all that is REAL) before. That's why, Jerri, there's
no room for floating for ME. I've had many other lifetimes where
I just floated (I believe) and I want to push on out.
Do I have drama in my life? Of course! And it really gets
me mad when I continue to repeat similar "negative" events. The
game, then, beomes not just to notice the problems and understand
intellectually what has happened, but to understand the FEELING
and the emotion that has transpired and then to make a conscious
CHOICE to change it (or to accept it and continue--especially
if it was a "positive" event.) A story that I will paraphrase:
During WWI, a reporter went out into the country in Pennsylvania
or someplace to try to determine what the folks thought of the war.
He went up to a farmer who, expressing no knowledge of the war at
all, simply said "well, they've certainly picked a beautiful day
for it." You see, in his reality, there was no war. For many others,
war was thousands of miles away. For yet others, it was a struggle
for life and death. We co-create events. Some of us are simply
observers while others of us as profoundly participating. ALL of
us participate (ultimately) but to varying degrees. Replacing
"negative" thought with positive thought aligns your energy with
similar positive thought. The end synergistic effect is that there
is yet more positivity and less room for negativity. I personally,
know no one who has aids or even cancer (currently) nor have I been
terrorized nor have I been exposed to hostilities (of war...other
than as a meek stint in the Air Force.) I tend to create, instead,
difficulties with personal relations and problems with money. So
that is what I concentrate on solving. I try to determine what
the basic emotion underlying my problem might be, then I try to
resolve (or process) that emotion so that it won't interfere. It's
natural for us to have fears and angers, hurts, etc. but we need
to process them out...otherwise, the ego puts us into self-pity
or some related place, and difficulties arise.
(I am hurrying, so I may be a little scattered, here.)
Paul, what may be more accurate is to say that I've created
other people and other things and events, some more intimately
than others. By so doing, I get involved with whatever they are
to at least some extent. Certainly the more support there is in
my reality for something, the more of it I will encounter. To the
extent that the collective unconscious has a solid view, I, too,
will probably share in that (you don't have to be religious at all
to be influenced by Judeo-Christian beliefs.) So, then it comes
down to snatching it all away from our autonomic, automatic
subconscious minds and making CONSCIOUS choices and decisions and
then (and only then) returning the "corrected script" back to the
subconscious mind. In this sensing of the situation then, I can
turn away what would otherwise have been, as you put it, the
overwhelming of my individualized reality creation by the concensus
reality (of which I am also a part.) As I stated earlier in this
topic (or in 316, I don't remember) it means taking your power back
from wherever or with whomever we've turned it over (unless we feel
comfortable with it there.)
I need to go, duties beckon. I hope to get back to you.
Frederick
|
| 358.20 | My two cents | COLORS::HARDY | Turning rats into stars! | Sat May 09 1987 23:30 | 55 |
| I have just returned to DEJAVU; I have not been here for many days,
being off learning things and trying to do my work. This
discussion teaches me a lot. Sometimes I think I've heard it all
before, and just forgotten. But that would be presumptious.
"Is that a real poncho or a Sears poncho?" - Frank Zappa,
COSMIC DEBRIS
Elsewhere in DEJAVU I said that I had been happy since mid-February,
but in fact I was troubled and did not know it. Strange. Limited,
as somebody said, in my vision. I could not see what bothered
me, but I could hear it, so I wrote it down, and reflected upon
it; then I could understand. I was upset. I found I had so long
been other peoples' ideas of me, I did not know who I was.
I was quite suprised, after much death-agony-thrashing over issues
of lying, lack of confidence, and general confusion at all levels,
to pick up the newspaper and read about Gary Hart.
Now, because people believe in good and evil, Gary Hart has decided
to quit the race. The ideas of good and evil are ideas, but they
have changed history. Are they true? I do not know! I know that
they are used to choose.
All ideas are merely that: points to measure where you are going,
on the basis of where you have been. That's where the rubber hits
the road: to know that you are moving, and to know that you chose
the way to go, hence have chosen what you will see. What one sees,
is what one gets; since one chooses, in some sense one _does_ get
what one deserves. But it's easy to get confused about what this
means in practice, and forget what was sought, becoming entranced.
To say that this means individuals deserve whatever others do to
them is to attribute moral responsibility to experience, not to
action. That's not correct.
(In fact, at some level, one remembers well enough, and the shadow
of the memory will walk beside somebody who forgets, and remind
them from time to time.)
Re .16: I think the problem lies in the correct understanding of
"choice". To edit these things out of a personal script does not
imply nonexistence. The process whereby terrorists and nuclear
weapons come into existence has also created you and I; we're It!
To live in a world where the poets and philosophers write books
on absolutes to make the world meaningful is EXACTLY EQUIVALENT to
living in a world where engineers and scientists do moral improvisation
while building the world! The moralists have ruined numberless lives;
we technical types can destroy planets, so we hafta know what we are
doing, and why, as best we can, so that we can exercise choice.
That's how it looks from here, anyway.
Pat Hardy
Kali Yuga Test Labs
|
| 358.21 | Don't tell what it is... | NEXUS::MORGAN | Walk in Balance on the Earth Mother | Sun May 10 1987 05:25 | 67 |
| Reply to .0; Steve;
Perhaps we can add two other examples that might help present another
aspect of this problem. The first one's just for fun, the second
is more serious and to the point.
Emperor of the World
I was reminded (on Usenet) of a fellow who lived in San Francisco who
proclaimed himself Emperor of the World. I have forgotten his name now.
Aparently this man lived the part to a certain extent, even printing
his own money. Did he believe he was Emperor? If memory serves me right,
I think he did believe he was Emperor. Some people even traded in his
script (money). Did he create his reality? I think he did. Was he
Emperor of the World? I don't know. I don't remember anyone else
filling that position so perhaps he was. B^)
At least he was a very benovelent Emperor, he didn't start any wars.
Does it have value?
On the other end of the scale we have _something_ we all love and
cherish as being something of worth; something of value. This something
probably fuels our very existance. It is used to pass information and
energy between parties even though it has no energy or information.
Actually it has no worth and no value. It only has value if all of us
believe in it. Is this something God? Some call it God but that is not
what I am referring to. This something is much closer to us than any
God. Is this something Love? Well, you can surely use this valueless
item to get love. Even the institutions that proclaim love can't
propigate their message without this valueless item.
To some this valueless item represents the highest stratum to which one
can attain. If we have this item we can do things that mere mortals
cannot. This valueless item separates persons into classes, classes
which have a value. These classes were generated by a valueless item.
This item has only the value we assign to it by belief, yet this item
in many ways determines what our beliefs are. This item is much
the same as the snake who swallows its tail, recreating itself anew,
yet it has no value.
Men of great value often base their lives on this valueless item. And
other men often lose their lives because of this valueless item.
This item is a great hoax, but a valuable hoax based upon a valueless
item. It is an oxymoron, wouldn't you say?
This item is created by us and has no value. It only works because we
believe in it. If two or more persons believe in this item it works. We
create new realities of value with this item, yet it has no value.
Is this item religion? No, but religions certainly use it. Is this item
politics? No, but governments would be helpless without this valueless
item. Is this item human life? No, but humans have a difficult time
living without this item. What is this valueless item??
yenom repap
We believe in this item and it works for us, yet it has no value.
It is only repap. Did we create this reality? Yes. And did we do
it together? Yes. Is this moral? Well I don't think so, but others
see absolutely no problem. Consus reality? I think so.
Now we can create a newer reality (on a continuing basis) with just
about anything we believe in. But mostly we believe in yenom repap.
Mikie?
|
| 358.22 | Giving free play to imagination | RAINBO::HARDY | | Mon May 11 1987 13:27 | 18 |
| It is possible that I spoke too harshly of moralists and technocrats.
After all, the moralists are only trying to explain their point of view,
and the technocrats are trying to improve the world and defend themselves.
None of that is wrong. So much of what they do is useful. But
clarity is important.
I know there is a common ground between exposure so harsh that it
reduces everything to nothing, and concealment so thorough that
furry monsters can tiptoe through the shadows. People have their
individual preferences on this, but I think everybody agrees the
extremes are uncomfortable. (On the other hand...didn't somebody
say that extremism in defense of liberty was no vice? Hmm.)
To invent your own reality is always educational. But sometimes it
can be *quite* a suprise.
Pat Hardy
|
| 358.23 | Reality,..by any other name would smell as sweet | SPIDER::PARE | | Mon May 11 1987 15:57 | 19 |
| "Von Neumann's discovery that our thought processes (the realm of
symbols) project illusory restrictions onto the real world is
essentially the same discovery that led Einstein to the general
theory of relativiey. Einstein disproved the universality of
Euclidean geometry. Until the general theory of relativity,
Euclidean geometry had been accepted without question as the
underlying structure of the universe. Birkhoff and von Neumann
disproved the universality of classical logic. Until now, classical
logic has been accepted without question as a natural reflection
of the nature of reality.
A powerful awareness lies dormant in these discoveries: an awareness
of the hitherto-unsuspected powers of the mind to mold "reality,"
rather than the other way round. In this sense, the philosophy
of physics is becoming indistinguishable from the philosophy of
Buddhism, which is the philosophy of enlightenment."
The Dancing Wu Li Masters
An Overview Of The New Physics
by Gary Zukav
|
| 358.25 | Some thoughts | ORION::HERBERT | What a long strange trip its been! | Mon May 11 1987 20:33 | 72 |
| Re: .19 (Frederick)
> You see, if you have many other lifetimes, (and Lazaris says most
> of us have had thousands,) we've already experienced most of the
> emotions (all that is REAL) before. That's why, Jerri, there's
> no room for floating for ME. I've had many other lifetimes where
> I just floated (I believe) and I want to push on out.
I think we are talking about two different definitions for the word
"floating". What you appear to be disagreeing with is not what *my*
concept of floating is. I would like to clear that up for you,
and anyone else that may have been following this. My concept of
floating is: Finding balance, flowing with energy instead of fighting
it or trying to manipulate it, avoiding extremes, and enjoying what's
here and now. It actually can be summed up I think by saying to just
"be".
From your reply, it appears that your concept of my use of the word
"floating" is that it means going nowhere, and just kind of hanging
around, waiting to see what happens.
But I think we have two different opinions of how the Universe works
too. We agree on a lot of things, but there are other points that
we are quite different on. I think that I am constantly changing,
evolving, and moving, and I interpret that as experiencing. Whether
I am aware of it or not, I may keep changing, evolving, and moving
simply as a natural part of the Universe. I think everything in the
Universe is constantly doing that. It may just be what parts of the
Universe do! I don't think I can hold myself back from evolving, in
as much as I can hold myself back in perceiving and how I relate to
it all. Even if I were to decide to have an unhappy existance in this
life, I may still evolve for my next existance. I'm not a real firm
believer of the "you'll keep doing it over until you get it right"
thought. That seems to imply that there is something "right" we should
be doing, and what we're doing now is "wrong" or is to make up for past
"wrongs", or we wouldn't still be here (what a bummer to think about.)
I also don't think that there is somewhere I'm supposed to be going. I
think I will evolve naturally along with the rest of the Universe.
Images of superiority and inferiority within the Universe are just
mental games. Things are just different...nothing is better than
anything else...what makes your experience unique is how you relate to
it. But even that's not wrong, it just is.
Sometimes it seems very incredible when I feel that what we're doing
is just totally perfect, and it is just what it is. That there are
no final truths; no Gods passing judgement; no levels higher than
others; just that it is very simple. We make it difficult and we
think everything has to have some great meaning. It all seems so
theatrical sometimes.
We put ourselves lower than other people who we think are better than
us, and we put ourselves lower than dis-embodied entities who we think
must know more than us because they've succeeded at staying on a spirit
level. Who says that's success? Why can't it just be a different
place to be, no worse, no better? Perhaps there is no difference
between us and these things we place above us...and it's just a method
(way of thinking) that we use to relate to life and get what we want
from it. But it might ONLY be a method we've devised for this life,
and is not a final truth of the Universe.
I don't know...I just have an active mind that inquires about all of
these things. I'm learning all the time as things keep changing.
I've stopped telling myself "look how far I've come" and "Gee, I've
really grown", because I'm not so sure anymore that it wasn't just an
illusion to convince myself that I was progressing from a "worse" place
to a "better" place. Now I'm asking myself if progress is anything
more than simply changes which are being judged. Perhaps we are just
making it much more difficult than it need be. Simple things are the
hardest to see sometimes.
Jerri
|
| 358.26 | more and more and more... | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Thu May 14 1987 02:34 | 102 |
| (SYSTEM DMATE2 was inaccessible last night.)
As I pointed out b4, I am a short-timer here so I will speed
up what I might "normally" have to say...additionally, so much of
what I think these days has been so strongly influenced by Lazaris,
that I will probably opt for quoting from him or giving my version
of what he's said only because I usually like what he has to say
more than what I have fully thought through. So, for some
"short-cuts:"
re: .20
Lazaris has said that we are what we say, think and do. (Ponder
this simplification for a while.) Additionally, he has suggested
that we be tacticfully honest with others but ALWAYS BRUTALLY honest
with ourselves. Here's a heavy: WE ALWAYS GET WHAT WE WANT, NOT
NECESSARILY WHAT WE ASK FOR. Explanation: Emotions are all that
ultimately matter, since our reality is really illusionary...therefore,
you will always get whatever underlying emotion you seek to fulfill
which is often much different from whatever you think you want.
Sometimes we seek out some of the blockbusters such as self-pity,
martyrhood, victimhood, etc. and will therefore satisfy that particular
want in regards to whatever we ask for (e.g. ask for money, get
self-pity instead.) Another point: Everything that you have ever
had pass through your life can be found in your subconscious mind...
you could, if you desire, list off ever license plate you've ever
seen (in alphabetical order.)
Your last two paragraphs are particularly nice!
re: .22
I have found that people do things more often than I suspected
out of a desire to control and manipulate and therefore want to
dominate rather than allow dominion. In other words, they subscribe
to the theory that "no pain, no gain," (which I completely disagree
with.)
re: .25
Perhaps I did take you too harshly based on my interpretation
of your word "floating". Thank you for your clarification. In
regards to being where your "supposed" to be, it really comes down
to "where do you want to be?" You could transmute, transform or
even transcend this reality if you really wanted to (as we've hinted
around at earlier.) There are no real better thans...no real worse
thans, either. Essentially, there just is, which is continually
changing (.23) Lazaris has said that perfection (to get our
definitions in order, here) is trying to do things that have already
been done only better. There is no creativity (as he has defined
it) therein. i.e., don't strive for perfection. Disembodied spirits
are exactly as you have said, no better than else, just at a different
level (with, therefore, different perspectives.)
More Lazaris: "the collective unconscious is a prison...give it
the slip."
The most powerful gift? The gift of choice.
There is no cause, only choice. There is no effect, only decision.
Success is like reality. It's not there until you measure it.
"A spiritual person is measured not by their perfection but by how
they handle their imperfections."
Here's a real brain-buster: "The physical plane is composed of
choices and decisions which are propelled by our thinking and feeling
and are compelled by attitudes and beliefs into manifestation onto
the loom of intention (will) and desire (imagination.)"
Reality=(Beliefs + emotions)times(x)imagination
The secrets of spirituality:
1. What we are now is what we are becoming.
2. The only way to change in the future is to change now. Change
never takes place in the future.
Several years ago, he spent nearly two hours talking about halograms
and talking about our reality in halogram terms. I will try to
reproduce it verbally: Project thought onto a splitter (which is
our senses). The reference beam then becomes imagination and
feeling. The object beam (from the splitter) goes to beliefs and
attitudes while the illumination beam is will and action. The film
is then our physical world. This can then be projected...and produces
yet another halogram. He repeated each halogram (through soul,
GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS, etc.) six more times altogether and brought
the entire thing around full circle to where we had started. I
know I haven't adequately described it here, but I can say that
it was a spectacular presentation.
Incidentally, last weekend they (Concept:Synergy) announced that
they are moving next month to Lake Arrowhead (near LA). So the
address I gave in 316 will only be legitimate for a short while
longer (they've been in Marin County for about eight years, I
think.)
This conference is a wonderful opportunity for all of us (especially
you, since I won't get to benefit much longer) to grow...thinking
and feeling and sharing in that. Several years ago I did this sort
of thing with a group that met weekly. I miss those days and I
will miss this, too. There are many wonderful respondants within
this conference and there is a great deal of valuable information.
Hopefully, there is some of that for you above. Again, I "dumped"
Lazaris stuff on you only in the interest of time.
Later, (if I can.)
Frederick
|
| 358.27 | More friends than we think, sometimes... | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Fri May 15 1987 03:22 | 73 |
| Hi. I've gotten notice that I should be here two more weeks (maybe
less, maybe more,) so I will continue throwing out things that Lazaris
has said over the past 12 years (5 years of my own notes) until
I have said all I feel like...you can ignore it or discuss it as
you *choose*. When I am done, I will return to explain whatever
I can based on the info given to me for anyone who wants that.
What is love? It is a skill and therefore an action.
1. It is CARING (inate feeling;investment in outcome;action of)
2. It is BEING RESPONSIBLE for or with...
3. It is KNOWING ABOUT, OF...(wherever you place the love)
4. It is RESPECT (loving out of respect...manifestation)
5. It is HUMILITY (being intimate...a counterpart)
6. It is COURAGE or COMMITMENT
7. It is GIVING
The greatest act is the act of love (loving and being loved...self,
others, GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS)
The greatest joy is healing.
What is the nature of illness? It is a blockage, static, simple,
mostly negative. It is a structure which impedes good health:
1. It is a disorientation (away from fun, success, etc.)
2. It is an alienation (from substance of good health)
3. It is a disorder (of things, like priorities, e.g.)
4. It is a failure (of not doing our reality "right.")
Why do we have illnesses?
1. As a message from higher or inner self (coded so that ego won't
interfere.)
2. As feedback ("How am I doing?")
3. As static and interference produced by conflicting BELIEFS and
ATTITUDES.
4. As manipulation (to get others to love, to get things, etc.)
5. As a release and relief of tension (feelings not expressed ooze
out anyway...this lifetime is "small change" so what's the
difference? You can't walk away from the body if this excess
baggage is still there.)
6. As a cooperation with what you want (each cell is a growing
consciousness that tries to please us...if we say "this is going
to kill me" the cells respond.)
7. As a "lesson" which we've chosen.
What stops us from making choices?
1. Inertia
2. Projection (e.g. father onto every man, etc.) refusing
responsibility
3. Identification (with self as child...) refusing to be real
4. Boredom & Restlessness (higher octave of inertia)
5. Jealousy & Revenge (higher octave of projection...when you discover
that she's not mother, we punish...we indulge the ego)
6. Guilt/depression/worry (refusal to have fun) higher octave of
identification.
7. Self pity.
The greatest gift is choice.
When you give up judgmentalness, you create a reality where there
is nothing to judge...not that you see it differently, but that
the reality really is different. (don't panic...you can still
discern, have opinions, etc.)
Blockages are like steam on the bathroom mirror...
they keep you from seeing yourself.
Through the blurred image your foggy shape becomes a scary monster
and you run rather than clear the mirror.
Do you hate yourself for a steamy mirror?
Then, why do you hate yourself for your mental fog?
You clean the mirror,
you discover yourself.
(tomorrow I will reply to a mail message.)
|
| 358.28 | Don't forget the popcorn! | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Sat May 16 1987 03:46 | 106 |
| Re: mail...I will try to respond first with facts as related by
Lazaris, then by conjecture by me...in regards to various levels
of consciousness.
You may start by drawing a large circle...within it make as many
dots as you feel like...then make a tiny, little circle floating
around anywhere...Now pick out a dot. Next, draw a "smudge" around
that dot. What do we have here? Your first correspondence class
in drawing! No, seriously, the large circle represents your higher
consciousness (higher self). The dots all represent lifetimes (whether
they be as mineral, plant, animal or human.) The dot with the smudge
is THIS lifetime. The smudge itself is the sub-consciousness.
The little circle is the unconscious mind. As I've stated before,
the subconsciousness acts somewhat as a filter. There is only one for
each lifetime.
This subconscious stores thoughts, initially at random, later, linked
by conscious or higher conscious or unconscious selves. This
subconcious stores this code and doesn't really "care" who activates
it. Unfortunately, the ego (which is a part of the conscious self)
can activate this code as well. While Freud thought that the
subconscious was the seat of power, Lazaris says that that isn't
true...it was once held by our unconscious. Later it was held by
the sub-conscious and around the turn of this century, by the conscious
mind (where we are today.) The name of the game is to take conscious
dominion, then make it sub-conscious (in dominion) and later yet
making the dominion consciously unconscious. From the unconscious,
we can go to the higher conscious or self...so, its from conscious
to sub-conscious to unconcious to higher conscious...all consciously.
Do you follow that?
Anyway, we ain't there yet, but that the "work" for us. (This game
continues on and on starting at one end and working towards the
other, taking more and more responsibility as you go.)
I get a little lost in the descriptions here but as I understand
it, in order to break free of all lifetimes and become "at one with"
our higher self, we must get past the unconscious mind. Why?
I'm not sure, but it may be because it can attach to any lifetime
it wants to. Sometimes this may not be useful e.g. let us say we
tap into Van Gogh's artistry...then you would also get his madness.
Or, maybe you would tap into Einstein and along with his genius
you would get his loneliness. So you can't sort out the "positive"
from the "negative" as easily as we would like.
The unconscious travels around as I've said and it is the way
we can "communicate" with our other lifetimes or dejavus or dreams,
etc. Is there anything beyond the collective unconscious? Remember,
it is the culmination of every thought that has ever been thought
or ever will be. Lazaris says "find out." (He has said that he
exists far beyond our planes where even thought does not exist.
He is simply a spark of energy that has "down-stepped" itself to
where it can CREATE thought. We think (implies time...available
only to this physical plane and to astral plane as concept, only.)
The sub-conscious has no order in terms of rationale or logic.
We are the ones to assign that. Ugly and other thoughts are there.
There is no right or wrong there. All emotions are there. How
does it operate? (from my notes:)
1. It gathers attitudes, beliefs and experiences. It puts them
together harmoniously and consistently.
2. It stores all ideas and combinations thereof.
3. It stores all information and has access to any realm or dimension
and can combine these to have understanding or wisdom.
4. It stores all information and has access from every dimension.
It can combine these to produce growth and evolution.
It can be an enemy or a friend. Are these statements understandable?
What is spirituality?
1. Your relationship with GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS (and everyone
has one.) Having an active & passive communication.
2. Loving. Beginning with self, then others, then all. It doesn't
happen all at once. Also being loved. By our reality and our Higher
Self.
3. Excellence and Elegance (ease, joy, happiness, & enjoyment.)
Am I doing it easily? It's not just succeeding, but how.
4. Motivating self out of gratitude.
5. Being active. Intimately involved in every aspect of our lives.
Accomplishing things, setting goals, meeting goals, setting new
goals. Taking responsibility for self and then responsibility for
the reality that is larger than the self.
6. A celebration (of life, experiences, awarenesses) Not an
adolescent party. An adult's party is life! All assets eventually
become a liability (including our bodies.) In death, we never lose
consciousness...we simply walk out.
7. Busting systems. Replace them with new beliefs, systems, etc.,
then bust them with new ones, etc. "A firecracker that never quits
exploding."
What you call reality is but manifested thought, frozen by intent.
Steamy ideas become liquid, liquid thoughts.
Liquid thoughts become frozen, become reality.
It is no accident that water symbolizes emotions.
What percentage of your earth is water? What percentage your body?
The most common and simple form of water is liquid.
You must exert lots of complex energy to make it steam...or ice.
It' not necessary to cut and chisel your way out of your icy
cages of limitations.
Allow them to melt with the warmth of compassion and self-love.
Allowing is not being apathetic or blind, for when melting the
dungeons,
take care not to destroy the turrets.
From the turrets of your ice castle you see beyond the horizon.
As usual, the above is my interpretation of what Lazaris has said.
The final part is from a no longer published book he dictated.
Frederick
|
| 358.29 | There IS a light at the end of this tunnel. | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Tue May 19 1987 04:06 | 81 |
| LAZARIS stuff (via Fred's filtrations) continues:
As 366 raises the issue, I will add here: Shirley will reportedly
be mentioning Lazaris in the next book and as for female/male energies
I've no doubt she will be using his stuff. He has said (to steal
her thunder, perhaps) that all of us have both masculine and feminine
energy (as I believe I mentioned elsewhere in this conference.)
This differs from psychological theories. There are four components
to each: for masculine (animus) energy:
1. Will--creates form, fills space
2. Action--getting it done, shaping, creating structure
3. Intellect--dynamic creative energy (making sense out of action)
4. Meaning--to life, ideas, etc. "doing", provides, protects...the
resultant pursuit from intellect
for feminine (anima) energy:
1. Imagination---creates space or context, formless (original energy--
see 316 for GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS)
2. Feeling--physical or physchological, giving, receiving, nurturing
3. Conception--"being"...of ideas, synergies, etc. (from imagination)
4. Perception--allows balance, irrational thought, intuition
The first two of each of these energies are the "primitives"...though
all of us have all, women are "charged" with feminine energies while
men are "charged" with masculine, so men tended to develop will
and action (the "Bull") while they sought out the "froofroo" with
imagination and feeling.
The more developed male (typical in the 50's and 60's) men added
their own imagination and feeling to the "bull". This man likes
his woman to stay home, calls her "dear", "honey" or in the most
revealing cases, "mom".
At this point, the crisis of the anima (feminine energy) develops
and men either (A) drops imagination and feeling and becomes the
bull again or (B) drops will and action and becomes a "wimp" (all
imagination, no "balls", and angry at women). Sometimes becomes
the little boy...both an insult to men and to women.
Women (somewhat more complex) when they add will and action to their
imagination and feeling looks for a man (the "egghead") to provide
her with intellect and meaning. She never gets fulfillment. In
another variation, she develops her own intellect and meaning (this
woman "has everything") and become the men they looked for or becomes
manipulative or "ball-busting" or continually looks for a man (the
"shark") or becomes the "butch"--maybe or maybe not as a lesbian.
Note: Please note that this is a summarization and not a complete
representation.
The problem is that men need to develop Will and Action, followed
by Imagination and Feeling, then intellect and meaning and finally
conception and perception.
For women, say "no" to the temptation to be a man, after Imagination
and feeling, add will and action, THEN add conception and perception
and ONLY THEN add Intellect and Meaning.
Men need to let go of "pride" and say "yes" to the feminine energies.
The whole person who is either a man or a woman will then have all
eight components and will be beautiful to behold and an inspiration
to others.
This past two months Lazaris has added a whole bunch more...I will
relate these values tomorrow night.
For tonight I will leave you with this:
What you call past or future lifetimes are only influences upon
your present point of power.
They do not control you, they only influence.
They only provide opportunities that you may accept, deny, or
alter.
If your back is sunburned and someone slaps you sharply it will
sting intensely.
If your back is not sunburned and someone slaps you sharply,
it will still hurt.
The sunburn does not cause the pain...it only influences the intensity.
Other lifetimes are like sunburn.
Frederick
|
| 358.30 | Love is the answer...what's the question? | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Wed May 20 1987 03:32 | 135 |
| ...as promised...
Lazaris said that chauvinism is something both men and women share
and that unless you've thought about it and taken serious steps
to not be one, you are. It came about as a result of men (the "bulls"
in .29) realizing that they didn't have imagination (or at least
have it developed.) In order for women to want to have anything
to do with them (since women could imagine) they "faked it" and
let women know that they didn't need women but that women needed
them.
As a consequence, women tried to need men while men tried to not
need women, creating havoc and chauvinism in the process. In truth,
according to Lazaris, it's the other way around...men DO need women
and women truly don't need men (whether or not a man is "gay.")
As a sidelight, realize that an aware man can know then that a woman
may be coming to him out of want instead of need whereas a woman
may feel that a man is coming to her out of need and not want.
The fully developed person will come to another out of want and
can at that point only can voluntarily create a need (a preference
to need, in other words.)
...it kinda feels like I'm all alone (does this night have a thousand
eyes?)...(it's so quiet in this conference...)
Back to anima/animus:
The basic powers:1. of freedom
2. of giving
3. to act
4. of joy
We created an illogical system to allow room for love. There is
a harmony between doing and being; between masculine and feminine
energies.
Masculine principles:
1. (1st chakra) Willing, acting, manifesting. Security.
Self-reliance.
2. (2nd chakra) energy creating form to force content to fill context.
Fills space.
3. (3rd chakra) Shaping, forming and focusing energy so as to create
more or new structure.
4. (4th chakra) Dynamically creating. Putting into action.
5. (5th chakra) Motivation. Seeking and searching for meaning.
6. (6th chakra) Instinctive energy to protect and to provide.
7. (7th chakra) Energy of doing.
Are we doing things for show or to seek meaning? Do we provide
or do we take? Do we spectate or do we participate? Men to
either defend their maleness or apologize for it.
Feminine principles (original energies):
1. (1st chakra) Security also. IMagING; feeling; desiring
2. (2nd " ) Gathers content to force form to create context.
creates space.
3. (3rd " ) Giving and receiving. Creating and allowing to
be created. to nurture and to be nurtured. (emotion, caring)
4. (4th " ) Ability to create, manifest. Power.
5. (5th " ) Allowing perception (the most gentle)
6. (6th " ) The balancing of all things
7. (7th chakra) The beingness.
Logic is form. Cannot imagine without imagination...male energy
does, female energy lets it be.
Out of this balance (masculine/feminine ENERGIES) comes a glimpse
of the full self. From this balance comes the full symphony of
harmony.
These energies are never separated:
1. Whenever there is will, there is imagination.
2. Whenever there is action, there must be feeling (can't act w/o
thinking and feeling.)
3. With understanding there is conception (whether of babies or
ideas.)
4. with meaning there is perception (perceiving with a sense of
meaning.)
The bridge of belief is conception and perception. It is the vision.
Metaphysics appeals to conceptive, perceptive parts.
Society is over-balanced masculine energy.
Happiness is a fulfillment of needs.
Joy is a fulfillment of preferences.
All experiences come from beliefs.
Seven categories of payoffs:("rewards" for avoiding positive reality
creation) Payoffs keep us from making decisions.
1. Avoidance (of truth, honesty, success, etc.) at the least: of
joy, in control, etc.
2. blame (we do it almost orgasmically)
3. righteousness (angry, indignant, hurt) can't process this because
it isn't real (like guilt)
4. wanting a guarantee. "promise me it'll work!" one of the most
difficult to ignore or get rid of. There is a difference between
being sure (discerning) and guaranteeing.
5. Self-pity. (victimhood, martyrhood are offshoots) When you
talk, can one add "poor me." at the end of the sentence?
6. Self-importance. "I'm special!" This one ultimately blames.
Often searches for ideal relationship forever.
7. Clinging to the past.."I want to rub their noses in my failure."
Self-pity is the ultimate enemy of choice. The antidote is to ask
for help (usually from counselors, anima, animus, higher self)
Freedom is being able to function within our boundaries...it is
a relative term. It offers and requires responsibility.
Dominion is the cornerstone of our reality."I don't have to manipulate,
I can creatively generate." The organization created by humans
called religion, is "wrong."
Sometimes the most loving thing to say is "no."
To feel something, you must think. So to change a feeling, think
of something that is of a different feeling.
I leave for tonight with:
There is no time.
There is no space.
There is no motion.
All is now...All is illusion.
The four-sided sprockets (the structures) on both sides of the singular
frames provide the continuity of your film.
If the sprockets are cut, the film skips.
Cut some sprockets.
And don't forget the popcorn.
I wish to reemphasize that this is a compilation of notes...it is
a gathering from many hundreds of hours of seminar work. It may
not be "accurate" or "factual" for you.
Frederick
|
| 358.32 | Rocking and rolling | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Thu May 21 1987 03:16 | 88 |
| re .31 What you say makes sense up to the point of your use
of the words actualization and ego. Rather than differ, please
see what Lazaris has said about ego (either in 358 or 316.) I
am obviously using him as my authority here so disagreement is
entirely possible.
The concept of self-actualization was Abraham Maslow's baby...
at least until shortly before his death. Late in life (as he
became more of a metaphysician) his views started to deviate
somewhat from earlier works. According to Lazaris, the concept
is not fully developed enough.
Herewith are the steps toward UNCONDITIONAL LOVE
There are seven steps to becoming a self-realized being. This is
at the moment that one knows he/she is a treasure. It can also
be referred to as "heaven" (this narrow slice through which one
pops up.)
1. Self-awareness---recognizing that we have an impact on others.
2. Self-worth---recognizing spiritual nature
3. Self-esteem---earned caring and compassion for self
4. Self-love---for us to discover
5. self-confidence---coping with reality; depending on self (earned)
6. Self-respect---appreciating emotional self
...and out of the synergy of those six steps comes:
7. self-realization---impact with responsibility.
It is the synergy of these seven steps that comes unconditional
love...unconditional love is NOT a function of love, but rather
a function of the synergy of self-realization.
One of the paradoxes of our reality is that both we create it
and we have impact (and others have impact on us.)
Incidentally, Lazaris mentioned that you can notice in our reality
that a human passes through all four (4) kingdoms on the way to
being human. First, it is a mineral, then plant, then animal
and finally human. The soul enters the body usually within three
days...if not, the infant dies. The soul is the higher octave or
purpose of the anima and acts as the lens between the Higher self
and GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS. You will also note that all fetuses
are female before some of them become male.
What unconditional love is NOT:
1. the sweet, sticky goo of acceptance that whispers "I love you."
2. the numbing out of self to the world (Christ didn't walk around
with grin on face saying "I love you.")
3. an airy-fairiness talking in hushed tones.
4. a living in a fantasy world (devas, etc.)
5. living in potentia.
It IS, instead:
1. A materially successful person (an inspiration to others)
Someone who has handled physicality successfully. Not a burden.
2. Accepting things as they are AND wanting to make them better
(Jerri, are you with this?)
3. Accepting people as they are (without expectations, demands
or conditions) AND expecting (paradoxically) more with humility
and hope.
4. A detachment. Being impeccable and aware of everything.
Feel quicker. Never carry a grudge. Learning more and more.
Always looking for heart or love.
5. Has the six qualities of self-functioning and uses them to have
others have them, too.
6. Always gives and cares (receiving simultaneously)
7. Always honest.
You won't "find" realized beings because they are constantly
changing.
Play a game of chance: roll the dice and get a "7". If you accept
the challenge you win total enlightenment. But you only have
one toss.
Do you want one die? You'd be a fool for you would surely lose.
How about two? How about ten? How about a thousand (that's more
like it!)
And thus you select not one or ten, but hundreds of lifetimes to
experience in your one chance to win enlightenment. Once your
thousand dice are cast the problem becomes finding the right
combination, that confounded "7".
Thus you experience one lifetime after another looking for the
magic one.
Don't you realize there is not referee, there is no judge?
Don't wait until you find the lucky 7, turn the dice and MAKE
this one the lucky one.
Multiple lifetimes are a game of cosmic craps.
"CHEAT!"
Frederick (spewing forth his Lazaris material...)
|
| 358.33 | SOME PRESENT BELIEFS | MTBLUE::PUSHARD_MIKE | | Thu May 21 1987 05:24 | 12 |
| A couple of things i have come to believe from my own investigations:
We can reincarnate if we wish and if we have gained sufficient energy
to do so.
Our soul is either male or female and we remain one or the other.We
could,however,get the wrong body for our sex.
our soul is human not plant or mineral or ?
MIKE
|
| 358.34 | some more beliefs | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Fri May 22 1987 04:36 | 112 |
| ...CONTINUING Fred's notes on Lazaris...
What is trust? It is a deliberate and delicate balance between
hope (and expression of abundant present, alive with possiblility,)
belief (an attitude based upon an opinion held with conviction which
precedes experience) and reliance (which implies, but isn't, action.)
What are the components OF trust?
1. It must have both a beneficial and harmful possibility.
2. Result depends on the future (not the present)
3. The "harm" from the trust must be potentially more harmful than
the benefit is beneficial (horse race betting is not trust.)
4. Must honestly expect the benefit to occur.
Adult laughter can be finding the humor in our own melodrama.
Love, intimacy and caring are all acts of will. (If we were intimate
with everyone, we'd not have any free will.)
What is caring (a state that needs to be enacted)?
1. Openness
2. Empathy
3. Vulnerability
4. Trust and trustworthiness
5. Love and Intimacy
6. Risk of hurt (hurt only exists in "TIME")
7. Confidence in self and others (trust, humility, hope and courage)
What is intimacy?
1. Closeness (physical distance is irrelevant)
2. Tenderness (towards someone)
3. Vulnerable honesty (exposing weakness)
4. Trust and trustworthiness
5. Love and caring
6. Risk (the fear) of humiliation
7. Understanding (of that which we are aware)
Love, intimacy and Caring are an unbeatable trinity of emotion.
Why do we fear them?
1. Fear the words themselves
2. Fear responsibility (requires integrity if someone gives gift
of love to us...we can hurt them)
3. Fear impeccability (concentration in the moment)-requires attention
4. The trinity attracts negative ego
5. Fear growing up (emotionally)
6. Fear being weak
7. Fear of being naive-"Is it real?"
Lazaris has spent a goodly amount of time talking about the journey
towards mastery of spirituality. He has likened it and connected
it with the tree of life and the tree of excellence...also with
the Tarot. Unfortunately, it is too complex to outline all 22 steps
here (four levels--7 steps within each of three, one step in last)
It is available on audio cassette from a lecture entitled "Secrets
of Spirituality" March 10, 1985.
(in 358.31 I had 5 steps listed...probably my error in note-taking
for virtually always there are seven.)
Antidotes:
1. to inertia--start feeling, thinking
2. to projection--be responsible
3. to identification--have intimacy
4. to boredom--give, love (to others)
5. to revenge--say "no!" (to negative ego)
6. to guilt--laugh, have joy
7. to self-pity--ask for help (inner and outer)
I will mention here that for those of you who may never see Lazaris
(and it's Lazaris, not Lazarus) that he often speaks fast, usually
with a lot of humor, and always with the channel's eyes shut. This
makes it even more fascinating for all the expression he manages
to convey without using open eyes. Every workshop is "timed"
nearly flawlessly, though (obviously) he uses no notes and never
forgets anything. If you meet him in person, if you happen to have
a powerful crystal on, he will usually reach for it (remember, his
eyes are closed) and often comments on it. He knows everything
about you (emotionally is his preference...physically it is all
an illusion for him, thus the closed eyes.) Someone sent me mail
regarding a video tape...I recommend it at least once to get the
sense of being there in person. Also, in person, like Shirley
(or probably conversely) he always does a guided meditation...
this experiential portion is usually the "best part" of being with
him. I cannot replicate most of these things here, obviously.
The address (as someone else asked in mail)
is Concept:Synergy P.O. Box 159 (m) Fairfax, CA. 94930
or phone (for tape list, etc.) 415-456-4855
re .33 I know you want to hold onto your beliefs especially since
you are more directly experiencing them; I urge you to get some
more information from other sources before you "adhere" to some
of the things you say, however (personal opinion, Mike.)
I will communicate only a few more things over the next few days;
after that, I will "give it a rest". I will try to give a couple
of days to respond to any inquiries...if there are any...and then
You will be left to work it out without me (which you have succeeded
quite well in doing, anyway.) Again, I would like to state that
I did not originally intend to "dominate" this conference...I just
wish to leave you with what I would have tried to convey had I been
able to stay and play with you longer.
For tonight:
In your physical world of processed fast and junk foods, there are
those researching and deciding that the synthetic ingredients and
artificial preservatives cause cancer.
Guilt is totally synthetic and completely artificial and far more
destructive than a Big Mac and fries.
Frederick
|
| 358.35 | A MEMORIAL for memories | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Sat May 23 1987 02:20 | 77 |
| Memorial day weekend's first day...what is a memorial day?
A couple of years ago it was becoming aware of a former girlfriend's
death (several months earlier.) When once you get a true sense
for the fragility of this thing we call life and try to understand
what the reasons for it (or for its ending) are, then we realize
the value (as someone mentioned about money) that we place on things
and people and recognize the importance of doing it as excellently
and elegantly as possible. It appears to me that most of us playing
in this wonder concept of a playground for adults (i.e., this
conference) have a sense for the value of life and have a deep,
inquisitive desire to find out who's pulling the strings and why
are "they" doing it. I feel that it can be a shock and even a terror
for many of us to find out that "it ain't what we thought it was."
The fear of losing out on heaven, for example, can be quite
frightening. It is precisely those fears that can keep us in check
and it is precisely those fears that enables us to allow others
to have control over us in their zealous manipulations. So, often,
we plod along, deliberately, carefully, and apprehensively. It
is there that I have been these last few years. "What if Lazaris
turns out to be a fake?" Think of the humiliation! So, I considered
this carefully. About eight years ago I became a certified massage
therapist and in the process was exposed to things I never knew
existed (physically and metaphysically.) It was difficult for me
to shuck a Catholic background (yet I "knew" something was wrong
there.) Exposure (so to speak) to several people with open minds
and then later to workshops (Ken Keyes and Sage Experience) plus
more and more inputs into my life from the heretofore quiet
metaphysical side of myself ultimately led me to discover Lazaris.
At this point many of you are poised similarly. So what do we do?
We take it in, as much as we will allow. After it begins to make
sense or we try some things that work, then we take in a little
more. After many times this way, we develop this trust for ourselves
and lose some of those fears we once had. It is then, perhaps,
that we will allow a truly transformative or even possibly a
transcendent reality. Can we have the things Lazaris (and many
others) have talked about? It appears that way. In 306 (I think
it is) I talked about Lemuria. That was prior to my spending a
whole, incredible week with this friend, Lazaris, which was entitled
"Lazaris remembers Lemuria." He has said that, thankfully, science
will never prove the existence of Lemuria, but that it did exist
as a time that imagination has forgotten and that we are all of
us capable of taking dominion of this physical plane as the Lemurians
did so "long" ago. We are the mapmakers for the New Age. We can
do it. You are not here reading this by accident. There are no
accidents and there is no luck. I and you are making it all happen
for our own individuated reasons. Don't let this get too scary,
let it instead be exciting. Lazaris is not a cult figure, nor does
he have nor will he allow to be made into a guru, master, father
figure, etc. (though I will admit to some tendencies there) for
as he puts it, ultimately we stand alone. He would rather stand
next to us than force us to ultimately break the umbilical if we
view him as other than a friend. Explore what he has to say, for
I believe that his level of wisdom is exceptionally worthwhile.
I have no desire to recruit any of you, for I know where I stand
in this matter, but as I create my own reality in a more and more
positive manner, I am finding more support for my positive beliefs,
values and attitudes. The more who share in these views, the more
fun I find it to be for then the "help" comes by me a little easier.
As Lazaris has said, we need to work, but that means work easy,
not work hard. It never ends, and it just enables us to become
more of whoever it is we are.
Thank you, new friends, for enriching my life with your patience
and attention, and other things, too. A memorial to my life.
"Give yourself permission to fail.
When you give this permission, you ALLOW yourself to succeed.
The more often you permit yourself to be wrong, the more often you
will be right.
The key to decision making is not WHAT you decide, but THAT you
decide."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.38 | Another reference | FDCV13::PAINTER | Is we is or is we isn'... | Wed May 27 1987 20:09 | 16 |
|
Hello everyone.
I'm new to this conference, and was drawn to this topic immediately.
Why, I don't know (well.....yes I do know, actually).
I'm in the process of reading "The Road Less Travelled", by M. Scott
Peck. What has been written here sounds very similar to the message(s)
in this book. If this book has been discussed elsewhere in this
conference, please point me in that direction.
To reduce my observations on the material presented and discussed here
to a very simple statement, it would be "Good stuff!".
Cindy
|
| 358.39 | What it is...for me | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Thu May 28 1987 03:58 | 67 |
| re: .36-.37
I have over the last several years taken friends to Lazaris seminars
or at the very least given them tapes for their perusal (if not
just talked about him.) What's really somewhat interesting in the
vein in which you speak is how others perceive him...one very close
friend of mine considers himself a "Buddhist" (philosophically,
at least) and has said that Lazaris must have picked up all of his
stuff from Buddhism. Another close friend is a Rosecrucian and
told me that Lazaris must have picked up his stuff from the
Rosecrucians. Yet another friend told me that Lazaris material is
very similar to the Course in Miracles. A former girlfriend said
that Lazaris sounded just like the typical channel. A later girlfriend
said that Lazaris was just a very clever psychologist. I will simply
suggest that Lazaris is the "wisest" of beings to ever appear to
me and in that capacity should very well be able to understand all things
which appear before me, including my friends, and present them in
the "logical" manner in which I had already perceived them. Do
you follow this? In other words, he is reflecting my reality back
to me...and reflecting others' realities back to them. As we've
pointed out earlier (in 316) Lazaris is not here to "do it for us"
but to help us unfold it for ourselves.
Your later stuff about "where you are" is simply a way of
understanding that you are everywhere while you are in your point
of power (HERE, consciously, as a human being) PRIMARILY focused.
I've asked those questions of myself, too, and I will admit it is
most difficult from a human perspective to understand the creation
of a universe as a result of thought and nothing more. Yet it only
motivates me to attempt to realize that even more by creating my
"smaller" realities more consciously and hoping for elucidation
on the rest as a result.
re:.38 congratulations on your growth!
Peck's work manual is very helpful and useful to assist in everyday
kinds of things. What I disliked about Peck was his use of religion
as the ultimate goal. I do not care about worshipping anything
nor do I have any interest in a personified "GOD" energy. So, if
one eliminates those particular references, there are many handy
pieces of information within the body of their work.
A clarification that I picked up watching a new Lazaris video the
other night: Anything that our illusion indicates as motion is
a process that can be defined in seven steps. (In other words,
motion is an illusion...anything that has motion is a process...
all processes have seven steps[can have seven steps].)
"Beware of the person who says they like everyone for they probably
love no one.
Be cautious of the person who says they are not worthy of your
friendship or your love for they are probably telling you:
'You are not worthy of MY friendship or love.'"
"What is the Grand Plan?
What is the Ultimate Plot?
So many in metaphysical and spiritual study and growth attempt
to answer these questions. They think that if they can unravel
the plot, they won't have to finish reading the book.
Life, the Universe, Reality...it's like a fantastic story that
YOU are creating. Spiritual growth is becoming a good story teller.
ONLY...the person who can tell a good story can do it without a
plot."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.40 | Understanding is great | FDCV13::PAINTER | Is we is or is we isn'... | Thu May 28 1987 21:24 | 27 |
| Re.-1
Thank you! It's been about 48 hours now. I am finding that it takes
one heck of a lot of dicipline to not get caught up and lost in the
old patterns, but then nobody ever said it would be easy.
Comment on religion and Peck's work - I agree with you for the most
part (though my path is a bit different than yours and closer to
Peck's, hence I am getting quite a bit of information from the book),
however he did cite a case in which a woman was so 'beaten about
the head' with religion, God, good vs. bad and so forth throughout
her life, that she had to break with the past and the concept of
'God and religion' altogether and become a person in her own right.
She then had to understand that she alone had the power to decide
for herself good from bad, right from wrong, and that these sorts
of things aren't necessarily decided by a higher power (i.e. there
is no 'punishment' for going against these perceived rules). Only
then could she find peace within herself, and it took a very long
time to do this. From this case I infer that though Peck found his
way through God, religion, grace, etc., he does acknowledge that
this is not necessarily the best path for all people, especially
for this woman.
But then, I did skip a few chapters and read ahead.....
Cindy
|
| 358.41 | Many paths lead to roam | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Fri May 29 1987 03:14 | 127 |
| SINCE we've brought up the idea of many paths more than once here,
I will follow these lines with what Lazaris has talked about in
regards to MASTERY-the spritual journey home. I thought I couldn't
but I will try...keep in mind here that ANY path will work...there
is no "right" way...:
MASTERY (phase IV)
/ \
/ \
/ \ >>>>>top of
Understanding Wisdom Phase III
------------------------
| \ / |
| \ / |
Courage \ / Joy
-------------------------
| \ \ / / |
| \ \ / / |
| \ \ / / |
| \ \ / / |
| \ \ / / | >>>>>>top of
| \ \/ / | Phase II
| Elegance |
| /| \ |
| / | \ |
| / | \ |
| / | \ |
| / | \ |
| / | \ | >>>>>top of
| / | \ | Phase I
Impeccability | Vision
-------------------------
\ \ | / /
\ \ | / /
\ \ | / /
\ \ | / /
\ Clarity /
\ | /
\ | /
\ | /
\ | /
\ | /
Desire
You will note (if you work at my imperfection, here) that each
phase has 7 new lines added (except IV). Each of the seven is a
conservation of energy...no new energy is added.
Desire corresponds to the beginning (Malcouth in Tarot)
Clarity to Yesson
Impeccability (home) (notes not complete)
Vision Visionary (Metzah)
Elegance Tibareth
Courage Giborrah
Joy Chessy
Understanding Bena
Wisdom Chokma
Excellence Katha
Forgive me for not knowing the TAROT...those of you who know can
make the proper spellings, etc.
1. Brinkmanship--the Fool
2. Transmutation--the magician
3. Internal change--high priestess
4. External change--emporess
5. Ego control--emperor
6. ego mimic--heliophant
7. purpose---the lover
(next seven)
1. victory--the chariot
2. balance the imbalance--justice (balance)
3. internal knowing--hermit or croan
4. reassessment of world--wheel of fortune (zodiac)
5. power of manifestation--strength
6. metamorphosis--the hanged one (spirit can escape, reenter)
7. death--death
(next seven):
1. empowerment--temperance
2. denial of ego--devil
3. deny collective unconscious--power
4. GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS---the wayshower
5. co-creation--the moon
6. rebirth--sun
7. union/communion--judgement;dominion
(final component)
1. Mastery--the World
Desire corresponds to Conscious
Clarity corresponds to Sub-Conscious
Impeccability to Anima
Vision to Animus
Elegance to Unconscious mind
Courage to SELF (Spiritual synergy of limited self...physical self,
emotional self, intuitive self, mental self)--the totality
of what is possible.
Joy to SELF (the Witness--fully realized self)
Understanding to Soul (octave of anima)
Wisdom to Soul (octave of animus, remember?)
Mastery to Higher Self
Don't be surprised if you have a hard time following this...it was
quite an intellectual exercise and there was a lot of dialogue
surrounding it. Draw it out...then draw it out using my substitutions.
Try to make sense out of it.
Being all we can be physically, intellectually, taking care of ourself
emotionally (by expression) and stretching ourselves intuitively
leads us to be open to sense the Witness and self-realization.
This is where we are headed on the physical plane (...r u here,
Jerri?)
" You will not allow yourself to honestly grow mentally or
spiritually if you are unwilling to delve into and own the intensity
of your emotions.
You can SAY you are growing...but you are lying...especially to
yourself.
The boundaries of your potential overlapping areas of reality
are limited, but flexible. How do you expand those limits?
Through the expression of your emotions. When you talk about
and with emotion you expand the number of people with whom you can
honestly communicate.
Similarly, you expand the levels of consciousness...the planes
of reality...upon which you can honestly function. "
-Lazaris-
(Luh-ZAR-is)
Frederick
|
| 358.42 | Challenge | MTBLUE::PUSHARD_MIKE | | Fri May 29 1987 13:14 | 14 |
|
I became very deeply involved with religion and phychology for about
5 years and read a lot of material on the subjects including the
book mentioned by Peck.I also have read a lot of Leo Bascaglia(probably
wrong spelling)and seen his programs.I find nothing new or profound
about what Lazaris says.I really wonder what his purpose really
is?If all he has said is available from other sources then what
is he offering?If he is so all knowing how about some information
on scientific things.Tell us something so profound that there would
be no doubt about his identity.Something we can use that will be
sound proof of its existance.
MIKE
|
| 358.43 | | ERASER::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Fri May 29 1987 13:53 | 12 |
| Re .41:
It would appear that "Lazaris" is a student of the Qabballah. There
was a close tie-in to Quabballah and Tarot, primarily as a result
of the Golden Dawn movement in the late_19th-early_20th Century.
The interpretation of the Arcana is interesting, and a bit
nonconventional. But then, so is some of the sephira on _his_ Tree
structure.
Must have something to do with creating one's own reality. :-)
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.44 | Simplicity is natural | ORION::HERBERT | Walk in the sunshine | Fri May 29 1987 14:17 | 43 |
| Re: .41 & .42
I agree with Mike...the things Lazaris has said are things I have
already come across from different sources. That's why I have
said several times that I believe we can get answers from all around
us. It's wonderful that the Universe is set up that way...we all
have paths to greater awareness and understanding for ourselves
without needing to talk to anyone in particular, or go anywhere in
particular, or do anything in particular. But that's TOO EASY for
many of us to accept. So we need to view it in harsher terms and
make rules necessary for advancing ourselves.
I think Lazaris is a good source of help for many people. But as
I've said before, I don't think a valuable source for one person is
necessarily a valuable source for another. We are all so different
that you may learn lessons from a channelled entity, and I may learn
lessons from a bum hanging out on a curb. They're both the same in
my opinion. My experience has been that I've learned some of the
most profound things from some of the most (seemingly) simple,
unlearned, poor, and unaware people. This has been mind-blowing to
say the least. To me, it has shown that we're all equal...which,
in turn, has brought me a new concept of love.
Mike, your question about "why hasn't Lazaris told us anything
new or profound?" is one that I have wondered about myself. I'd
like to suggest that *one* of the reasons might be because we
already *know* a great deal! Sometimes it's the recognition, or
acceptance, of something that we've known all along, that appears
to be a new, profound revelation. I remember saying, "Yeh! I
*knew* that!! But NOW...I REALLY FEEL IT!!"
The knowledge may already be ours...and our "teachers" (those
around us) are the ones WE USE in a process of recognizing and
accepting that knowledge. Therefore, it doesn't matter who your
"teacher" is.
I would just like to share one more thing...it's from the Lazy
Man's Guide to Enlightenment:
"The person who most needs enlightenment, is the one who
sees other people as needing to be enlightened."
Jerri
|
| 358.45 | When the time is right... | AKOV68::FRETTS | Shine your Spirit! | Fri May 29 1987 14:24 | 26 |
|
Re: .42
Though I haven't read or listened to any Lazaris material (except
what Frederick has presented in this note), I have read and
listened to information presented by others - incarnate and
discarnate. Over the years as I began to allow myself to open
up to new ideas, what always amazed and delighted me was that
everyone was saying the same thing - they were just presenting
it in different ways. What this did was confirm for me that it
might have some value (also, that the information profoundly touched
me on such deep levels confirmed it too). I feel that those who are
in the role of "teacher" (or however we want to define the role), are
all just repeating the same stuff over and over again until such
time as we all "get it" (an old est paraphrase that is still
lingering and comes in handy now and then!). We each hear it at
our own time and pace - and the teacher arrives when the time is
right. I don't think the fact that Lazaris may be repeating
information you already have been given lessens what he has to say
at all. I know that you have been profoundly touched by what you
have come to learn and experience and feel. There are those for
whom Lazaris will be the catalyst they have been looking for.
Regards, Carole
|
| 358.46 | "how can I release this prison door I'm holding?" | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Sat May 30 1987 03:42 | 85 |
| re .42-.45
I got quite a chuckle out of your collective responses...with
the exception of Carole, I will admit to some disappointment. Recently
I read a book by Muktananda and I was also disappointed because
he "really could have said what he did in just a few paragraphs" rather
than a whole book. Carole has a very valuable awareness there.
What I find interesting is that some of the rest of you have
heard it all before and yet my perception is that if that's the
case, then why haven't you said so? Leo Buscaglia? The man's had
four heart-attacks preaching love, love, love...he says virtually
nothing else and does very little else. He needs to hug because
of his own lack of self-development. Anyway, I should probably
not "attack" specific things, here.
It is also amazing to me, unless you didn't read what I wrote,
that "you've heard it all before." I think that that might be an
indication of a closed mind. I spent 9 years studying ("formally")
psychology (the "Science of Behavior") and read Ken Keyes books
(some of them) and spent time both with him and the Sage Experience
people. NOT ONCE, did anyone ever anywhere put self-realization
in the same sentence with unconditional love. Unconditional love
has been called a function of love; Lazaris says differently.
Way back in 316 someone asked about "new stuff." I responded
that Lazaris is not here to do it for us...I've repeated that
statement. This is a reality that we have created...there are many
tools accessible to us. As Jerri has pointed out many times, you
don't have to go far to find them. So why do you want to know what's
going to be discovered on MARS when there is so much to learn
about yourself? That fascinates me. Based on what I've read in
this conference, though we are all working on a deeper understanding,
it's very clear to me that to my view many of you are chasing foolish
ideas. We are all on an Easter egg hunt; some of us keep choosing
rotten eggs. I knew five years ago when I started with Lazaris
that most of the stuff he talks about is stuff we already know.
I believe that in 316 I said so...I also tried to communicate that
in my mind he simply does it better, puts things, ideas, concepts,
etc. into a better perspective than any one else, AND, if you REALLY
listen, he will grease the pan for a real smooth ride! As I mentioned
earlier, the intellect and intuition are only two components of
the "limited self." Lazaris has meditations that will knock your
socks off! He has done some in person (that he has not placed on
any type of tape) that are incredible in the depth and reach and
release that they are capable of eliciting from within us. Hundreds
of people would undoubtably stand by me as I say that. He also
does a great deal of work in person and on tapes that will go quite
far in dealing with our current emotional conditionings. To insist
on satisfying our egos over intellectual pursuits is an insult to
the whole idea of an infinite wisdom (as I perceive Lazaris.) I
simply will no longer subscribe to the "Grand Promise"...the BIG
LIE that our science has tried to convince us of...that there is
abundance for all through science and that as long as we pursue
it we will be taken care of. You may convince someone else that
intellect is where it's at, but you aren't going to convince me
(and I'm not particularly deficient there.) Quit chasing rainbows
if what you are really looking for is love (and you are.)
Anyway, based on the responses of some and the mail from others,
some of this is worthwhile to some of those out there and more
meaningful than understanding the components of auto mechanics or
the weather in Nantucket's leading cemetery in July. Both of which
I'm sure Lazaris will be "glad" to respond to you about. I detect
ego out there that is rising up and saying "show me!" (my own ego
notwithstanding.)
...once more...there are literally hundreds of hours surrounding
what I've written...rent or buy a tape and listen. If you still
benefit more from your seance with aunt Harriet or from a 2,000
year-old book (for all the good it's done to billions hence) then
please, by all means, continue to find your enlightenment there.
If what "this Lazaris" says has no value for you, that's really
okay, too. I prefer to think that there is a great deal of value
here and would hate to have someone turn away out of a fear choice
rather than out of a growth choice.
I believe I have maybe one more week of communication here so
I will continue as I have for at least a few more days next week.
After that, someone else can continue this or you can go back to
your test tubes and Ouija boards.
"Houdini's greatest trick was to be chained, locked, tied, enveloped
in the darkness of a securely locked bag, and then submerged in
a tank of water.
The trick: to get free."
-Lazaris-
(I suggest very careful reading of that quote.)
Frederick
|
| 358.47 | Let me see? | MTBLUE::PUSHARD_MIKE | | Sat May 30 1987 16:15 | 42 |
|
ref:43-46
I appreciate the comments from all.I did have to take a step back
on some of yours Fredrick.I didnt expect that kind of response.I
felt like i had in some way offended you.I certainly did not intend
to if i did.My comments were intended to acquire answers.I dont
think that repeating information takes away from what is
said.Repetition is needed,since we all hear things at different
times.I still do not understand why an entity such as Lazaris,with
his infinite wisdom,would want to do what he is doing?Does he have
a purpose?What motivates him?Is he so bored that he has to talk
to us?I am interested in knowing theses things for my own self.If
He is so much beyond us in development i would like to explore his
personality and know some of the mysteries he could tell about.I
think exploring and wanting to know about things around us is a
great way of knowing more about ourselves.I certainly lack a lot
of self development,if i didnt i would be perfect,and that would
be boring to me.I am traveling a road with a lot of others.I am
different from all the rest,an individual.My development is as
individual as myself.How i do it is up to me to decide and is as
good as anyone elses way.Since i am at a certain point of development
i will see many others who are at different points and wonder why
they do certain things,but,i cannot judge THEM,but only what they
are doing in relationship to my own present perspective.I will not
find love by looking for it,only by giving it to others,By choice.
I learn from others and they may learn from me.Anything i say in
this conference may or may not be of any use to anyone,but,i feel
the sharing of ideas and feelings IS important to me.
I wouldnt be in this conference if i was not interested in the
subjects we discuss here.It was therefore,in that context,that i
asked the questions i did.I am more interested in what Lazaris IS,
and where,etc,than what he is saying philosophicly.
BYE,
MIKE
|
| 358.48 | | ERASER::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Mon Jun 01 1987 14:09 | 66 |
| re .46:
Looking back at the base note title, please recall that it's labeled,
"Truth, _Faith_, and Reality." We've talked "Truth," and "Reality";
underlying all of these is the less-discussed "Faith." Much of
the Lazaris discussion is a shining example of pure faith, as in
religion. Faith/belief is a powerful tool, and has great applicabil-
ities, particularly in certain rituals and ceremonies, yet, no more
than any other aspect of human activity, should it be all-consuming.
You are not to be faulted for following Lazaris, Fredrick; however,
I suspect in your last response something a little negative towards
other paths; perhaps I am in error, perhaps not.
In the absolute sense, thought, logic, or other aspects of the human
mind are totally unnecessary to achieve happiness. Even birds and
reptiles, neither of which seems to have much of a brain, let alone
complex mind, seem to be able to achieve these ... and even love
(eagles, for example, mate for life). So why have these attributes?
The answer seems to be that there are certain advantages is using
these facilities to expand oneself. Indeed, if these were not
worthwhile _tools_, it would be the height iof irony that we should
all be discussing these thoughts on a network brought about through
creative technology. [Those reading this without the help of
terminals and network connections are exempt from this observation.
:-)]
On the general subject:
There is a misperception here, I feel. There is no such thing as
"Science." There are various scientific disciplines, all of which
use certain tools to organize and systematize knowledge. By doing
so, researchers in the various disciplines will be able to get more
comprehension on their subject of interest. _Notice, that nothing
discovered "scientifically" need be classified as an Absolute Truth;
rather, it's something that helps make sense over something that
otherwise would be more difficult to cope with. It was, for instance,
an application of logic and the discipline of cryptology that enabled people
using the Rosetta Stone to decipher and ultimately translate the
hieroglyphics of Khem (ancient Egypt), which expanded some of our
lost metaphysical knowledge.
Why worry about what people will find on Mars? Why _not_? Mars
is as much a part of the grander scheme as is anything "revealed"
or even hinted at. Is it any less worthy to be concerned about
the composition of the Martian lithosphere than it is to seek ways
to tap into akashic records? I doubt it.
One of the great tragedies of _world_ civilization was the destruction
of the great library if Alexandria in Egypt. The Romans, early
Crusaders, and Moslems all had a hand in it, over various historic
periods. One of these (I won't say which) said of the contents,
"If what's said in the books here is contrary to our holy writings,
then they are evil, and must be destroyed; if what's said in the
books is in agreement with the sacred writings, they are superfluous
and might as well be destroyed." Thus, a great deal of knowledge
was forever lost to us because of an inflexible mind-set.
Now, I'm the last person to think I've found the One True Way _or_
the One Absolute Authority. But, as "noted" earlier, I do try to
keep one eye on what seems to be accepted fact while I'm still looking
around. Even where "accepted fact" may prove erroneous, understanding
where one has been is important, as is where one wishes to go.
Peace,
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.49 | Preachers rarely love | ORION::HERBERT | Walk in the sunshine | Mon Jun 01 1987 15:55 | 47 |
| Re: .46
Frederick, I'm glad that you are getting such a chuckle out of
the responses and thoughts of other people in this file. I'm
sure some are getting a chuckle out of you too.
To me, your last reply seemed something of a "put down" to some
of us. It appears (to me) that you think you know more than the
rest of us, and that you're going to tell us what it's all about.
Forgive me if this isn't true.
You seem to be able to tell people when they are right and wrong,
and when they have valuable awareness, and when they don't. You
must be a very good judge.
If you know so much, why are YOU wasting your time talking to us?
To help us? Why don't you love us instead?
You've said before that you believe you create your own reality.
Then may I ask you what you are doing in a place where you are the
enlightened one while all of your brothers and sisters are less
enlightened?
You may have aquired some new knowledge for yourself and had new
insights about some things. You may have studied many subjects in
your life and been rewarded for your studying with approvals from
people who give approvals. Good for you! I just hope there's room
for love for fellow (human) beings in your reality. Not the kind
of love that wants to change someone for their own good...but the
kind of love that accepts a person without judgement; seeing them
as perfect to receive love, just the way they are.
Love is the greatest thing you can do for other people. Better
than sharing knowledge, awareness, or enlightenment.
Intellectualizing the concept of unconditional love does not mean
you have it! And I think love is the only thing that can make all
of your other accomplishments mean anything at all.
If you're still learning things, be careful what you say to people
now. Your current perceptions may unfold in a way you never would
have imagined, showing that your previous teachings/preachings
were limited in their own way, and perhaps were more harmful to
others than you realized or intended. Love is all we need.
I wish you well.
Jerri
|
| 358.50 | Your way... | MOSAIC::GARY | inclinded to go barefoot... | Mon Jun 01 1987 20:43 | 33 |
| Regarding the last few, to no one in particular...
I find that the more I learn the less I seems to know :-).
I firmly believe that just because a path is right for me in no way
means it will be right (or wrong for that matter) for someone else. EVERY
path has it's lessons to teach.
The more I discover about my self and what I need to be a happy and
loving human being the more I believe that we all have our own paths
to walk; so much so that I'm not really sure what good giving advice or
wisdom is from one person to another, not really sure that anything I
have to say can help anyone else. (But then it does no harm either.)
Hmm, That sounds as if I believe we are all cutoff from one another, and that's
not what I meant either. We can support and help and love one another, but
all the progress that is made is made alone. A teacher(friend, lover) can
tell me something and I may believe it, but until I KNOW it with my own heart,
it just doesn't make a real difference. Each of us is firmly responsible for
his or her own destiny, and self, and we all must progress at our own pace.
I also believe there is no scale for enlightenment. No way to say I believe y
and so I must be more enlightened than someone who believes x. And that
includes ME :-). So while Lazius (sp?) is the path for some, Leo B(?) is
the path for others, and straight Christianity the way for still others.
And I make no judgment, it all depends on the need of the individual.
At last, we can all be right! :-)
-vicki
|
| 358.51 | A little tempering may be in order | HULK::DJPL | Do you believe in magic? | Mon Jun 01 1987 20:49 | 32 |
| I've been looking at some of these replies and have wondered whether or not
to get involved. Seeing the direction that this topic has takken, I am now
prompted to share some feelings of mine and how I got them.
I was raised a Roman Catholic. "Why?", I asked. "Because!", was the
reply.
Due to an increasing awareness of other beliefs around me, I can no longer
say I'm Catholic. This doesn't mean I have renounced most of my
traditional Christian values [golden rule, etc.].
I am currently in the middle of what I call a "faithquake". I have had
some experiences which led me to doubt *some* of the validity of what I was
taught.
The first thing that came out of my jumble of emotions was the realisation
that religion is *such* a *personal* matter, that there can be no 1
religion that is the be-all and end-all of religions. I can accept
anybody's religion as *ok for them*. As long as they don't push it on me,
I have no problems.
Just as if you asked 10 programmers to write a sort routine, you would get
10 different programs, so too would you get 10 different descriptions if
you showed 10 people "God". It is all perception.
Frederick, if Lazaris works for you, I'm *truly* happy for you. But please
understand that other people's perceptions are different. They may not be
able to see what you see, just as you may not be able to see something that
is as plain as day to them.
Still searching,
dj
|
| 358.52 | May-day! Oops, caught a head-wind! | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | | Tue Jun 02 1987 03:25 | 102 |
| re: .47-.51
After I went home Friday, I asked myself "why did I do that?"
Yes, I meant what I said but weren't there really more helpful things
that I could have said? Yes, probably. For instance, I wanted
to thank Steve for his Quaballah and Tarot observations...neither
one of which I know much about. But, instead, my anger/frustration
was such that my "ego" took reins...as it has too often here this
past few weeks. As several of you pointed out (especially Jerri,
who really does have a nice light!) I became judgemental and dominating
rather than what I know to be a preferable alternative. Someone
asked me in 358 what I was doing if I had it "all together". Jerri
refreshed that question...I sincerely hope that you can see as I
clearly "KNOW" that I don't "have it all together." Have I made
progress? Clearly so, in my reality...but I still have a long way
to grow. My current girlfriend (herself a long-time student of
Lazaris) asked me why I'm doing this? My answer is that it's fun...
as I have pointed out before, however, that should not be at anyone's
expense, including my own. Adult fun is better than that! Faith?
Well, Steve, no doubt it appears that way...but in truth (mine)
there is always a doubt...which is why I don't "OWN" my responses
and instead quote Lazaris. I've become as IVORY (99.9% pure) in my
convictions about Lazaris but yet this particular forum has allowed
me the opportunity to look at my notes some more...to study more,
as it were. You see, I come down hard on some of you thinkers
because I myself have tried hard to make it work that way and I
have not succeeded there. I see it as a blind alley. The process
of study has shown me why that will fail, and I believe that it
will. For as I've pointed out, we need to "FEEL" and as my
girlfriend has pointed out to me...*I* need to feel more and think
less (in other words, do the work, not the recitation of the work.)
So, you "caught me" in my negative ego. Thank you for the gentle
way in which you pointed that out to me. We all have a reflectiveness
within our realities...you reflected back to me my own limited
beliefs and doubts. I appear to have been extended by a couple
more weeks here (talk about uncertainties!) so I will attempt to
be more "real" as I continue in my discourses. Hopefully, your
patience will continue, as well. We all seem to agree that there
is no one path...all of us are individuals with uniquenesses that
persist. Where do I personally go? To subjects as 370 asks.
Indeed, why DO we do certain things? Because once we know the answer
we can work on changing them. As Lazaris has said: 1. Recognize
the problem. 2. Acknowledge it and your involvement. 3. Forgive
yourself 4. CHANGE So to respond to the 370 questions here
that would seem like a fair way to go about resolving the issues,
wouldn't it?
Mike, the answer to why Lazaris is here is one of the oddest of
answers. He is here because of Peny. Peny is an energy he knew
on other levels and was interested in her on this physical plane.
So he prepared to meet her here by communicating through the man
who was married to her (Jach Pursel, the channel.) They have not
been married for about ten years (or about 1-2 years since Lazaris
first came through.) Lazaris is completely aware of Peny in all
her other incarnations but chose this lifetime (an "unnecessary"
lifetime, according to Lazaris) in order to communicate. It them
became Peny's idea to have Lazaris communicate with others whereupon
Lazaris agreed. He says that he knew what Peny's reaction would
be and that he has been prepared to speak with us as well.
(for more, "Lazaris explains Lazaris" mentioned in 316.)
Lazaris says he spends approximately 1% of his energy in communicating
with us...the rest of his energy is working with other entities
on many other levels and with his own "growth" infinite levels removed
from us (on this level.) He also has acknowledged that he knows
this response is not acceptable and that he could have made something
else up, but that this is the truth for us.
Incidentally, he says that the first seven levels of love for us
are: 1. security (the infant) 2. pleasure (the child) 3. sensual
(the adolescent) (where most of us get stuck) 4. self-love (we hover
around this) 5. societal (others or groups of others) 6. humanitarian
(the nature or potential of humankind) 7. cosmic love (loving our
higher self, soul, GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS.)
Is there more...yes, but we don't need to worry about levels beyond...
there is love of motion, energy, light, etc. and beyond.
So, I was obviously (at least to me) not coming from self-love in
some of my responses last week. I am NOT, however, a "Blind-faith"
follower or worshipper, either...I, too, believe in individuality
and now is the time (as 3 or 4 of you pointed out) to start
ALLOWING that (from the heart.) As another Lazaris aside...he has
said that we "should" be grateful for our technology for it allows
us the "time" to grow inwardly...something other humans have never
given themselves...ironically, he says, we think LESS than they
did BECAUSE of that very technology...(laziness, for one reason.)
Herewith a message I haven't succeeded in adhering to:
"Understanding and expressing your emotions is the basis of true
growth...the basis of true spiritual evolution.
The way you communicate with someone is to allow your mutually
individual and independent realities to overlap. Further,
communication can occur only in these areas of overlapping. The
same is true with communication from one plane of reality to
another.
The only quality that exists among all people...the only quality
transcends all planes of existence is : LOVE.
Love is the ultimate emotion and to experience it, you must be
WILLING to experience all the others."
So shall I endeavor to follow that particular credo.
Frederick
|
| 358.53 | Yes, that's it..... | FDCV13::PAINTER | Is we is or is we isn'... | Tue Jun 02 1987 14:42 | 14 |
|
Re.52
Congratulations on YOUR growth! That took courage, and hopefully
we will all learn something from your response.
Re. Others
Thank you for engaging in constructive criticism and positive feedback
as opposed to taking the easier path (of destructive criticism and
negative feedback/fighting words). By doing this, you too have
grown.
Cindy
|
| 358.54 | THANKS | MTBLUE::PUSHARD_MIKE | | Tue Jun 02 1987 18:52 | 9 |
|
Thank-you for your reply on Lazaris.An interesting reason which
to me tells me something about his personality.I would like to hear
more about the reality that he exists in,if possible.
I appreciate your openness and honesty.Its refreshing to assosiate
with people i have met here.
MIKE
|
| 358.55 | ...what's tomorrow's lesson for today? | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Jun 03 1987 03:53 | 94 |
| re: 53
Thank you...as we continue on our happy trail, I thought I'd throw
in this little story:
It seems this little bird decided to hold out to travel south for
the winter. Well, on into the first blizzard, he decided he'd had
enough, so off he went heading south. Pretty soon, however, his
wings froze over and he fell to earth. While he lay there, half
frozen, a cow came by and made a deposit of what we shall call a
muffin, square onto the hapless aviator. Lo and behold, however,
the heat from said muffin thawed out his frozen wings. In his
exhuberance, as he chirped away in glorious ecstasy, along came
the neighborhood cat, who, seeing our feathered friend, promptly
ate him.
3 morals:
1. Everyone who shits on you isn't necessarily your enemy.
2. Everyone who gets you out of shit isn't necessarily your friend.
3. If you're warm and happy, keep your mouth shut.
While I'm not too sure about these morals here, sometimes there
is a certain sad truth to such stories. Hopefully, there are other,
more positive "endings" and therefore different stories to tell.
This story could well apply to some of the interactions we all too
often seem to have, however, so maybe there is a little wisdom here
for all of us.
re: .54
I very strongly urge you to send away for the Lazaris explains Lazaris
tape, Mike...cost, I believe, is $10 for 60 minutes worth. He really
covers a lot of territory there. I'm not sure I can answer much
more than that. As a footnote to my response of last night, however,
let me say that Peny married a guy named Michaell Prestini shortly
after splitting with Jach and ever since the three of them have
shared a domicile. Peny talks with Lazaris almost nightly, as I
understand it, and she gets to be the "guinea pig" for many of the
things Lazaris wants to try. I have heard that once upon a time
Lazaris made objects move (that's a rumor) but I know that he and
Peny both have confirmed a story about healing a woman around 12
years ago and in the process, he raised her off the bed nearly one
foot. He says that he has since "learned" to downstep his energy
more so that that would not reoccur. Anyway, I often feel somewhat
indebted to Peny for "sharing" Lazaris with us. Peny is quite
extraordinary, herself, quite educated, insightful and wise. An
audience with her can often be quite constructive. Jach recently
said, on local television, that he doesn't know where Lazaris comes
from, but that he feels compelled to believe what Lazaris has said
(Jach has to listen to recordings, since he is asleep without dreaming
while he is in trance.) He added, however, that it doesn't really
matter to him and shouldn't matter to others where Lazaris says
he is from if the message is useful to you. I think most of us
would be willing to agree with that.
Lazaris has added that he is simply a spark of consciousness, without
form. All of us exist on the same levels he does, except that he
does not exist in any of the physical planes...he "chose" to not
do so and is quite "content" with his "decision". The singular
big difference between us and them (Lazaris speaks of "himself"
in the plural) is that he is aware of his multiplicity and even
though we also have it, we are not aware of it simultaneously as
he is. He adds that since he sits outside the "set" (as in math)
of the physical plane, he can therefore observe it better than any
human can, which is why he can offer insight we are unaware of.
In regards to 370 as I brought up last night, I will stay out of
that one for now, but notice how often similar situations have cropped
up throughout this conference, i.e., someone has a "story" and then
"wants to understand it." Isn't this exactly what life could be
all about? Creating stories, moments, experiences, etc. and then
trying to figure them out? If you would spare me some more repetition,
then you will see from what I've written before in 316, 307 and
358 that it is entirely plausible that this dominion that Lazaris
is encouraging us to take is "what it's all about." In other words,
understanding the hows and whys leads one to consciously, successfully
creating a reality in which we have complete dominion and that once
having achieved that, there would simply be no "necessity" for
continuing in physicality (unless you "choose to" for the "fun of
it.") Is this clear and does it make sense? Once more, though,
it's a big leap to dominion, at least it has been for me (since
I am not "yet" there.) The responses to 370 have been quite
insightful, by the way...in my opinion. I do believe it does have
"something to do with creating your own reality."
I know I repeated a quote last night (deliberately) so here is one
that seems a rational followup:
"The only lesson to learn is that
THERE ARE NO LESSONS TO LEARN."
-Lazaris-
(you see, Jerri, he agrees with you...remember that I've done the
communicating, not Lazaris.)
Frederick
|
| 358.56 | is there still more? | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Sat Jun 06 1987 03:59 | 88 |
| re: my own notes
I feel compelled to complete several aspects of Lazaris material
that I have not yet gotten around to writing. The last two nights
I have been trying to read as many of the notes that both I am
interested in and that I have had time for. Lots of good stuff
there! (I'm not finished yet.) Is there a "quick and dirty"
way to know when someone has added anything to a particular topic?
I suppose one can search by date but that seems slow. If so, it
might be useful to know in order to go back to "already covered
territories" and still have respondants...(who would know that
45.87 just had a response to it and who would add to that, e.g.?)
One of the things I should have said the other day is that
Lazaris DOES add new stuff (even though most of it can be found
elsewhere) and yet it is usually presented in very understandable
language...this occured to me while I was reading several topics
from the past two years that were for me, at least, tedious and
difficult...for example, pick up a technical book of some type
(where you only have a limited knowledge) and try to read it. It's
often so difficult that the reader quits. In this regard Lazaris
is seldom boring (although my presentation of him might well be.)
He says that when we find ourselves in that position that it MIGHT
be our ego trying to play the avoidance game. Voila! Another
reason for his "usefulness."
Among things that come to mind: our physical reality is comprised
of the physical forces (weak, strong, electromagnetic and gravity)
synergized with the metaphysical elements (earth, wind, fire and
water) to produce the alchemy of our reality.
That around the time of Homer, et al., vision was actually different
than ours...they did not see the same color blue as us, for example
(and would therfore describe the sea as red, etc.) He added something
that they had and we don't, but off-hand I don't remember what.
During earlier times, (and this ties in with anima/animus discussion)
people had much less imagination than we did (except for the Shamans,
etc.) and would therefore HAVE to "go to the mountain" as it were,
to experience something directly. For us, we have 26 letters that
can be arranged in certain ways in which to convey meanings and
trigger imaginations that the ancients could not have grasped.
For this reason (among several) we can use meditation and accomplish
many things that would otherwise not be possible. (I want to expand
on this later, probably next week.) In other words, we don't have
to go to Machu Pichu to feel it, or to any other place upon the
planet or the universe. We can easily go into meditation and
experience it.
Also, another aside about Concept:Synergy. They are all now
wealthy and self-sufficient. They have no real "necessity" to make
any more money for themselves...they do and they will, however, for various
reasons. As of early fall last year they had a regular mailing
list of 30,000. I suspect it's much bigger due to the incredible
publicity of the past 6-9 months. They are opening an art gallery
at no. 1 Rodeo Drive, Beverly Hills, CA. that will match the one
in Marin County that Shirley mentions in the movie she presented last
January. The one in Marin has been voted the most outstanding
art gallery of Marin County (by who, I don't know.) Marin County
is the county on the other side of the Golden Gate Bridge from
San Francisco.
Though I suggested to Mike that he get the Lazaris explains Lazaris
tape for him, I don't necessarily recommend it for anyone else.
The reason is that he is more interested in him than in what he
says (at this point, at least.) I recommend almost anything else
(although I do have my favorites.) He also has tapes with JUST
meditations on them, ranging from help with menstruation to
communicating with the GODDESS. He has been asked which one to
pick and he has responded "Pick one."
I will be seeing you...
"You will not allow yourself to honestly grow mentally or spiritually
if you are unwilling to delve into and own the intensity of your
emotions. You can SAY you are growing...but you are lying...
especially to yourself.
The boundaries of your potential overlapping areas of reality
are limited, but flexible. How do you expand those limits?
Through the expression of your emotions. When you talk about
and with emotion you expand the number of people with whom you can
honestly communicate.
Similarly, you expand the levels of consciousness...the planes
of reality...upon which you can honestly function."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.57 | Don't sweat it | HULK::DJPL | Do you believe in magic? | Sun Jun 07 1987 03:39 | 4 |
| re -.1
Your notebook will bring new replies to old notes to your attention
automatically.
|
| 358.58 | | KIRK::PIERSON | | Sun Jun 07 1987 21:59 | 5 |
| re .-1 & .-2
That is true IF you have read all notes.
dave pierson
|
| 358.59 | | HULK::DJPL | Do you believe in magic? | Mon Jun 08 1987 00:45 | 3 |
| re .58
Or set them as 'seen'.
|
| 358.60 | | INK::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Mon Jun 08 1987 12:33 | 52 |
| Re .56:
> Among things that come to mind: our physical reality is comprised
> of the physical forces (weak, strong, electromagnetic and gravity)
> synergized with the metaphysical elements (earth, wind, fire and
> water) to produce the alchemy of our reality.
>
Generally, people look at physical reality differently than that.
The "metaphysical elements" are oftem thought of in terms of matter
states: earth=solid, wind [or, more properly, air]=gas, water=liquid,
and fire=plasma. Of course, since the "alchemy of our reality"
is undefined, you [or "Lazaris"] might be setting up something defined
by itself (i.e., "Our physical reality is comprised of ... the alchemy
of our reality."). If indeed you [or "Lazaris"] is defining rather
than explaining, my apologies for misunderstanding.
> That around the time of Homer, et al., vision was actually different
> than ours...they did not see the same color blue as us, for example
> (and would therfore describe the sea as red, etc.)
That's a misconception that was popular a couple of generations
ago, primarily because "blue" as a word was not prevalent in Homeric
writings; however, since the pigment was used elsewhere (check any
Egyptian tomb) and because "blue" was used in other cultures (see,
for instance, _The Epic of Gilgamesh_), it's hard to believe that
only the Greeks were colorblind to blue. If this is "Lazaris"
speaking, he ought to check the writings of other ancient cultures
before making such statements.
> For us, we have 26 letters that
>can be arranged in certain ways in which to convey meanings and
>trigger imaginations that the ancients could not have grasped.
Sorry, I can't agree with that, either. The ancients could imagine
as much as we, given the intellectual stimulus. Many of today's
thoughts had seeds in ancient writings, such as atomic theory
(Lucretius, for one), heliocentric solar system (Hipparchus, as
I recall), and the differential and integral calculus (Archimedes
of Syracuse). There are other examples in other cultures.
Naturally, we can see farther and think more deeply, because we
have their experiences to draw on; the implication, though, that
modern language and alphabets make a significant difference is
seriously open to question, however.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.61 | yes, they could see blue | ERASER::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Tue Jun 09 1987 18:13 | 13 |
| Re .56, .60:
Did a little checking. There are at least two words in the ancient
Egyptian language for "blue." Since we don't have ROMs for
hieroglyphic characters, I'll do the neareest phonetic equivalent.
One is "mekerr"; the other is "khesbet." Khesbet is also used to
refer to lapis lazuli, by the way.
The language is at least a couple of thousand years older than Homer.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.62 | I am...here | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Jun 10 1987 04:00 | 101 |
| re. .57-.59 Thank you...so far I don't know how to apply that but
I will try as I get more "time."
re. 60-.61
I have been playing Jimmy Olsen, cub reporter, here, simply to report
what I have heard...one can easily argue the merits of my reporting
and/or note-taking. For example, I have noticed that my girlfriends
notes are very disimilar to mine...I find that rather interesting.
What I notice as important, she often doesn't and conversely. For
"intellectual" stimulation/satisfaction, then, one needs to listen
to the tapes (as many as a dozen times later I will still hear things
I didn't hear the first time.)
In so far as the alchemy of our reality, I cannot explain his
statement further...I will state that he has used the metaphysical
elements very powerfully in our meditations, however...more later
this week on that. As regards the color red vs. blue, one needs
only to be aware of those who are colorblind (to whatever extent)
to know that a red or blue can both appear to be the same "color"
of gray to a given individual. Who is to say that to Homer and
others of ancient times, their "color-blindness" didn't exist to
the extent of "actually seeing" a different color? Why would Lazaris
make what could only be considered a "stupid" statement otherwise?
I have considered that position many times and my conclusion is
that what he says is probably true...let me throw a fragmentation
grenade into this, however, by adding that Lazaris has also said
(more than once) that he has no attachments...he is therefore not
attached to being either "right" or "wrong." Could it not therefore
be that he is simply "wrong" about this? Certainly yes, according
to you...(this could also be perceived as an easy way out, too,
I suppose.) He has said many things (here and there) that at first
glance seem to be in error (as I believe I reported in other words
in 316 or 358) and that later proved to be explainable or correct.
So, what's the answer here? I don't know. It takes nearly two
years in advance to get an appointment to talk with him (or maybe
just 3 months if you create that on the floating schedule) or you
can perhaps even possibly get to ask during the question/answer
sessions held after the 2-day workshops. As for me, I have better
questions for myself to ask whenever I get those rare opportunities.
In other words, it's difficult to get to find out specific answers
like this unless you make it real important to know and why would
you want to IF you can find out about your temper, jealousy,
lack of success, etc. instead?
Incidentally, what Wayne wrote in 288, I think it is, about
the void, is quite fascinating and lends itself to what Lazaris
says very handily...just substitute a few words here and there...
Lazaris has talked about success many times (telling us that
the rest of our universe is very successful...WE'RE NOT.) But,
rather than meaning that as some sort of putdown, he has given us
many ways in which we, too, can be successful (which we ARE, if
we simply allow it.) I will not go into all the various formulae
for success and steps, etc., you can get that from a tape if you
wish, but I will say that one of the ways he talks about allowing
for more success is through work with our "success cube." The floor
of this cube is our beliefs...the ceiling is our outward image (such
as "I've never seen myself this happy before.") and the width is
our desires and expectations. How deep? this is an internal image
of ourself (how we value ourself or what we think about
ourself...decisions and choices.) Deservability is what comprises
the sides. Freedom is living within the boundaries.
He says that the success cube is always full because we create the
maximum we will allow so, in order to have more success, create
a bigger success cube. How? By meditation...going into the
subconscious mind and pushing out the walls. The messages are held
by the sub-conscious and we need to be willing to expand any one
dimension (with FEELING.) Sounds simple, but obviously, it requires
working with more than just the intellect.
Another note earlier in these notes concerned itself with
Christianity and it's following the Egyptian Osiris precedent.
I found it fascinating and also supportive of what Lazaris talks
about in terms of "scripture" that we covered in 316.
A very important aspect that remains to be covered concerns itself
with dealing with components of ourselves, i.e. the child, adolescent,
adult, counselors, etc. Similar, but markedly different from
the approach of transactional analysis. I will go into some further
detail in a subsequent response. I feel that this background is
essential before talking about meditation from my Lazaris perspective.
Once I am done with meditation (talking about it) I will consider
my Lazaris material "presentation" covered to at least its basics
and I will probably add little further. So there be my "schedule."
Skeptiscism is healthy, in my view, and I encourage it to the
point where one doesn't lose track of perspective on ones "purpose."
Sometimes, however, it becomes prudent to "fly in the face of
rationale" in order to break free of chains that hold firmly in
a prison of limitation. Be WILLING to fly!
re: current course in 370:
"When trying to find the causes of distress, the solution lies in
common denominators. The singular common denominator to all
the traumas and tragedies in your life is:
YOU were there when it happened."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.64 | Lily said it, too | VINO::EVANS | | Wed Jun 10 1987 16:30 | 9 |
| RE: 63
Reminds me of Jane Wagner's line, via Lily Tomlin thru her "bag
lady" character: (paraphrasing)
Reality's just a collective hunch.
Dawn
|
| 358.65 | The symphony is playing...do we harmonize? | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Thu Jun 11 1987 03:42 | 140 |
| re: .63-.64
Werner has done a great deal towards uplifting the consciousness
of us all (I believe,) and for that we owe him a great deal, in
my opinion. As for Lily Tomlin, she does fairly sizzle with some
of her stuff...very insightful...if I'm not mistaken, she is either
a Ramtha or Lazaris student.
re: .60
While my tendency is to agree with you on the ancients as to their
intellect, I will defer my thought to earlier notesfile stuff regarding
learning things at different times...i.e., perhaps they couldn't
understand nuclear physics and yet they understood far more than
most of us about building a campfire. In this regard, again deferring
to notesfiles info, in other lifetimes (assumption, here) we learned
about things which are not relevant or important to us in this one,
and vice versa. So as we've discussed before, we are all exactly
where we want to be along our "path." However, to respond more
directly to your premise (versus the statements from Lazaris) there
may be a case here where you are both "right." Consider for a moment
that in ancient times the masses usually ascribed themselves to
whatever the seers, soothsayers, witchdoctors, wise-people, witches,
shamans, "intellectuals," holymen, etc., etc. had to offer them
for their guidance and purpose and for ways to attain whatever it
is that they were going after. It was these who had their
"clairvoyance" or "enlightenment" or whatever else was noteworthy
of "leadership" value that stood out and became the historical figures
or footnotes some of which you describe. This does not mean that
the masses could see what the "leadership" prescribed. It is entirely
possible that Lazaris refers to the masses when he talks about reading,
etc., acts that were not available to the ancient masses. One would
go to a holy man, e.g., who would then direct that person to a
particular mountain to climb, or river to sit next to, or plant
to consume (for its hallucinogenic qualities, perhaps.) Lazaris
(I think) is simply saying that we don't need to do those things...the
writings that we have and the stimulation we have are sufficient
to experience VIA MEDITATION, etc. what previously could only be
done "live." As Einstein marveled the zipper, so Lazaris has expressed
fascination with our alphabet. Okay on this one?
Let me now try to explain as best and quickly as I can what
it took me five years to finally understand concerning aspects of
ourselves. Though Lazaris had us work with this in the past, it
wasn't until the "Realizing Lemuria" week with him two months ago
that I finally "got" the significance. But as others have expressed
so eloquently in other topics or even in this one, sometimes this
understanding is difficult to attach words or maybe even intellect
to. Understand that like everything else, whether as a friend of
Lazaris or by some other method(s), it all tends to weave and interlace
itself to give the totality of whatever it is is your reality.
So, by this method (Lazaris') at least, there are certain precepts
that need to be understood in order to intellectualize it (although
intellect is not the only vehicle available for understanding.)
It is helpful to see the value of the tarot, the Quaballah, the
seven steps to spirituality, astrology, gestalt therapy, numerology,
etc. etc. and for me, I immensely enjoy watching all these things
come together and "making sense" or seeing the overlap one to another
and back again. And I think that that is what this entire conference
is about...all kinds of ideas and thoughts and then each of us,
individually, pulling and gathering whatever we can into a common
understanding. So, to this end, it is necessary for this particular
subject of components to understand that there is no time, no space...
all lifetimes occur simultaneously--past, future, parallel. So
within that, just in THIS lifetime, one is always an infant, always
an adult, always young, always old. And, paradoxically, all of
these "parts" are always changing (the only constant, of which there
are none.) So you can change your future, you can change your present
and you can even change your past. As a child, all of us experienced
certain things...most of us are not too interested in playing with
our own toes or belly-buttons anymore...we've "outgrown" that.
Certain things, however, we haven't yet "outgrown." Feelings.
Yes, feelings. We can all "too well" remember the ridicule, the
punishments, the sadnesses, the pleasures of certain things, etc.
Is remembering them enough to be done with them? No, I don't think
so. Have you "dealt" with rage simply because you remember the
rage you felt at some event or person? No. So, Lazaris has shown
us that we CAN deal with some of these "negative emotions" (unexpressed
or perhaps non-handled) now, in this, the present. Central to this
is discovering wherever it is that these feelings came from. And
for most of us, they came "from our past" or, more specifically,
usually, from components of our past. Two of these components are
our "child" and our "adolescent". They live now. They exist.
Forever. AS a child, or an adolescent, however, they can be seen
to be as "underdeveloped" in a sense (from an adult perspective.)
In other words, they are only capable of reaching just so far.
A child cannot be an adult, and it can only understand things from
a child perspective. It is very often this same child that we,
as adults, must deal with. Analyze a particular feeling sometime...
where does it come from? Where and when have you experienced it
before? Could it have been in your childhood, adolescent, (or
as Lazaris has suggested--sometimes from another lifetime?) So,
what about it? Lazaris has "suggested" (incidentally, he only
"suggests" events, etc.) that the child within us can NEVER get
enough love. It demands love incessantly...and is never satisfied
for very long. The idea, then, becomes to give the child whatever
it is it is seeking...otherwise, it becomes demanding and disruptive
to our "adult" self. When this happens, we become the "critical
parent" or we allow our negative ego to dominate or we allow a
monstruous combination of the two. This, by the way, will happen
unless we consciously choose to be an adult. Simply dealing with
the child or adolescent or young adult is not enough here. Lazaris
has stated that unplugging the ego and dismantling the critical
parent, together with the handled child and adolescent will only
produce a boring and bored shell of a human being (a "psychic
vampire" oftentimes.) The DECISION to become an adult, however,
clears those blockages. I will not go to further length to describe
the qualities of an adult...it is all available on tape. Let me
just get back to the child. Two months ago, I (and 300 others)
got to see something virtually none of us had ever witnessed before.
And that was a "session" with Lazaris whereby he "worked on" about
30 individuals in front of the rest of us. This was done in groups
of five or so, over about 4 days, taking about two hours for each
group. All of us were able to learn from what we were able to observe.
What was quite interesting to me was that within the 30 or so
individuals there were perhaps 4 or 5 therapists. They, too, have
"blockages." Lazaris, in a matter of minutes, was able to ask
appropriate questions that helped each and every subject with his/her
blockage. Further, most of these blockages stemmed from a childhood
experience/memory/belief. It became very clear to me how devastating
these blockages can be. I will not go into discovering the blockage
here, for this is already taking a "long time" but I will say that
once you have discovered it, it is relatively simple to "fix."
It simply involves meditation. Think about it. Simple, is it not?
And yet so many of us won't do it. During those workshop days there
were people who had had blockages from there childhood (up to about
40-50 years for some) who were suddenly able to release them. It
was quite extraordinary for them and quite extraordinary for us
both to see similarities between them and us and being able to watch
the process of learning how to deal with it.
I am pressed here for other duties so I will try to pick up
from here tomorrow.
"All levels of Reality are in harmony. Your Reality is not.
The same force that destroys that harmony is used to put it back
again...
...free will."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.66 | Soar with eagles or... | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Fri Jun 12 1987 04:34 | 47 |
| re: .65--a continuation
The child is roughly 6 years old. It asks "AM I getting enough?"
It wants to be like the parents but can't. Success to a child means
pain, sometimes. The child is: self-centered, a victim, in fear,
manipulative, has anger/rage, is concerned for survival. So what
can you do with it? Go into it's place, as an adult, and give it
what it wants...and as much of it. As it becomes satisfied it then
becomes the FREE CHILD.
The adolescent (9-12) is into better than, martyrhood, panic,
manipulation of others, perfection, blame, rationalization, and
approval. He/she feels unforgiveable. They mimic adults. They
ask "AM I good enough?" This adolescent wants to be anything that
works. When it is satisfied, via meditation, it becomes the CURIOUS
ADOLESCENT.
Similarly, the young adult can be handled.
And the critical parent can become the nurturing parent.
The synergy of the free child, curious adolescent, nurturing
parent, positive ego, anima and animus, soul and self is called
the seven internal resources by Lazaris...access to these resources
are "true wealth."
One of the keys here is forgiveness. 1. for the child, from
parents. 2. the adolescent feels unforgiveable. 3. the young adult
doesn't need forgiving (it has all the answers) 4. the adult seeks
it from deeds or religion. 5. the metaphysical adult realizes the
need and seeks it from self. 6. the spiritual adult seeks and gets
it NOW from Higher self, GoD/Goddess/All-THat-IS. (It's arrogant
to not love oneself; If it's good enough for "GOD" but not good
enough for us.) 7. Co-creatorship with GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS.
Busting systems.
Anyway, I think the picture is moderately clear, here. This
is different from strictly role-playing, for there the power is held
by the child within, not by the adult. In these meditations, the
adult YOU has the power and simply allows the child (usually) to
have what it wants. It is incredibly powerful once this mechanism
is fully appreciated and applied.
(I'm out of steam...more later.)
"The key to freedom is power and the key to power is responsibility.
You are eager to be powerful so you reluctantly agree to be
responsible even though it scares you. Freedom really scares you
and it is a fear with which you seldom deal."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.67 | ...the things I see on the road... | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Tue Jun 16 1987 04:20 | 39 |
| ...a little bit more on -.1, -.2 ...
There are some glaring omissions in what I have written due
in part from my lack of understanding...e.g., I have not spelled
out what the free child is (part of it is that it is totally
impeccable---focused.) Anyway, I have been too busy to continue,
I hope to continue more later this week.
I will add this from my notes:
Are we free? No, if we need to ask. Or,:
1. If we are living in the past
2. If we need permission to grow
3. If we are locked into self-pity and self-importance
4. If we deny other's freedom or invade their privacy
5. If we try to control people (out of self-centeredness)
6. If we aren't BEING RESPONSIBLE for our reality
7. If we aren't actively pursuing freedom (we'll lose it if it
isn't constant.)
"Metaphysics is not a union shop...there are no points for seniority."
When all the promises fail, the belief that mankind is evil, etc.
manifests. One then becomes a living suicide.
"Old dogs can't learn new tricks...old humans can."
0-6 years of age and high school are the most damaging periods of
life.
"In the history of the world, the majority has never been correct.
It has always been a lie...now it's called communism."
"The Spiritual Path is NOT a lonely path. When your growth is filled
with love, joy and aliveness, the path is crowded with many unseen
friends. It's only when growth is filled with fear, struggle, and
pain that the path seems so lonely."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.68 | | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Thu Jun 18 1987 02:08 | 98 |
| RE: more reality...from Lazaris thru me, to you...
As I tried to describe in my last few entries, it is important
to deal with the blockages in one's life if one chooses to spring
ahead as far as "possible" in a given lifetime (up to a complete
transcendence.) There are many ways of achieving everything that
is possible. Lazaris has been wonderful in showing us a multitude
of ways...we can choose and decide which, if any, to do, whether
it's "his" method or some other. Dealing with the child and adolescent
is simply one of the tools. Another is going into the subconscious
mind and changing beliefs, etc. directly. As I stated earlier,
this generally involves meditation. I will "bring this up" later
on...for now let me give you some information that seems to be of
interest to the topics I've seen discussed since I've been here
and perhaps much earlier. I've spent the last few days going through
my 3-inch binder full of notes jotting down various points. Herewith:
"We must own the collective unconscious before we can give it the
slip." 'The Power of Dominion' 10-28-1984
Science is now proving what metaphysicians have been saying.
Ultimately, science will conclude that there is more than an objective
reality...something more than you. Some will refer to this as 'GOD'
(as an electricity.) Science will define this as energy (without
feeling.) GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS is more than a tool. It DOES
care and science will not be able to prove it.
'Being Loved' 1-13-85
Prior to physicalness, we go from nothing to all. The concept
of God is light. It is true. The core of our reality is trapped
light-white holes or black holes (depending on direction of
revolution.) Light is trapped by four forces [mentioned earlier
in 358] and the four metaphysical elements come from the trapped
light. Gravity is a particle and a wave. Trapped light that traps
itself. Trapped God that traps itself. Our reality is trapped
thought.
'The Secrets of Spirituality' 2-2-1984
Intelligence is the ability to pay attention. Success is more
than an attitude...it is also an aptitude. Wisdom can be acquired
also. If intelligence is within time, wisdom is looking outside
of time in a certain set and setting. Wisdom does not rely on logic.
Wisdom is what's right, good, morally correct, adds to principles,
ideals and makes a better person. We need both intellect and wisdom
to have the materials to build success.
'The Tapestry of Success' 1-15-84
The difference between one sub-atomic particle and another is
not the substance but the vibration of the elements. Trapped light
trapped by energy trapped by thought. There is no movement, just
shifting of thought. Is there such a thing as space? No. What
is time? Why do these conventions exist? Because we want a quality
to our lives. We want to do more than wake up and go to sleep.
...this is not a culmination of all other lifetimes.
' A Private Consultation' 10-3-85
Mathematicians used cause and effect to prove our mechanical
system. There has never been proof that cause and effect work-
it has been an assumption based on political pragmatism. Cause
and effects can be little pasttimes; games to play in the "waiting
rooms" of our life.
'2-days with Lazaris' 5-3-86
Chakras are the doorways between physical, auric, energy and
etheric bodies. The etheric body is a dream or idea that your higher
consciousness has. When our aura stops, we die.
'Chakras' 10-26-86
...in response to earlier note...in ancient times, man could see
Venus with the "naked eye". But he couldn't detect violets or
blues.
'2-days w/Lazaris: Transmutation:The Vision Quest' 3-22-86
No such thing as a soul-mate as we believe it. In order to
have one, must first acknowledge our wholeness. Soul-mates can
come in any combination or sex who agree to love on "soul-level."
We don't need someone else in order to be whole. We have the tools,
which we will eventually retire. It doesn't matter if someone
else loves us, just that we love someone.
'2-days w/Lazaris' 11-30-85
"We are here because you-your higher consciousness-invited us.
You invited us not only to share your Vision, but also to help you
discover/rediscover your Future Vision. You have your work, we
have ours.
Before we speak of the Changes, let us teach you how to change
the Changes. You have your work, we have ours.
Our work is to show you how to rediscover and how to recreate
the Future. Your work is to rediscover and recreate it."
11-29-86
"The lament of the martyr is that of being misunderstood; the
disclaimer is that of innocence and naivete. The goal of the
martyr is to punish."
-Lazaris-
Frederick (who else?)
|
| 358.69 | ? | FDCV13::PAINTER | Is we is or is we isn'... | Fri Jun 19 1987 21:59 | 10 |
|
> "The lament of the martyr is that of being misunderstood; the
> disclaimer is that of innocence and naivete. The goal of the
> martyr is to punish."
> -Lazaris-
Fredrick - please interpret, I'm not quite sure on this statement.
Thank you.
Cindy
|
| 358.72 | Here's to success! | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Jun 24 1987 02:25 | 186 |
| re:.70
I believe you are on the "right" track (according to Lazaris'
information, that is.) For the moment, however, let me avoid more
detail to complete the stuff which I think might take two days.
I may be done with DEC on Friday (or, maybe another false alarm...
has to do with requisition of funds...) Let me say that Lazaris
has spent a great deal of time and energy discussing martyrhood
(with several tapes so labeled,) so information is available there
for you. Incidentally, new phone numbers for Concept:Synergy are:
(714) 337-0789,0781,0787.
...if I remain at DEC I will try to respond more fully to your inquiry,
however, you are on the way without my input.
more notes...
The collective unconscious has been negative of late. What has
been an asset has become a liability. When people knew everything
[100 or more years ago it was possible to "know everything"...not
anymore] they spent time thinking. Now, because knowledge is easily
available, people have stopped thinking. Less rein for the negative
ego in thinking. Pain wins awards in our world. Happy people are
seen as shallow.
"1987: The year of Discovery" 12-14-86
95% of allopathic (sp?) [AMA, etc.] medicine does not work. The
first step to health is making a choice to be well. Healing is
suspending illness long enough for healing to take place. What
is mental illness? Sometimes it's a different way of operating-
a different vibration of energy. Sometimes it's an "E.T." [literally-
he said that when these people go "back" away from physicality,
they go "WOW! What was that?" and probably never incarnate into
this reality again.] Sometimes insanity is the sanest thing to
do.
On longevity: It is a choice. Genetics is cooperation. Isolation
(is experienced) if you don't do or have the things everyone else
in the family does (therefore the cooperation.) :
1. You must believe you can live a long time.
2. You need proper nutrition...it is YOUR nutrition...whatever
works for you. What gives you the most aliveness?
3. You must be physically active in non-invasive ways...must work,
but not (necessarily) for money, but rather for joy (this is
more important than diet or activity.)
4. You need a spirituality. Vibrant and growing with GOD/GODDESS/ALL-
THAT-IS.
(an interesting aside from my notes:)
Pre-void <<<------------------------------------------------->>> to matter
(no vibration) l l l l
Senses Sound Color Fragrance
(slow vibrations) (faster vibrations)
Above from "Healing: Body, Mind and Spirit" 3-21-87 (2-day workshop)
The civilizations prior to Lemuria living in caves in the Andes
and Pyrenees had no violence but did have fear.
"The Secrets of Spirituality" 2-12-84
The servants of the physical world:
1. Time- Created for convenience for ability to learn from over
a period...for Gestalts. Time initially circular, flexible,
but we learned to straighten it out. We limit our success by
giving our power over to time. Gives us a cushion to being thought
and manifestation.
2. Space-rocks don't have space...we give it to them. We can "lay
it all out;" give sequence.
3. the Past-an illusion we have given ourselves. For the benefit
of cause and effect. Karma. We create shadows to have depth
and then we forget them. the past "takes over" (with power.)
It's a story-line commited to memory which we change.
4. the Future-(desire) Rather than serving us, we've given in to
it. They aren't even our "own" desires.
5. the present-to bring it all in.
Additionally, we created an assistant, the EGO, which initially
was supposed to deliver information. We became it's slave in order
to dominate rather than taking dominion.
To get beyond the collective unconscious, need to get past the
paradoxes:
You create your own reality (emotionally, as well) AND you have
impact and others have impact on you.
The unknown is beyond the collective unconscious. There can't be
anything there. Then why go there? Because we can function more
and more as the spiritual beings that we are. It is a necessary
phase in going "home."
"Conceiving/Perceiving" 9-23-84 and "2-days with Lazaris" 8-18-84
Continuum of healing:
l------------l--------l--------l--------------l----------l--------l-----l
1. (0) 2.(10) 3.(20) 4.(25) 5.(50) 6.(60) 7.(75) 8.(100)
1. no healing--savagery
2. barbaric healings (superstitions)
3. faith healings (charlatans, etc.)
4. AMA (allopaths, osteopaths, etc.)
5. balancing (accupuncture, accupressure, body work, massage,
reflexology, etc.)
6. homeopathy-naturopaths (the body knowing what to do for itself)
7. energy healing (lights, sounds, colors, quartz, magnets, psychic
surgery)
8. spontaneous healing (no particular method---just a decision for
instant healing)
"Healing: The Nature of Health I" 4-14-85
A particle of gravity exists.
We will never know God in our physical reality. That is why we have
a soul, SELF, and Higher Self. We can conceptualize God, etc. but
that is all.
"Being all you Are--3-days with Lazaris" 3-25-83
For the most concise information concerning science, religion and
mysticisms, I strongly suggest a tape entitled "Love and Peace"
from 8-21-1983. Lazaris spent a good deal of time talking about
historical perspectives, etc. and showing (on a blackboard) circles
with divisions describing his views. Some of you would really enjoy
this discussion.
Ego knows we are in a battle-we don't. It's stupid, however (like
all negativity.)
There is no nobility in struggle.
"There has never been a failure that has been for our own good."
It could have been better. Success can be sweeter without struggle.
Time has only been linear for the last 500 years. Before that it
was irregular (a wiggle, not really circular, either.) It took
about 900 years as a result of Christianity to "straighten it."
(It took 2-300 years to decide whether God, Jesus and Holy Ghost
were one or several gods.)
"3-days with Lazaris" 6-17-83
We want to punish the one we're with if we can't be with the one
we want to punish.
The opposite of love is apathy.
"Transmutation: The Vision Quest" 3-22-1986
"Welcome. We wait silently, balanced on the edge of your reality...we
are waiting. We wait for you to love yourself enough to allow us
to love you. We wait for you to value yourself enough to allow
us to explore your inner realms---to value yourself enough to journey
with us on a very special Quest. We wait not for all of humanity.
We wait not for all those who claim an interest in metaphysics and
things mystical. We wait for you, specifically you.
Come with us on a Quest, a Vision Quest of Transformation. Gather
a new will and imagination. Discover a new heart and a new brain.
Conceive a new mind and new eyes. You are ready to accelerate your
growth. You are ready for a journey that has never been.
Come with us, just you and us. Love yourself enough...We are
waiting, balanced on the edge of your reality."
enjoinder for "2-days with Lazaris--Transmutation: The Vision Quest"
1-17-87
"The successful person recognizes and acknowledges fear and, through
forgiveness and change, proceeds to succeed in spite of it. The
failure denies fear and proceeds to fail because of it"
Frederick
|
| 358.73 | More and more and... | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Thu Jun 25 1987 03:04 | 137 |
| ...(funds were allocated...I will be here at least a few more weeks)...
...the continuation...
In the old world, things were "predestined" (and predictable)..in
New Age, you create your own reality. Doom and gloom is having
no vision. Vision produces alternative realities.
Core truths:
1. You create your own reality.
There are seven theories of how reality works:
a. There is no such thing as deep space. There is a crust of
reality into which you can puncture into the core of
probability.
b. REality is caused by observation.
c. We are a part of a larger whole.
d. There are many worlds and many universes.
e. There is a larger logic as there is a larger world.
f. Not just by observation, but by consciousness.
g. There is a dual reality of potential and actual manifestation.
(Belief only has to hit one person and then it's everywhere.)
ALL of the above are true.
2. REality control. ARe you going to live or die? Your choice.
3. Is there a "GOD" or not? There is a GOD/GODDESS/ALL-THAT-IS
that loves you. "God" didn't let things happen. We did.
4. Not an issue of life and death. It is an issue of love and
impact. The ability to hurt someone opens to the ability to
love.
Growing through joy is faster than through pain or ordeal. To the
admonition "you shouldn't play God!" the reply: "What other game
is there?"
"Changing the Future Vision" (2-day workshop) 11-29-86
The message of cancer is: "I want to change."
"Ending Self-Punishment" 2-15-87
What is intuition? It is and act or faculty of knowing directly
w/o use of rational process. It is a non-rational knowing w/o
understanding of how you know. It is the spontaneous knowing that
precedes and follows understanding(or rational understanding) that
comes from the realm that prefixes and suffixes manifestation on
the physical plane. (Science is within mysticism) It is a realm
that prefixes and suffixes manifestation or the physical plane.
RAtionality leads to understanding. What are the tools of rationality?
Inductive/deductive logic. Time(linear). Space. the Past. Cause
and Effect (as real). the Collective Unconscious as Absolute.
Intuitive processes are everything else. Intuition leads to knowing.
The tools are that which precedes and follows logic. It is
synergistic. It is knowing and therefore "right" and "correct".
"Intuition" 2-10-85
What is aids all about? (I realize there is a separate topic for
this but I will include it here as it is "Lazaris stuff")
First of all, it is not an attack by God on gay men. GOD/GODDESS/ALL-
THAT-IS does not discriminate. It's not a punishment, either.
Only lesbians (as a group or class) are not getting this disease.
Obviously, this is no more desirable than being a gay male in the
eyes of those who hold that it is God's will. It is also not the
cells in your body rebelling against you. It is a disease that
speaks to several issues:
1. Defenselessness (poor me! or self-pity) Who are these people?
Hemophiliacs, Haitians, gay men. ("You have to take care of
me.")
2. Defensiveness. Can you tell these people anything?
3. Anger at world. From the parental family (hemophiliacs, e.g.)
Mother to son ("See what you've done to me?!") Prostitutes
(who are angry at men [who in turn are angry at women])
4. "I want to know who really loves me!" "Help me find out."
(by alienating all but the core.) People who are searching
for spirituality but don't know another method of finding it.
What is the answer? LOVE. It shows that the old methods of loving
don't work (i.e. via sex or drugs) We need to find new ways of
loving, not via genitals but via heart. Love yourself, then others.
Aids is the anger that won't be released and the love that won't
be felt. It is saying: "This isn't what love is all about...there's
more!"
"Healing: The Nature of Health II" 9-8-85
Also,
Aids is the tip of an iceberg (of immune deficiency-type of diseases.)
There will be many more this century with no known cause or cure.
This speaks to:
1. Defenselessness and its opposite, defensiveness.
2. Who loves me?
3. Anger-Look what you did to me!
4. I think I deserve punishment and it's not happening fast enough.
(Self-punishment)
Gay men have taken it to an extreme to show that 2nd chakra method
of loving is not enough.
Antibiotics also destroy the immune system and make one vulnerable
to this type of disease.
Stop playing victim/martyr or defensive/defenseless. Give love
to the heart center (4th chakra)
Use .9% saline instead of whole blood wherever possible to avoid
transfusions.
Avoid vaccinations for many are made from blood components which
can be tainted.
"Changing the Future Vision" (2-day workshop) 11-29-86
also, Lazaris talked about it somewhere in terms of being a
hopelessness and a helplessness, but I haven't found it in my notes.
Additionally, he says that there will be cures very soon (but not
necessarily medically) and that more and more will occur after the
first one happens. He first spoke of aids about 4 years ago, before
it was "popular."
...next...a little on dreaming (covered elsewhere, I know) and
meditation.
"First you create the kind of space you want to play in and THEN
you manifest the toys."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.74 | Daydream believer...no monkey | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Fri Jun 26 1987 03:55 | 107 |
| ...the HOME stretch...
Why am I? That hasn't been asked yet. We are still between the
why and am.
We gave ourselves the ability to dream (after we had the tools.)
The tools never become dull...they regenerate. We denied feelings...we
felt fear but pretended we didn't (loneliness.) Then we built
elaborate systems of imperfection. In Lemuria, the beliefs weren't
as polluted as ours. We [presumably the audience] are a higher
level of consciousness than much of the planet-it doesn't make us
better, just more responsible. "They" are asleep without sleep.
Dreams: Ideas and images that exist outside of reason
(time,space,logic)
Lifedreams:
1. daydreams-non-responsible,spontaneous, absent-mided...least
responsible dreams...most subject to ego.
2. future dreams-a conscious dream. It's the one you decide to
have. Represents a greater level of responsibility. It is outside
of reason (can either daydream or meditate from here.)
3. Meditation-Images and Ideas (deeper)
4. Gestalt--Spontaneous awareness (often seems like "that's it!")
5. Intuition-Psychic flashes or hits--faster than gestalt
6. Vision-future dreams taken to their fullest extent (creativity)
...eliminate boundary between dream and real. (illusion)
7. nightdreams-totally with responsibility. Lucidity is what is
done in a dream.
Lucidity-conscious awareness and direction of a dream
The sub-conscious protects us. Dreams to not remember e.g. nightmares.
Dreams to remember--precognitive,psychological
Therapeutic dreams--everything in the dream is you.
Gestalt's of awareness involve thinking.
Night dreams don't have vision, though they can be visionary. They
are the ones in which it is most difficult to have lucidity in.
Plants dream, even minerals dream. How can we work to remember?
Because we have language and a complexity of brain, we can interpret
dreams and distinguish them from other states. REM is a significator
of activity of the brain. (cold-blooded creatures have passive dreaming
with no REM, etc.) We have active dreaming.
Why do we dream?
1. To supply self with tools of reality creation (desire, imagination,
expectancy{not likely})
2. To complete development of brain (infants sleep and dream a
lot.)
3. To complete the development of the nervous system.
4. Dreaming increases the capacity to think and feel.
5. It is an avenue for the autonomic nervous system to express
itself. Unconscious mind-is connected to all past lifetimes.
Nightmares are a release. Though we have 10-12 dreams per night,
most are gobbledeegook.
6. To provide a manner of processing and communicating with the
Higher Self. The higher conscious provides us ideas without reason.
Night dreams are usually used because the ego is less active there.
7. It is significant and important to allow the brain to create
the future.
Thinking, Feeling, Future and Higher Self (usually with old men
in them) dreams are the most important.
Resistance to lucidity is equal to resistance to responsibility.
The benefit to both is freedom.
In Lemuria, there were dreamers...people who would dream for others.
Dreaming is the reason things weren't played out physically.
Nobody dreamed Lemuria anymore so it disappeared.
We [I again presume the audience] are the dreamers.
We are dreaming the form of life-logic,reasoning,time,space,...all
of which only exist in this reality.
There are linear dreams and vertical dreams (where everything is
compressed into a short time).
As we remind ourselves throughout the day that we are only dreaming,
we will find that our responsibility is increasing. "Why is this
happening?"
"Do not look into the Ocean to find your Lemuria: Look into your
heart and your mind. Look for your courage and your adventure and
you may possibly find Lemuria.
The benefit: Self-realization, which is the synergy of the
Valued Self, resulting in greater awareness, deeper appreciation
of worth, richer esteem, more powerful confidence, more deeply
resonating respect, and greater self-love. The benefit: Conscious
Reality Creation, which means greater success with your programming,
with more meaningful access to manifesting what you want with precision
and a more real sense of empowerment. The benefit: Spiritual Mastery
and a giant step toward HOME."
-Lazaris-
"Realizing Lemuria" (6-days with Lazaris) 4-12/17-1987
Incidentally, Lazaris has separate tapes on Dreaming...I have no
notes from them.
Next time...I will attempt a conclusion via explanation of meditation,
etc.
Frederick
|
| 358.75 | Martyrs | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Mon Jun 29 1987 14:57 | 28 |
| More on martyrdom:
I think I've got it now......here's my attempt at taking a good
guess.....
>The lament of the martyr is that of being misunderstood; the
disclaimer is that of innocence and naivete.
Those people who have experienced 'grace' have had their eyes opened
and can now see things that have been a mystery up until that time.
Other people who have not experienced 'grace' do not understand
the people who have, and claim to be uneducated (for lack of a better
term). It then becomes frustrating to the people who have received
'grace' to enlighten those who haven't because they don't 'speak
the same language' anymore. Depending on the level of the uneducated
person, the 'enlightened' one might actually be viewed as something evil
in the worst case, and in the best case is misunderstood.
> The goal of the martyr is to punish.
Learning is painful. Martyrs cause people pain, because they force
people to think for themselves and accept responsibility for their
own actions, and to look at themselves realistically perhaps for
the first time in their lives. Only after people do this can they
change/grow, and thereby prepare themselves to receive the 'grace'.
The pain inflicted is done so out of love.
Cindy
|
| 358.76 | Close the umbrella and feel the rain! | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Tue Jun 30 1987 04:26 | 132 |
| ...and, in "conclusion"...
I bet you're expecting something earth-shattering here, huh?!
Well, lets allay your expectations...not really!
As soon as you read this next sentence or two, close your eyes
for a second, and think about what I am about to say. Can you remember
some event from a good while back? Can you remember a dream from
sometime in your life? As you sit there with your eyes shut and
think about them, what is the difference between the visualization
of one to another? Is this not also a similar "visual" as to what
you experience when you daydream? What exactly distinguishes one
type of visualization from another? If you reread some of my notes
from what Lazaris has said about dreaming...if you reread some of
my notes based on what Lazaris has said about different levels of
reality...then if you think about them in terms of your dreams,
recollections and other visualizations, then can you not see that
with the exception of the IMMEDIATE present, there is very little
to differentiate these events that "this Lazaris" hasn't explained
to us? The point is that all events: future, past and present are
being "controlled" from your IMMEDIATE present. It becomes virtually
impossible to distinguish night dreams from memories of "actual"
events or even from fantasies. For myself, I have an experience
that I'm not sure if it happened or not: to wit: My high school
class (many years ago) was supposed to take a class trip down the
Potomac River to Marshall Hall (I think it was called). Do you
know that for the life of me I cannot remember if I actually went
on such a trip or not? I can see a boat of some type and some
amusements, but that is all. Did we not go and am I just making
that up or is that all I can remember (in which case it scares me
because I didn't do drugs or alcohol in those days?) Anyway, once
you can accept the idea or concept of sameness, once you can understand
that unlike the ancients we don't have to go to the mountaintop
to experience things...then you can see the value that meditation
is capable of having. Believe me when I say that of all the "work"
I do in metaphysics, my most un-favorite is probably meditation.
Usually because I fall asleep or "check out" and don't wind up doing
what I'm "supposed" to. And yet the most powerful experiences have
come from those times when I denied my ego it's control and I stayed
"with the program" long enough to orgasmically experience unbelievable
releases. What exactly can one do in meditation? I am very
unqualified to speak about all the different types of meditation,
but here I speak of guided or visual ones. This is to focus on
an outcome of some type. One of the things that can be done is
to "rearrange" some of the thoughts you have sitting around. In
my case, I could go into meditation and imagine different rides,
different friends, different girls I might have looked at, etc.
in my Marshall Hall experience of my mind. This would make it much
more difficult to erase as an experience then. Is it real or not?
How real are your dreams? How real is the past which has a tendency
to change (I've discussed this some before, but if you think about
it, your past events actually do change as you allow them to--you
try harder and you suddenly "remember" some new "fact" that wasn't
in your memory banks before?) What's the big deal? The BIG deal
is that you can actually change your reality by changing your past
(in your meditations) by changing the future you think you might
experience (in your meditations) and therefore changing your PRESENT.
Way back in the beginning of this topic I pointed out that facts
are NOT facts and attempted to support that statement. Does it
really matter what anyone else sees or thinks? Not really, if you're
honest, here...ULTIMATELY, all that matters is what YOU think, what
YOU feel and what YOU want to do or imagine. If you decide that
you went to Harvard and go into meditation and change it, will you
behave as though you did? Yes, if you completely support the theme...
i.e., you take tests, go to classes, talk to professors, etc. etc.
ALL in meditation. It really does work this way. There are those
we call crazies running around convincing others that they are what
we "know" they aren't and they believe it. The difference may be
in taking responsibility here, however, for ourselves and for others.
So, what can you do in meditation? You can be forgiven by whomever
you would like, you can punish whomever you like, you can start
fires, wars, win prizes, awards...you can please the child that
lives, the adolescent that lives and you can change the sub-conscious
that stores all this hodgepodge of stuff. Can you really? YES.
I know because I have accomplished it. I know (by the standards
of some of you out there) by the experiences of others. I believe
it. I use it and more and more I am making it work. Can I win
big lotteries? Yes, if I get my ego out of the way. Can I make
new friends? Yes, if I get my ego out of the way. In meditation?
Yes, and then in the present.
Some of you (as for me in my past) can only understand things
that you intellectualize. Some of you can only understand things
that you feel. If it doesn't make sense, you poopoo it off. If
it doesn't set off emotional fireworks, you dismiss it. What can
be done? Start doing it and don't ANALyze it. Work with little
things, things you can probably believe...allow for just small
emotional sensations. As your belief and confidence grow, you can
apply this to other areas.
Can you do other things with mediatation. Of course, as some
of you undoubtably know better than I. Body relaxation, for one
that comes to mind. But you can accomplish so much more that the
potential is virtually unlimited. That's why Lazaris uses it.
He has told us that there are other methods but that this is truly
one of the easiest and most productive. Perhaps that is why he
always uses them. Perhaps that is why Shirley MacClaine (a Lazaris
"follower") uses them. And others...
LAzaris has a whole series of tapes on meditation...to the
extent that you could channel other entities if you so desired
(discussed elsewhere within these notes). Otherwise, almost all
of the tapes (whether audio or video) will have at least one meditation
on them. If you should get a tape, listen to the meditation and
DO it. If you don't believe it can help, then it won't hurt you
to do it. On the other hand, your beliefs may change.
...and most importantly, your REALITY may change. When I spoke
with Sharon Gless a few months ago, she was real clear that it was
her belief that the work she had done with Lazaris was very significant
towards her successes of the last few years. The Emmy she won was
a result of two powerful meditations she had done with Lazaris.
Do you believe it? Some of you won't...some of you are willing
to change your views for "illogical" reasons. Others of you may
just believe it enough to alter your reality into whatever you want
it to be as you have fantasized it. What I find interesting is
that some of you "skeptics" are still reading this...good for you!
Congratulate yourself for that much openmindedness.
...I will have some follow-ups...I will DEFINITEly be gone within
four weeks.
"Sometimes in meditation there is a lightning bolt of enlightenment."
"The power of creation lies in the joy of illusion."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.77 | Couldn't resist this | INK::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Tue Jun 30 1987 12:31 | 13 |
| Re .76:
> As soon as you read this next sentence or two, close your eyes
>for a second, and think about what I am about to say. Can you remember
>some event from a good while back? Can you remember a dream from
>sometime in your life? As you sit there with your eyes shut and
>think about them, what is the difference between the visualization
>of one to another?
Fredrick, I did as you asked. I had a _devil_ of a time reading
your note with my eyes shut. :-D
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.78 | The hooded martyrs are closer than we think | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Jul 01 1987 03:57 | 103 |
| RE: -.1
Congratulations on acknowledging the child within you...it is
clear he is intact. This is not a putdown, by the way...though
it could be. Hopefully you gave the concept more than a cursory
opportunity, for it is precisely in this area that I rarely "hear"
you "talk". It is very helpful to have encyclopedic knowledge as
I'm sure you will acknowledge, but I, for one, would like to read
about some of the other emotions in your life (besides the obvious
humor and ocassional anger.) Anyway, I thank you for stimulating
a great deal of work, thinking and awareness for me, as I have written
more on this theme than ever anywhere except my notes. Your
provocation was "perfect" for me and, I assume, for the other
respondants.
re: MArtyrhood (via Lazaris):
In Christian methology Lucifer was the first martyr...he was
supposed to be in charge only he got miffed because he wasn't.
All he got was a third of the angels and the underworld. (Poor
Luci...) Lazaris says it is now our ego and we still need to
encounter it. It is literally a battle of our lifetime. We can
either encounter or battle it...the choice of confrontation is ours.
What is martyrhood? It is similar to victimhood (poor me) but it
is more sophisticated and damaging.
It's characterizations:
1. I'm unappreciated "no one knows the trouble I know..."
2. ...misunderstood "you took it wrong, you don't understand, I
won't tell you how you did it or why (victims are wronged but
they WILL tell you.) Martyrs are usually silent.
3. Hopeless The one thing they've got is gone.
4. Burdened with impossible demands-won't point them out.
5. Saddled with unsolvable problems. Suffer! Suffer! Suffer!
6. Innocent of all wrongdoing. It was an accident. It couldn't
be helped. They LIE more than any other group.
7. They are mistreated and misjudged.
If you stay in these positions, you are a martyr. It is a form
of self-pity and self-importance. A martyr lives for exhoneration
and vindication in the future. It is a silent and righteous anger
that seeks righteous and silent revenge based upon blame and punishment
resulting in righteous punishment. They are also cowards because
they won't tell you for fear of discovering that they were wrong.
They are never wrong "no, I meant to say..." They believe that
they never have impact on anyone but themselves. [note this-Cindy]
Martyrs love to sigh [as I did in my last reply in 316] A martyr
enjoys the suffering of others. They love being overly responsible
for others. (anger and hostility in these last two.) Martyr uses
guilt to push you away "leave me alone..." Pretends to be complete
with past ("someday...") The martyr is a loser but doesn't know
it. He/she is not only foolish, but stupid. He never wins! Lucifer
couldn't be God so he became a martyr.
Why do we choose martyrhood?
1. Because the grand promise failed...when the resources failed,
we blamed humanity rather than our egos.
2. Because we refuse to feel gratitude. Gratitude represents weakness
to us in our conditionings. Because we will have to be RESPONSIBLE.
Because we won't be responsible. Because we might be loved. Because
we might have to feel other feelings (like joy or sadness). Because we
might have to admit someone is nicer than us and therefore uses power
better than we do.
3. Out of fantasy. We will never tell anyone. It is our "grandeur."
4. God has done us wrong! We get pissed at God! So we will punish
him for his unfairness to us. The more we suffer at his or
government's or something else's hands, the more worthy we become.
Behind every martyr there is a Christ (we're doing it so others
won't.)
5. This is how we prove our love. That's how mother proved her
love, so that's why we won't love ourselves...it hurts too much!
[it was probably four components, not five]
The solutions:
1. Find out who you want to hurt. Then STOP it.
2. Bust the promises. Realize that when we were children the ego
made promises that were close...now they aren't even close. So,
instead, punish the ego. Do this in MEDITATION.
3. Start to feel gratitude [covered as a separate seminar]. You
can start at the point of punishing the ego.
4. Start acting in a loving way (although not necessarily with
the person you want to punish.) Let yourself be loved. Start building
a real future.
5. Let yourself live in a fantasy "I could have been the greatest..."
6. Make friends with your sub-conscious (be in charge.)
7. Let SELF be a witness-sense it all around you. Realize that
we are at a crisis.
"the Crisis of Martyhood" 10-16-83 & "the Crisis of Martyrhood II"
4-1-1984
Do you get a sense of what martyr as defined by Lazaris is? Does
it answer your questions? I will try to interpret if you desire.
Let me know.
" There is a deep doctrine in the legend of the Fall; it is the
expression of a dim presentiment that the emancipation of ego
consciousness was a Luciferian deed. Man's whole history consists
from the very beginning in a conflict between his feeling of
inferiority and his arrogance."
-Dr. Carl Jung-
Frederick
|
| 358.79 | Martyrdom continued.... | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Wed Jul 01 1987 15:55 | 39 |
|
Struggling to understand...but foresee a breakthrough in my future!
(:^)
Let's see if this is closer to the definition than my last guess:
According to Lazaris, martyrdom, it seems, it a self-imposed
condition. Martyrs cannot love unconditionally (give love without
expecting at least the same amount, or more love in return - but
they never tell you when you do - consequently you can never truly
please a martyr). They EXPECT and place demands on other people
and believe that their efforts are not/never appreciated. They are
never satisfied with the amount of energy/love other people show
them, and therefore become 'energy sinks'. Martyrs are the eternal
pessimists, and see the glass as always being half empty and are
more apt to make others feel like they 'don't' do enough as opposed
to they 'can't' do enough. It is because of this that martyrs cause
pain.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Now for the rest of the question -
What about the early Christians who prefered to be killed as opposed
to renouncing their beliefs? I don't really see them fitting into
the 'martyr' category as Lazaris describes (if my guess above is
correct). The definitions in my (DEC-issued American Heritage)
dictionary are:
Martyr: 1. One who chooses to suffer death rather than renounce
a religious principle.
2. One who makes great sacrifices for a cause or principle.
3. One who endures great suffering.
Is Lazaris simply referring to #3 above, or can his explanation
of a martyr also be applied also to #1 & #2? Thank you!
Cindy
|
| 358.81 | Which to choose:manure festuring or manifesting? | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Fri Jul 03 1987 01:57 | 69 |
| Re: .80
Nicely said, Larry. From my perspective your answer is right
on target. You are so "right" when you say people don't want to
hear it. For them, they want juicy, dramatic, sensational "meaningful"
stuff, all the better to satisfy their own particular self-image,
i.e., someone who either comes from self-pity or self-importance
(which is ultimately the same. This is a clear manifestation of
negative ego.) It is much the same as those individuals who are
totally into the body beautiful and not much "beyond." The cure
for narcissism, however, is forced upon us whether or not we are
ready--it's called old age. Ultimately, people in one incarnation
or another will also "age" to the point of being ready to listen.
re. -.2
My response (as I looked at it yesterday) is different from
Larrys...hopefully it will add to his. Your rewording of Lazaris'
definitions is fine...the second part is the stickler. To begin
with, who has ennoblized the Christian martyr? Why is this considered
so special? Because some fool decides to get eaten by a lion seems
not reason enough to me to want to be like him/her. Why not lie
to change your life, i.e., get to live? Why is telling someone
the truth necessary? So what if you say that the sky is fuschia,
who cares? Now I'm not totally callous to this situation, but I
do think that many if not most of them could be avoided. In the
violence of rape many people "allow" the rapist for the sake of
living. Most of them are able to get over the guilt attached by
getting on with their lives. Similarly (I think,) this particular
type of martyr need only lie to live. Guilt is an artificial
emotion...it is anger that one feels he/she has no right to. Once
it gets converted into anger, it can be processed out as anger can
be. There are too many variables to respond to here to adequately
answer but I further believe that we do not (as Larry pointed out)
need to be "victims" (or martyrs) and that the reality you create
is simply a reflection of the particular individual's need to satisfy
that desire. There are always choices. If one takes charge of
his/her reality, gets into a place of dominion and then makes the
positive choices which will produce a successful reality, then one
will never have to face a death or dishonor situation. I could
be stronger about this, but you'll have to work this out. What
we have been talking about these last 80 responses is the creating
on one's own reality. What you are trying to do is to take it back
away from the individual and placing the reality creation back into
the hands of another, whether beast, man or God. What I am trying
to do (and it seems that Larry's response is in agreement) is to
show and demonstrate that there is "no one else" "out there."
In other words, YES, those Christian martyrs wanted that reality
whether that decision was conscious or not. It is not for us to
judge them for that place. ALL judgements are poor ideas...this
includes positive as well as negative judgments. As the person
who brought up paper money in 316 indicated, who's placing the value
and where? Why value this or any other type of martyrhood?
Why not value positive, loving situations rather than a person who
chooses to get nailed to a cross? What a negative image that is
to follow! Yuck! To the extent there was a Jesus, do you suppose
he was into punishing others by doing this? "Let them all feel
guilt!" Additionally, he might have said, "let me out of here,
this isn't fun anymore." Maybe not, but others have struggled
very hard to set up similar thinking.
Anyway, this falls very short of a good response
to your imquiry, but I think that whenever I hear Lazaris talk of
martyrhood I hear him speaking to the individual type of martyrhood
rather than the overt, Christian suicide. I'm sure the parallels
are there if you dig deep enough.
"Whenever you really ask for help and not just self pity, you will
always receive it." (Rana speaking in "2150") by Thea Alexander
Frederick
|
| 358.82 | From USENET | EDEN::KLAES | The Universe is safe. | Sun Jul 05 1987 18:35 | 111 |
| Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Path: decwrl!pyramid!thirdi!sarge
Subject: The Nature of Knowledge
Posted: 1 Jul 87 21:57:48 GMT
Organization: Institute for Research in Metapsychology
I an interested in the issue being discussed by Richard Carnes,
Eric Raymond, and Gene Ward Smith, namely: What constitutes bona fide
knowledge. I'd like to present a rather radical approach to the issue
as, if you like, a Devil's Advocate position, though one I currently
think is correct. I'm willing, however, to be argued out of it.
Knowledge takes on a different appearance when looked at from the
viewpoint that an individual takes at a particular time. Michael
Polanyi's PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE is a good reference on this point, though
my views could be considered an extrapolation (or a corruption) of
his.
At any particular moment, from the viewpoint of an individual,
knowledge and belief (meaning not a weak opinion but a firmly-held
conviction) are one and the same thing. If I believe something (such
as the truth of *this* philosophical position), I say "I *know* it's
true." In other words, it is knowledge, to me. If you agree with my
belief, you also call it knowledge, because then it is a belief of
*yours* and therefore knowledge for you. If you don't agree or aren't
sure, you call it a "belief" of *mine*. It isn't, then, a belief of
*yours*, in the sense of belief I gave above. That, in my view, is
what knowledge actually is.
From this point, two further very important questions can be asked:
1. What criteria do I (or others) commonly use (and what criteria *ought* we
to use) to decide what to believe and what not to believe?
2. What kinds of arguments or demonstrations could I adduce to get others to
agree with my beliefs.
(1) and (2) could be reduced to the single question:
"What are the criteria that individuals use in fixing belief, and
what criteria *should* they use?"
These criteria can and do vary enormously from person to person.
And for one person, these criteria vary at different times, depending
on the circumstances or context. These criteria have nothing to do
with what *knowledge* is, from an individual viewpoint, namely belief
or acceptance of ideas as true. It has a lot to do with how we
*decide* what we know (or believe).
The most common criterion for belief (or knowledge) is authority.
The vast, vast majority of my beliefs are based on the assertions of
others whom I trust, *especially* those beliefs that are called
scientific. The fact is, I simply have not had and could not have the
time to do all the necessary experiments myself, so I must rely on
authorities (and textbooks, and the like) to tell me what I should
believe. Now, of course, I assume that if I *did* have the time to
carry out any particular experiment, I would duplicate the results
reported by the authorities. But this is a mere assumption, based on
acceptance of authority. I don't think there's anything *wrong* with
believing trusted authorities. There's a fine art to knowing which
authorities to trust. But, in point of fact, we do *not* generally
engage in experimentation and observation as the basis of *most* of
our beliefs. And with many of these beliefs, we never find ourselves
in a position to *use* them in order to determine for ourselves
whether they work or not. In fact, if we did not absorb beliefs
without question as infants and children, we wouldn't have any kind of
world-view at all, not even one from which to question certain ideas.
It is actually more in our own personal lives than in scientific
pursuits that we use empirical and pragmatic criteria for fixing
belief. In the past, on several occasions, when I ate a certain kind
of ice cream I felt sick, so I assume that will occur in the future
(an empirical criterion). Or I find that the assumption that others
usually have good intentions is a workable assumption, in that acting
on it leads to good results (a pragmatic criterion). And so forth.
Other beliefs I hold because they are elegant or aesthetic. A certain
chord on a guitar "feels" good, and so I accept it as the correct
chord. Of two theories that fit the known facts, I would tend to
choose the one that is the most elegant or the simplest. Some people
accept certain things as true because they find these things
comforting, or because they are novel or bizarre, and they are tired
of boringly acceptable ideas.
Now it is a perfectly acceptable activity to advise people as to
*how* they should decide what to think, to believe, about the world.
A follower of William of Occam would advise a bias towards simplicity; a
hippie might say, "If it feels good, believe it," a psychic might
advise following intuition, a theoretical physicist might advise
mathematical elegance, a social scientist might advise attending to
statistics, etc.. To me, however, it would seem wrong to say that
just *one* criterion (such as a pragmatic one) will fit all occasions.
It seems best to say that the criteria for belief should fit the
context to which that belief is appropriate.
To summarize: As each of us looks at what he knows in his own
life, what he knows at a particular time is coextensive with what he
believes at that time. Thus, for an individual at a particular time,
knowledge and belief are equivalent. Different methods of assigning
belief to various ideas are appropriate to different situations.
Knowing, and the various criteria we use for deciding what we know and
what we don't know, are two different things.
"From his own viewpoint, no one ever has false beliefs; he only
*had* false beliefs."
Sarge Gerbode
Institute for Research in Metapsychology
950 Guinda St.
Palo Alto, CA 94301
UUCP: pyramid!thirdi!sarge
|
| 358.83 | Follow the spirit, not the letter of the messages. | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Mon Jul 06 1987 15:37 | 77 |
| Re.81
Frederick,
> What you are trying to do is to take it back away from the
> individual and placing the reality creation back into the hands of
> another, whether beast, man or God.
You misunderstand my entries. I'm not TRYING to do anything here
except to *understand* more fully what it is that you (and Lazaris)
are trying to say.
It would have been easier for me not to bother to ask the questions
at all, but that would have been lazy of me, no??? Is not one of
your primary messages to seek the truth?? (insert rhetorical face here).
> What I am trying to do (and it seems that Larry's response is in
> agreement) is to show and demonstrate that there is "no one else"
> "out there."
Though your intentions are quite honorable, please keep in mind that
may make perfect sense to you does not always make perfect sense
to everyone else. In addition to trying to do what you mentioned
above (and doing quite a good job at that - as far as I'm concerned, as
I've learned quite a bit) it would also be nice if you would also try
to make other people understand *without* reading any more into the
questions than is there or making snap judgements. This may surprise
you, but I have not formed an opinion on this issue/definition of
martyrdom, and therefore am not defending my position. It's not
possible to defend something one doesn't have.
As for your view on 'nothing else being out there' - it is your right
to or not to believe in a 'higher power'. That's fine. I have that
same right. As I said before, our paths are different and that's OK.
Besides, in my frame of reference (which is being expanded constantly),
you are half right about there being 'nothing else out there'. As a
result of reading quite a bit on the topic recently (coupled with a
few experiences of my own) I believe that the 'higher power' exists
within as well as all around.
Just because I believe this doesn't mean I'm going to try to 'convert'
you to my beliefs or vice versa, but I do expect from you that you will
at least respect (try to understand) my beliefs and I will do likewise
(which is why I'm asking the questions as opposed to making statements).
Indeed the only way we are ever going to achieve world peace is if
people on this earth would stop telling everyone that their way is the
'right' way, thus implying that everybody that doesn't believe in what
they believe in is WRONG (categorically across the board without closer
examination). I am quite willing to have my beliefs examined and welcome
the opportunity to discuss them at length if you or anyone else would
like to do so. If in doing so I change my mind about some of my beliefs
then that's fine. I have changed my mind in the past and will most
certainly do so in the future. Everyone else (you included) should be
open enough to do the same, otherwise the discussion would be
one-sided and a total waste of time.
More on the topic - from a Christian standpoint:
Last night I was reading a book entitled "Unconditional Love". In
it was the story about Jesus when he was being tempted by Satan out
in the desert. One of the 3 situations was when Satan led Jesus
to the cliff and told him to jump off saying that angels would
rescue him. Jesus refused to do this, because then he would be
giving up the responsibility for his own actions and turning this
responsibility over to God. Jesus replied something like this -
"It isn't good to try God's patience.".
Same message - different words (in my opinion).
Acceptance is the key. Only then can we even begin to understand
each other. (C.P. - July 6th, 1987)
Cindy
|
| 358.84 | | SNOV06::MYNOTT | | Mon Jul 06 1987 23:25 | 10 |
|
re: .83
Cindy,
Well said, speak soon.
...dale
|
| 358.85 | Just desserts! | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Jul 08 1987 04:47 | 33 |
|
re: -.2
I agree with -.1 (aren't numbers fun?) in that your response was
well taken. I do not argue with what you say. I will acknowledge\
that ocassionally I lack finesse and therefore "pontificate" rather
than "teach." Oh, well, I will try harder. Let me add, however,
that I feel I have a long way to go to grow (as I have stated before)
and that I don't fully understand all that Lazaris talks to me
about. But, because I believe that he is "all wise", I try to accept
everything he says even when I have to take things on the basis
of trust. What this does is makes it difficult, at best, to work
through other ideas and concepts whenever the wordings don't "mesh"
or "match." So, what I will then often do is get confused and
frustrated and therefore express that in some sort of form of anger.
Voila! i.e., responses come out like mine sometimes do. In this
particular case, however, there is an underlying irritation that
is simply a continuing part of me. It has at least in part to do
with my Christian background and with those who were once close
to me who retain that background--in some cases, even more so.
Because I have weeded through the jungle and have seen some lights
here and there, I very much would like for others to see those same
lights, in part to validate myself and my conclusions. I recognize
the fallacy here and the inherent weakness on my part in regards
my own "knowingness" and yet it remains present up to this point
in my life. I want to believe that any moment that may change!
I will be optimistic and yet I have a certain belief about
probabilities...
Continue in your quest...you deserve whatever you get and you
will get whatever you deserve...don't allow a reality you cannot
accept! (including me.)
Frederick
|
| 358.86 | Semantics, my dear, semantics! | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Wed Jul 08 1987 14:58 | 49 |
|
Re.-1
I do understand what you are saying, and no apologies are needed.
At the present time, a relative of mine is considering joining a
religious group that I do not believe is valid (in my frame of
reference), nor do I believe that it would be a good thing for her
to do, simply because they are providing her with easy answers.
As you already know, when you reach a certain level, there are no
answers - just a whole lot more questions and even more paradoxes.
It is VERY difficult for me to keep an open mind and to act as a
sounding board. It would be easier for me to reject her and the
religion (as many other relatives have done - too scary to have
their belief structures challenged), but that wouldn't help her
in the least, and she is someone I care very deeply about. So,
I allow her to examine her own beliefs while conversing with me
and playing (sorry...) devil's advocate. There have been many points
in the conversation where I've been able to make her doubt what
the people in the religion are telling her to the extent that she then
goes back to them to pose more questions - and that is a good thing.
Similarly, I also go back to my books and find the words to state my
position more clearly in terms she will understand. If in the end
she does decide to join the group, then at least she will be going
into it with her eyes fully open.
Being firmly rooted in my own beliefs (with good reason because
these beliefs have worked very well for me in the past - though
hopefully not rooted so deeply as to not allow change....), I have also
taken a lot of what has been said in the past at face value (trust
without total understanding - though not blind faith, there is a
difference), and so therefore it is sometimes difficult for me to
explain to her why I believe the way I do - but I'm getting better,
and am learning quite a bit about her, myself and our beliefs in
the process. It seems that this example above parallels what you
and I have been going through here with the 'martyrdom' definition.
The moral here, of course, is that challenge is the only way we
are going to grow. That is why I didn't take your note (-3 ago)
personally. It may have seemed that way from the tone of my response,
but that certainly wasn't the case. I welcome such opportunities
to work through the logic, which is why it has been quite interesting
to read your entries - they make a lot of sense to me.
Somewhere I read that the 'spirit of the law' is much more important
than the 'letter of the law'. Perhaps we can all learn from this.
Cindy
|
| 358.87 | Crystal workshop notes | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Tue Jul 14 1987 00:25 | 92 |
| Re: Lazaris material...appendix 1
On crystals--I added some stuff in 307. There is certainly
more that Lazaris has talked about and I will add some of that stuff
here:
The best crystals (metaphysically or evolutionarily) are from
Madagascar (where they supposedly are no longer mined.) The next
best source is crystals from Brazil. U.S. (Ozark, etc.) crystals
are not considered as "good."
[Ten years ago a crystal was found
in Brazil (I believe it is) that was just cut this past year or
so. It is a huge ball (larger that a basketball.) It is still
located in the gallery in Larkspur landing. Lazaris says that this
crystal came from Lemuria and is loaded with information. The price
tag on it is $125,000.]
Metaphsyical properties:
1. To balance and harmonize (has the ability to..)to eventually
be at a constant vibration.
2. Gathers and stores information and knowledge.
3. Amplifies, projects and directs information (through a spiral
of energy [that I am not going to discuss here])
4. Is useful in transformation or transcendence.
5. Can condense and focus energy (like a laser.)
6. Can communicate with one another.
7. Can work to protect and heal.
We never "own" a crystal. We can only be guardians of them. They
are highly evolved consciousnesses, as people are. They are immensely
powerful. Cloudy crystals have power we cannot use. Clear crystals
can have inclusions or cracks that can sometimes augment or amplify
their energy. Size is not as important as quality and use. If
a crystal has angles, it is supposed to. Similarly, a ball is supposed
to be that way. Angular crystals should have points, peaks and
angles. In healing, whatever you have designated is okay. Crystals
should be stored in a loving way. Clear quartz can be used for
anything. Rose quartz can be used for emotional issues. Smokey
crystal can be used for anything while amethyst can be used for
work with the Higher Consciousness. The fast energy of Arkansas
quartz can also be very erratic. It's energy can "spin out."
Brazilian quartz has "true" energy which moves slowly and its
c-axis is straight. Madagascar crystal is rarer and was once
linked to Brazilian crystal before the Continental Plate separation.
It is like the Brazilian but only "more so." You "can't beat"
the Madagascar crystal.
Four types of crystals:
1. Sphere or ball. Has infinite sides radiating in infinite
directions. Good for healing, general malaise, and protection.
Also good for draining energy and for teaching. Not good for
directing energy.
2. Generator. Has flat, raw or rounded bottom. The double
terminated has energy in both directions. It is not good for
directing energy, but it is very good for programming. All
angles are there for all-purpose generating.
3. The wand. Similarly shaped to generator (and may be double-
terminated also.) Used for an over-all sense of programming.
4. The healer. If angles are steep, then has fast energy. If
angles are shallow, then it has slow energy. Both ends of this
double-terminated crystal have different angles.
How to work with crystals:
1. Clean the crystal: a. Hold under tepid water. or b. Soak
sea salt water for 24 hours or c. place in sun and moonlight
for 24 hours or d. bury it in the earth for 48 hours.
2. Clear the crystal: a. Under water b. Hold it by points in
one hand and with other hand, take breath, exhale sharply while
squeezing sides. c. Run hand back and forth (back to front)
and flick off energy.
How to program:
1. Work it, rotate it, let it get soft and warm.
2. Pick a side (each side can be a separate program) or all
sides at once.
3. Put finger on side, say proper words, breath with a push on
crystal.
4. To activate, put finger on spot (tighten if you want, like a
hose, by closing opening.)
To put consciousness in, breathe out--one side will be "tacky"
(conscious) while the other side(s) will be smooth. Program will
be off tip. Visualize to point and energy will go in the direction
it is "supposed to." You can also touch points to charge from
one to another.
"The Crystal: Its Power and Use" 8-11-1985 (available on audio
tape)
"The possible becomes probable through the mysterious alchemy of
self-love and joyous expectation.
The probable becomes reality through the willingness to receive."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.88 | An abundant REALITY | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Jul 15 1987 05:11 | 157 |
| re: Lazaris material--appendix 2
On Abundance: (the skill of having it all)
In 1979 Lazaris said that once upon a time problems were solvable
but that the time was rapidly approaching when problems would not
be solvable in linear time because they would become too complex.
It would then be necessary to solve these problems by creating new
realities. We ignore these things about abundance:
1. That it is an important part of creating our own reality.
2. That we've generated this reality to create and have fun AND
to CONSCIOUSLY create success. This is not optional. We cannot
ignore one of the two mandates.
3. That we lump everything that has to do with power, success,
etc. in with materialism. Abundance is an integral part of
spirituality.
What this reveals about us is:
1. It suggests that our new spirituality is based upon our childhood
religions (our old spirituality in drag.)
2. Our confusion of politics of Eastern and Western religions to
new spirituality. We need to realize that our new relationship
with God/Goddess/All-That-Is is one of love, light, laughter
and ease...not one of pain and agony.
3. People's anger and rage at inability to have success.
4. Their attachments and judgements about money and success. We
need to realize that money is an illusion just like the rest
of our reality and that we can have as much of nothing as we
want.
Having or not having it is not important...what is important
is what we do with it or what we deny ourselves by not having
it.
What is abundance? It is about money and so very much more.
Traditionally, it has been wealth and all its trappings...it involved
struggle and fighting over. The new abundance includes the old,
for growth is expansive, not linear. It is a sustaining, maintaining
and expanding of that wealth, in every aspect of self and our
spirituality and relationship with God/Goddess/All-That-Is. Letting
metaphysics be our whole life, not just parts of a day or week.
It is a skill we can learn although perhaps wobbly at first.
How do we do it?
I. It's important to honestly release REALNESS. Techniques work
where we allow the reality to be an illusion. Some of us allow
everything to be illusionary except relationships, others allow
everything but health, others, etc. Where we hold on to realness
is where we have problems. We can use metaphysics to prove
it (metaphysics) doesn't exist. The price of admission is to
leave realness at the door. How? By reminding ourselves that
it's only a dream and that the players in our lives are just
reading the lines we gave them. Sometimes night dreams have
an impact and yet we readily admit that they are illusionary...
the "eyes-open" dream is *more* of an illusion.
II. By releasing the consciousness of limitation in which we live.
There are certain giveaway signals of limited consciousness
or scarcity consciousness:
1. When we lack desire, expectancy, and imagination.
2. When we refuse or avoid responsibility for either our failures
or our successes.
3. When we procrastinate. This is terrorizing us.
4. By believing that we don't deserve and trying to convince
others of our undeservability.
5. When we are addicted to self-pity and martyrhood. This
is limited consciousness.
6. When we find gratification out of finding fault or by blaming.
7. By guilt. When we screw up but especially when we succeed
("I didn't deserve to get this job...")
We can drop and release this by:
a. Recognizing this limitation.
b. Acknowledging that it is true. (We will feel anger, remorse,
disgusted with behavior [not self] when we really acknowledge.)
c. Forgive self and not putting it off.
d. Resolve to change.
III. Release the false meaning of wealth, money and success.
Inflation is the added weight or value that we have added
to money. Take the weight off!
The common weights:
1. The more money one has, the more intelligent he/she is.
" " " " " , the more shrewd they are and
that people without money are dumb and dull.
2. If you have money, you are crafty and wicked (these are
common messages from parents.)
3. People who have money are powerful.
4. People who have money are better than we are, therfore
we are less than. This is trying to get validation and
self-esteem from money. These people don't spend it because
it means giving away their self-esteem.
Wealth is having access to the resources [see earlier response
in this topic]. Abundance is having what you want all the time
with love, laughter, light and ease.
We worked for the old abundance. The new abundance we step
into.
It is not just the old brought forward. The New Age is NEW. We
have gone from destiny to creation...by ALLOWING.
IV. Be willing to be abundant...to have it all.
1. By letting go of the old script.
2. Responsibility is not the issue here--accepting or denying
is the issue. Create safety so that the consequences of
abundance are not reasons for avoiding it. We create the
reactions as well as the actions.
3. Drop our "specialness." Say: "I am willing...just like
everyone else."
4. Forgive yourself. If God/Goddess/All-That-Is can, so can
we.
5. Let go of self-pity.
6. Accept adulthood. We are no longer children or even
a combination of child/adolescent (a "grown-up"). Be the
free-child/adolescent with dreams, lost in time/space...
intrigued by do's and why's.
7. Accept spirituality. The magick doesn't lie in the
techniques...it lies within us.
V. Know what you want and why? Bottom line it! Make it for
understanding, not excuses. It will tingle when you've bottom-
lined it!
1. Give yourself permission.
2. In meditation, go to mountain top, firmly plant your feet
and bellow out to all of your reality what it is you want.
3. Ask for help: from counselors, or LAzaris, or any of the
unseen friends.
4. Feel what it is like to have...ACT as IF---NOT, "DO as IF"
Feel the part of abundance with whatever it is you have.
VI. KNOW that it is done. Stretch your image. Stretch the success
cube [..earlier in this topic] Change your beliefs and feel
grateful. GRATITUDE is not a requirement from God. It is
a GIFT from God/Goddess/All-That-Is. "Lower" lifeforms can't
have gratitude (although they can be happy.)
VII. Apply one of the manifestation techniques.
[I will try to give these various ways...and there are several
any of which will work...in a later response.]
It is important to practice...the magick is not in the technique,
it is within us.
"The New Abundance: the Skill of Having It ALL" 7-12-1987
[next month the topic is on the ART of having it all]
"Magick is the art of causing changes in consciousness to occur
in accordance with the will."
--Dion Fortune--
Frederick
|
| 358.90 | Lazaris' response to drug questions | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Sat Jul 25 1987 01:05 | 180 |
| Lazaris material--appendix 3
The following is an excerpt from a private reading/consultation
I had with Lazaris on 5-3-1984:
...
F (for me)-I'm curious about drug highs and how they are similar to love
or different from love and how do they work, how do they accomplish that,
if that's what they are accomplishing?
L (for Lazaris)-It depends on what you mean by drug high and similar to love
and whatever. What are you meaning specifically?
F- ummm
L- Not every drug you get a high from and ones you do get a high from are
not necessarily love.
F- What is that high then?
L- Euphoria, is that what you're meaning? That sense of total freedom?
F- Yes, , bliss, whatever, I don't know...
L- Yes, all right, that scope...We would suggest how it produces it, first
of all, in terms of that...we would suggest it produces it through, how do you
say, the drug influence: what it causes to do is lets down the barriers, that's
the first thing that it does, in terms of the uptightness, your insecurities,
your affronts, your images, your games, things of this sort. Because of the
influences of the drug, it causes those to be lowered. Now we would suggest
here that there aren't any drugs that eliminate them, but they cause those
barriers to be lowered, and, therefore, "less inhibited, less concerned with
my fears and doubts of image and humiliation, and things of this sort" and
therefore, the personna gets sort of *drugged*, the personna gets, in a sensing,
well, that's it, it gets drugged, it gets preoccupied and therefore there tends
to be, at least initially, the opportunity for a more real, *A more Real*,
sense of self, to show. Therefore, as one gets under the influence of a certain
drug, etc. the person can be more demonstrative, more emotionally expressive,
etc., more honest with their own feelings, and attitudes, and outlooks and we
would suggest that the result of that is a state of bliss in the sense that
"this feels GREAT! to be so honest, it feels GREAT to be so there, so present,
so alive, so, so attuned with what's going on" and we would suggest here that
that's the natural state, that's the way people are supposed to be but because
they build the barriers of the personna and of the ego and of the "I've got
to look good and perform right and what will people think of me and I better
do all the manipulations that I have to do, etc." therefore the realness of
them gets expressed very seldomly so that when it does finally get expressed
it *feels* so wonderful, it feels so blissful.
F-(undiscernable)
L-And we would suggest that in that sense it's the same as when you feel that
sense of ecstasy or love or bliss...you've let down your barriers.
F-Is that the same as love?
L-Well, ah, the same as love? It, it can be, yes, and we would suggest
here, feeling that sense of love, not necessarily for a person but for the
reality and for the freedom. When you do get in that state you will let down
your barriers similarly and therefore the difference is that one is artificially
induced and the other is more emotionally induced or more naturally induced.
The PROBLEM is, and in that sensing, one becomes dependent upon the drug to do
that, and therefore, in that particular sensing, it loses it's punch, it loses
it's value. We would suggest here if a drug is taken, for example, in terms
of, whatever, etc., obviously some can be physically hazardous and therefore
we don't recommend those but if you did take a drug, say, or you, just even
in the sensing, smoking marijuana...the first time that you let it really
work for you, positively, of letting down those barriers and finding out what
it can be to be REAL, what it feels like to be totally honest and totally
straightforward, etc., how beautiful that is...it is initially intended as,
all right, here's your peek at what could be, now get there on your own!
Now, in a sensing, it's like so much of what happens is people say, "Well,
look, if you will be honest with me and if you will be totally straightforward
etc. and allow for honest interaction and communication and let down the
barriers and just be you, it'll be wonderful." And the question is "Yeah,
how will I know that? How am I sure? What if I let down those barriers
and it's awful and it's terrible and then I've ruined everything." And
so they want a guarantee, they want, you know, "Give me the guarantee that
it really will be wonderful and I really will be happy and then I, I'll do
it." Well, we would suggest here you CAN'T give a guarantee, but sometimes,
SOMETIMES, and please understand this is not consistent always, sometimes
if indeed through the use of an artificial stimulant such as a drug, that
barrier can get downed, etc., then they can *see* the other side and realize,
"By golly, it IS really wonderful. Here is my guarantee." Now, the problem
becomes, in that sensing, is do they take it as a guarantee that yes,
"If I let down my barriers and I can be really happy" and then go ahead and
do it on their own, without the need of using the drug to get there, to use
that, to have that happen, then indeed it can be very wholesome and
beautiful and a very marvelous experience. The problem becomes in that
they don't really believe that they can do it on their own and therefore
they have to keep taking the drug, have to keep smoking that extra joint
or have to have that hit or have whatever it is that they're taking before
they can let themselves have that and we would suggest here that therefore
they never, ever accomplish that on their own but develop instead a
dependency upon the drug to deliver them into that state. THAT's when it
becomes very destructive. And so we would suggest here it all depends on
the degree and it depends on the intentionality behind it and so we don't
oppose drugs in terms of across the board but we do oppose certain drugs
because they're physically harmful; but we would suggest here that we
oppose ALL THINGS that are used as an escape or as a way to avoid the realness
or a way to "cop out" of one's own experience in that particular regard,
to use it as a crutch, to avoid being able to do it on your own. Then
we would suggest whether it's a drug or a course of study or it's a guru
or a master or whether it's a personally induced meditative state, if
it's used as a crutch to avoid the realness of it, then we would suggest
it's as detrimental as anything. And so we would suggest here that one
has to, therefore, exercise moderation and one has to be honest in terms of
"What am I really doing here. Why am I taking this? Why am I now doing
this particular drug number, etc. Is it, in a sensing, to experience
a new level that I intend to follow up with in subsequent meditations
and in subsequent work, to accomplish on my own, or is it as an escape
or is it as a social pressure and 'Aren't I cool? or whatever"...a variety
of motivations there. And the only one that really works is for exploration
that "I intend to stretch out there and then to follow it up. Follow it up
with realness without the drug to accomplish the same thing." And we would
suggest here that it works in that scope.
How it works, physiologically, quite obviously, is that it affects
the nervous system which therefore affects the indocrine system which
in that particular sensing operates with the working of hormones and
various other chemical releases and lack of releases in the body system
so as to create that particular state of awareness. It can be accomplished
without the drug and indeed, they have proven quite clearly that the
brain will produce LSD and in that sensing in a very pure and beautiful
state and we would suggest here totally lacking in any harm or difficulty
and it will produce it naturally so as one can establish, say, an acid
high, for that matter, and knowing the stuff is good that they've taken,
because it's self produced, that can be more vibrant and more real than
*any* that people could have accomplished in terms of taking that drug
or any of the synthetic suppliments that have subsequently been put
together.
F- Is that not an escape then, too?
L-Not necessarily. Indeed, we would suggest here that it can be, even
then. In other words, you can go into a meditation and you can adjust
your frequency such that you can, your pineal gland in combination
with the pituitary, can reproduce a minute amount of what would be the
substance, chemical substance, called LSD and trip out on it, absolutely
so! And we would suggest here that in that scope, again, what's the use?
Why are you doing that? "Am I doing that to explore, to reach new levels,
new dimensions that I want to follow up with and get there on my own or
Am I using it to escape?" Oh, most definitely, someone can sit down and
meditate and do a very clean and very beautiful meditation or someone can
sit down and meditate and use it as an escape even short of any kind of
high, just sitting down and closing your eyes, taking a deep breath,
counting down and sitting in a meditation for three or four hours a day...
is an escape. And, and...
F-Lazaris
L-that's what fits. Yes?!
F-I didn't mean to interrupt, but I wanted to know if in that particular
situation, I get the thought that perhaps we are here on the physical
plane to, well, I don't know, maybe this is incorrect but to, (or is
inappropriate) but the, ahh, those kinds of levels, that ecstasy, that feeling--
is very difficult to stay in the physical plane with, is it not?
L-Yes, it is.
F-So...
L-Absolutely!
F-So, that then becomes, okay, that therefore eliminates the need to be in
the physical plane any longer. AT that point..
L-Uuummmmmm
F-At that point when you get to the level that that's where you want to be
all the time, you no longer need a body.
L-That's true, you no longer *NEED* one, you still have one, however (laughs)
and therefore, quite often where it can tie is the same kind of situation
where you can reach that state of ecstasy or state of bliss or whatever and
realize how fantastic it is, then you come down from it and realize "That's
what I want all the time. Now I need to take the steps to move to that
direction, it can be my inspiration, it can be the reason for changing this
or that behaviour pattern or processing through this or releasing that
bit of my past or for changing this particular ego, particular configuration
I'm currently working with, BECAUSE, I know that it stands in the way of
reaching that state and therefore I'm here physical, I have a body, I have
these constraints and I'm working through them so that, why? So that I
can eventually be in that state all the time without having to artificially
induce it, without having to have someone else do it to me
and so that I can create it and therefore in this there would come that
time that if indeed I could sustain it there would be no need for physical
form" and, therefore, you wouldn't come back to [having] physicalness.
....
"The law of priority: When priorities are in order, definitely 50%
will be achieved. Probably 75% and possibly 100% will be achieved.
When priorities are out of order, none are achieved."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.91 | This is why I believe | ARMORY::CLAYR | | Thu Aug 20 1987 18:51 | 31 |
|
This reality is ours--is each of ours separately and
collectively we having created/are creating it at every instant.
There is no "past", no "future", there is now, the "nowpoint" in
the words of Seth, and when we see, we see creations around us
projected into physical being by the energy that runs us--LOVE.
Even as I reach for glass of water, drink from it and fulfill
my thirst of the moment, I in the same way bring/brought into being
the glass, the water, the faucet, the plumbing, the building in
which I stand. "I", being the unique product of spirit wearing the
vestments of all levels of actuality between the worlds of pure
spirit and matter simultaneously, am you and each "separate"
consciousness that exists, from the smallest subatomic particle
to the largest cluster of galaxies.
All of these and all beings are the same energy, only projecting
through different lenses, following the laws (of physics) of this
universe. Every form of consciousness that is manifested has mani-
fested in its own way by its own choice for its own purpose.
The source is 'one' for all of this universe, the manifestations
are many, though each plays by the same rules of the same game.
The ultimate power over every movement of energy creating any given
actuality on any scale derives from us by "authority" of the original
love energy that we are. This totality of being, including all that
we will ever know (and beyond to the nth power (as n approaches
infinity)) is GOD.
This is why I believe that we create our own reality.
|
| 358.92 | Transcendence--2-days with Lazaris | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Tue Dec 01 1987 04:55 | 186 |
| more Lazaris material--appendix 4
This past weekend (Nov. 28-29) I spend another incredible two-days
with Lazaris. The following is some material from that weekend
from my notes:
People often wonder what happened to cause the sudden disappearance
of various civilizations. Prior to 3500 years ago, societies were
not male-dominated. Though most of us believe that male-domination
has always been the case, that is not the truth. Well, then, if
not male-domination, then female-domination, right? NO. Prior
to male-supremacy there was TOGETHERNESS. Mayan society, until
its height, was a society *together*. Egypt, prior to 1500 BC
was also. (Romans "stole" Crete's society patterning to create
female gods.)
What happened was that a few men came along and decided that
they wanted to dominate. So they did. Though the GODDESS was an
acknowledged deity with civilization, *they* determined that GOD
(and men, therefore, of course) was superior to the GODDESS. Thereupon
it was systematic to "put down" Goddess energy and "put up" God
energy. Women, as a rational consequence, were henceforth deemed
inferior. (There was NEVER a time when women were considered
superior.)
This belief was carried forth into modern times to the extent
that it is pervasive throughout every aspect of our society. What
has happened in modern times, though, is a certain awareness of
this stupidity. The problem is, though, that feminists will try
to insist that women are superior to men, but by doing that, they
are using God energy and NOT Goddess energy. Warrior energy is
[one form] of God energy.
(Lazaris spent a considerable amount of time talking about
the Bible...I will try to remember some of the highlights:)
The Bible as we know it contains 150,000 inconsistencies in
the New Testament. It has been written by hundreds of MEN over hundreds
of years. The state of women as considered by the Bible is very clear.
They are inferior. Lazaris pointed out the story of Sodom and Gomorrah
and pointed out that when God sent two angels in the form of men
to Lot, he gave his daughter to some men "to be ravished." God
smiled upon Lot for his sheltering the strangers (the angels) but
felt nothing for his daughter. As they fled (Sodom's?) destruction,
Lots wife turned to salt upon turning around to look. Later, though,
Lot turned to look and had nothing happen to him.
In many other passages throughout the Bible, similar fates
fell upon women. They were (always) considered possessions and
unimportant in the eyes of God. They were considered the servants
of men and men were not punished for this. [This is an all-loving
God?]
The inconsistencies in the Bible come from the many different
authors the Bible had. Many of these authors deleted favorable
references to women or references to Goddess energy. Goddess energy
was considered evil and women, as a subset of the Goddess, were
often considered no better.
Towards newer times, Lazaris mentioned that he finds it rather
interesting that much mention is made of the 6,000,000 Jews killed
in WWII (by a God-energy society which wanted to exterminate a
society which didn't have the same God) while one never hears much
mention of the 11,000,000 WOMEN that were killed because they were
branded as witches, usually with no proof. [And yet apparently
no killing has ever been done by Goddess-dominated societies?]
Male supremacy is a loser game. To resolve the issue of
AIDS (and no single cure will be found) and to resolve the issue
of pollution or ozone-layer destruction or dying of fish or
deforestation of the planet, etc., we must not look for a single
source. The single source concept is the male supremacy concept.
We will find answers only by working TOGETHER, not as either
singly superior. Our reality is trying to tell us to quit looking
for solutions in a logical and linear way, and there is no more time to do
so. It is time to transcend our reality. Maleness is becoming
too heavy a burden to carry. "The way of the warrior" (confronting,
battling, conquering, transmuting the enemy) is coming to an end. Instead,
the "Way of the adventurer" (encountering, unfolding, befriending,
transmuting with love and dignity) needs to develop.
1. Encounter-reach out. WHAT is the essence? What is its character?
How does it begin? What are its traits? What impact does it
have on me and what impact on others? What does its personification
look like?
2. Unfold-WHY...?
3. Befriend-HOW? Change manipulation into persuasion. Rather than
taking the life, show loyalty and determination. Learn to love
even the ugly parts of the self. Embrace the negative energy.
4. Transmute-Show gratitude and love or use help from the unseen
friends [separate topic]. Change our beliefs through sub-conscious.
Two worlds are becoming clearer.
1. Where diseases, etc. are prevalent.
Look to the immune and endocrine systems--defenselessness,
defensiveness, self-pity, etc.
2. Because of AIDS, etc. more $ will be spent. The solutions
will develop longevity and cancer-fighting benefits. We
will not find "A,B,C" cures. There will be mostly individual
solutions. Around June-Sept, 1988, there will be AIDS hope
though with side effects.
We will learn about the Earth as a life form-an organism.
(By way of repetition--) If you want to change reality, change
image. "Who am I?--is always changing" Who we are is what we say,
think, and do. Reality always FOLLOWS image (not the converse.)
Belief precedes experience. Image is the container that holds it
all within. [Image is depicted as the banks of a river. Identity
is depicted as the river.] It is time to turn the river into an
ocean.
It is easy to sell fear [don't think so? look at many of these
conference notes.] It is not so easy to sell truth. Back up choices
with decisions. Back them up with actions (thoughts and feelings)
and with attitudes and then with belief. Every problem we have
is telling us to work together.
There are two types of shame: 1. for things uncorrectable
2. of being (just for "being")
Because of shame, we belief the Biblical story of Genesis
and original sin.
Shame must be transcended in some lifetime.
When we feel we don't love "good enough", we feel undeserving.
Deservability and shame cannot be fixed by processing, but by
transcending.
There are two types of transcendence:
1. In which there is no memory or knowledge. Lazaris will
not teach us this method--there's no point in it.
(As an aside, mostly, he mentioned that Shamanism does
not distinguish between what happens and dreaming.)
2. In which there is an impact. The last step becomes
nebulous.
Transmutation-Is the changing of mutated energies.
Transformation-Is the changing of the form of energy.
Transcendence-Is the changing of reality.
Transcendence requires the immersion into the energy of the Goddess.
There are four resistances to transcendence:
1. Resistance of trust in self. "I can barely exist in this reality."
"Change reality? I don't trust that I can."
2. Discomfort. "Transcendence is too Christian and that's not
comfortable." "Don't expect, be comfortable."
3. Too finite or too complete. "What if it doesn't work?" (This
is an attempt to protect metaphysics. Metaphysics doesn't need
protection.) (Habits don't necessarily disappear because of
transcendence...must then break the habits.)
4. Resistance to feminine energy.
Trust and perfection are often confused. If one is perfect, there
is no need for trusting. Perfection is static. Perfection is the
antithesis of creativity. Perfection is a state of superiority
and a "better than."
Perfection leads to failure. (If God is perfect, we are human,
we are not perfect, and God will not accept us.)
Failure leads to punishment.
Punishment leads to doubt.
Doubt creates less trust.
Less trust creates more perfection.
This is a perpetual motion pattern, but it is the easiest type of
pattern to break because it can be broken anywhere.
HOW Do WE break perfection? One way--CONSCIOUSLY do it "Wrong."
As I look over my notes tonight, I realize that I did an incredibly
incomplete job of taking them in the first place. So, for anyone
who may fathom an idea that this is "All" of the information that
occurs during one of these workshops, then I profoudly apologize
to Lazaris for falling so far short. I feel that everything I
"learned" during my participation was extremely valuable and goes
far beyond my inadequate note-taking. The experience of the
meditations was unbelievable! My feeling is that perhaps some of
these words are helpful in reinforcing concepts or seeds possibly
already in place or may help put them there in the first place.
[Especially the notions of male-supremacy...but before jumping
onto a war path, check out the concepts of masculine/feminine energy]
Like every other seminar I have ever done with Lazaris, this one
was no exception in being phenomenal. That I fail to convey this
is due to a failure of our communication.
Frederick
|
| 358.93 | You can't digest everything at once! | BARAKA::BLAZEK | A new moon, a warm sun... | Tue Dec 01 1987 13:43 | 7 |
| Frederick, there's no need to apologize to anyone, Lazaris
included, for "inadequate note-taking." What you've shared
is a wonderful perspective and any information you bring is
read with great interest by me (and hopefully many others).
Carla
|
| 358.94 | | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Tue Dec 01 1987 15:48 | 40 |
|
Lazaris has read Riane Eisler's _The_Chalice_and_the_Blade_! How
nice! (You might enjoy reading it too. And _When_God_Was_a_Woman_
by Merlin Stone.)
There is one statement in there that is somewhere between misleading
and false, to wit: "(Romans "stole" Crete's society patterning to
create female gods.)" Although the area of Rome was occupied from
about 1500 bce on, which overlaps with the Minoan civilization (which
ended about 1100 bce), it did not develop much of a "civilization"
until the eighth century bce, long after the fall of Crete. Instead,
Rome got most of its deities (female *and* male) from Greece. It
was in Greece that the religion of the Great Goddess was modified,
e.g., the goddess Athena was brought forth full-blown from the head
of Zeus, and that modification is what the Romans took, e.g. Minerva
was brought forth full-blown from the head of Jupiter. This is
not of Crete; Athena is a much older deity than Zeus.
You (I presume you rather than Lazaris because of the brackets)
ask the perceptive question, "And yet apparently no killing has ever
been done by Goddess-dominated societies?" Eisler thinks not.
She thinks that the ritual slaying of the king (See _The_Golden_
_Bough_ by Sir James Frazer, among others.) is solely an artifact
of dominance-based cultures. I disagree. I've seen photographs
of bodies (*very* old bodies) of men who were clearly ritually
slain as part of the culture of a grain-based society.
These killings were not murder, were not gratuitous, and were
performed only on volunteers. (One thing I learned when I was
studying this is that the sacrifice *must* consent, or it isn't
valid.) Such killings were originally annual, to insure the success
of the grain crop. (One man per year per "kingdom"; it was the
king who was killed.) Then they were every three years, then
every seven, then at need, then... well, why do you think we have
scarecrows?
For more on this topic, you could read note 518.* in WOMANNOTES.
It is a poor thing, but mine own. :-)
Ann B.
|
| 358.95 | | DECWET::MITCHELL | Value me--I'm different! | Wed Dec 02 1987 00:10 | 18 |
| RE: .92 (Frederick)
>...one never hears much mention of the 11,000,000 WOMEN that were
killed because they were branded as witches, usually with no proof...<
That many people have been accused of witchcraft and murdered is
certainly a fact, but where did this "11,000,000 women" figure come
from? That represents 1/5 the population of Europe during the time of
the Spanish Inquisition! (including Russia and the British Isles).
Something is wrong with this picture...
Just wondering... What was Lazarius doing during that time?
John M.
|
| 358.96 | Your milage may vary. | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Wed Dec 02 1987 20:23 | 5 |
| The general estimate for the number of women/people executed for
witchcraft during the timeframe of the Inquisitions runs from
one-half million to two million.
Ann B.
|
| 358.97 | Insufficient data for any accuracy. | SSDEVO::YOUNGER | There are no misteakes | Thu Dec 03 1987 17:10 | 9 |
| Actually, the figures I've read are the number of people executed
for witchcraft over the 300 year period when this happened runs
from 500,000 to 11,000,000. It has already been said that most
of these were women. And yes, THIS IS A LOT OF PEOPLE!
Appendix A of _Dreaming in the Dark_ by Starhawk is probably the best
account of the witchtrials in print.
Elizabeth
|
| 358.98 | 1988-the Year of Compassion | PUZZLE::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Tue Dec 15 1987 05:33 | 103 |
| Having just attended the Lazaris Sunday workshop entitled
"1988-the Year of Compassion" on the 13th of December, I thought
I would share some of my notes with you (the audio tape should be
available in a couple of weeks to anyone interested):
[By the way, Jach announced that Peny and Michaell Prestini are
changing their last name to "North" {beats me!} Also, their
gallery will be renamed "Isis Rising"]
It is easier to sell fear than positive energy because if it doesn't
happen (that which the fear is about) then no one is going to complain.
Also, it doesn't require responsibility. Many also find fear to
be more romantic. Our negative ego thrills at war. We can forget
about the mundane parts of our lives when we focus on fears such
as global catastrophies, etc. Positive energy, on the other hand,
has to be reproven over and over.
What is compassion?
1. It is internal passion (passion-very intense, powerful,
enthusiastic desire.)
2. It is courageous intimacy and risk of vulnerability-
to be tender, allow closeness-to have understanding
3. It is an active caring for self and for *significant* others.
(This means *doing* something about it.!)
4. It is an active caring for *others* and the world.
How does one become compassionate?
1. Create 2 or 3 intense desires. Specific, courageous in detail.
Understand the components if it is abstract.
2. Develop *TOGETHER* energy-between-an expansion-*without*-within-
the "we did it!" energy.
3. Create and accept more loving relationships. *Let someone FIND
US* [this is more frightening for us than finding someone else]
4. Develop and expand your spirituality. This includes our
relationship with our Higher Self, our future self and with
God/Goddess/All-That-Is.
"Spirituality is like a smorgasbord. You don't have to take everything
on the table. You can choose the parts you want."
Here are some of the predictions for 1988:
In health, immuno-deficiency diseases will be spreading. 3rd world
nations, particularly, will have difficulties. We will not be able
to shut them out. Their concerns will be ours. There will be 2-3
major breakthroughs with AIDS. Their will NOT be a vaccine, there
will be many solutions. There will be significant breakthroughs
with cancers. Alternative healing methods will gain credibility.
Health deals with self-pity. Immuno-deficiency deals with
helplessness; Cancers and Immune/Indocrine problems are connected
with hopelessness.
The weather will appear to be attacking us. There will once again
be a drought in the SE, also in the SW and Northern California.
But it is in the NE and the NW that the most distinct difference
in weather problems will show up, because they will be unable to
cope with what they encounter. (He indicated by way of example that
while Minnesota residents can shrug off 6 inches of snow, San Francisco
residents couldn't...because they aren't used to it...this is what
he means by unable to cope-unusual problems)
The economy will have a recession in June and November, 1988. Not
a depression. There will not be fast money to be made. Investments
will be conservative. There will be grander international cooperation
followed by economic prosperity in 1989-1990 (due to communication.)
This will be a result of confidence (as opposed to the breech of
confidence that was experienced this year prior to our economic
tumult.)
This will be a year of "accidents." Crime will be more personalized.
Not particular terrorist activities. (As an example, he pointed
out last week's crime on the PSA flight which wound up killing 43
people.) This is due to a breech of hope.
There will be four significant earthquakes in Ca. 2 in populated
areas and 2 in non-populated areas. There will be loss of property
and minimal loss of life. The earthquakes we will experience are
not worth leaving the state for. Earthquakes speak to our
unwillingness to change--the earth shakes to wake us up! Energy
field shifts speak to world power.
There will be some fantastic breakthroughs in technology, particularly
in regards to waste and pollution and also with nuclear waste.
Technology is a friend that provides answers for some problems.
We need to watch out for an accumulation of guilt and our lack
of deservability. It will be a year of detail and compassion.
We need to pay attention to details and to use what we know. It
will be a year to have courage. We need to take the time to protect
ourselves (and he pointed out creating a protective bubble for
ourselves each time we do things such as getting into a car, etc.)
January 1st will mark the beginning of the new shift in energy
(unlike many other years.)
Part of the workshop (as usual) had a meditation...this one
(which should be on the tape) was a nice one dealing with a
cone of power.
Frederick
|
| 358.99 | Workshop, SELF-ESTEEM, Mar. 24, 1988 | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Sat Mar 26 1988 00:16 | 159 |
| Appendix 5
note from a workshop titled:
"Self-Esteem" March 24, 1988
What is self-esteem? It is a love that is earned. It is an honesty,
integrity, trust, etc. All these terms are nebulous and elusive concepts
in our reality. Why is esteem seen as such?
1. Because it is a value judgement. We are so afraid of using the word.
2. Because it involves emotional estimates and subjective evaluations.
Every emotionally response we make involves esteem. Every thought we
have is a product of esteem.
3. Because in the hierarchy of needs it is in 4th place and people are
confused by its positioning (after Survival, Security and Belongingness.)
Much of traditional and "new age" therapy has a penchant for esteem.
We often avoid needs by relabeling them as wants or preferences. There
ARE needs which we should identify. Satisfying needs provides happiness.
Satisfying preferences provides JOY. Esteem is a NEED.
4. Because we never do not experience it. We cannot get out of the set.
We may have low esteem, etc. but we always have esteem.
"Like a fish doesn't understand water, we do not understand esteem."
Unlike the fish, however, we CAN learn about it.
Why is esteem important?
1. Because life is about growing. To have fun, success, explore, confront,
deal with self, etc. We need a reason and a motivation to become more.
Esteem provides that reason.
2. Reality turns on belief and choice. Belief (out of which all reality
comes) precedes attitudes ("colorations") which are followed by feelings
which in turn produce thoughts which in order produce decisions which
generate a choice. These choices then produce new decisions which lead
to new thoughts which lead to new feelings, etc. The two pivot points
are choices and beliefs. The rest lead to these. What motivates?
Choices do.
Esteem provides a sense of evaluative estimate of self.
It also gives us a willingness to understand, explore and change.
3. Of all the KINGDOMS, we are the least prepared. What distinguishes us?
Our capacity for survival depends on our ability to think, feel and
reason (which is the synergy of thinking/feeling.) We can then take
dominion. To productively and progressively think and feel, we need a
measure and value. Esteem does this.
4. Every power we have as a unique human is predicated on and comes out of
our estimate of who we are. Our willingness and ability to act comes
out of esteem. Without it we would not grow, our choices and beliefs
would stagnate. It is ESSENTIAL to existence, with or without a body.
What is esteem? It is the estimate, evaluation, appraisal of self. A value
judgement that we make and adhere to. It is the love we earn. The combining
of these together produces a transmutation or transformation which is our
esteem.
What are the components of esteem?
1. DETERMINATION-to be powerful. "I am determined, regardless of what
reality does!" Not that we *are* powerful, but that we are determined.
2. ABILITY-to think and feel. Practice it. What kind of thinker are we?
How much have we developed our ability to feel? THE MOST FRIGHTENING
EMOTION WE HAVE IS LOVE. What scares us is not war, but peace. We
know what to do when we are angry. We do not know what to do with love.
3. EVALUATION-of our character. Character is an ideal or ideals that we
hold. Ideals are things which we will never fully reach (such as
creativity, love, etc.) With the ideals we establish certain principles
and certain boundaries. Character is the frequency with which we
implement our principles. [Lazaris hereby diverted our focus to our
presidential campaign. He stated that there is no clear charisma is
our candidates. The search here is for character. What this reflects
is our own search for our own character.]
4. WILLINGNESS and DESIRE-to seek understanding and meaning [masculine
energy] and to allow perception and conception [feminine energy]
of something new.
5. Also an EVALUATION-of principle-based action vs. expedient-based action.
6. Also an ABILITY-to INTEGRATE thought and feeling. That you feel something
does not mean that there is a thought behind it. Combine thought and
feeling to come up with an action.
7. Also a DETERMINATION-that we are not helpless. "I determine it."
We are always seeking esteem, but it isn't always self-esteem. If it isn't
self-esteem, it is false-esteem.
What are the differences between self-esteem and false-esteem?
How do we do or seek false-esteem?
1. Repression-of thoughts and feelings. Doing things out of fear choices
rather than growth choices.
2. (and more frequent) We Devalue our choices. ("It is out of my control.")
We diminish our resources. Much of our doom and gloom reality does this.
We lower our values. Once in our life quality was important; now, it
is quantity that is.
3. Seeking esteem through aspiration and intention.
4. By seeking outside validation. As a source for esteem, it is devastating.
(We *can* use outside validation as feedback, income, etc. of self and
what we are doing.) Use dreaming. What was the intention and what was
created?
We will always seek either false-esteem or self-esteem.
What happens when we rely on false esteem? (The negative ego likes it.)
1. It becomes insatiable. We need more and more. More and more choices are
then made out of fear.
2. There is a sense of powerlessness. What happens if we don't get approval?
3. We lead a life that is miserable. Always running from the dread--of
failure, success, potentials, etc. It makes us physically exhausted.
Like in "tug-o-war" there is a tremendous amount of energy with little
consequence. Then it suddenly ends, both teams exhausted.
4. We are locked in anger and repressed emotions. Angry at the source of
validation. Finding self as competitive--usually silently.
What happens with self-esteem?
1. The person is ALIVE. We feel love (genuinely) and a trust in self and
in those who have demonstrated a worthiness of trust. Also, we feel
a sense of expectancy and enthusiasm. Along with the core component
of health: ALIVENESS.
2. Creativity-Generating and/or inspiring conception and perception in
self and/or others.
3. Pleasure-We will experience it short or long term. Happiness is the
fulfilling of needs. JOY is the fulfilling of preferences.
4. Dynamic Spirituality-takes on power, beauty, wonder. How often do
we exhaust LOGIC first, *before* using our spirituality?
5. We have PRIDE-not false pride or hubris. But pride in a reality that
encompasses dignity. Proud of the illusion we've generated.
6. Sense of productivity. Learning about self in whatever we do.
7. There is a WILLINGNESS to ADVENTURE. Looking at life as an adventure.
A willingness to risk, to explore.
How do we DO self-esteem? It's very simple, really.
1. RELEASE your FATHER. Let him be a human being, no more and no less.
Mother=love for us. Father=esteem for us. Let him make his mistakes.
2. (This is initiated usually between ages 8-10. If father isn't there
emotionally/physically, there isn't any self-esteem.)
3. Recognize false esteem. "Which source am I seeking?" Recognize,
acknowledge, forgive self and release it.
4. Monitor the seven qualities:
(1) Honesty-"How honest was I today?" (This is different than truth.)
(2) Responsibility-"How responsible was I today?"
(3) What is a measure of my integrity? (Integrity is the spontaneous
honesty and responsibility in my life.) It measures evaluation
of character.
(4) Measure your trust-willingness and desire.
(5) How much did I co-create my reality today (with Higher Self,
God/Goddess/All-That-Is, counselors, child, etc.?)
"Help me God!" is a manipulative beseeching.
(6) Honor your emotions. Listen and bring into integration your
emotions with feelings and thoughts.
(7) How much can you say that you CONSCIOUSLY didn't hurt anyone?
Intent is very important here. The "highest" form of hurting
others is helplessness.
The negative ego says "I did it!" When we co-create, we say "We did it."
We can retreat into the shadows and stagnation of fear.
"The goal of the new spirituality is to give up neither your identity
nor your will. Evolution is about expanding, not denying. Growth
and the Sacred Journey are not just about seeking truth. They are
about seeking the HIGHEST TRUTH. They are not about settling for
any old truth. They are about stretching for the HIGHEST TRUTH...
and then continuing to search and reach for an even HIGHER TRUTH!"
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.100 | 2-day with Lazaris, Mar.26-27 "The Awakening" | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | HOME, in spite of my ego! | Wed Mar 30 1988 04:18 | 81 |
| I could not ever do as good a job as Lazaris does in talking
about what he does and, as I've pointed out before, we each interpret
the things he says individually. But with that in mind, I wish
to bring up here one of the concepts that was brought out at this
past weekend's two-day workshop. The following notes took about
two hours to deliver to those present. As anyone could readily
tell, a great deal has been "left out." My reason for giving you
this is basically because it may help answer questions that I have
seen arise in this conference over and over and I also feel that
giving you this little bit would not detract from any potential
experiential encounter you may have in the future.
KARMA
Karma and destiny both exist but not in the ways presumed.
It originated in the EAST as a philosophy, although it exists
everywhere. Karma exists as we create it. We choose it. It is
the "law" of cause and effect. It is also the "law" of effect
and cause.
Misunderstandings about karma:
1. That it is imposed on us (by some sort of Karmic Lord) rather
than chosen. When a life is over, WE review it and make choices.
We do not need to create a dance. It is balanced NOT by doing
the opposite, but by RELEASING IT. It lasts as long as we choose
it. No one ever says we are done. Karma has been politically
motivated (what else would you say to millions of starving people
that would placate them when you are helpless to help?) What
is the price to pay for allowing karma to be a part of you in
this manner? The price is that we give up our power and endure
longer than we need to. "God" only says "YES" to whatever we
want.
2. We will notice that people only put an emphasis on the NEGATIVE.
That is, why is it we only have negative karma to work off?
No one sees positive karma.
3. Having karma is often a euphemism for avoiding responsibility.
One of the biggest criticisms (and correct) about the New Age
is that it promotes self-centeredness (sadly true) and lack
of responsibility and lack of caring. Also, when an event is
a minor one, no one ever says it's karma. They only say it
is karma when it is a major event and when they have not got
a better answer or feel overwhelmed by it. What are the effects
and how do the causes come together?
4. Karma is contrary to reality; it creates contradictions; we
resolve contradictions. (We don't need to resolve paradoxes,
we can live with paradoxes...not so, however, with contradictions.)
We need, therefore, to resolve the contradiction of karma.
If all time is simultaneous, how can something happening NOW
be affecting something happening NOW? The ONLY way it can happen
now is if we choose it. It may INFLUENCE the now, but it doesn't
CAUSE the now. This is similar to going to see two movies, one a
comedy and one a tragedy. Whichever one you see first causes
a different outcome in how you feel about the second and how
you feel afterward. Sometimes, our karma is simply saying "no."
5. Sometimes karma and destiny are used to promote a shallowness
of understanding. Religions use it to promote and preserve
their own hierarchies.
6. Sometimes we use karma to promote blame. We do this rather
than operate out of compassion and character [character was
a major part of this weekend...I do not plan to discuss it
due to its import and complexity.]
7. Karma promotes helplessness. We become spiritual and then we
suffer in silence (because of "karma.")
Karma and destiny can each have tremendous power. The secret
to destiny (which is similar to karma) is that we choose it.
It is a way to accept responsibilty.
We need to release our self-created karma and express a destiny
which we choose.
THE HIDDEN POWERS ARE NOT UNLOCKED BY MEMORIZATION, BUT BY
EXPERIENCE. A road map is not the same as the trip.
"The New Age is an Age of Humanity-an Age of Consciousness-in which
each individual lovingly and celebratorily creates a world of
Dominion rather than one of Domination."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.101 | "2-day May 21-22, 1988;"Way of the Adventurer" | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Fri Jun 03 1988 05:12 | 157 |
| This was another watershed Lazaris workshop, which employed
techniques, etc. not previously used. Additionally, the latest
Lazaris book was just off the presses that week and it "coincidentally"
has many of the concepts covered in the workshop in it, especially
some of the Goddess information. I find the book much better than
I anticipated (since it is reprints from articles and questions
and answers from workshops, etc.) and I recommend it to everyone.
Back to the workshop, briefly...(I do not wish to lay out
everything covered, just some bits)
* * *
Along with animal spirits, we have plant and mineral spirits as
well. It can be very helpful to know what they are and to come
in touch with them. The mineral can teach things such as vision,
patience, perserverance...minerals do a lot of "out-of-body" since
they do not have the same mobility as other "life forms"
Teacher plants (such as marijuana, tobacco, "magic mushrooms", etc.)
can teach how to interact with the four metaphysical elements, i.e.,
earth, wind, fire and water. [we've already discussed spirit animals
in another topic.]
[a little bit on femininity---also covered in previous replies from
a slightly different point of view and in other topics and covered
quite well in the new book.]
Womanhood, as a general rule, involves anger or rage. The anger
is directed at men, for having power and not allowing it in them,
and at women, for not having fixed this earlier. (Manhood, as a
general rule, involves fear...Fear of women, who has the power of
life or death at birth, and of not knowing what to do with the power
they have.) Women are "allowed" by men to be feminine (according
to their definitions...since primitive times to very recent times)
or to have power (in the 1960's and 1970's) BUT NOT BOTH. The
11,000,000 witches that were killed (mentioned in a previous reply)
were not killed because they were witches, but often because they
had power--which in those times meant wealth--and that was intolerable
to men. What this means for women is that they are invisible and
therefore there is rage. An example of a reaction to this is
bulimia and anorexia, which often comes from the emotional state
of "I hate myself so much, I won't feed the woman I am." Similarly,
breast cancers (which could just as easily occur in men but don't)
are a result of a desire to "rip the womanhood off myself." These
women do not want to be men, they just do not want to be women living
under these conditions.
Another example...if a man is told he thinks like a woman, it is
considered an insult. Lazaris suggests that it should be considered
just as great an insult to a woman to be told she thinks as a man.
Women need to get in touch with their power AND their femininity
(which THEY need to define for ONLY themselves) and to be successful.
[please understand that there were several hours of discussion left
out of my brief representation]
Manhood fears come from (additionally) the supposed need of being
competitive and successful. (Men have heart attacks because they
scare themselves to death.)
Men expect women to reassure them. Women expect men to fix things.
Men need to define masculinity for themselves.
Both men and women wear their armor and "clank" rather than
communicate.
We all need to discover the masculine AND feminine energies within
and accept them to become a whole person.
The etheric body exists before the auric (fields) or bodies which
exist before the physical body. Similarly, at death, the aura
goes before the physical body does. We can engage the etheric world
to make whatever changes we want...which in turn have to change
the auric bodies, which in turn changes the physical reality.
(As a repeat: the mental plane is a conceptual plane of reality.
the causal plane has all possibility within it.) We can go to the
causal plane and invoke the etheric body and produce a very powerful
reality shift. [I am not going to go into any more details on this...
for anyone interested, you'll have to go to the source.]
The point of all of this is that this is one of the components of
being an "Adventurer". We are all a part of being "Warriors."
There is nothing wrong with being a warrior, but there are
alternatives. The major difference between the two is that the
warrior set ends sooner (all sets end.) A warrior always needs
a battle...the ultimate battle is life, therefore, when this life
ends (as a warrior) another life begins. As an adventurer, we can
move beyond [which ties in to the idea of crossing the bridge of
belief.] Adventurers find adventure; the trust can give one the
impetus to go on.
Here, briefly [and with some hesitation] I VERY CASUALLY list the
components of being a warrior:
I. Confrontation
1. Surprise
2. Fear
3. Clash
4. Control
II. Battle
1. Struggle
2. Suffer (sacrifice)
3. Contain
4. Compromise (settle)
III. Conquer
1. Fight
2. Force (physical, mental or intuitive)
3. WILL POWER (involves fight and force)
4. Domination (through pity, dealing with the past.)
IV. Change
1. Destroy (negative ego)
2. Guard (territory)
3. Defend (position)
4. PERFECT (reality, so that it never happens again.)
At certain times, the warrior may be the best or only way; certain
warrior, certain components. Also, Lazaris "admitted" that many
of his previous techniques to us involve using warrior
methods...because it is so ingrained in us (this includes programming
techniques.)
All the above components have interrelationships...i.e., e.g., How
does a warrior handle fear? By suffering, forcing, and guarding
(number 2 in each component)
What are the Adventurer components?
I. Encounter
1. Curiosity
2. Wonder
3. Exploration
4. Embracing life
II. Unfolding
1. Learning
2. Understanding
3. Conceiving
4. Perceiving
III. Befriending
1. Engage
2. Allow
3. POWER of WILL
4. Dominion
IV. Transmute
1. Mastery
2. Expands (the territory)
3. Permits (to soar)
4. Trusts
These have similar interrelationships within.
"You don't get there overnight; it's what you work towards."
[in a discussion about the Goddess...taken from the new book:]
"...A key to your spirituality in this time of the 80's and 90's-
the key to that which is called the New Age, and more appropriately
should be called the New Spirituality-is your willingness to cross
the Bridge of Belief. The key to traditional spirituality, as
represented by world religions, is your willingess to take a leap
of faith. The New Spirituality is based upon your willingness to
cross the Bridge of Belief. It does not require blind faith. It
requires a partnership of belief with God, with Goddess, with
All That Is. The feminine energy, the energy of the Goddess, provides
that Bridge of Belief across which you must pass to fully engage
and realize your spirituality."
-Lazaris-
Frederick
|
| 358.102 | | DECWET::MITCHELL | The Cosmic Anchovy | Fri Jun 03 1988 18:46 | 42 |
| RE: .101 (Frederick)
Hi Frederick.
Sounds like Jach is reading a lot of Indian lore nowadays.
> minerals do a lot of "out-of-body" since they do not have the same
mobility as other "life forms." <
What happens when you split a rock in half? Where does the "spirit" go?
Does a mountain have one spirit or millions, being made up of individual
rocks? How do these alleged spirits get into these things? Does a car
have a spirit or are their wheel spirits, axle rod spirits, windshield spirits,
and on and on.
> Women are "allowed" by men to be feminine (according to their
definitions...since primitive times to very recent times) or to have
power (in the 1960's and 1970's) BUT NOT BOTH. <
This certainly goes against the goddess archetype. Venus is not only powerful,
but the very essence of femininity. Ditto the virgin Mary.
> The 11,000,000 witches that were killed (mentioned in a previous
reply) were not killed <
I'm still waiting for some kind of corroboration on that one.
> Similarly, breast cancers (which could just as easily occur in men
but don't) are a result of a desire to "rip the womanhood off myself."
<
This is bullshit and an insult to any woman who has been unfortunate enough
to suffer breast cancer. Women are predisposed to breast cancer for hormonal
reasons, not psychological ones. "Lazaris" needs a course in basic biology.
John M.
|
| 358.103 | A comment on just one point | MARKER::KALLIS | Don't confuse `want' and `need.' | Fri Jun 03 1988 19:20 | 24 |
| Re .101 m(Fredrick):
>...breast cancers (which could just as easily occur in men but don't)
>are a result of a desire to "rip the womanhood off myself."
This, particularly today, is a hot button for me. My Siamese cat,
Karamaneh, who is deeply attached to my wife, has suffered from
mammarian cancer (breast cancer) for nearly two years. She has
undergone surgery that has made her suffer briefly, and has made
my wife suffer emotionally along with her.
Now, no way our little fourteen-year-old _spayed_ Siamese cat is
desiring to "rip the [feline equivalent of] womanhood ..." from
herself. Indeed, such a thought would never occur to her.
Some diseases, alas, have a biological basis. Mammarian cancer
is one of those. I doubt that breast cancer could be as prevalent
in men as woman, BTW: the mammarian tissue most prone to cancer
in women is effectivekly absent in men.
As the Great Anchovy says, "Lazaris" might need some courses in
elementary biology.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.104 | The Spirit of Rock | GENRAL::DANIEL | We are the otters of the Universe | Fri Jun 03 1988 19:33 | 20 |
| re; John
>What happens when you split a rock in half? Where does the "spirit" go?
Well, rocks are like crumbs are like amoeba. When you split a rock in half,
you have two rocks; likewise, with crumbs and amoeba.
Maybe they all contain the Universal Spirit of Rock. They also roll ;-) .
I wonder what the first amoeba thinks of all of this?
Are there amoeba in anchovies?
What about ourselves?
Is the desire that we have to come in to Union, merely the amoeba withint us,
calling us together to become one Amoeba again?
(Happy Friday)
Meredith
|
| 358.105 | i'm disappointed, Steve... | ULTRA::LARU | transitive nightfall of diamonds | Fri Jun 03 1988 19:36 | 32 |
| 358.106 | Reply | SCOPE::PAINTER | Heaven is a loving environment. | Fri Jun 03 1988 19:58 | 23 |
|
I would have to agree with Frederick/Lazaris on the link between
women-hating and breast cancer. This is not to say that *all* breast
cancer is *caused* by this, however what was written on this makes a
lot of sense to me.
There was a time where I would not necessarily have believed such
a thing to be true, however reading "Love, Medicine and Miracles"
by Bernie Siegel, MD. definitely made me see quite clearly the link
between the mind and body here.
Having grown up in a misogynistic household also has a bit to do
with my belief above because I've been there (not breast cancer,
but definitely the desire to be anything but female to be accepted
as I was, including forming my views, participating in 'boys' sports,
not playing with traditional 'girl' toys, not letting emotions show
because 'women' were weak and I wasn't going to be weak, etc.....
all of which of course is an impossibility but it was tried by me
nonetheless). Therefore, the words from Lazaris really hit home.
Fortunately I've managed to overcome this childhood junk and get
on with life, but it took a long time to do this.
Cindy
|
| 358.107 | | GENRAL::DANIEL | We are the otters of the Universe | Fri Jun 03 1988 20:09 | 15 |
| > C'mon, Steve... we're talking people, not cats. Your data
> are irrelevant.
not really, Bruce. the symptoms are the same.
> I believe there is a considerable body of opinion that holds
> that mental state is a prime factor in the development of cancer.
Yes, there is. However, it is not necessarily universal. Biological
abnormalities (inherited or just plain out-of-balance) don't have to develop
because of mental inbalances. They can, but they don't *have* to.
> Statistical correlations don't prove anything.
Neither does "a considerable body of opinion".
|
| 358.108 | | SWSNOD::DALY | Serendipity 'R' us | Fri Jun 03 1988 21:32 | 17 |
| If "cancer in animals/cancer in humans" is not an analogy, why is
it so common for cancer research to be done on animals.
I personally _do_ believe that a healthy mental outlook will result
in a more healthy life, but I would hesitate to be so specific as
to say that a woman's bad feelings about femininity can cause the
specific areas of her body that are obviously female to become
diseased. If that were true, would it mean that a man that had
bad feelings about his manhood could develope ... er ... weenie
cancer???
Another thing, if 98% of all breast cancer were found in women (I
have no idea if this is a true figure, but just for arguement),
might it not be because, on an average woman has 98% more cells
than an average man?
Marion
|
| 358.109 | There are always explanations. | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Sat Jun 04 1988 04:18 | 92 |
| re: last few
In the first place, I didn't say these things...Lazaris did...
but let me add my intrepretations as best as I can.
As for the issue of spirits in minerals, mountains, etc.
The comment was made (you should keep in mind that what I usually
write are my notes...the weekend I attended was approximately 15-16
hours of information along with various "feeling" activities [blendings
and meditations] and there was much more discussion than what I
present...which is why I strongly suggest going to the source by
way of tapes, books or workshops, if more clarity is needed) that
"it all depends" on the item in question. First, you must understand
that consciousness is not physical in its "basic form." Lazaris
has said that hundreds of thousands of consciousness "units" make
up "energy units," and hundreds of thousands of those make up sub-
atomic particles. So, in physical reality, there is a staggeringly
infinite number of "consciousness units." However, there is no
time or space, remember, so that this is more conceptual than
factual (as he has repeatedly told us that reality is illusionary)
so that it becomes PROBABLE (and each of us is "proof" of this
following statement) that ONE consciousness has dominion in a
physical reality "over" others. Another way to put is is that there
are overlapping realities. Each cell in your body contains
an overwhelmingly large number of consciousness "units" that are
each striving to be more of what they are (to "grow") and to
evolve to whatever the next level is for them. Part of their
reality concides with our own...our own consciouness has evolved
to the extent that we can be human and can (obviously) put
all of these consciousnesses within our sphere of influence.
Clearly it is a cooperative effort (but again, as Lazaris has
said, the universe is in harmony...*we* aren't.) So, to get back
to the mountain, etc., the answer would be...it depends. A mountain
*may* have ONE spirit or it may hold an infinite number. We have
spent time talking about power spots, so why is this a surprise?
We could be a bunch of cells (as in our friends the amoebas) or
we can put a bunch together and be plants or animals or humans.
This really makes sense if you make an effort to get out of the
narrow confines of human thinking, and I know this just sounds like
words, especially if one isn't in tune with the sensing/feeling
(emotional or intuitive) aspects of oneself. The gaia concept
fits in here, too. Anyway, I don't know if my limitations are
what will keep you from understanding this...I *have* a very
strong sense of this concept having spent several years tossing
this around. And I have a tendency to concur that this is something
one senses rather than intellectually explains.
As for physical health being influenced by emotions, I very
strongly suggest either Lazaris' Health I or Health II audio tapes
(two separate 3 1/2 hr. seminars) AND/OR read the section (which
was an answer to a reporter's question) in his latest $9.95 book.
I do not wish to spend my time retyping the book so I won't.
Cindy, however, did a very reasonable job of answering some of the
questions raised. For starters, Steve and a couple of others, Lazaris
made it clear (even if *I* didn't) that this was a GENERAL statement,
not a specific one. It is also clear that while humans and animals
can each (since we are all physical together) respond to our physical
realities, chemically, etc., the "reasons" that we are doing things
which may appear similar might be totally separate. I will react
differently to emotional inputs than everyone else, so will animals,
etc. Additionally, my anger *At* something may produce an ulcer
in me while your anger towards the same source may only give you
a stiff set of shoulders or a headache. Again, it is important
to recognize here (as I have stated a few other times) that the
release of an emotion is the most significant part of having it.
It is NOT true that all women are mad and want to lop their breasts
off. BUT, what I believe Lazaris was saying is that in the *majority*
of women who develop cancer of the breast there is *probably* an anger
at being a woman in a society that does not acknowledge their
personhood. That our male chauvinist society considers women as
little more than chatels who are to be dominated by men. For a
man this doesn't seem too bad (except that it is) but for a woman
this is tragic. Similarly for a man who has a heart attack. At
the depths of that man *may* or *probably* lie an emotion that is
mostly fear-oriented...and its roots could be tracable to the earliest
experienced fear for him. Once again, please read (go to a bookstore
and read it there, if you don't want to spend your money this way)
Lazaris' section about health in his new book (specifically pages
112-133...these pages are followed by specifics on AIDS pages 134-157.)
I acknowledge your difference of opinion and respect your
right to hold it (any of you.) Based on what I experience in my
reality, I value what Lazaris expresses far more than the rest of
the consensus, however. I will only say this much more here now,
though, and that is that this rationale is enormously complex and
is not easily answered by a few scientific findings (which are
usually eventually discredited anyway.) I have my truths...yours
are up to you.
Frederick
|
| 358.110 | Reply to .109, Fredrick and all, | NEXUS::MORGAN | Human Reality Engineering, Inc. | Sat Jun 04 1988 19:32 | 11 |
| >First, you must understand that consciousness is not physical in its
>"basic form." Lazaris has said that hundreds of thousands of
>consciousness "units" make up "energy units," and hundreds of thousands
>of those make up sub- atomic particles. So, in physical reality, there
>is a staggeringly infinite number of "consciousness units."
Seth said the exact same thing. Could this be the first confirmation
of sub-atomic physics?? B^)
Of course it could be that Jach and Jane read the same book. Does
anyone know where the C units and E units idea came from?
|
| 358.111 | nobody knows | ULTRA::LARU | transitive nightfall of diamonds | Tue Jun 07 1988 18:06 | 26 |
| 358.112 | | DECWET::MITCHELL | The Cosmic Anchovy | Tue Jun 07 1988 20:07 | 33 |
| RE: .111 (Bruce)
>> If "cancer in animals/cancer in humans" is not an analogy, why
is it so common for cancer research to be done on animals. <<
>...We experiment with animals because that's the best we can do,
but any researcher will tell you that it is extremely risky to
extrapolate animal results onto humans. <
I think you missed the point. Marion was pointing out that cancer
occurs in animals as well as humans, and that breast cancer in a
bitch (as in dog) certainly is not due to the animal hating it's
female station.
> We don't know the causal chain that makes a cancer. Why do you think
the tobacco companies have been so successful at beating the
lawsuits? <
IF we did not know the causal chain (in many instances) there would
be no such word as "carcinogen." And the tobacco companies have
been successful not out of there being any scientific validity in
their position, but out of shear political clout.
> New studies show correlations between certain kinds of inner
states and cancer. <
State-of-mind can set the stage, but it is not the player.
John M.
|
| 358.113 | cont. | ULTRA::LARU | transitive nightfall of diamonds | Tue Jun 07 1988 20:39 | 28 |
| 358.114 | exit | DECWET::MITCHELL | The Cosmic Anchovy | Tue Jun 07 1988 20:54 | 10 |
| RE: .113 (Bruce)
Ah, but Bruce, from Frederick's note it sounds as if "Lazaris" said
that ALL breast cancer in humans was caused by a mental state.
Animal studies challenge this notion by illustrating that animals
get cancer independent of mental state. Since people have animal
bodies, it is entirely possible (let alone *factual*) for them to
get breast cancer independent of mental condition.
John M.
|
| 358.115 | Do you really??? | CLUE::PAINTER | Heaven is void of prejudice. | Tue Jun 07 1988 22:31 | 8 |
|
Oooooo John, you *animal* you!
Were you a bird in a past life? An ostrich perhaps?
Loading on the Ark 2*2. Maybe that's where we met.
Cindy
|
| 358.116 | Health is too vital to be arrogant over. | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Wed Jun 08 1988 05:25 | 83 |
| I want to clear up a few items...
As for feminine images aluded to by John...if you look closely,
you will discover that IN THE first place, the images are those
created by MEN. In the SECOND place, their power was always
secondary to male or masculine forces. I am sure that other
male chauvinistic traits are handily available, but these came
quickly to mind. And the value placed on FEMALE virginity? Come
on, now, whose value do you think that is? Certainly not woman's.
Your notes on hormones? Well, all it takes is hormone injections
for a man to develop female-like breasts. What do you suppose is
the incidence of breast cancer in these "men?" AND, if hormones
*are* to be determined to be the *Cause* of female breast cancer,
what do you suppose it is that causes those hormones to act (to
an excess or whatever) in the first place?
As for the note about male "weenie" cancer, I'm afraid we're
dealing with different criteria, here, which is precisely the issue.
Men don't have to deal with the same inferiority women do. Men
DO have other problems, obviously, such as impotence, etc., that
are no doubt a manifestation of THEIR emotional crises.
As for animals hating their station, I don't know...all I can
relate to is the concept of animals being "anxious" to leave the
physical plane for who-knows-what reason(s). My girlfriend's
seven year old (and $5000 worth, financially) Doberman developed
cancer in its legs last year and had to be put to sleep. We
(and especially, she) spent a great deal of time thinking about
that one and it was not an easy thing for her to do. Though we
may have similar maladies, the "causes" may not necessarily be the
same.
I hate cigarettes...yet my last two girlfriends are smokers.
I would like to see tobacco as we experience it be eliminated.
I would like to see the tobacco companies express some honesty
and responsibly act to aleviate us of a consensus reality agreement
of a great harm. At the same time, I believe that people who
point their fingers at tobacco as the root of all their troubles
are being equally remiss in their responsibilities to acknowledge
that THEY were the ones who voluntarily entered into their pacts
with the "packs" (of cigarettes.) Moreover, I am willing to bet
that if we were to search, we could find the emotional basis for
their problems. It is interesting that many people smoke just
as much for their entire lifetimes and don't experience the problems
that these others among us do.
Once again, I point out Lazaris' latest book, the two tapes
on health, or, for a quick shortcut, read my very brief explanation
from my notes in 358.27. Also, read note 358.72. No doubt there
is a great deal more support, as Cindy has pointed out other books,
but it sure makes sense to me. As a bit of an aside, it is often
interesting to note that so often we are surprised by the suicide
of someone we have known. We are surprised because we have "no
idea" that they were in such a state as to be willing to do that
as a solution. I do not wish to get into the surrounding arguments
around suicide (see the PHILOSOPHY conference for this if you wish,
in which this was discussed a few weeks ago) for the point I am
trying to make is that it is EXTREMELY difficult, if not impossible,
to determine the emotional composition of anyone else. How can
we determine what emotional conditions are prevalent? How can you
so quickly dismiss anger or fear, etc. as a "Cause" of either their
suicide or their illness? I'm further willing to bet that most
of US don't know precisely what our emotional state is all the time,
either. What about that hurt you experienced in fourth grade?
Or the humiliation at the swimming pool when you were 14? What
about the anger at the adult who manipulated or dominated you into
doing or avoiding something you wanted or didn't want? ...What
has happened to all these emotions? Are you consciously aware of
all of them? If you say YES, then I say "BUll-shot!" Further,
what justifies the arrogance to deny the probability that that
UNEXPRESSED emotion isn't stuffed into some internal organ or
skeletal component? Do you really think it is wise to ignore
this very real likelihood? Do you want to depend on science
with it's wonderful cause and effect rationale to aid you in the
time that that illness or malady surfaces? I do not wish to be
so foolish. I work hard to determine whatever my emotional state
is most of the time...when I get sick, I look as deep as I am
able; when I get injured, I similarly look. My goal is health...
and not just through vitamins, health foods, etc., but from the
EMOTIONAL (and NOT MENTAL, as some of you have erroneously used
the concept) state in which I reside.
Frederick
|
| 358.117 | On suicide | SCOPE::PAINTER | Heaven is void of prejudice. | Wed Jun 08 1988 14:47 | 90 |
| <<< REGENT::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]RELIGION.NOTE;1 >>>
-< Religion Conference >-
================================================================================
{From: "Unconditional Love", by John Powell, S.J.,p70-71}
The Story Of Katie
'A few years ago, a woman named Margaret Stern Mattisson shared with
us a shattering episode from her own life. She called her story,
published in Reader's Digest, "Love is Not Enough". The summary line
beneath the title read: "Our daughter was bright, loving, popular,
successful - 'perfect', we felt, in every way. And then one awful
night she tried to end her life."
Margaret Mattisson very courageously told the story of her child,
Katie, the ideal daughter. She told of the unexpected phone call
which came to the church hall during the production of a musical in
which Margaret Mattisson was playing a part. It was Katie gasping,
struggling: "Mother, come home....I've taken sleeping...sleeping..
sleep..." The the crash of the phone and Katie to the floor, the
frantic phone calls to neighbors, the ambulance siren, the white
hospital sheets and the still, unconscious form of Katie, the perfect
daughter, who tried to end her life.
The unspoken question that ached in her mother and father at her
bedside was: why? Fortunately Katie did revive. But when she sat up
in the first glimmerings of consciousness, it was anger, not pathos,
that spewed from her: an astonishing array of angry, vulgar epighets.
Katie had never, never sworn before. These were words it was supposed
she did not know. Katie was snapping like an animal. she bit the
nurse on the wrist and sent an angry fist flush into the face of an
intern, bloodying his nose. New curses, kicks and angry screams.
Hours later, after waking from a sedated sleep, Katie whispered: "I
sort of remember...I hated everything, everything."
"Us, Katie? Mostly us?" Katie's father asked.
"No. Mostly me," she said, closing her eyes.
Later the staff psychiatrist visited Katie and reported to the
bewildered parents: "Katie is a very upset young woman. She doesn't
think much of herself. That's why she took the sleeping pills."
"But she's wonderful - always has been," the distraught Margaret
Mattisson blurted out. "She must know it!"
The doctor remained calm. "She knew you thought so, and she tried to
be, felt she had to be, what you thought she was. That's what she was
telling us last night."
"Why didn't she tell it to us before? We always talked," the puzzled
mother asked.
"She didn't want to disappoint you - didn't want anyone to think she
wasn't all nice as they all thought she was. We all want to be loved,
you know. She thought acting nice is what made people love her - even
her parents. She doesn't think she is a person, so dying doesn't
matter."
Katie's parents responded that they had loved her, and asked how it
was possible that Katie could hate herself.
The doctor replied: "Love is not enough. You can't exist as the
reflection of someone's love. You have to be your own person.
All the time that Katie presented herself as the ideal daughter and
young lady there was inside her a seething resentment and
self-contempt. Her parents had built a pedestal for her and she
climbed up on it. For years she played the role because she thought
it was the admission price for being loved.
At last - thanks perhaps to Katie's shattering and almost disastrous
attempt to die - the parents understood and Katie recovered. The
essential and most valuable thing she recovered, of course, was her
self, her own individual, unique, and unrepeatable person.
Thank you , Margaret Mattisson, and thank you Katie for sharing your
story. The lesson is so easy to lose, to forget. We must all be sure
that those to whom we are committed in love know that there is no
price tag, no admission price on our love. I have given you my love
freely. It is mygift to you. There are no reserve clauses, no fine
print in the contract, no hidden agenda.
Love is the purest and simplest of gifts. Most people want to be very
sure that their love is not taken for granted. Unconditional love
says the very opposite: "Take me, and take my love for granted." In
the words of the contemporary hymn: "All I ask of you is forever to
remember me as loving you."
|
| 358.118 | Anon | CLUE::PAINTER | | Thu Jun 09 1988 18:49 | 87 |
| This note entered for someone who wishes to remain anonymous.
----------------------------------------------------------------
RE: the emotional factors in the causes of cancer (or any
disease for that matter)
Emotional States are generally considered to be a FACTOR in the
occurance and cure (or lack of cure) in any disease. So are
1. genetics, 2. environment, 3. physical health prior to disease
state (i.e., state of immune system, general health, etc.), 4. a
host of other things I know nothing about.
Highly charged negative or POSITIVE emotional states cause
physical stress which, over a prolonged time, may decrease the
immune response. This leaves one more open to any disease.
The effect that a general emotional state has on physical health
does not necessary include "illness as a metaphor." The idea of
"illness as a metaphor" is much more speculative and has not, to
my knowledge, been extensively researched. It is certainly
an intriguing idea.
HOWEVER, even if illness can exist as a metaphor for an
individual's emotional state, the question arises "Who decides
what the metaphor shall be?" In an essay on symbols and dreams,
Jung quite clearly stated his position that although universal
symbols may exist, dreams should always be interpreted on an
individual basis since most symbols are highly individualized
and therefore have different meanings to different people. I see no
reason why this kind of thinking should not be generalized to include
the interpretation of illness as a metaphor.
In other words, to one person uncontrolled growth of breast
tissue may represent "ripping one's womanhood from her self"
while to another woman it may be "frustation of the desire to
nurture." And, off-the-wall as this may seem ;-), in
another woman it may be that she drinks, smokes heavily, is on
the pill, has a genetic tendency towards cancer as opposed to
some other disease, and has a lot of fatty tissue (carcinogens tend
to lodge in fat). Or maybe she feels unloved and unwanted, and
is looking for attention.
My personal belief is that illness can exist as a metaphor, but
does not necessarily exist as such. Looking to my own life, as a
singer if I'm lacking confidence and overstressed before a concert
I'll frequently get a sore throat. I've seen it in other singers as well.
And my mother, who hates babies and children, convinced some
doctors to give a hysterectomy sometime before I was born. When
her aunt found out, she intervened. Within a year of my birth,
my mother developed cancer and got her hysterectomy. Personally,
I don't believe it was a coincidence.
In a very well known book (I cannot for the life of me remember
the title) about a teenager battling with a brain tumor and
struggling to complete high school before he dies, his father
mentioned something to the effect of it seeming as though his son
couldn't learn and grow fast enough and his brain grew a tumor in
response to the frustrated learning/growth.
RE: Tobacco companies
I agree that tobacco companies have one all their law suits
because of political clout. They also pour enormous amounts of
money into hiring teams of the best lawyers available. How many
individuals can come with a few hundred thousand dollars just for
legal fees? They also instruct their lawyers to harass their
opponents at a level that most individuals are unwilling to sink
to.
And as to people being responsible for having adopted the habit,
up until advertising was banned, tobacco companies advertised
smoking as being HEALTHY. Very easy to tell someone who got
hooked on a narcotic (yes, tobacco contains a narcotic) 40 years
ago (when they were sucked in with promises of improved health)
that its their fault they are now sick.
The tobacco companies and the U.S. government knew LONG AGO that
tobacco is a major factor in lung cancer. That information was
deliberately withheld from the public, even while more and more
people were enticed into becoming addicts.
While nowadays it is definitely the individual's responsibility
to not start or quit, I don't think its so easy to say that about
people whose habits were started in the pre-warning days.
|
| 358.119 | | DECWET::MITCHELL | The Cosmic Anchovy | Thu Jun 09 1988 20:50 | 12 |
| RE: .118
Pity that someone who makes so much SENSE should be anonymous.
OK, Cindy, you channeled this info, right? ;-)
Frederick: I recall the incidence of breast cancer in men to be
around 2% (don't hold me to that). Wonder what ol' Laz has to say
about prostate cancer in men?
John M.
|
| 358.120 | Skeptics use metaphysics to prove it doesn't exist | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Fri Jun 10 1988 04:42 | 115 |
| re: .118
Yes, I agree with John that this was well thought-out and
informative. But, from my perspective, it still represents a
few limited thoughts (in the context of creating one's own reality
and recognizing it.)
For a start, if we accept CYOR and reincarnation, as we discussed
in previous notes, then genetics become a rather interesting set
of components to self. To state this another way, one chooses genetics
(since one co-chooses which parents to have, etc.) one chooses the
environment (since one can choose which parents to have) and
one chooses which "time" in which to live. (It is so difficult
to remember these things when we get caught up in the "apparent"
melodrama of our lives. This is why I occasionally get somewhat
frustrated with communicating about these concepts with others...
it is enormously complex and involves understanding many of the
"requisites." All that stuff about time existing only in the now,
space as illusion, past lives, collective unconscious, everything
as part of Higher Self, etc....all these things seem like irrelevant and
interesting exercises to ponder; but the point I am trying to make
is that they all fit as integral and necessary parts of the whole
picture. Sure, there are obviously many, even in this conference
which thankfully has many beautifully open minds, who can "logically"
and systematically tear down many of the concepts using their mental
abilities of deduction or can recite "proof" for non-acceptance.
I submit, though, that it takes (for many of us) enough patience
to see more of the WHOLE to see that all this DOES make "sense".
So it is in this regard that the author of that note has picked
up a couple of pieces without looking at a grander picture. If
it is as I believe that we do indeed create our own reality 100%
and that we therefore select all the components of our lives, then
it must also follow that we select the illnesses and will find the
causes for them to suit whatever believe system we are subscribing
to. The arguments here concerned emotional impact. Again, following
some of the tenets of this "grander picture", physical reality is
illusionary. Which means that if *anything* is "Real" it isn't
that. What is real, then? Perhaps intuition, perhaps intellect,
or, perhaps emotions. Since most of us seem to feel that "GOD"
is pure LOVE, then I guess that we could reach consensus agreement
that LOVE is real...and LOVE happens to be an emotion. So, if emotions
are real and physicality isn't, there are probably ways in which
one could deduce that emotions "precipitate" the "illusion of
physicality."
This is the gist of the concept as I have attempted to decipher
it. Keep in mind here, please, that when I say "we" do it, I may
mean self (conscious or not) or perhaps Higher Self. I have not
made a careful distinction in many places where that distinction
would have been appropriate.
The author mentions a sore throat as a response to stress.
Where does the stress come from? The stress is coming from an
EMOTION (probably fear) which is "choosing" to manifest as the
throat in question. Where is the fear coming from? Perhaps it
is a message from the sub-conscious...perhaps it is a message
from the Higher Conscious...OR, perhaps it is interference from
the negative ego. Is the emotion being dealt with? No, in this
scheme of things it is not, for if it had been the sore throat
would not exist. Why not? Because the natural state of the
body is one of ease and harmony (and love, happiness, etc.)
Clearly a sore throat (for a singer) is most often not going
to produce that. So, if it's a message from the Higher Self,
what could it be? I can only guess but one message could be
that "you are trying to use singing as a weapon, so I will
weaken that," or "you are not convinced that you can succeed, so
I will give you agreement" or "your lines of communication are
muddled" and probably countless other messages (and these I just
made up and are probably poor.) Again, in the message I entered
that precipitated all this, I attempted to show that while
certain shared emotions can "cause" different manifestations,
I also wanted to show that similar manifestations can occur as
a "result" of different "causes". The original message was that
there *can* be similar "causes" for certain maladies, not that
there *must* be.
As for the arguments about the cancer in smokers, the most
glaring point to notice is the use of the word BLAME by the
anonymous author. I indicated the word RESPONSIBILITY not the
word blame. We all make mistakes and we can learn from them.
We can also learn (better, I believe) by doing it right the first
time. So, now that these individuals have allowed themselves to
be addicted, what can they do? They can take responsibility for
for making a change. How do they do this? Well, this note is
intended to be a representation (as best as I am able) of what
Lazaris has said to us. Lazaris does NOT say "You are responsible
and you will die." He VERY CAREFULLY, LOVINGLY, and INSIGHTFULLY
has provided us with steps we can follow to make the desired changes.
There are many methods that we can use and many of them are not
uniquely his. But for those that are, then it behooves one to
follow the recommendations in order to either "prove" or "disprove"
the assertions. He says, (and this is early in 358, I believe)
that we need to recognize, acknowledged, forgive (self) and then
change. I offer you his solution...if more detail than what I have
provided is necessary, go to the source. I do not have his wisdom
so do not expect it from me. I do not wish that burden. I have
repeatedly offered his advice and given reasonable clues to
verification of his claims. If any of you have done all that he
has suggested and have failed to produce the results you sought,
then you should speak out. If you haven't followed the advice,
then you shouldn't attempt to speak from first-hand knowledge (in
an effort to discredit,) for that is potentially very hurtful to
those who may benefit. I have succeeded in applying what he has
said (not everything, but many things) to my life with the results
being what he suggested they would be. Many of these things are
too personal for me to share, so I will not.
Taking responsibility is the opposite of laying blame, whether
that is towards someone else or towards oneself. We can always
come up with justification for anything...and we always will,
apparently. It doesn't matter how old one is or what their
standards are, they are always capable of releasing unexpressed
emotions and they are always capable of changing beliefs. To
the extent that one does or doesn't is a reflection of their
desire, intent, imagination and expectation.
Frederick
|
| 358.121 | | FSLENG::JOLLIMORE | For the greatest good... | Fri Jun 10 1988 12:44 | 25 |
| .118 (Who was that masked person?)
I have an image of who you are.
.120 (Frederick)
> As for the arguments about the cancer in smokers, the most
> glaring point to notice is the use of the word BLAME by the
> anonymous author. I indicated the word RESPONSIBILITY not the
I musta missed this. I don't remember seeing the word BLAME anywhere.
> ..... So, now that these individuals have allowed themselves to
> be addicted, what can they do? They can take responsibility for
> for making a change. How do they do this? Well, this note is
> intended to be a representation (as best as I am able) of what
> Lazaris has said to us.
So, an old woman, who was inticed to smoke 40 years ago with ads offering
increased health and got hooked as a result of being deliberately mislead
by tobacco companies seeking only profit, should save the courts time and
her own frustration and take the gobs of money she would've spent on law-
yers and buy everything Lazaris has to offer? That about it?
Jay
|
| 358.122 | Reply | CLUE::PAINTER | | Fri Jun 10 1988 15:44 | 28 |
| Re. last few
I would use the word 'Reason' as opposed to 'Blame'. I didn't really
read 'Blame' into what Anon submitted - rather it sounds more like
a reason, or a justification of an earlier action. To be angry
at those who suppressed information about that dangers of cigarette
smoking, yes, I would be angry - very angry indeed, and justifiably
so, especially because a profit motive took precidence (sp?) over
the health and wellbeing of millions of people (and thus not giving
those people enough tools/information in order to allow them make
their own informed choices). This would go along with 'if you are
aware of the problem, you are part of it.' Somebody (or probably
lots of people) chose to go with their negative ego instead of striving
for the common good of all.
Granted, if the smoker now chooses to continue the habit after finding
out the serious negative impact it has on their life, then they
have only their own selves to blame (I believe). A victim is only
a victim until they realize they have a choice. I say this because
I've been there myself.
I think of CYOR as simply along the lines of "I'm mad as hell and
I'm not going to take it anymore."...and then going out and making
active changes instead of 'letting things happen' (or in my case
'living for others and being stepped on'). When I did this in my
life, it made a HUGE difference.
Cindy
|
| 358.123 | Response from channeled Anon | CLUE::PAINTER | | Fri Jun 10 1988 17:02 | 15 |
| Cindy,
......you were right in my use of the word blame.
RE: responsibility to quit - Generally, yes. However, the people
filing law suits are pretty much beyond quitting. These are
people who have had large parts of their lungs removed and general
don't have much time left to live. For them, smoking has become
pretty much impossible--its all they can do to breathe. They
generally don't live to see the outcome of their trials, but their
families carry on the suits.
Signed,
The masked Anon
|
| 358.124 | Let Lucy hold the football, then cry "foul!" | WRO8A::GUEST_TMP | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Sat Jun 11 1988 04:03 | 69 |
| ...okay, I accept the INTENT, but in .118 it said "...easy to tell
someone...it's their fault they are now sick." (just for
clarification.)
I don't remember which reply I wrote it in (in 358) but somewhere
I entered what are known as payoffs. These are things you "get"
instead of what are generally thought of as positive. Blame is
a payoff, righteous anger is another. In the reincarnational scheme
of things, I believe that we have had many "Queen for a Day" lifetimes
whereby we ended them on some sort of sour note. These were sad
(from our perspective) lives or lifetimes, with lots of suffering,
sacrifice, pain, etc. What do these lifetimes look like? I think
that many of us think only in terms of the ancient past when we
think of former lifetimes, etc., so we dismiss what we see around
us presently as current lifetime activity and ignore it. But, for
many (most, I believe) people in my reality, they are currently
living this "Queen for a Day" scenario. They will, sadly, end this
lifetime in pain, suffering, etc. Is it necessary? Maybe for them
it is...it isn't my place to determine that. Is it for me? No,
I do not wish to do this lifetime that way...which is why I am taking
this CYOR "bull" by the horns and doing my best to avoid the kind
or kinds of endings I am reasonably certain I have already had.
I want a happy "ending." Can others have one, too? I believe they
can...I believe that they can radically change things in their lives.
Perhaps at the point that there are only remnants of lungs left,
and the damage is major, there is little reason to believe that
beliefs can be changed and the (undoubtably) pent-up emotions could
be released. Perhaps one can offer solace to these individuals
to ease their physical pains and by understanding that they will
have an opportunity to start with a clean slate...as we all do when
we start a lifetime. Anyway, what I am saying here is not easy
to talk about, for it brings up so many righteous emotions, and
I am really not attempting to make light of the seriousness involved.
I further believe that one's character is extremely important, and
principles are a major part of character. I would applaud anyone
who "fights to the end" over principles. As I have stated in my
entry 20 replies or so ago, there is another avenue other than as
a warrior. But so long as we choose the warrior path, then do
it with impeccability and with excellence. No, I did not say
ignore the tobacco companies and let them run roughshod, anymore
than I would allow anyone (consciously) to manipulate, dominate,
exploit, control or otherwise lord over me. We should stand for
our principles. Cindy states it well 2 replies back, I think.
But I would only state that I will not allow myself to necessarily
buy into someone's melodrama, either. I don't believe it helps
someone grow by being manipulated into pitying them. I do not believe
that compromising my principles helps anyone by my example of love
and respect for myself (or, more correctly, a lacking of.) And
no, Jay, I do not expect you to do anything, and you or no one need
ever spend anything monetary or any time dealing with Lazaris if
you do not desire it. However, as long as I deal with the world
in the best way I know how, if someone asks for my advice, if someone
appears to be able to use my help, if I can teach anything at all...
then I will offer the best I have to offer, which these days is
paraphrasing and "parroting" the things I hear which sound the best
to me, and those things DO emanate from Lazaris, more often than
not. Absolutely make your own choices and decisions. But since
I believe another solution is possible, don't be righteously angry
or indignant with me because I don't support your methods.
I believe in compassion, not pity. I believe in releasing
emotions instead of repressing or suppressing them. I believe that
love can prevail in my life. I believe I can create a fun and
successful reality. I believe that my reality will reflect my
beliefs and attitudes and I will find fewer and fewer "reasons"
or "excuses" for blaming and accusing and fearing, etc. You are
free to believe anything you want.
Frederick
|
| 358.125 | One-on-One with Lazaris...deeper than it looks. | WRO8A::WARDFR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Mon Oct 24 1988 18:49 | 154 |
| In the interest of responding a bit to the question, "Does Lazaris
know things that others would not?" and as a way to demonstrate
a part of what occurs during the INTENSIVEs (one of 4 days which just
concluded and I gratefully participated) I offer the following
from my notes:
[Groups of forty people volunteer to sit in a "section" within
the remaining 260 others. From these forty, a Concept:Synergy staff
member randomly selects an individual who volunteers to ask Lazaris
a question. This question gets answered by Lazaris taking anywhere
from about 15-30 minutes. Approximately 5 or 6 individuals get
to ask questions from within that group of forty. Groups of forty
get "rotated" about 7 or 8 times over the course of 4 days. At
the end of four days, everyone should have had an opportunity to
be among the forty and about 30-40 people from the entire workshop
will have had an opportunity to go "one-on-one" with Lazaris. Is
it valuable? Based on the tears of the individuals asking, I'd
say yes. Based on the opportunity to watch and learn, I'd say
definitely yes. The only word for it is "AWESOME",...which is
a word that applies to Lazaris in general, anyway.]
(Please note that much of this dialog may be inexact...I don't take
dictation well. :-) )
"Hi, Lazaris, my name is Kent. I am a controller for businesses
and my problem is that ocassionally I will get sick and my job will
end in the meantime. This has occured to me over and over during
the past 30 years."
Lazaris-"Let's talk about mother." (Lots of laughter from audience.)
"How much do you love her?"
Kent (K)-"She controls everyone."
Lazaris (L)-"Let's talk about mother. How much do you love her?"
(more laughter from audience.)
K-"Well, she's a pain in the neck. She is 85 years old and she
is in charge of 4,000 people and she is always trying to control
everyone, me included."
L-"How much do you love her?"
K-"I don't like her."
L-"How often do you see her?"
K-"Not very often."
L-"How often is that?"
K-"Maybe twice a year."
L-"Is there anyone else you don't like that you go visit that often?"
K-"No."
[laughter occurred throughout at certain points...this may have
been one.]
L-"Did you dislike her enough to leave home?"
K-"Yes."
L-"Did you leave home early?"
K-"Yes, as soon as I could."
L-"When was that?"
K-"When I graduated from college."
(HOWLS of laughter!)
L-"You left home early because you didn't like her and you left
home after college. That's hardly leaving home early!"
"How old are you?"
K-"I'm 55."
L-"You see, Kent, you are in love with your mother. You are sexually
in love with your mother. Not that you have had sex with her,
understand, but that you are sexually in love with your mother.
Where was your father during all of your childhood?"
K-"He wasn't around. He was completely dominated by her and he was
home as seldom as possible. He'd go to business meetings or stay
at the office late or he'd work in the garage."
L-"What was the relationship like with your mother?"
K-"We'd fight alot."
L-"Describe the fighting."
K-"We'd scream at each other alot."
L-"Were you ever physical with her?"
K-"Yes, I'd push her and slam doors."
L-"What else?"
K-"I spanked her once."
L-"Understand, Kent, that you are mimicking your mother. As is
often said that imitation is the greatest form of flattery, so you
mimicked your mother out of love for her. You loved her too much.
You had a sexual relationship with her indicated by the way you
fought with her as a long-time married couple might. Your father
was massively henpecked, as it were, and refused to have anything
more to do with her. He more or less said, 'You want her, you
can have her' to you and butted out. If not, you'd have a tremendous
anger at your father for the rivalry of your mother's attention.
So, you've got a duality going. The spanking is part of the dance,
a taunting, a way to get love. At the same time, your mother is
trying to be you. When she gets sick, in her fragility, you do,
as a sympathy."
... this interchange lasted about 20 minutes...obviously
there is a lot left out...
(From here Lazaris instructed Kent on what could be done to get
out of this self-punishment. This, basically, deals with mediationally
addressing the adolescent within that made the "contract" with his
mother to give her all of his undivided love. To wake him up, revive
him and to undo that contract. Afterwards, he would have to start
from "scratch" and find out what he *really* likes...what foods,
clothes, etc. since all of his values are really his mother's.)
* * * * *
Phil (P)-"Hi, Lazaris, this is Phil...I have problems with my
mediatations. I can't seem to get into them the way others seem
to. They're not as smooth as I would like."
L-"What makes you think so?"
P-"Well, I hear others crying, but I don't cry. I have never
cried during a meditation."
L-"What do you want?"
P-"To feel more."
L-"Are you sure you want the answer?"
(lots of laughter from audience.)
P-"Yes."
L-"WHy do you think you're special?"
P-"I'm an easy-going, fun guy."
L-"Anything about being more sensitive?"
P-"Yes, I am more sensitive than most people."
L-"Are you more sensitive than other men?."
P-"Yes."
L-"How about women?"
P-"I am more sensitive than most women?"
L-"Do you know any women who are more sensitive than you are?"
P-(after pause of 15 seconds)..."No."
L-"So, you are more sensitive than all men and more sensitive than
all women."
P-"Yes."
L-"Who gave you the message of specialness?"
P-"My father, I guess."
L-"What is your relationship with your father?"
P-"We are great buddies...we worked together for 14 years, too."
L-"What was your relationship with your mother?"
P-"We didn't get along. She was always being a martyr."
L-"Did your father show emotion?"
P-"No. He's somewhat aloof; I'm the sensitive one."
(probably more dialog in here...)
L-"What's happening here is that you feel that you are better than
everyone else...because you are more sensitive. What it is is an
extreme arrogance. You are more sensitive, however, you are not
more emotional. So, there is a conflict between you and your
experience...on the one hand you are more sensitive, on the other
people are feeling more than you are. You feel you shouldn't have
to work as hard as the others, but it isn't working for you. You
are in silent competition. You want everything handed to you on
a silver platter (but grandiosity it isn't.) It's like cotton
batten or a muffler. Until you release specialness, it isn't going
to work for you. In order for metaphysics to work you must let
go of specialness. In order to get to the depths you intellectually
seek, you must release the specialness."
(This dialog took approximately 15-20 minutes...once again, I don't
have it word for word...moreover, while both of these may appear
harsh in some ways, the reality seemed less harsh in the way
it unfolded. The point that may or may not be obvious to you
is that Lazaris knows each person to depths that the person doesn't
know him/herself. This was demonstrated repeatedly. This is something
I have been aware of for many years, however.)
Frederick
|
| 358.126 | specialness/cure | PNO::KELLOGG | | Mon Oct 24 1988 19:59 | 6 |
| Frederick
Any insight on how to release "specialness"? Especially when
there's difficulty in deep meditations/visualizations as described
in .125? Thanks in advance
rk
|
| 358.127 | The processing is necessary before the manifesting. | WRO8A::WARDFR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Mon Oct 24 1988 21:09 | 41 |
| re: 126
rk, As I see it, the attitude he (Phil) holds is what prevents
him from going deep enough into meditation. In other words, it
it the attitude of "I am more special (sensitive) than everyone
else, therefore I don't have to do plebian things like meditate.
I can just sit here, God will come along, recognize how special
I am, and will give me the benefit of having a deep, meaningful
meditation without my really having to." Anyway, as this situation
holds, it is strong enough to keep him from the emotional depth
he wishes (intellectually) to attain. This delineates the difference
between what we want and what we say we want, by the way.
So, if we can agree that this is what's holding him back, your
question is "how does he release specialness?" Good question.
Tough (for me) question. :-) What it mostly ties into is the better
than ego (as opposed to "worse than" ego, which is also a specialness
which leads to a better than because of being worse than. Follow
that?) There are lots of ways of "busting" the better than ego.
I have skirted around the ego here from the time I entered my first
note and have never fully talked about the ego. Though there are
other notes which deal with it to some extent, I do not feel those
other notes deal with the fullness of understanding which can give
us the most value. I have *promised* to enter a full note(s)
on this description since it is highly involved and very important
in understanding how our reality functions. As recently as two
weeks ago (during a 2-day workshop) Lazaris added several more
pieces to our puzzle in regards to the ego. During the 4-day
INTENSIVE last week, we dealt an entire day on the discussion
of the SHADOW, which has an overlapping relationship with the
ego. As soon as I can, I will attempt to tell what I can about
these two aspects. Until then, I do not wish to give bits or
pieces. If you really wish to on your own, however, I highly
recommend both the video tape (Releasing Negative Ego) or the
audio (Busting and Building Ego.) Lazaris goes into a great
deal of information on this (obviously) there.
Phil has been around Lazaris for many years and knew exactly
what Lazaris was talking about. Which is why Lazaris didn't
detail the answer further.
Frederick
|
| 358.128 | Preparation for 1989 and the future. | WRO8A::WARDFR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Fri Jan 06 1989 19:17 | 194 |
| Recently I attended two different workshops, a 2-day on Nov. 26
and an evening on Dec. 15, during which time Lazaris outlined the
year and decade to come. The reason I enter this information is because
I feel it is valuable to all who are seriously concerned about the
present and the future and feel that it is within their capacity to
affect their outcome.
During the 2-day, Lazaris outlined two different realities, one
he called the future of consensus, the other the future of choice. He
spent approximately 2 hours describing the world we will have if we
continue along the current path of the world of the consensus. It was
perhaps the most frightening and nauseating stuff Lazaris has ever talked
about. I am going to deliberately avoid entering that information in
this file for various reasons. Instead, I will concentrate on entering
the information that has to do with the future of choice, for it is the
one that should appeal to us, it is within our reach and it is the one
which does not need any more heaviness to weigh it down.
*Briefly* some of the events that will occur to the current consensus
world: Physically, individuals will encounter four system failures-
lymph, immune, endocrine and nervous (this includes various AIDS-type
diseases, syphilis and other VDs, Addictions of various types, especially
Crack and speed, on so on.) Economically, various breakdowns globally
along with many individual catastrophies...Tokyo being the most critical
component to world economy. Mentally, spontaneous autisms in adults along
with insanity and depression. Ecologically, severe weather of the headline-
making variety including droughts, famines, earthquakes, etc.
All of this had to do with the reflection of the emotions held by
the consensus: helplessness, hopelessness, issues of alienation, numbness,
insensitivities, apathies, refusal to think, impotence in world, low
self-values, etc.
He indicated that we are standing on perhaps the most critical brink
of our world and that how we handle 1989 will have a tremendous impact on
the decade to come and the century we are in. He also indicated that none
of the past predictions of doom and gloom have ever come to pass but that
we need to get out of fear, get to work and create a reality that is positive.
The price of giving up is surrendering visions, dreams, power...the energy
to create doom and gloom is already in place, [it needs to be throttled.]
Along these lines, he told us that the Atlantis to which we are associated
destroyed itself because of a corruption of technology and because of apathy.
He also added that those of us who were among those who were on Atlantis when
it destroyed itself were actually in the minority while we were there...the
minority which espoused doom and gloom...a minority that made an individual
choice to self-destruct. He indicated that the majority on Atlantis did
not destroy themselves...they still continue in a parallel reality [same
time, different space.]
The future of choice has similar problems that the future of consensus
has...it has, however, different solutions. 1989 serves as a year of renewal
which means restoring, revaluing, making new...of power, dreams, visions.
This future has in its current energy some of the following: lifetimes
to 100 years and more- perfectly alive and vibrant, more awareness of body
systems, miracle cures, more emotional communication, more definitions of
family, space for intellectual thought, sharing of knowledge, bridging of
humanitarian issues, economic worldwide cooperation, lots of personal wealth
due to lots of work, dropping off of greed and violence, weather flattening
out; technology, psyche and intellect are seen as a tripod for change.
And on and on...
Four ways to look at our reality:
Causation:
1. Past leading to present (karma)- "What goes around comes around."
An idea originated by Newton of cause leading to effect based on mechanics
of the universe.
2. Upward causation-from lower to larger or higher. "If I break my leg, I
can't get to work, I lose my job, I lose my home." Originated or espoused
by DesCartes. Body first, then mind follows. Relies on absolute efficacy
on logic, which in turn relies on time being "real".
3. From future comes the present-what we experience now is a result of desire,
expectation, imagination. Based on quantum physics. Heisenberg's uncertain-
cy principle. Schroedinger's cat--observation causes reality. Brain's
frontal lobes control the rest-it is the future oriented part of the brain.
Memory (positive and negative) are everywhere throughout the body. DNA
records the future, not the past.
4. Downward causation--Higher produces the lower. Spiritual leads to physical.
Mental reality forms physical reality. What we expect produces results.
All four of these work, because they are a function of belief. We look to all
four as reasons for reality. THIS IS IMPORTANT TO SEE because from here we can
separate the two different reality choices.
What happens if you believe in (1.) above? Scientists continue to prove that
this view is inaccurate and out-dated. There has never been a test conclusively
proving this view. Moreover, it provides no way to "fix" things--we cannot
alter the event. What this means is that there is no choice but to accept
the consensus future. If you believe in (2.) above, added to what has been
statede, it is a closed system. THere is no way to get to the cause. There
is, therefore, no choice but to accept the future of the consensus.
Why do we hold on to these two (1. & 2.) views?
1. Because we cling to the past, because we were taught and because we don't
want to look or think about it.
2. These two views require no responsibility. We look back, feel guilt and
shame, but then simply apologize.
3. We pretend to be observers.
4. We continue with payoffs [stated in another note in 358.]
5. We get too weak to do anything about it...caught in a vortex.
6. Because they are economically and socially unsound. Money would no longer
be spent and the purpose of society is to control.
7. Because we don't need more excuses.
These two views have a low threshold of belief and people protect their beliefs.
What can we do to affect change? To shift the paradigm of causation?
1. We can end powerlessness, self-pity, and anger at "God".
2. We can think and feel and release pent-up emotions (which can destroy our
world.)
3. We can grow up...spiritually, by taking adult responsibility.
4. We can fill our lives with aliveness.
We can stay with our guaranteed future--the future of consensus--or we can
choose the alternative. There are secrets which are in place. The dark side
of the secrets keeps us moving towards consensus.
Herewith are listed [very briefly] the secrets that we need to espouse.
I. Fulfillment: 1. Evaluate obligations and eliminate them {expanded on}
2. Evaluate ambitions (if it's someone else's it's negative.)
3. Find happiness--completing or filling needs: survival,
security, belonging, esteeming, need to know, need for
esoterics.
4. Find miracles--anything that is more than we expect.
Become intimate (trust, tender, embracing) with desire,
expectation, and imagination (the tools of manifestation.)
5. Find the joy-meeting with preferences (relationships,
e.g., can't provide happiness)
6. Co-create ambitions
7. "Own" spirituality.
II. Make spirituality {not the pictures we hold--elaborated on at length}
the greatest priority:
1. Establish principles of honesty, integrity, character.
2. Establish realness--that we can direct impact.
3. Develop intimacy with unseen friends (counselors, etc.)
4. Co-create our reality-with unseen friends.
III. Co-create reality with counselors, and Higher Self: There is energy
between. It is the energy of creation and it is focused. We need to
understand that the biggest resistance is wanting to take full credit.
We need to understand that we alone are responsible for our failures
because we are the only one in our "crew" who has blockages. Having
to do reality alone is the biggest problem; it is ego-centric.
IV. Come ALIVE-Start trusting again. Don't have a lack of expectation and
enthusiasm. Step confidently into the future.
There are specific techniques which we can use. There are certain ones which
are more appropriate now (1989) than other times.
The most appropriate thing to remember right now (during the first three weeks
of 1989) is that the year began on Jan. 4 and that this energy is conducive
to starting projects. INITIATE as many projects during this window as possible.
Even if they are only conceived...but implement as much as possible. Some
will fail, but many will not. February will be a rougher month. June, July
and August are the roughest months of the year. September will have fear in
it for about three weeks, to be replaced with lots of success and uplifting
energy. Next December will be a time to reflect on accomplishments. 1990
will be the year of awakening. 1989 is the "darkness before the dawn".
Techniques for the year:
1. The solstices and equinoxes are a time of renewal. Sit down and look
at projects. Make a list. Then, plus or minus two days from the solstice/
equinox (19-23 of month) find two hours for a ritual of renewal. Bathe
to purify (using music, candles) sensing water washing away pollution
of fears and doubts for about ten minutes. Pat self dry. Extinguish
candles, put on robe, and contemplate (with inspirational music) the
list. Then go into meditation using manifesting techniques {available
in book and on tape} and go down list and visualize the projects.
Sense an ending of old patterns and entering new. Thank reality, end
meditation and comtemplate again. The bathe again for 3 or 4 minutes
to seal the process.
2. (Non-meditative) Work and rework priorities. What are your priorities?
Spend 20 minutes brainstorming for 1 or 2, up to 3 sessions. Don't
assess or judge the brainstorming. Afterwards, consolidate lists.
Then put the priorities in order. When priorities are in order, you
can possibly get 50%, probably get 75% and actually will get 100%.
Put the list up and use it as a reference for events in life.
3. Create a health regime. What do you consider a healthy diet? Whatever
it is for you. Also create an activity regime. What are appropriate
activities or exercise for you? Also create a spiritual regime. What
spiritual activities do you do? Then use these in a meditation using
a cocoon of healing.
4. (Non-meditative) Do short and long-term visioning. Sense these visions
as two spheres of light. Where I want to be and where I want the world
to be. Once these four have been created, on a regular basis, sense
bubbles floating up into the night between 9-11 p.m. This can be done
in or out of meditation. Since others around the globe will be doing this,
it will have a somewhat of a chelation effect...time-release.
5. Develop an intimacy with at least one of the four elements (earth, wind,
fire, water). Talk to it, program with it, develop closeness to it.
6. Implement the priorities-act consciously. Celebrate them. Let them
be our inspiration. Let them spill into other areas, not by martyring
ourselves.
7. Use solstice and equinoxes to deepen and discover the Goddess energy
and open self up to it (and it's three aspects: maiden, mother, crone.)
Frederick
|
| 358.129 | more to add? | COPA::CABANYA | | Wed Jun 07 1989 20:56 | 10 |
| Frederick -
now that the year is almost half over, and the current state of China
and other disasters around the globe - do you have anymore you can add
to this note for 1989?
Thanks so much for your information.
mary
|
| 358.130 | Our reality continues... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Thu Jun 08 1989 15:19 | 25 |
| re: .129
Mary, thanks for giving me an opportunity to re-read that
information...funny how just a couple of months go by and information
is "forgotten."
I have been to several workshops with Lazaris since the ones
mentioned in .128. Mostly, Lazaris talks about what we can do next
(as opposed to, say, what we haven't done, etc.) He *did* recently
tell us that June-July would be difficult months, so that seems to
be keeping the year in accord with his "prediction." We do have
our summer solstice coming up, though, so that is a good standard to
shoot for (as mentioned at the end of .128.) Other than that, I don't
off-hand remember anything more specific in terms of "what's coming
up" in the year to come. All I know is that is has been made
very, very clear to me that *I* need to develop my spirituality far
more than I have. It is my opinion that others would benefit from
that relationship within themselves, as well. Time is too short
(in terms of this incarnation) to muck it up...my reality has reflected
the upheavals within myself, so it's time to "correct" the beliefs,
attitudes, and emotions which hold my reality in place--into a form
which produces more harmony and peace and fun.
Frederick
(Was there something more specific that you wanted to know?)
|
| 358.131 | no speicific questions ... | COPA::CABANYA | | Thu Jun 08 1989 16:12 | 9 |
| no - didn't want to know anything more specific. Was just curious as
to what you're thoughts would be re-reading that note now, 5 months
after posting. I'd say it looks right-on to me! Its going to be a
long summer ...
thanks!
mary
|
| 358.132 | A little update and some more information... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Tue May 15 1990 16:36 | 100 |
| For those who may or may not have noticed, the metaphysical circus
has shut itself down considerably over the past year or so. This
is precisely what Lazaris predicted nearly two years ago. Has
metaphysics died? No, definitely it has not. In fact, it is
stronger than ever. It's just that many of the charlatans and
performers have been exposed and have lost their flamboyant appeal
as well as the fact that our media seems to have lost interest.
Just as well, for those with fervors (religious or otherwise)
who had felt threatened now feel that the threat has diminished.
...gives us more space! ;-)
Lazaris is still increasing in his appeal, though clearly not
for those who aren't going to be (in this lifetime, anyway.)
This past weekend I participated in a sold-out intensive (600+
people...the largest to date.) Not a large group, by earthly
standards, but powerful enough to alter the course of the
humanity they are intimate with. These people came from all over
the world, the Orient, France, England, Australia, South America,
Canada, and all over the U.S. as well as other areas, I'm certain.
So, for those who think that all this stuff in DEJAVU is only a
passing fad, it is! But it only is that for those who aren't truly
serious in their spiritual potential. Those who are serious
will undoubtably take many wrong turns and go up dead-end alleys,
but they'll get back up and continue their search again. They
won't give up or chalk it up as a fad. Those reading this are
likely among that group. Congratulations, keep it up!
(A little hint, that probably won't do any skeptic in this
group any good--don't be surprised if 100 years from now one is
still able to attend a Lazaris workshop, attended by dozens and
dozens of very ancient people...)
from notes:
We need to find OUR OWN way home, not THE way home.
HOME is at the root of every passion, every catch of breath,
in every cell of our bodies...There *is* A lifetime where we
embrace openly, surrender victoriously...on our way home.
THERE IS BUT ONE LESSON--THAT THERE IS NO LESSON.
We need to find our self--there is no reward to earn, no permission
to attain...other than accepting and giving ourself permission.
We also need to drop karma, set it aside; we don't have to respond
to every betrayal, every abondonment, every relationship...
It isn't "God" that we need to find...it's OurSELF that we need to
find.
The first and last step of any valid spiritual journey is being
the fool. Rather most people will say "I'll do...rather than be
foolish."
What we have in common:
1. Craziness
2. Old Spirituality of pain, etc.
3. We are winners...willing to be powerful
4. We all hear the call.
What we don't have in common:
1. The degree to which we accept the things we have in common.
2. A particular, peculiar, unique way home.
(Lazaris said that it is important for us to realize that he speaks
to us literally, metaphorically, allegorically and symbolically and
that it is up to each of us to determine which is which.)
Our Higher Self contains all of our lifetimes, etc. within it.
Between us and our Higher Self is a fuzzy layer called the Soul.
It also resides between our Higher Self and that which is beyond
(God/Goddess/All-THat-IS.) IT is the lens to G/G/ATI. There is
an unconscious mind which follows us from lifetime to lifetime.
There is a sub-conscious mind which store information from this
lifetime only. Within that sub-conscious mind is information
which we have put in and then said, "let no one in, not even
me." The sub-conscious complies and keeps us out. There are
certain beliefs, called laws, which fall into this category.
There is also our own personal myth. This is the way we pass
tests [remember, there are no lessons or no tests...] and is
often found in the region of the wounding or of the shadow...
It does not end well. It ends in fearful death or great tragedy.
The myth usually surfaces in life at certain times, such as a
in a "wounding." Or maybe in a "deepening." Or maybe in the
shadow or the time of the "double" (when we attempt to recapture
youth or accept wisdom of age.) Youth says they'll live forever...
old age means disintegration and death. The myth catches up.
To go HOME means getting off the wheel, stepping off the
wheel of physical incarnations...our myths and law keep us from
this. Our dark law and personal myth also won't allow us to
leave our karma.
We each need to discover our own myth and law and decide what
to do with it...edit or change it or drop it. Our myth contains
all the faces (7) of the soul. The myth gets replaced by visions
and dreams of the future. The law gets to be broken.
The DArk Ages weren't...it was a time of magic and miracles...
the Renaissance (the age of "reason") violently erased desire and
passion, the body and compassion, imagination and inspiration and
left only intellect and reason behind. History is ending again.
Who will open the doors?
Frederick
(Understand that this is but an infinitesimally small portion of the
work that was generated last week...)
|
| 358.133 | More from the Intensive...food for the wise. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Thu May 17 1990 20:05 | 79 |
| The seven faces or phases of the soul:
1. The grounding--Our name--our actual, come-into-this-lifetime physical
name (in Christianity, without a "christening" the soul wanders.)
Name given by parents. This first name has meaning. This is *not*
the entering of the soul into the body. This is the Earth stage.
2. Power--(Water)--occurs from 0 months to 18 or so years. Covers
childhood and adolescence. Very fluid and changing time.
3. Burning Eternal Youth--e.g., leaving high school. People who
feel that they'll live forever, etc.
4. The wounding--and the deepening--with the wound can come a
deepening, an adult realization that this is their world.
Life takes on a maturing process.
5. The shadow. The "twin" (e.g. Mordred.) Often called the mid-life
crisis. Some respond to it by returning to youth. A time when
all the shame/deservability/angers/sabotage, etc. reveal
themselves.
6. The double--(Janis face) The time when there is a turn forward
into wisdom or retreating to become the little child (called
senility.) This is an attempt to go home, either by going
forward into the future or back to the past.
7. Death or Remains--When the soul completes with the body. There
is a richness that gets discarded. Will be faced.
Our personal myth is often found in the wounding or the shadow.
The unconscious mind holds the secrets to the soul, to our Higher
Self and to God/Goddess/All-That-Is. It holds primal emotions,
thoughts and beliefs. Holds our ultimate dark law and personal
myth. It holds information and programs we have no idea even
exist. AS LONG AS WE STAY IN THE PHYSICAL MIND, WE WON'T SEE THEM.
Unless we are willing to feel the chill, we can't feel the warmth.
The enlightened can see worlds beyond.
The exceptional can understand the worlds beyond.
There are four ways to touch this world (the underworld:)
1. In search of a lost love (agony and pain.)
2. Through depression (as Persephone--Jackson Pollach [sp?]--Kandinski
[also sp?] reaching the brilliance.
3. By force and resistance (Hercules)
4. By choice--across the river of forgetfulness (as Aeneas did.)
Keeping our negative shields in place, we are alienated from our
sub-conscious and un-conscious minds. We are also isolated from
our soul. THIS SHIELD TRANSCENDS LIFETIMES. We *do* take it with
us. THIS IS THE BASIS FOR KARMA. We CANNOT get HOME with this shield.
The negative shields:
1. Reluctance or denial of love--by not receiving.
2. Self-punishment--denying success.
3. Self-sabotage--undercutting;foot-in-mouth
4. Addictions--physical or emotional
5. Guilt--An anesthetic to cut pain.
6. Deserving--feeling that we don't deserve
7. Shame
Need to be replaced with a positive shield:
1. Receiving love
2. Pampering (*not* indulging) self--things of value only to the self
3. To have own power(s.) [Defined later.)
4. To utilize personal strengths. [Also defined later]
5. To allow the self to feel and to think.
6. To be WILLING to have what we want.
7. To feel REMORSE (*not* shame.)
Adolescents have rules; Adults have no rules.
Frederick
|
| 358.134 | If I didn't give you a hard time...then who would? (;^) | SCARGO::PAINTER | And on Earth, peace... | Fri May 18 1990 16:10 | 9 |
|
Frederick,
>food for the wise.
If we're not wise, might we get something out of it anyway? Should we
be reading it? Etc.
Cindy
|
| 358.135 | step right up, take a # please! | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Fri May 18 1990 16:32 | 5 |
| re: .134
Cindy, you know I'd be ready to fill for you any time!
Mary
|
| 358.136 | Wise men say, only fools rush in... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Fri May 18 1990 18:22 | 11 |
| re: last two
Hahahaha.
I knew that would draw somebody. ;-)
Incidentally, what makes you think you're not one of the wise?
Frederick
;-)
|
| 358.137 | It's a conscious choice, relatively speaking of course. | CGVAX2::PAINTER | And on Earth, peace... | Mon May 21 1990 20:42 | 9 |
| Re.136
Frederick,
>Incidentally, what makes you think you're not one of the wise?
I only associate with out-groups. (;^)
Cindy
|
| 358.138 | easy... | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Tue May 22 1990 16:16 | 5 |
| re: .136
If I were, would I really be here? Now? Doing this?
Mary ;-)
|
| 358.139 | The soul's path... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Thu Nov 01 1990 18:08 | 83 |
| The following is extracted from notes I took during the 4-day
Intensive which took place in L.A. from Oct.25-28.
If we find our soul's path and align ourselves with it, anything
we want will manifest magically and miraculously. Things in line with the
soul's path must be received--with gratitude--not earned or agonized for.
Our soul is the lens between God/Goddess/All-That-Is and our Higher Self.
If we can perceive and conceive, we can master our unconscious mind. It
is within our unconscious mind wherein lies our strength, our power and
our soul. It is the eye that allows perception, the portal that allows
conception. Ego is the eye to perceive. With context and form we can
then conceive. Through the eye we can perceive God/Goddess/All-That-Is
as a living energy, a vitality which has impact. We can also conceive
the relationship through our soul. The soul can perceive us through the
portal, and through the eye can conceive us.
There are lesser and greater mysteries that need to be explored to
find the faces (or phases) of the soul, its stages of development and
its path. Without an unconscious mind, we would have no creativity of
any type, no philosophy, etc. (only chemistry and biology would remain
and they would soon disappear.) The unconscious world is massively vast
and intricate. At a certain point, we CANNOT PASS successfully within
the unconscious mind, WITHOUT unraveling the lesser and greater mysteries.
In order to find the soul's path, we must pass the dark night of the soul,
and must confront or encounter the ugliest parts of our personality
(our lesser mysteries) or our weakness and powerlessness can turn into
debilitating and destructive experience. Understanding the darker side,
we can traverse the night of the soul, and can confront OR ENCOUNTER the
most negative us. (The myth of Arthur had to do with the search for the
Holy Grail, which was actually the search for the soul's path...notice that
one by one the knights were consumed by their own darker side. Only Lancelot,
by fighting his dark side, survived. We have a belief which says that life
is a struggle. If we follow that path, and it works, Great! But there is
another way.) We can consciously choose to discover our soul's path.
The soul has seven faces or phases. They will all make their appearance
within our lifetime. We cannot turn away from them. Either they will
find us via our unconscious mind, or we can seek them out via our
conscious mind (into our unconscious mind.) If we seek our unconscious mind,
it won't seek us. It is the unconscious mind that forces itself upon us,
not our soul. The seven faces of the soul are as follows:
1. Our given first name (usually, although sometimes the surname.)
This is called the GROUNDING of the soul.
2. The time of water, feeling for ourself, discovering our personality.
This is the core of the soul.
3. The time of fire. ETERNAL YOUTH. When we feel, in our adolescence,
that we are immortal, that we can accomplish anything, and we are
filled with hubris.
4. The WOUNDING. The wind of the soul. Often with first menstruation
for girls, wounded hubris for boys ("I'm not the best.") When the fire
scorches or singes our wings...when we are betrayed by our thinking.
Can come again.
5. The SHADOW. The smoke or smoldering of the soul. This is our dark
side. This is the mid-life crisis. "No one loves me." "I can't stand
the damage I have wrought." "I'm old, my dreams will never happen."
6. The DOUBLE. The time to come at peace with life. Either by turning
back to youth to begin again (senility) or by developing the richness
of what we've got. When we tell stories not to recount for no reason,
but rather to enrich those around us.
7. The REMAINS. This is the face we see at death. This is the death
mask. We must see it. The reason it's negative for so many people
is because they don't want to deal with it.
There are seven ways to bridge the unconscious mind:
1. dreaming
2. intuition ("a hunch that's right")
3. gestalt
4. visions
5. night dreams
6. daydreams
7. meditation
The imagination we hold is older than we are. The unconscious symbols
of the mind are timeless (and therefore are available to all---) What we
think may have been UFO's in our history may well have only been the
results of accessing of the unconscious mind. What is our core?
It is imperative that we understand the lesser and greater mysteries.
Understanding the lesser mysteries means understanding our personality.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
I will talk about personality in the subsequent entry.
Frederick
|
| 358.140 | Personality---the lesser mystery on our soul's path | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Thu Nov 01 1990 18:10 | 135 |
| This note should be linked to the one previous to this. This
information also comes from the Lazaris Intensive in L.A. Oct. 25-28.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
It is important to remember the importance or impact of finding our
individual soul's path. It should be clear that in order to find the
soul's path the lesser and greater mysteries must be resolved. Why?
Because the soul will present all seven of its faces to you in this lifetime,
directly or via the unconscious, and a part of that is the dark night
of the soul, which we will either confront or encounter. The dark night of
the soul is the ugliest parts of our personality, and our personality is
a part of the lesser mysteries.
There are nine personality types. We all have parts of each, yet
we are all only one primary type. It is imperative to discover the ONE
type that we are. The reasons and the way to use these types will follow.
I will list the type, a brief description, AND ITS DOWNSIDE (or darkside)
1. LOVE. To have someone care for me. Being compassionate.
*downside*-can be possessing, smothering and manipulatingly so.
"I want someone to love me, dammit, and I'll do anything to get it."
2. ADMIRED. Seeking approval, can succeed at anything, but looks for
others to be impressed by them.
*downside*-(very trecherous) Deceptive, opportunistic, deceitful,
materialistic, status-seeking, un-feeling, trusted by none, deserted
by everyone. Pathological liars, betrayers, backbiters. "I don't
want you to worry, I did it for your own good."
3. FEELING, UNDERSTANDING. Inspirational to others, creative. (The poet
who describes in glorious detail whatever he/she observes, e.g.) "I have
to FEEL it!" ("The rain was a message from the cosmic..." e.g.)
*downside*-obsessed with their own emotion; introvertedly self-absorbed.
Paralysis of depression; emotions so horrible and so consuming that
depression follows. "No one understands how I feel."
4. INTELLECT. Intellingence, genius. "I want to understand myself through my
intelligence or my thinking." Wanting to take ideas apart and putting
them together again.
*downside*-cynical, analytical, arrogant. Has to face the paranoia of
their own nightmarish thoughts. Fear is that those thoughts will get to
us, that the conspiracy of the world will come true. "I know too much."
5. SAFETY. To do what I have to do to not have to worry. Being safe, being
secure. These are the loyalest of friends (who are friends without
strings, just for the joy of it), generous, provide safety w/o mothering.
Allow others to learn about themselves. Genuinely nice people.
*downside*-can become totally dependent, hostile and obsessed.
Morbidity of dependence; have some of the worst nightmares.
Sometimes hoard things. "Don't lie to me." "Don't take my safety away."
6. HAPPY. "What's most important is that I be happy, have fun or have a
good time." Wants to do different and new things all the time. Jack
of all trades, master of none. Brings joy, laughter; gives, does.
Gratitude just happens. Can watch nature for hours; optimists.
*downside*-addictive, obsessive, miserable, self-indulgent, infantile,
hedonistic, demanding. "I'll do anything, try anything, to be happy."
Must face the mania of obsessions, compulsions.
7. SELF-RELIANT (LEADERS). Depend on no one. "Rock of Gibraltar."
Powerful, charismatic, commanding, solid, capable, magnetic, raises dreams.
*downside*-tyrant, bully, mean, vicious, self-absorbed need to control.
"I'm doing God's work."
8. PEACE-KEEPERS. Mediator, negotiator, facilitator, arbitrator, always
looks for unions, wants a reputation for keeping the peace, brings
harmony, finds common ground. Stops blame and turns it into creation,
helps people understand their vision.
*downside*-peace at all costs, forget the details. "I lied for your
own good." Deceptive, non-trusting, neglectful. Can get into self-denial,
abandoning self. More likely to become schizophrenic; potential for
multiple personalities.
9. BEING RIGHT. Wise, discerning, helpful, changes others through correct
observation and insight and perspective; perceptual and conceptual.
"I know what to do here." "I hate to say I told you so, but..."
*downside*-righteousness, blame, panics when wrong/mistaken, stops
at nothing to be right. Can become destructive in need for perfection.
The only way to fix things is to destroy them. Can be scared to death
that their valued attempts to be right have been wrong and have
caused destruction.
One of these is at the core. From here we either lean in a positive or
negative direction. It is either the "personality" before or after each one
in this list (THE SEQUENCE/ORDER OF PERSONALITIES IS IMPORTANT!.) For
example, if I'm a love personality, do I want to get it by being right (the
one before) or by being admired (the one after?) How do I do it? By
discovering this leaning we can determine the thrust of our personality and
can then uncover the dark side. We can then infuse the *direction* that
needs to be taken.
[NOTE:--If one is a safety person, e.g. or a leader, that is what the person
already IS. That is, they do not need to develop being a safety person,
in the former case, or a leader, in the latter, for they *already are* that.
What then, should they be striving to be?]
Personality type Goal or *direction* to be taken
___________________________________________________
1. LOVE-------strive to be a FEELING person. (To create, put back in the world.)
2. ADMIRED---- " " " " SAFETY person. (To create safety and security
for someone I love more than myself. To achieve for them.)
3. FEELING---- " " " " RIGHT person. (Need to love someone who is
"superior" to you.)
4. INTELLECT-- " " " " LEADER. (Become principled; take charge.)
5. SAFETY----- " " " " PEACE-MAKER. (Bring union, find commonality.)
6. HAPPY------ " " " an INTELLECT person.
7. LEADER----- " " " a LOVE person. (Be caring and compassionate.)
8. PEACE-MAKER " " " an ADMIRED person. (Be admired for achieving
something through peace.)
9. RIGHT------ " " " a HAPPY person. (Good is not the enemy of better.)
1,2, & 3 are what we think and feel.
4,5, & 6 are what we do.
7,8, & 9 are how we relate to the world.
To help us determine personality, we can look at our relationships with
our parents (attached, detached, or ambivalent--push/pull. Ambivalence is
also a love/hate, instability, no commitment, have been rejected/humiliated/
or abandoned)
1. LOVE--ambivalent towards father. (Wobbly esteem, wants people to love them.)
2. ADMIRED--attached to mother. (Mother is the source of life.)
3. FEELING--detached from both. (Turned inward.)
4. INTELLECT--ambivalent towards both parents. (Knowledge becomes parents.)
5. SAFETY--attached to father.
6. HAPPY--detached from mother. (Happiness becomes mother.)
7. LEADER--ambivalent towards mother. (Depend on no one.)
8. PEACE-MAKER--attached to both parents.
9. RIGHT--detached from father.
These are *not* absolutes...look at which you do, which is most important?
What gives you the most drive? Which matters most? What would you want
people most to see? How did it root? How have we expressed it (lean?)
By healing the liability, and forgiving ourselves, we can change ourselves
by lifting to the higher octave (the *direction* above.)
Intricacy of expression determines our uniqueness.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.141 | what is? | SFCPMO::CABANYA | | Thu Nov 01 1990 20:49 | 8 |
| Frederick,
Once again, thank you for taking the time to type those in.
What is the difference between dreaming, nightdreams and daydreams?
Mary
|
| 358.142 | I'm not sure between dreams, daydreams, visions... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Fri Nov 02 1990 19:15 | 16 |
| re: .141 (Mary)
...I was hoping nobody'd notice! ;-)
I'm a bit uncertain about this. I may have to dig a bit to
find out. Is it on the "Dreams" tape (Terry, Meredith?)
As I thought about it, it may be a very fine-line sort of
distinction. You know how Lazaris likes to draw out 7 things
("anything can be expanded or contracted") and maybe this was
one that could easily have been six things instead. But I'm not
sure...I will try to find out, and if I do, I'll put it in here.
(He did not elaborate, at least not while I was conscious of it. :-) )
Frederick
|
| 358.143 | Spacing out, again..."I must be dreaming!" | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Mon Nov 05 1990 19:53 | 23 |
| re: .141,.142
Mary, I've been listening to the DREAMS tapes from May and
June, 1979 and Lazaris explains that there are seven different
types of dreams (I also entered a note on dreams earlier in this
note--358.) The seven types of dreams:
1. Waking dream (daydream)
2. Fantasy
3. Quality of meditation
4. Spontaneous awareness (gestalts)
5. Intuitive awareness
6. Creativity, (all creative endeavors are dreams)
7. Sleep state.
Is this the same thing as accessing the unconscious mind? I'm
not certain. At first impulse I'd say yes.
I will continue to look, perhaps in my notes...(I don't have an
encyclopedic mind, sorry...and sometimes I space out a bit in
workshops and don't notice or pick up on some things. Keeping
notes helps keep me grounded and focused, but it isn't a sure thing.)
Frederick
|
| 358.144 | hmmmmm | SFCPMO::CABANYA | | Tue Nov 06 1990 14:21 | 6 |
| interesting!....
thanks Frederick!
mary
|
| 358.145 | A rose by any other name ? | UTRTSC::MACKRILL | If it works, don't mess with it.. | Tue Nov 13 1990 13:02 | 39 |
| Frederick, thanks for sharing ... it's nice to read your writings.
Some questions if I may...
re .139 our Given first name or surname...
Our names are normally chosen by our parents. The first name is a
product of the parents' favourites and unfortunately, sometimes a
parent's grandiose elusions. Other than names with biblical origins
which have clearer meanings the name we are given is often a popular
one or "in fashion at the time". A door has a handle for the
convenience of others. Could names equate to merely the handle on
the door ?
An unpopular given name can adversely affect the personality of the
bearer of that name. This can influence the person to deviate from
his/her true personality. Although the pro's and con's of a name can be
a starting point for the seeker to focus on when attempting
self-development, is it really part of a basic facet of the soul ?
(The name "Lazaris", is it his given name or an adopted name? Is there
significance of this name within the concept of Lazaris teachings ?)
re .140 There is one personality at the core...
I agree with this, however, the true personality is often masked by an
overriding and sometimes negative trait. Due to trauma, often in our
formative years we attach ourselves to favourite personality survival
tools which help us to cope with our current reality. We have all met
people who adopt a hard and cold exterior to protect an "inside" which
is soft and loving. We all build walls and barriers to protect
ourselves and we often _become_ the wall and barrier and perceive this
to be our true personality. How would a seeker then identify his/her
true core personality if it is well masked by such "survival tools",
overhangs from the fight/flight primary response?
Wondering aloud,
- Brian
|
| 358.146 | This is what I see... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Tue Nov 13 1990 15:42 | 90 |
| re: .145 (Brian)
Thanks.
I agree with what you wrote. Let me, if I can, add a few
clarifications, to the extent that I am able.
Easy ones first...Lazaris is the name he gave himself. It has
no meaning, insofar as he has ever indicated (this he explains on
a tape entitled "Lazaris explains Lazaris.")
Next, the person's given name. As you are probably aware,
belief precedes reality, thought precedes manifestation, etc.
There is a part of you that exists and existed before you. It is
that you that determines whether or not you will spin off another
lifetime. At the point that the determination has been established,
all the initial factors are gathered and culled into "conception."
That is, whatever prior lifetimes are important to resolve, whatever
focuses are to be looked at, etc. are all '"vibrationally" coalesced'
before the lifetime. This includes finding the proper ("vibrationally"
speaking) parents, the proper place in time, the proper space, etc.
All the "pre-determinants", if you will, that will be the initial
primers for the lifetime. These are the circumstances that you are
"allowing" in your creation. This includes the name which your energy
has chosen for whatever reason. Why have you "chosen" that name? What
is the name's significance? Is it to be that name? Is it to rebel
against that name? Is it to generate an obstacle of some type to
either encounter or confront?
As Lazaris has indicated and I think we can appreciate (and I
believe I entered this in one of my earliest notes,) the *programming*
necessary to set up just one factor is immense...the *programming*
necessary to generate and maintain just the tip of our fingers would
take volumes of books to describe...the *programming* that is necessary
to generate and maintain a human body would take more space than all
the libraries of the world. Choosing a name is a part of the
programming. It is intricately involved in the entire manifested
reality. But, according to my understanding of what Lazaris has
told us, it is this initial christening by the soul which is the soul's
first phase. Do you choose it? Everything in our reality is either
there by conscious generation or (sometimes-less-than-conscious)
allowance. Our beginnings comes from our higher consciousness, a part
of us, followed by our unconsciousness, another part of us, and
supplemented by our sub-consciousness, which accumulates as we
develop. The conscious us is very "simple" in its beginnings, it
appears to me. That we forget these initial experiences is part
of the game. As Lazaris says on a tape I've been listening to
these last few days ("Self-Worth and Self-Respect--The New Natural
Resources") every lifetime starts from the beginning.
Your next set of questions is more difficult, I think. Yes,
I agree with your statements. What you are talking about is the
personna. It is that "personality" which shields and masks our
shadow...which in turn covers our personality/identity/image.
How does one break through? With a decision to do that. Start
anywhere. Start looking at what works and what doesn't work.
Start looking at blockages, payoffs, negative scripts, and on the
other side looking at strengths and powers. As these are unraveled,
a personality begins to show. Still, it may be difficult. Based on
what I experienced during the Intensive a few weeks ago, some people
seem to get theirs right away, while a few people chose the incorrect
ones while a few couldn't choose from a couple of narrowed-down
choices. The questions I listed at the end of that entry are geared
towards helping one determine their personality. Also, and I didn't
talk about it, one can go inside, and get answers from within (from
counselors, archetypal energies, etc.) Most of the people reading
DEJAVU have not developed this inner communication, I suspect, and
to talk about it is not going to inspire them. Also, our negative
egos like to interfere and will either validate or invalidate in
order to set up the disruption. So, unless the inner world has been
adequately broached, this source of revelation will be fairly
unreliable to most people. But, to more or less *summarize*, the
personna is not all that pervasive that one cannot see their true
attributes. Look and keep looking.
(Personally, I have been tossing this around for these few weeks
and am still not solid in my decision. I did the meditations with
Lazaris to pin it down, got answers, and have subsequently had some
doubts...probably from my negative ego. I have asked a few friends
for help but they seem to only be able to verify my list of choices.
I thus far have been unable to crack the list of three or four. There is
another part to this, the Greater Mysteries, to which I only alluded, and I
intend to explore that to see if it helps me pin down my personality.
If I succeed in that area, I will tell you.)
This information is probably incomplete, and represents my
current understandings, not necessarily what Lazaris has taught and
is teaching. I hope you realize that. In any case, perhaps it sheds
a little light...
Frederick
|
| 358.147 | A little to add about the U.S./Iraq situation. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Sun Feb 03 1991 02:39 | 39 |
| A few weeks ago, during a one-day not available on tape,Lazaris
talked about 1991 in more depth than he did in December (available on tape.)
The night before, during an evening session which should becoming
available soon, he talked about the Iraq situation. In December he had
mentioned that the U.S. would not have a war with Iraq, so I was curious
about the obvious change. Though you can hear his words yourself if you'd
like, my notes indicate that he said that up until the very last, it appeared
that we wouldn't. But we wavered in our consciousness and then "allowed it"
to occur (...all reality is our creation either by consciously creating it
or by allowing it...) The problem for many of us is that we can become
seduced by the melodrama of war and can become distracted from our metaphysics.
Anxiety and melodrama become bigger than the self. Television, however,
makes it no further than our hearts or our minds. For some people, this is
(an extension of) the father figure for them...some authority is doing it
and they are in control. Also, the war can activate the doom and gloom
scenario and make it appear to be the reality that we are choosing (of the
previously [in notes] mentioned choices--the dream, the mediocrity or the
nightmare.)
Lazaris suggested we not forget that we are the mapmakers, and that
metaphysics *does* indeed work. The following are helpful things to do:
1. Allow ourselves to express what we genuinely feel, whether it's anger,
pity or fear, etc.
2. Forgive ourselves for this reality--know that we created it by allowing it.
3. Tell ourselves the truth--see the negative potentials, then take their
energy and transmute the energy that is war into positives.
4. Look at the positive potentials (what it tells us about the bully,
negative ego, character within.) Visualize a life without nightmares.
5. Realize our own individual value. Our presence of mind is valuable.
6. Hold onto our metaphysical resonance---see that there are multiple
solutions [as I have also entered in notes before--this is as Lazaris
has pointed out before: the metaphysician is not the one with no
problems, but the one with many solutions.])
7. Act--use our metaphysics to act, dream to vision.
Frederick
|
| 358.148 | From 1-day: "Steps, Tools & Techniques to Make 1991 a Success" | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Sun Feb 03 1991 02:40 | 145 |
| 1991 is the year of exploration...numberically, 2 (1+9+9+1) represents
duality (a dialectic, thesis/antithesis)...astrologically Saturn's
prominence is also a duality, best/worst, limitations/potentials--
which is moving towards Aquarius, breaking old ground and replacing
with the new (1992--the year of Achievement--moving towardss esoteric
philosophy, where the intricate produces the simple, where metaphysical
produces the physical.) Chaos, insanity, panic & pity moving towards
excellence with success.
"Warriors", whether we want it or not, are drawn into battle to conquer,
and *change* comes either from conquest or failure. The price of being
a warrior [see notes from nearly two years ago distinguishing warrior
from "adventurer"] is that we give up dominion, destiny, power and focus.
By refusing to admit flexibility (and therefore being ill-prepared) we
are led into chaos and insanity. Though we may be stubborn, we aren't evil.
Explorers [the year of exploration, remember?] *can* have the knowledge of
the terrain.
Here are the energies for the year:
Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr.---AIR (Clash between past and future, between authority
and rebels, between momentum versus resistance, between rigidity and
flexibility. Upheaval between our hopes and fears. We'll also see
expectations vary wildly, with no solid foundations, no right answers.)
May, Jun, Jul---EARTH (Time to gather our strengths, power, talent and
abilities. Start using them, detail and formalize personal dreams,
even if they are still a lump of clay. Allow imagination to be a keel
to stabilize expectations. Gather trust, gratitude, value, happiness
and joy.)
Aug, Sep, Oct---WATER (Strengthen our priorities. Implement the new
context {backdrop} of our lives--previously the past led to compassion/
judgement which led to pain. The standard of competition led to perfection
and therefore to failure. Break from the past more conclusively, more
concisely, more completely...this is very important. Also, the sub-conscious
and unconscious minds will open more. This is a time to renew an upsurgence
of spirituality.)
Nov, Dec---FIRE (Survey our depths. Solidify and clarify our 1. dignity,
2. character, 3. vision and 4. vitality. This is a time for new enthusiasm,
fine tuning, going from a tunnel of darkness into a year of achievement.
"Let it flow.")
What to be aware of each month:
Jan--to be patient, forgiving, listening to whispers, be willing to have
something better.
Feb--bolster expectations, increase desire, lift imagination, create personal
dream.
Mar--the time to break negative patterns (jealousy, sabatoge, etc.) "This
time I won't go to the crutch of martyrhood, punishing, etc." Go looking
for miracles, don't wait for them.
Apr--Look for treasures, through the intensity of emotions look for depth,
deeper understanding, meaning, sense of destiny, personality and image.
May--Time to put self into action (grounding, stabilizing options.) Be creative,
use will, curiosity, communication, leadership. Get involved in the world.
Jun--Focus on love--yin/yang, amplification of and generation of...work with
trust and gratitude. Listen to hunches and to our bodies...What is
our resistance to gratitude (sometimes it's admitting someone was "greater"
and sometimes it's a fear of "strings attached"?)
Jul--Allow imagination to soar ("fantasize"--fantasia-revealing truths never
seen before, which now may appear foolish or fanciful.) Work on valuing
self, recognize our importance, significance. Value is a powerful
motivator, an energy, more than an attitude, that draws valuable things
to us. Work with the "mists" of happiness and joy {these release
endorphins and changes who we are.}
Aug--this will be a strange month...so be humble (willing to letting
it be different,) vulnerable at the time of strengthening, honest
with self.
Sep--Strong time of implementation (like May-->action.) Time to break
negative relationships (because we'll need the space.)
Oct--A time of manifestation (with Sept.) Allow spirituality to merge with
physicality and vice versa. Sense what that safe place looks like.
Nov--This is the time to be magical...let it appear.
Dec--This is the month of celebration, of accomplishments, of self, of
being a mapmaker.
To capsulize: Use relationships as explorations, let that in. Know that
exploring from a place of ill-preparation causes chaos. Really understand
where toughness is coming from. Know the terrain, but that doesn't mean
we can't expect things just because we don't understand them. Entering
each month prepared can help us accomplish our personal goals. Deal
with meditative energy each month...have interactions with our Higher
Selves to have them help us deal with our problems and concerns.
Do the following simple meditations often throughout each individual
month:
These meditations can take from 5-15 minutes and can be added to other
meditations--all start from a safe place that finds us meditatively going
to a place from which to do this--
January (do it retroactively ;-) there is no time in an altered space...)
Go to a place of wind...allow it to blow on us, getting stronger and
stronger (use lots of imagination!) Then, DECIDE to let the wind
go THROUGH us...carrying with it our concerns, our fears, etc. Feel
the patience, etc.
February--again from the place of wind...this time let the wind CARRY us.
Ride the wind to two possibilities: either where we WANT to go (where
a particular desire gets planted)or to wherever it wishes to take us
(to plant a desire.)
March--With the wind again, this time BREATHE it in---notice trees, etc.
getting almost inhaled, then breathe back out. Let patterns within
get blown away.
April--This time, go for a walk with a gentle wind. Let there be insights,
direction, answers.
May--Go to a breath-takingly beautiful meadow, remove footwear and wiggle
toes into earth. Absorb the earth's strength. [This process can
be done literally, outside of meditation, too.]
June--This time let yourself be buried into mud...totally submerged. Let
the mud draw the toxins or poisons (physical, emotional, mental) out,
even if we don't know what they are. Finally, let "LOVE" draw us
out of the mud, leaving the poisons behind.
July--Climb a mountain, any mountain in imagination, and notice how we feel
as we climb it.
August--Go to a place where there is a waterfall. Let the water pour over
ourselves, feel it pelt our head and face, touch it, let it wash away
all the stuff that needs it.
September--Let it rain on us ... play and dance in it. Then lay in exhaustion
and ecstasy in the rain.
October--Go to a gentle ocean. Sit alone, watch the water. Realize that
the ocean is always working [an ocean wave is a total circle.] Know
that it gives and takes away. Let it give and take away from ourselves
as we hypnotically watch.
November--Find and sit next to a beautiful campfire. See all the colors
of the rainbow in it. Then, as we watch, see all the realities we
want to have appear within the flames. Let the magic be there.
December--Again by the campfire, let the Higher Self be there. Allow it
to take the flame and place it within us. Know that this is an
eternal flame. Allow it to burn as a spark, as life, as freedom.
As always, there was lots and lots more, including other techniques, etc.
But this is enough for this purpose here.
Frederick
|
| 358.149 | Thanks, Frederick. | CGVAX2::PAINTER | And on Earth, peace... | Sun Feb 03 1991 23:55 | 1 |
|
|
| 358.150 | A little info from Intensive May 16-19 (S.F.) | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Thu May 30 1991 17:43 | 78 |
| Consciousness developed from random to organized energy.
From sub-atomic particles (and eight will eventually be found)
[a billion neutrinos squared=space] to atomic ("an electron is a
neutrino with a purpose :-) ") to molecular, etc.
Consciousness entered physicality (four planes comprise the
"lower worlds": mental-where everything is impossible, causal-where
everything is possible, astral-where everything is probable, and physical-
where everything is actual) via the constellation Sirius. This is the
etheric portal to physicality. It is not the center of the universe,
rather it is the doorway of raw physical energy. (Sirius or some "star"
can be found in every mythology...why?) From Sirius, there were three choices:
Sirius itself, the Pleides, and Orion (all three creating the "heavens."
From there to Terra Firma (Earth.) Those who came from Orion have no
interest in human dignity...people are "nothing" (Lucifer)... and settled
into Earth first. This resulted in the "monsters" of our early Earth
(flying reptiles, mermaids, mermen, minotaurs, experiments, etc.)
Eventually, however, some of the Orion inhabitants were displeased and
wished to create a world without anger. They did so in Lumania--cave
dwellers of the Andes and Pyrenees (which were at one time connected.)
These people had no anger, but had fear--they discovered that without
anger they could not temper their fears, and eventually they disappeared.
Meanwhile, those from Sirius and the Pleides settled onto the Earth.
The civilization of Lemuria was taken from energy of the Goddess
(feminine energy--subtle, quiet) while the subsequent civilizations of
Atlantis were almost exclusively "God" energy (masculine energy--powerful,
dynamic.) Feminine energy does not need masculine energy, rather it allows
it (so as to manifest it.) Masculine energy cannot exist without feminine
energy.
So, while the Lumanians (the first *lumination* of Orion) had gods
who fought for them (reptiles) they bred with barbarians and died out
in their realization that they could not out-bully the bullies.
The Lemurians arose not to take over, but rather to provide a living
example of another path. Not by technology, but rather, magic. They
developed spiritually, as a combination of Sirius and Pleides (almost
homeopathically) to infuse the land. Once it was "done," it slipped
away--lost in the mists of memory (although Lemurian energy exists in
the Pacific, the Sierras, the Rockies and the Himalayas--which is why
traditions see mountains as holy places.) Most returned to non-physicality,
some stayed [like those of us in attendance.] We have re-created the
world. Originally, we came from "stellar" origins, now we can re-create
through the Earth itself, from human influence. The result of this
is the modern world--the combination of masculine and feminine, that is,
the "All-That-IS."
The Atlantinians [or Atlanteans] traveled around and settled into
various areas of the world, Sumar (which then infused with Egypt--the
word "gypsy" coming from the traveling Egyptians,) to Mayan (Aztec, Toltec,
Incan, Aborigine, India, etc. Atlantinians were seen as "gods" with
lots of jealousy and infighting, and created pods all over the Earth,
with shamans and pyramids (built as temples, not as tombs,) etc. Each pod
thought of itself as original creating mythologies of floods, stellar seeds,
etc.
Along the way, each of us has had lifetime after lifetime (usually
*not* impacted---that is, usually not one right after the other in time,
usually centuries apart instead.) There is ONE lifetime, however, that
we came closest to going HOME, but we stopped, whether out of tragedy or
for things to clear up. We carry this (spiritual heritage) knowledge in
every lifetime "just in case." IT is in our unconscious mind, it is in our
sub-conscious, DNA, etc. (Certain segments of DNA are "gibberish" to
scientists and my never be unwound by them--these segments are our spiritual
heritage.) We can unlock the encoding via meditation.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Science has become our mythology, from fanciful to real. If we
cut throught the sheer fantasy (an essential ingredient leading to) we
can discover the "fantasia"--the truth revealed through the unknown.
"The weeds protect the flowers until they can bloom." Fantasy is necessary
to protect the fantasia.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Nature has never been in harmony---it has always been in turmoil.
* * * * * * * * * * *
The truth of our "spiritual ancestry" is now, not in the past;
it is a synergy of four energies: stellar origins, Lemuria, Atlantis and
our spiritual *heritage.* It is the fifth wave produced by these other
energies.
Frederick
|
| 358.151 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | I love this Earth!!!! | Thu May 30 1991 18:01 | 8 |
|
Hi Frederick,
I haven't read through your .150 in detail but did notice some info
on Orion. It will be interesting to see if this meshes with the
brief info on Orion that I will be entering in the 11:11 note.
Carole
|
| 358.152 | | VERGA::STANLEY | What a long strange trip it's been... | Fri May 31 1991 11:39 | 1 |
| It doesn't appear to at first glance but.... everyone's a critic.
|
| 358.153 | The reliability of the source is important. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Fri May 31 1991 12:20 | 16 |
| re: .151 (and .152) Carole and Mary
Based on my information, I would just as soon have nothing
to do with "Orion energy." I have not read all your stuff, but
from glancing at it, I'd say that it isn't for me. This is not
to say that someone else can't put this together in some other
fashion or that someone can't interpret the information some other
way, however, since I have a certain belief as to what my "origins"
are (and I've already spent a great deal of time developing, etc.
that foundation and understanding) I see no reason, personally,
to jump ship for what for me would be less reliable information.
As we all eventually get around to saying in here...to each
his/her own.
Frederick
|
| 358.154 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | I love this Earth!!!! | Fri May 31 1991 13:37 | 21 |
|
RE: .153
Frederick, I agree that the source of any information should be
questioned. I don't totally accept all information from any
source, but rather bounce each one up against the other and see
what meshes and what doesn't. I didn't see a lot that was in
disagreement with both perspectives on Orion. In 11:11, it was
stated that there is a dark side and a light side there. It is
the home of duality. It somewhat makes sense to me that we may
have to pass back through there in order to go beyond duality to
Oneness.
There are other sources of information that I have read that also
target Orion as the source of many of our more unpleasant issues
here. That doesn't mean that this involvement wasn't important to
our growth (who really knows?). If any part of that energy is
still a part of us (and I think it is), than we need to process
through it. "The only way out is through".
Carole
|
| 358.155 | Where is that Crab Nebula when we need it?: | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Fri May 31 1991 13:50 | 19 |
| re: .154 (Carole)
Good points and well stated. As I said, I didn't read all
your stuff so I can't speak to it very well. Again, however,
I have a *belief* which says that energy is here via three
different stellar origins...and that I am of the Pleides (possibly)
and Sirius. So though the Orion energy exists in both positive
and negative fashion, I really don't need to "dilute my green-blood
lines" ;-) (so-to-speak.) That is, similar to the tree of life
or the 22 steps to enlightenment, we do not need to follow ALL paths,
just one that works (and eventually they all do, though some can
be circuitous or less-elegant than others.) So, I choose to not
follow any Orion-based path nor am I attracted to it. That's all.
I don't mean to dampen your enthusiasm, if I have,... just to allow
for an alternative.
Frederick
|
| 358.156 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | I love this Earth!!!! | Fri May 31 1991 14:03 | 13 |
|
re: .155 Frederick
No dampening of enthusiasm here! ;^) Just a nit....it's not *my*
stuff....it's Solara's!
Carole
P.S. If you need Nebula, I suggest you not call him a Crab ;^)
|
| 358.157 | | VERGA::STANLEY | What a long strange trip it's been... | Fri May 31 1991 14:18 | 17 |
| Yes Frederick... to each his own.
Of course, those of us who hail from Orion take much of this with a
large grain of salt anyway. ;-) ...
Why is it that we humans can't see ourselves as part of the whole...
if we don't separate ourselves by color or religion or station in life
then we look to our celestial origins to base our separatness upon..
I don't care if your blood runs green or red, Frederick... I love you
anyway... whatever path you follow.
Walk as one with us in the light, old friend... where ever our
individual paths may lead us... (or as the Grateful Dead say)..
things are going to get stranger... lets get on with the show.
mary
|
| 358.158 | she gotcha Frederick ;') | ATSE::FLAHERTY | A K'in(dred) Spirit | Fri May 31 1991 14:38 | 6 |
| Good point about separateness, Mary (.157).
Ever in Oneness...
Ro
|
| 358.159 | Me two, me two, me two! | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Fri May 31 1991 17:12 | 31 |
| re: last three
Olay, okay...
As for separateness...that's a tough one to respond to, but
I will respond this way: as we look at subsets within subsets and
work from within them, it is important to look at the other components
within that set in order to work with them with the greatest amount
of excellence possible. Once outside the subset, however, it can be
seen as its whole, and the excellence within it becomes less critical.
For example, we see an animal, say a frog, doing a certain action
and we take it to be the action of a frog (i.e., all frogs do that.)
We take it to be seen as the frog fulfilling its maximum, performing
at its peak of excellence. However, if we look at all frogs, we can
see that some "perform" better than others--we compare, we judge or
opinionate, we set standards... This is sort of like that. As
one small frog in this pond, those "more evolved" than me would say
I'm okay as I am...those in my own world, however, see that I have
certain quirks or peculiarities which may not be as "efficient" or
elegant in particular situations.
Well, I'm one of many frogs. Yes, I'm okay and yes, I'm going
to make it. So are all the other frogs. Unlike the frogs, however,
we can make choices...we can think and process. So, while we *could*
stay somewhere, we could also change it. My comments are directed not
to the "more evolved" who see us all as one, but rather to the
subset of my fellow frogs...those who search for elegance and
efficiency and excellence. Are we all the same? Depends on where
you are standing when you are looking.
Frederick
|
| 358.160 | | ROYALT::NIKOLOFF | Time, love, and tenderness | Fri May 31 1991 17:17 | 8 |
| >> -< Me two, me two, me two! >-
I like that Frederick. And heres a kiss - so that you can become
a Prince ...;')
hugs, Meredith
|
| 358.161 | swallow, yum | NSDC::DONALDSON | Froggisattva! Froggisattva! | Mon Jun 03 1991 10:50 | 4 |
| So, Fred, my little amphibious friend, ;-)
*that's* why you don't like snakes!
Hopping_John.
|
| 358.162 | Some Lazaris sayings--[from calendars] | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Wed Jun 05 1991 15:04 | 93 |
| -- To begin the Journey Home: Love yourself enough to love someone else;
love yourself enough to love someone more than you; and love yourself
enough to recognize, accept, and appreciate your value.
-- The possible becomes probable through the mysterious alchemy of
self-love and joyous expectation.
The probable becomes reality through the willingness to receive.
-- What you are now is what you will become. The only time to change
is now...Don't wait!
-- The greatest power is the power of loving self, and then others. The
greatest gift is the gift of forgiving self, and then others.
-- Lowered expectations never eliminated the raw sting of failure. Raised
expectations, however, provide the missing ingredient that ultimately
secures the celebration of success. Always enthusiastically expect
the best.
-- Being loved involves both giving and receiving, and it entails something
more. It involves being changed by the love someone has for you. Too
often people resist giving and receiving because they are afraid of
being loved. Allow yourself to be loved by someone.
-- You are in this world to be understanding, not to be understood. It is
time to stop testing. It is time to start loving.
-- Everyone deserves; only a few are willing. There is no doubt that you
deserve total happiness. The question is: Are you willing?
-- Respect yourself enough to let yourself be respected. Value yourself
enough to allow yourself to be valued. Trust yourself enough to allow
someone to trust you. Love yourself. Let someone love you.
-- Once you love yourself, you can love someone else. Once you love yourself,
you can love someone more than you. Allow love to empower you.
-- Allow yourself the Ultimate Adventure: Rediscover how completely loved
you are by God/Goddess/All-That-Is and how deep is your own capacity to
love...Let's begin the Journey Home...Let it be.
-- At the core of every problem is this fear: "I do not love good enough.
I do not deserve to be loved. I am unlovable."
At the core of every solution: "Love yourself, for you are lovable. Let
someone love you. You do deserve." Let the solutions begin.
-- Losers deny their fear, but are paralyzed (they cannot act) because of
them. Winners freely admit their fears and eagerly act in spite of them.
Who are you?
-- Happiness is the fulfillment of needs. Joy is the fulfillment of
preferences. Gratitude is the celebration of both happiness and joy.
Gratitude is not a requirement asked of you---it is an opportunity
given to you.
-- Always increase your levels of Self-Esteem. Honesty, responsibility,
integrity (spontaneous responsibility), and trust are the cornerstones
of Esteem. No one can give them to you. No one can take them away.
-- The loudest and most consistent message from the Negative Ego is, "I
do not exist anymore! I have been handled long, long ago!"
-- Humility is not self-effacement. Humility is the courageous willingness
to see each day--to see each dawn--as a new beginning. Though it has
always been...today life can be new!
Come alive with humility. Be courageous today.
-- When you insist on growth riddled with struggle and strife, the Path is
a lonely one. As you allow growth to bubble and overflow with ease and
elegance, the journey home is crowded with the celebration of Love and
Light--with the celebration of God/Goddess/All-That-Is.
-- The Music of the Spheres--the Song of God/Goddess/All-That-Is--ranges
from the spontaneous giggle to the full explosion of joyous laughter.
Lighten up. Smile. Sing along!
-- We are here to touch you, to love you. We respect and love you too much
to force ourselves upon you. Therefore we wait...we wait, balanced at
the edge of your reality. When you are ready, our love is there. It
always has been. It always will be. Come on. Let's go home...
-- God/Goddess/All-That-Is loves you. Your Higher Self loves you. We love
you. It is time now: Value yourself, and respect yourself enough to
love yourself, too. If you do not think you can, ask for help.
-- Beyond the Bridge of Belief lie the Dreams and Visions of a new world of
love and hope, of a new spirituality of love and peace. The whole world
is watching. The whole world is waiting. Cross the Bridge...Let us
help you.
(Frederick)
|
| 358.163 | More Lazaris quotes--[from more calendars] | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Wed Jun 05 1991 15:05 | 81 |
| -- On your journey of renewal, decide whether yours is a path of confrontation
or encounter.
Decide whether yours is going to be a year of surprises and fears or a
year of curiosities and wonders.
Are you going to be a warrior again, or are you willing to be an
adventurer?
You choose. You decide. Now.
-- All that has transpired in all of the illusions in all of your realities
from the beginning of time to the present has occurred in the catch of
a breath of LOVE.
Nurture yourself with that LOVE...and...Breathe deeply!
-- Conjuring things that have never been and walking among them touching,
feeling, and responding:
Imagining allows you to fancifully sail into the future to explore and
to bring back the gems--the thoughts, feelings, ideas and concepts--that
are waiting there, that are waiting there just for you.
Remember: Always imagine. Always imagine, and always cherish your
ability to do so.
-- Life is a gift.
Life is a gift from God/Goddess/All-That-Is given through the Goddess.
Yours is to learn to receive. You are here to learn to elegantly and
graciously receive that gift that life is.
Yours is to learn to receive. That's it.
It's time.
-- Your world can be filled with the wonder and the power of delightful
magic.
It is not only where you look. It's how. It's why.
Listen to Nature. She will show you where and how.
She will remind you why.
-- You find what you look for. There is a world that can be filled with
love, filled with happiness. There is a world in which you can celebrate
the wonder of life.
Before, perhaps, you could see a world of hate, darkness, pain and
despair. Now you can begin to see the love, light, laughter and joy.
You find what you are looking for. What are you looking for?
-- As your renewal continues, new options, new opportunities--new gateways--
open to you.
Choices and decisions turn to actions and manifestations.
The secret: Reach for a future waiting to unfold and embrace you rather
than retreating into a past waiting to seduce and entrap you.
Now is the time to reach rather than to retreat.
-- With the Goddess energy it is not necessary to march or carry placards
or banners to defend Her. Her power is immense.
All you have to do is open your heart, reach out, and imagine Her.
No further than the tip of your finger, She's there, willing to be touched.
Are you willing to touch?
-- What's important is this: Do you love?
If the answer is yes, you are growing spiritually. If the answer is no,
you're not.
Do you allow miracles--those successes that are more than you expected?
Love...and allow miracles.
-- Take the time to turn inward. Listen now.
Listen to the inner voices and the inner conversations. Listen now.
As busy as you are and are becoming, as much impact as you have and will
be having, are you sure there is enough time NOT to turn inward?
Listen now.
-- Conceived in the solidity of renewal, new growth searches, stretches, and
reaches for new height.
Stronger because of the renewal, new growth stands powerfully. Poised.
Renewal complete, the Awakening begins. The new light, the new
spirituality, the new hope begins.
The awakening begins. Poised.
-- Beginning. Each beginning offers choice. You can choose the adventure--
the adventure of a future yet to unfold--or the war--the continuous war
with a past that will never be perfect.
Beginning. Which way?
(Frederick)
|
| 358.164 | And yet another group of Lazaris quotes--[calendars, too] | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Wed Jun 05 1991 15:07 | 68 |
| -- Understanding is awareness that you act upon.
Wisdom is awareness that is more than acted upon: It is awareness
that you live.
-- Nothing changes until you do.
-- Open more than your eyes. Open your heart to see the world and its
bounty of hidden treasures. Just beyond the boundaries of "what's
possible" lies a wondrous world of miracles and magic--a wondrous world
of hope.
Open your eyes. Open your heart. Hope.
...The doors will open.
-- Too often you look for instant growth and enlightenment. Even more often
the price is "no change." Change is instant, not growth. Long after
you make all the changes you want, growth continues and continues and...
Change now. Grow...forever.
-- And the stones spoke. When you want--really want--answers, they are there.
When you are ready--really ready--to change, the opportunities abound.
When you are willing to listen and to learn, even the stones speak.
-- Patience does not mean to postpone, procrastinate, or compromise. Patience
is a function of listening intently, observing precisely, and of doing
both with passion and compassion.
-- To perceive is to understand in the realms where words cannot tread, in
the realms that are beyond the images, beyond the words, beyond the
feelings, beyond conception.
To perceive is to allow meaning and understanding to come to you rather
than chasing after them.
-- The Enlightened Ones know there are vast and unexplored worlds and untold
energies "out there" to be found.
The Exceptional Ones more than know. They explore those worlds and those
energies. They live in the vastness.
-- Our Dream for you: Let each day be filled with treasures of curiosity,
wonder, exploration, and embrace.
-- Love always pays attention to detail.
-- Breathe Fire!
Dreams are the fueling fire of manifestation and the breath of your
living desires.
Discover the Dragon...Breathe fire.
-- There are but three tools with which to create your own reality and your
own world. No more, no less, only three:
Desire, Expectation, Imagination.
And the greatest of these is Imagination--your Imagination.
-- Vulnerability is an incredible private strength. It means you are strong
enough and you are powerful enough to ask for help.
-- Whatever you look for, you will find. Wherever you place your attention,
that is what you are going to create.
-- Obscured by adaptation and cynicism, bound by incredulity, magic was once
lost in silence.
Magic is awakening. You can hear its call.
-- Life is a gift from God/Goddess/All-That-Is.
Yours is to learn to receive.
(Frederick)
|
| 358.165 | A crude map--from Lazaris workshop on Lemuria | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Thu Jun 06 1991 17:32 | 65 |
| The following is a rough representation of the continent of
Lemuria--please keep in mind two things: one, I'm not an artist and two,
I'm limited by the computer screen. [Also, this is not meant to be
comprehensive.]
___
/ /
/ / _ Islands along Eastern
^_____v-----------------------/ / / \ Coast
/ | \_/
/ rugged coast, timberland
/_ mountains |
| < O O
| the center |
| was "magic" land | O
| O | O
| high O O |
| plains | O
| O farmland |
| |
| /
| austere mountains /
\ mining, "Swiss" /
| /------------------------------
____
In the southwest, people mined and lived on peaks in homes with grass roofs
and flowers on them. Used minerals for ointments, etc. People worked away
from home for dozens of days at a time since travel was difficult.
No one lived in the northwest. Harsh, wet rocks (similar to Norway.)
The timberland areas had wooden houses, lumberjacks (men and women) in a
matrilineal society because women administered. Logs sold down the coast along
waterway between islands [not adequately depicted] and mainland.
The farmland had gentle hills and clusters/clans of people.
The plains of the west had cliffs and flat plateaus--"big sky" farming
The center was separated from the east by mountain range [not "drawn"]
which had to be traveled around in order to travel there. No one went there
unless there was a specific call, which came from a dream or meditation.
It was lush and forested except for sheer outgrowths of rock [depicted by
O's] that rose hundreds of feet. There was no way of reaching the tops of
those buttes except by teleportation. Each one had a city on top...from the
distance they were called "crystal cities" because of the crystal that was a
part of the stucco-type material used in construction. Each city had its own
specialty. For example, a city of healers, a city of teachers, a city of
dreamers, a city of keepers of the flame, storytellers, witnesses,
dreamweavers, etc. At solstice and equinox they held 3-4 weeklong
festivals...huge tents of multi-colors...thousands of camping families. Lots
of mysticism with fires, chanting, etc. People went maybe once per year or
maybe every few years. They didn't need technology, they used magic.
Crystals were used to impart knowledge and were planted throughout the world.
Some didn't want to leave [physicality] and returned into "pods" of heritages.
Those of us who were Lemurians are rebellion-oriented. We are not a group,
rather we are a gathering of individually set people. Those who will follow
us will pick "it" up on their own.
Frederick
|
| 358.166 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | Thru our bodies we heal the Earth | Thu Jun 06 1991 17:44 | 4 |
|
Sounds like it was a wonderful place to live!
Carole
|
| 358.167 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | time's nerve in vinegar | Thu Jun 06 1991 18:53 | 4 |
| Is Lemuria where Lazaris hails from?
Joel
|
| 358.168 | Lazaris sits at the edge of our reality. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Thu Jun 06 1991 19:55 | 6 |
| re: .167
No, Joel. Lazaris has never been and never will be physical.
Frederick
|
| 358.169 | Atlantis--from Lazaris Intensive May 16-19. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Thu Jun 06 1991 19:56 | 88 |
| The following is a representation of the first continent of Atlantis
according to Lazaris: [please continue to keep in mind both the limitations
of my skills and the medium. {no pun intended. ;-) } ]
_________________
_______________/ |
______/ |
/ MM |
| MM |
| MM ^ ----
| <-- valley--> | M |
| M /
/ MM M /
| MM M -
/ (nomads trekked from here) M /
/ MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM \
\ (to here) rich valley /
_________________________________________
This continent was present in this form during the time of Lemuria. It was
tribal, nomadic, packs of people. As people would migrate over the southern
mountains, they'd die in large numbers. Those who survived were usually
enslaved by those already on the southern side.
It came to its first destruction (of "natural" causes) at around
50,000 B.C. What happened was that the central valley (as depicted above)
was lower than the surrounding areas, and as destructive earth forces shook,
the valley sunk below water. This left two major land masses [which I don't
want to draw ;-} .] These two islands separated and the northern island
remained primitive; the southern island, however, developed into a megapolis
along the eastern and southern coasts. The "city" of Atlantis was along this
coast. It was 600-700 miles long but only a couple of miles wide. It was
very heavily populated and had a sophisticated technology.
That civilization ended as Atlantis sank further into the ocean. What remained
then were what had formerly been the mountain peaks. These formed hundreds
and hundreds of small islands and large islands. The City of Atlantis was
then a chain of islands connected by bridges. Some stayed primitive and
some were kept enslaved. They were clandestine, sometimes, and some were
used as penal colonies and some for old people or for prostitutes, etc.
Lots of what we call Egyptian, Roman, Greek with glass and chrome were what
structures looked like. People traveled by hot air balloons. From a
distance it looked serene. Each family had its own trademark colors. There
was an abundance of corruption. When it destructed, lots of people died
from being overrun by others. Most tried to run away from destruction
rather than through it and died. Many escaped and made their ways to other
civilizations. (The Canary Islands and Bimini are remnants.)
Reasons they destructed:
1. They lost respect for nature--doing things like we do-->putting nuclear
plants on fault lines.
2. They lost the "battle of crisis of human dignity, character, respect.
3. They *contained* power, rather than *harnessing* it (tyrannies, corruption.)
4. They de-valued humans. They killed easily.
5. There was a loss of fulfillment.
6. There was a loss of spirituality.
They didn't want to be responsible. Wanted to maintain status quo and
mediocrity. (If you don't go forward, you will go backward.) Power
without responsibility leads to tyranny.
We are in greater jeopardy of losing our freedom now than we were 25 years
ago. The bigger problem is that no one cares.
7. Also, there was a loss of hope, a loss of dreams. They ran from fear.
("lessons":)
1. Some of us were outspoken rebels then. But we failed. We are back now in
similar circumstances.
2. Atlantis *is* an expression of masculine energy. Masculine energy alone
always destroys itself. The goal for us is to take both the feminine of
Lemuria and the masculine of Atlantis to create a whole. Those who remain
in potentia will disappear. Those who stay in masculine, will destruct.
The current world is an experiment in All-That-Is. Atlantis is the energy
of will and action--dynamically manifesting nurturing. It is *our* way
to understand masculine energy.
3. The destruction was not a mass decision--rather it was an individual
decision. "WE" bought the consensus...a smaller set exists that is still
in Atlantis. They know where we are; we don't know where they are. We
bought the nightmare. WE who are dreamers will similarly watch those around
us who create their nightmares.
4. We can learn about the resonance there. What's the meaning? What's
the understanding? What's the action?
(Frederick)
|
| 358.170 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | time's nerve in vinegar | Thu Jun 06 1991 22:33 | 4 |
| OK - the what, or where *is* Lemuria?
Joel
|
| 358.172 | Stay behind with science or go forward with dreams. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Fri Jun 07 1991 12:31 | 17 |
| re: .170 (Joel)
Lemuria was (in time) in the Pacific...there is nothing left
of Lemuria there except energy (according to Lazaris.)
re: .171 (Paul)
Imagination coming from fantasia coming from fantasy...
yes, Paul. What is life, Paul, if not "fantasy?" Where do *you*
find "good, solid, unyielding truth?" Do *you* insist on time
being relevant as linear? Yes, Paul, it's "fantasy." Let me know
when it isn't.
Frederick
|
| 358.173 | | NOPROB::JOLLIMORE | Child of countless dreams | Fri Jun 07 1991 13:20 | 5 |
| .171 paul
>"Heaven is in Your Mind" as Traffic said back in 1968
I thought 3 Dog Night said that. ;') ;')
|
| 358.174 | "Secrets of Longevity: (Phase 1)" S.F. 7-21-1990 | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Wed Jun 12 1991 15:02 | 73 |
| Eternity does not come by prematurely ending life--it is
continuous and conscious intimacy and love.
What is longevity? The "dark side" (the ultimate prison):
1. The unidimensional world--length (time) only, which fears death.
2. The uni-thought that I *am* my body (the "body beautiful" or "body
perfect.")
3. Wishing to live because of a fear of what follows (as religions teach.)
4. Wishing to live out of a belief that physicality is all there is (the
secret agenda being that of domination.)
5. Belief that young is good, old is bad; young is right and beautiful, old
is wrong and ugly.
6. The desire to beat the system ("I won!")
7. The belief that death means failure.
If this is what longevity is, let it go.
The "light side":
1. The multidimensional world--great height and width, too (lots of projects
and interests.) Living to extend our depth, etc. That there is so much
more to do and explore.
2. Multi-emotional thoughts--that we are a piece of God/Goddess/All-That-Is
and becoming more. We realize we don't *need* this vehicle but we love
the illusion of it though we are willing to let it go.
3. Desire to remain alive. Desire to explore all the realms consciously.
Desire to understand the sub-conscious and unconscious minds. Also in
understanding that there is a Higher consciousness together with a desire
to sense the duality and make sense of all consciousness.
4. A desire to consciously generate this physical illusion. A desire to have
more years to discover what we are becoming, having already spent so
much time discovering what we *were.* A desire to have the opportunity
to love, to give, to receive as fully as possible. A desire for
conscious dominion.
5. Youth offers a fresh breath--a naivete, a spontaneity.
Age, also essential, gives depth and experience.
WISDOM BESTOWS AGE (*NOT* the reverse.)
Old age does not equal infirmity.
6. A desire not to beat the system but rather to "get off the game board."
To go to a lighter, freer system; from there to lighter and freer yet.
"I create my own reality" is also an illusion, but an important one to
master. Eventually we will be lighter even than that. We realize that
we don't want to compete with or become co-dependent with death.
7. Death is the healer/healing. But the act comes on our own terms,
consciously.
When we look at our old scripts, we can realize that what really scares
us is infirmity, not old age. We have a death script that we are following:
we follow statistics or parents or grandparents, pictures from childhood or
society. As we have blockages, payoffs and contracts, etc., are they and
the complaining, resentments, etc. better than death or is death an escape?
We also have a DEATH URGE, a part of us that wants to die and that sees
immortality as threatening. (We also have a fear of living.) This urge exists
on a genetic level--within our DNA.
Examples of death urges:
"Due to stuggles, etc., I don't want to live; who wants another 100 years?"
"I'm more hurt than anyone else." (ultimate self-pity and martyr.)
"You're killing me with what you are doing."
"Who loves me? (and I will die to find out.)"
"I've done what I am here to do."
This TIME BOMB of death resides in the unconscious mind. IT can only
be dismantled by bringing it to the conscious mind.
We have four limited bodies: physical, mental, emotional and etheric.
Two of these (emotional and etheric) are immortal. The etheric serves as
a prototype (and a bridge) of who we are. There is a piece of our genetic
code (DNA) that is stellar and immortal.
We need to develop longevity in stages. First by looking at our death
script and at our own death urge.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.175 | More on "Secrets to Longevity" | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Wed Jun 12 1991 16:22 | 82 |
| (More from the "Secrets of Longevity: Clues to Immortality, Phase 1"
workshop from July 21, 1990 in San Francisco)
There are certain physical and spiritual things we can do to extend
our lives:
Four physical parameters:
I. Purification--involve the 4 elements
Air--breathing with fullness, expelling toxins before absorption.
Inhale-extend stomach; exhale-tighten stomach
Do 20 diaphramatic breaths per day; also do 20 circular
breaths per day.
Water--98% of us are dehydrated, we don't drink enough water.
Drink 1/2 gallon of distilled (preferably, may have to
make up minerals another way) water per day.
Heavy people need perhaps more. We should urinate every 2 to
3 hours. Bowel movements once per day. Bathe twice per day
(preferably) to allow skin absorbtion. As you do these
things, do them with intention (know that it is extending
life.)
Fire--Expose yourself to sunlight 2 or 3 times per week. Sit
without glasses and eyes open (the UV is good 2-3 times/week.)
Do it for 10-20 minutes. Nude is best, expose the chakras.
If nudity is not possible, IMAGINE yourself nude.
Earth--(2 approaches)
1. Diet--Establish your *own* dietary regime---some of us
need meat, others can be vegetarian. Our heritage is our
etheric root. Eat foods from our own heritage. The key
here is establishing a healthy regime for 21 days (which
is the habit cycle.)
2. Sleep--The brain needs sleep for dreaming. Only 2 hours
every 48 hours is necessary. Find the amount of sleep
that works for us and use it daily within 30 minutes of
the usual time (the body stores up what it needs to do
during sleep and counts on the regularity.)
II. EXERCISE. Most effective is gentle, such as low or no impact
aerobics. Rebounding on a trampoline is good (sitting on the
edge, if that's all that's possible) for it moves organs against
gravity. Do this 10-15 minutes per day, 3 or 4 times per week.
III. WORK. Never retire. "Work" means doing something productive
(which means when we do something that helps us learn about
ourself) and something creative (anything that inspires in
ourself or in others,) which sparks conception and perception.
Balanced work is both creative and productive.
IV. Work with Healing the self. Listen to the whispers. Illness is
not something to be embarassed about. Anything can be cured if
you are determined to be cured.
Four spiritual parameters:
I. Interact daily with our Higher Self. Also interact daily with our
highest truth. Also, each of us has a healing word or tone
(which our Higher Self can give to us.) (The healing tone
has at an 'm' or an 'n' in it.) Use this healing tone daily.
II. Inventory, evaluate and extend (in terms of time) our death script
regularly. Similarly for death urge (perhaps daily at first,
monthly later on.)
III. Be happy. Look at our needs and tell ourself the truth about
them. (Maslow's listing of needs are usable.) (The things that
scares us the most is the "God-like" qualtities within.)
IV. Fulfillment. Design our own destiny from the absurdity of the
world around us. Look for meaning and character. Create a
fabric (this is the secret to longevity.)
Disconnect the death urge.
We can double or even triple our life expectancy with just part of
all the above.
[Lazaris has a meditative process for restructuring our DNA. I am
not going to print it.]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.176 | Binders for the aging process... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME---as an Adventurer! | Wed Jun 12 1991 16:48 | 42 |
| (from "Secrets of Longevity: Clues to Immortality, Phase 1" workshop in
San Francisco, July 22, 1990.)
To reverse, stop or retard the aging process:
1. Massage the blood--use hot and cold (via showering or ice/hot
packs) (especially on back of neck) to constrict and expand the
blood.
2. Exercise--Stretch the entire body (laying down prefered.) Open
up the lymph gates, stretch arms and legs up, down.
3. Think new thoughts, feel new feelings. Our brains think, if it
doesn't get new material it feeds on us. Senility is sometimes
caused by no thinking. Also, start new projects.
An adjunct: Rinse face 20 times (a fast motion of hands filled
with water splashing onto face) once each day.
IV. Meditate (revitalize pineal gland to affect aging.) The pineal
is more important than the pituitary. Visualize gland as 3 little
ball bearings..knead them, then "see" little golden drop (of
youthfulness) hanging from it, then see it drop into 4th ventricle
of *mind*. (This is anatomically not correct, but that isn't
important...this helps get a particular neuropeptide to work.)
V. Break your dark law (understand that we all live by a negative
"law." Look to our negativity for clues and hints--patterns of
failure, repetitions, negative ego fantasies...look to shame,
deservability issues, how we receive love...look to our "bottom
line"...our personal tragic myth, e.g. "always searching, never
finding" [There is a whole tape available on this. FAW]
VI. Visualize self *youthful* NOT "young" with harm to none (can be
hurtful if not stated as with harm to none.) Work with future
self (ten years older than script.) [There is a tape available
on working with Future Self. FAW]
VII. Also can work on etheric levels using breathing techniques
[covered elsewhere in the "Lazaris Material."]
* * * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.177 | From the Lazaris-Gilbert Williams 1992 calendar. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Sep 23 1991 15:41 | 83 |
| [...a "continuation"...see notes .162, .163 and .164]
--Remember the magic.
As you stand ready to embark on a journey that always begins and
never ends, remember the magic.
Know that there is a magic in the air for those "foolish" enough
to engage it--for those "foolish" enough to receive it.
You are not alone.
--Why are you here? There are so many reasons. Perhaps the most
concise: To be free___to create your own reality, your own world,
and your planet's future with love, light, laughter and joy.
You are a Map Maker. You are here to make maps of freedom and to
be free.
--There is such a thing as a quiet joy. There really is. There is a
peace that can come. Amidst the turmoil and tumult, there is a
peace.
There is a confidence that is solid. Real. It is like a whisper
poised on the inhale and exhale of each breath. Unshakable.
There is a destiny...and it's yours.
--There are vast universes and whole worlds far beyond that which you
know, reaching beyond that which you imagine.
Intrigued by the mystery, piqued by the curiosity...
That's what conjurs the wonder...and the magic.
--It is not time and space that stand between you and the things--the
desires, the expectations, and the imaginings--you want to create.
No. Nor is it logic and reason. It is belief.
Anything and everything you desire is no more than a belief away.
It's only a belief away.
--Love enough to Dream. Have courage enough to make it happen.
This kind of love, this kind of courage, is only found in the
mystery and majesty of personal depth.
It is truly a gift from your Higher Self.
--There are energies more powerful than you can yet perceive. There
is consciousness with more love than you can yet conceive.
There are gifts beyond. ... Let's explore. Let's discover. Let's
achieve.
--When changes seem to be happening too quickly--when the inner demands
seem to be too great--give yourself a chance to slow down, to
reflect.
Immerse yourself in love. Can you pamper yourself without
pampering your Negative Ego?
Solitude. Silence. They can be great healers.
Emerge transformed.
--No matter how noble, the demands of perfection will enslave, entrap,
disarm, or debilitate, if not destroy.
Demanding perfection is a favorite game of your Negative Ego.
You are not here to be perfect...You are here to learn to have
fun.
--There is a knowing that permeates every thought and feeling, every
action and reaction. Not intrusive, it is invited. It is welcome.
There really is that kind of knowing.
There is an exhuberance that motivates and drives unerringly,
without faltering.
There is a certainty, a surety, that surrounds every move, every
action, every impact.
There is a Soul's Path...and it is yours.
--A cherished secret of success: Resonance.
Do not give power away to the physical reality. Though it is
reality, do not let it become too real. The physical is an illusion.
No matter how beautiful or ugly, no matter how seductive or
frightening, do not give your power to the illusion.
Hold the emotional resonance of success, and success will come to
you. It must.
--As long as there is light, we shall love you. Forever and a day, we
shall love you.
As long as there is light ...
Let's go Home.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.178 | Some brief notes from this past 2-day | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Sep 30 1991 19:02 | 59 |
| A few "snippets" from the 3 days I just concluded
("Extending Your Life: The Next Step. Phase II: Secrets of
Longevity, Clues to Immortality"):
Longevity is the ultimate symbol of freedom.
Immortality is the ultimate symbol of self-determination.
If you don't dream, someone else will dream us--someone else
will weave us into their dream as a statistic.
Take back the power from the consensus that says that life is
limited. Only in the last 15 years has there been available to us
a new future. To have dominion is to walk with the elements.
Having dominion is the only out of the solutionless problems we
face. Get off the consensus reality game board. If we don't lead,
we follow. Don't play "cosmic machismo" and try to beat it...rather,
"break it." Make the consensus dance with you, don't dance with the
consensus.
The key to success is the process of creation and the action
of implementation.
Much of aging [skin, etc.] comes from "free radicals" which
are often found in rancid oils [and Lazaris recommends only olive
oil.] Vegetables do not make one more spiritual. The most dangerous
part of being vegetarian is the toxicity of negative ego ("I'm
superior because I'm vegetarian.") However, in time most of us
will become vegetarian. Do *not* eat margarine. Butter would be
better, if anything is needed. A no-fat diet increases the risk of
cancer by seven-fold. We need fat in our diets. We need
mono-saturated oil in our diet (2-3 tablespoons of olive oil.)
Gallstones come from a lack of oil.
Diet can help us reduce thresholds...can help us use the
body's energy elsewhere.
[I will be writing more about specific dietary considerations
later...]
When we are in self-pity or martyrhood, we're in it. If it's
*anywhere* in our lives, it's *everywhere*. The room is the same
room for everyone. No one is bigger or worse at martyrhood or
self-pity than someone else. As the warnings indicate "don't
operate heavy equipment while using this drug" so similarly
with self-pity and martyrhood "don't operate this life while
using this drug."
Personal history is coming to an end. Those who are unable
to be in touch with this will figuratively get caught with their
pants down--the "real asses" will show. (These are the people who
hold on to righteousness and blame.)
Always go for the greatest freedom (not for singularity.)
Spirituality is-- being free and being self-determined.
Frederick
|
| 358.179 | can't wait for more! | SFCPMO::CABANYA | | Mon Sep 30 1991 19:28 | 4 |
| thanks Frederick! Am looking forward to more on diet -
Mary
|
| 358.180 | Olive Oyl | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | kingfishers catch fire | Mon Sep 30 1991 21:21 | 5 |
| Based on these diet recommendations, sounds like Popeye might
care to check Lazaris out. ;^)
Joel
|
| 358.181 | Happy little "vege"-mites ;-) | UTRTSC::MACKRILL | At her shrine, music ever devine | Tue Oct 01 1991 06:26 | 12 |
| Funny you should mention that bit on diet Fred...
recently I watched a program done in the U.K which covered
saturated/poly-unsaturated fats, cholestrol factors on health. Strange
thing was where people at risk, reduced their cholestrol intake to an
acceptable level, an alarming number of them died of other causes,
accidents, suicides...the figures where well above the statistical
norm.
Weird huh,
Brian
|
| 358.182 | IMO (;^) | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Tue Oct 01 1991 13:15 | 6 |
|
Brian,
VEGEMITE! YUCK!
Cindy
|
| 358.183 | Some insight.... | WLDWST::KLYDIE | KJL | Tue Oct 01 1991 22:52 | 8 |
|
Truth is to have faith in what each person's Reality is...
I have had a hard time in facing reality....but when I did I realized
that I had to be honest very honest with myself and then have enough
faith to do what was right. Not a easy task. Not yet anyway.
Jannie
|
| 358.184 | Why butter not margarine? | WONDER::BAKER | | Wed Oct 02 1991 14:15 | 22 |
|
RE: .178
Why is butter better than margarine? You would think it would be the
other way around. I read the same thing in Ruth Mongomery's book
Born to Heal. It was about a man who was born with the ability to
match his energy to any other person's energy and boost it. Thus,
he could heal people by boosting their own energy. He would not eat
margarine, but didn't explain why.
I don't think the reason is to keep fat in you diet. I really got
the impression that margarine is bad. Maybe it is one of those
rancid oils mentioned in your note?
Just curious. The book Born to heal was excellent. I think it is a
neat idea that everyone has their own energy that is different than
everyone elses, just like a fingerprint. The doctor mentioned in the
book started a clinic called the Life Energies Research in Burbank,
CA. I never verified if it is still there; the book was copywrite
1970 I think. Anyone ever heard of it?
Karin
|
| 358.185 | butter vs margarine | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Wed Oct 02 1991 14:19 | 11 |
| I recently took a class on vegetarian cooking hosted by the local 7th
Day Adventist group. According to the teacher, who is head of the
college's cooking dept. or some such thing, hydrogenated oil (which is
used in margarine as well as other processed foods) is a totally
unnatural substance. The process changes the molecular structure of
the oil somehow (I'm fuzzy on this -- the class was last spring) and
your body has no way to process it. Apparently it shows up in your
body fat, though. I can't remember if she said it was carcinogenic,
but that was implied.
Mary
|
| 358.186 | From "secrets to longevity..." diet considerations | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Wed Oct 02 1991 15:26 | 72 |
| re: .184 (Karin)
It wasn't elaborated on...maybe Mikki, who is attending the
same-titled workshop in Ft. Lee, N.J. this weekend, will pick up
a reason (along with verifying doses? Mikki?) Mary M's .185 sounds
like a likely reason.
* * * * * * * * *
All this information is *IN ADDITION* to the information presented
earlier (a few months ago...I haven't looked to see which number.)
As such, it is important to recognize that HEALTH is only one aspect
of longevity (and a subset of *physical* things to do.) Within HEALTH,
there are these components ("this is about extending life, not about
nutrition." -LAZARIS):
DIET: Vegetarian or not, but what is appropriate for each individual.
a. Work towards eliminating red meat--but IF you *do* eat red meat,
COOK IT to medium or well done--pesticides, hormones, etc. eaten
raw can be dangerous.
Gout-->comes from uric acid--acids shoot into the animal's fat
at slaughter (beef uric acid) which we then eat.
b. Eat no pork or veal. (Fatty; veal is terribly mistreated meat.)
Eat no fish, particularly shellfish. Shellfish are scavengers
and they, along with 90% of all fish live within 3 or 4 miles
off-shore. If you do eat fish, be aware of source (don't eat
fish caught after the first rains, for example.)
It is okay to eat chicken and turkey and other lean fowl. Ducks
are not lean enough. Make sure they are well-cooked. Most chicken
has salmonella which can be cooked out. Fat [and this relates
to what Mary said in .185] is where the toxins are. Skin of
birds is where the fat is.
Be alert to food combining. Different acids are released for
different foods. If we eat fruit and meat together, for
example, one will get digested while the other one rots in our
stomach...
(1) Always eat fruit alone--it is speedy, can be digested in 30
minutes.
(2) Eat animal protein alone or with non-starchy vegetables.
Eat starchy vegs. alone or with leafy vegs.
For starches, wait 2 hours to digest.
For meat protein, wait 4 hours to digest.
(3) Eat *Small* portions! (3-6 oz. steak, for example.)
The stomach is small and shouldn't be bloated. Drowsiness
after eating is usually the result of the body dedicating
energy towards digestion---and therefore shutting down
unnecessary components.
For vegetarians:
The body uses 15 amino acids 8 of which the vegetarian
diet has difficulty providing [? I'm unclear as to this
statement...I may have misheard it...FAW]
Supplant a vegetarian diet with the following four basic
foods (A whole food contains all 8 amino acids.):
a. Wheat germ--shelf life is important. (rancid oil factor)
b. Peanuts--but be alert to fat.
c. Tofu
d. Spirulina (sea algae)--This is the easiest.
Also, Lazaris recommends that vegetarians supplant their
diets with "Taurine" [I never heard of this, so it's probably
misspelled. FAW]
Also, Lazaris said we should be sure of where our
vegetables are coming from.
Frederick
(next entry: vitamins and supplements.)
|
| 358.187 | more on "secrets to longevity..." | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Wed Oct 02 1991 15:54 | 51 |
| ...diet considerations, continued...
* * * * * * * * * * *
Vitamin supplements (the basic regime):
1. Need vitamins A & D. Make sure that it comes from a dried
food source (rancid oil factor, again.)
2. Recommends vitamin C (Linus Pauling was "nearly correct.")
Taking 400-500 milligrams helps break down [something...I
lost it...maybe Mikki will get this. FAW]
3. Vitamin E (not oil-based.) This helps fight free radicals.
4. B-Complex.
and 3 additional things:
5. BETA-CAROTENE (helps fight free radicals) 75,000 IU's
is not too much [I think this is what he said...FAW]
It also elasticizes.
6. Add selenium (but must be yeast based.) This is a cancer
fighter.
7. A product called "Cell Guard" from a Hawaiian company named
BIO-TECH. (S.O.D. [again, I never heard of this...FAW]
body alone can't assimilate. But with Cell Guard, it can
be. This also is great for jet lag (2 tablets for each
hour of travel.)
Herbal supplements:
1. Blessed thistle--it's a wonderful tonic to eliminate
morbidity in the stomach, liver, kidneys, lungs, etc.
It provides Oxygen to brain (and helps eliminate headaches.)
(The brain is the biggest Oxygen user in the body.)
Also, this is powerful for circulation, blood pressure and
heart.
2. Cayenne--These capsules are "almost a wonder." It cleanses
and stimulates blood--helps lymphatics. Helps prevent
age or aging spots on skin (which are dying cells.)
3. Burdock--body cleanser and detoxifier (of metals and
pesticides, particularly.)
A DAILY REGIME OF THIS WILL MAKE US *AVOID* SICKNESS, WITHIN
18 MONTHS
4. Echinacea--works on glands, endocrin system, lymph system.
Builds immune system.
5. Hawthorne--heart builder and blood cleanser. (Great,
especially when used in combination with blessed thistle.)
6. Garlic--"nature's antibiotic" Can use massive doses (Lazaris
mentioned some aid's patients who talk one bottle of garlic
per day--with good results) Odorless garlic is available.
Frederick
(next entry-->Hygiene and other considerations)
|
| 358.188 | I am so psyched! | ROYALT::NIKOLOFF | More than words | Wed Oct 02 1991 16:13 | 12 |
| >> It wasn't elaborated on...maybe Mikki, who is attending the
>> same-titled workshop in Ft. Lee, N.J. this weekend, will pick up
>> a reason (along with verifying doses? Mikki?) Mary M's .185 sounds
>> like a likely reason.
* * * * * * * * *
I have copied it out and will take good notes.
thanks, Frederick.
Mikki
|
| 358.189 | | DSSDEV::GRIFFIN | Throw the gnome at it | Wed Oct 02 1991 16:33 | 8 |
| re: 187 and garlic:
Are there other ways of getting garlic other than fresh cloves or
powder? I haven't really used it since Stephen was born because he has
indigestion whenever I have it (I'm breastfeeding). But I know my
system could use it.
Beth
|
| 358.190 | More on diet, hiegiene from "secrets to longevity..." | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Wed Oct 02 1991 16:38 | 103 |
| ...health considerations, a continuation....
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Most of the advances to age over the past 100 years have
come not from science or diet, etc. Rather, HYGIENE has been
responsible for increasing our lives by 50% (and babies living--
from 3 in 4, 100 years ago, to one death per 100,000 [I believe
this was what he stated.])
Therefore it is important to watch our hygiene.
Wash hands frequently. Change towels, especially hand towels,
frequently. Blow nose, brush teeth, cleanse eyes often. Change
tooth brushes each month. Use a product called "EYE BRIGHT"
(with an eye cup--in solution, flick eyes in it 20 times for each
eye--will draw eye mucous out...)
Guildlines for acquiring herbs and vitamins:
1. Buy from a successful store (turnover helps assure freshness.)
2. Lazaris recommends 3 companies (although there may be a few others
which are as good.):
a. Nature's Way--least expensive of 3; high integrity.
b. Enzymatic Therapy
c. Rainbow Light
3. Stay away from multilevel companies *unless*
a. Unavailable elsewhere
b. The company is reputable AND YOU DO THE RESEARCH to discover
this.
Also, c. There are price considerations.
d. Blends make it easier to "justify" raising prices
e. Will often throw in unnecessary or misused additives.
Certain blends are superb, but if *you* don't check it out, don't
take them.
BEWARE of:
1. EPHEDRA--it's a vaso-constrictor
2. MAWHUANG
3. FOTI
These are natural "speed" If you *must* use one of these,
use only 1, and NOT in combination and in only small amounts.
FOR MEN:
Can help male menopause with boron, and magnesium. Also,
a product called PROST_ADE! BEGINNING NOW, AT AGE 30, 40, 50
OR WHATEVER, IF WE TAKE 1 TABLET OF PROST-ADE PER DAY, WE CAN
VIRTUALLY ELIMINATE PROSTATE CANCER.
FOR WOMEN:
PMS is "real". It is a chemical shift. The monthly flow of
blood includes toxins. Often, cramping is from toxin released.
Drink lots of water 7 days ahead (recognizes that this goes against
bloating beliefs.) Eat no meat.
Also,
1. Put a boron capsule into diet...this aborbs calcium, works on
elasticity.
2. Also, magnesium. Both boron and magnesium will help "aging"...
[lost the rest of this...FAW]
Also, these herbal blends:
1. Change O'Life--from Nature's Way (balances estrogen.)
2. Fem Mend--also from Nature's Way
helps pre-menstrual, menstrual and menopause
3. Saw-Palmetto (THIS IS THE ACTIVE HERB IN PROST-ADE mentioned
above for men.)
4. HYDROGEN PEROXIDE--use food grade--Hydrogen and Oxygen are
essential to longevity.
Make a solution using Aloe Vera Gel and make a 6% solution.
(Use 6 parts H2O2 to 94 parts aloe vera gel---most of the
hydrogen peroxide is 35% pure, however, so [you'll have to
figure this out...faw])
Rub this solution on tummy during cramps.
Also for women--osteoporosis is the shrinking and brittling
of bones. USE BORON AND MAGNESIUM---DO *NOT* USE CALCIUM.
If you do use calcium, use twice as much magnesium. Calcium
makes the bones brittle!
For both men and women:
Hydrogen peroxide is great for our health regime...can even be
taken internally (food grade.) Use it on swollen glands, ear aches,
etc. Also, good for ARTHRITIS (in solution.) Arthritis is
virus-based. Five minutes daily is enough-->rubbed all over body
(in aloe vera gel solution described above.)
Can also be gargled (not in solution, obviously.)
(Be aware that it will bleach hair, however. ;-) )
When in the sun, avoid "hot sun." Stay covered...tanning is
not good...if tanning is done, however, extend it over time.
DO *NOT* USE TANNING OILS, LOTIONS, CREAMS!! These create free
radicals while in the sun and promote aging in the skin. In fact, being
as clean as possible, thereby even allowing body oils, is
recommended. Body oils can putrify into free radicals, as well.
(Sunlight with chemicals can produce free radicals as well as
melanomas.)
If you *must* be in the sun, take lots of beta-carotene!!
Especially for fair-skinned people.
Frederick
|
| 358.191 | Question | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Wed Oct 02 1991 17:22 | 4 |
|
Anything about fresh juice?
Cindy
|
| 358.192 | some clarifications... | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Wed Oct 02 1991 17:47 | 18 |
| Frederick,
The proteins that a body cannot manufacture, and therefore must be
eaten, are called "essential amino acids." A *balanced* vegetarian
diet provides all the essential amino acids -- there is no problem
with getting protein. A balanced diet would be grain/legume based,
with approximately 3 parts grain to 1 part legume, with a few nuts
(not peanuts -- these are actually legumes). The total diet should
work out to be approximately 2/3 grain/legume and 1/3 vegetables.
Cindy, fruit juice is less good for you than eating the actual fruit.
It is, however, better than any junk beverage. Because of its high
sugar content, fruit juice is best diluted with water. Eating the
actual fruit lowers the proportion of sugar and slows its digestion --
hence avoiding a sugar rush/insulin overproduction. And it provides
the body with some fiber.
Mary
|
| 358.193 | 35-45...they all look alike...;-) | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Wed Oct 02 1991 18:01 | 42 |
| re: .191 (Cindy)
No, not that I heard.
I went out and purchased most of the items I mentioned (except
for a couple of the vitamins and the "women" items) and my
bill was about $120. One problem I have is in determining dosage
(of the herbal supplements, etc.) Using the bottle instructions
as a guide, however, I determined a plan for myself. Also,
I didn't "shop" and compare items. It seems to me, though, that
this practice will be costing me approximately $2 per day. Seems
okay to me at that price.
Lazaris did mention that "the channel" (Jach) had switched
to vegetarian a couple of years ago, but reluctantly. Initially
he had problems ordering food from the room service people in
hotels he has stayed in, but has worked it out somehow. Also,
he mentioned that once in a while he, Michaell and Peny will go
to a Chinese restaurant and enjoy themselves.
By the way, though I already stated this I will state this
again...this is *in addition* to the things I have mentioned
before (drinking 1/2 gallon of pure water, sitting in the sun,
etc.)
Something else...it bothered me that Lazaris put so much emphasis
on food, when I *know* beliefs are MORE important. Then he
clarified this for me on Sunday, where in passing he mentioned
that it takes energy to maintain physical form, it takes energy to
counter beliefs...it is more elegant to work with the beliefs you
hold than against them. It takes far less energy to work with
the physical reality as we believe it to be than to use that energy
in countering it. This is similar to what he said nine years ago
when he said we *could* maintain our bodies appearing to be no older
(or younger) than age 35. Then, to my "dismay ;-)" nearly three
years later he said: Yes, you *could* maintain your body appearing
to be age 35 but 1. why would you want to? and 2. it takes a
TREMENDOUS amount of energy to do so...which could be better utilized
elsewhere.
Frederick
|
| 358.194 | be here now | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Wed Oct 02 1991 20:03 | 17 |
|
Frederick,
I'm glad to see the approach Lazaris is taking. Given my own
experience, there needs to be a focus on the entire being - mind, body
and spirit. Focus in on one too much, and you have an imbalance.
For example, just thinking about exercise isn't going to stretch your
muscles one iota. Similarly, exercising without self-introspection is
only going to focus in on your body, not your mind or spirit. And
reading spiritual material isn't going to exercise your body or do
meditation for you.
We really are an entire package. Living consciously - be it eating,
exercising, reading, meditating, or whatever - is the real key.
Cindy
|
| 358.195 | some comments | POCUS::FERGUSON | Zappa for President in 92 | Fri Oct 04 1991 00:26 | 28 |
| Fish - Does Lazaris have something specific against fish? Or is it a
pollution issue? What does rain have to do with it?
Tofu - The rancid oil factor is important here too. Aoid tofu that's
been sitting unwrapped in a vat of water for who-knows-how-long.
Garlic - I forgot the name of the "magic" chemical or enzyme but fresh
is the best source. Pills are okay but powder has almost no
nutritional value (so you get garlic breath with none of the benefits).
EYE BRIGHT - How do you get your eye in the cup? (sorry I couldn't
resist)
Bloating & Water Retention - are caused by a high concentration of salt
in the body. The only real cure is to drink more water all the time,
not just when the problem hits. This flushes the salt out of the
system. The "minimum water formula" (I think; I got this information
years ago and I'm not sure how accurate my memory is) is 8 ounces for
every 20 lb of body weight. More is better.
Osteoporosis - the natural preventative is high-impact activities such
as running, raquetball, jumping rope or aerobics -- this forces the
bones to produce more melanin, which in turn thickens them.
ginny
|
| 358.196 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words. | Fri Oct 04 1991 07:24 | 24 |
| >Osteoporosis - the natural preventative is high-impact activities such
>as running, raquetball, jumping rope or aerobics -- this forces the
>bones to produce more melanin, which in turn thickens them.
Osteoporosis is a loss of boney tissue resulting in bones that are
brittle and liable to fracture. Infection and injury can cause
localized osteoporosis of adjacent bone. Generalized osteoporosis is
caused by; menopausal hormone failure, prolonged rest, Cushing's
disease, steroid drugs, thyrotoxicosis and primary biliary cirrhosis.
Established osteoporosis cannot be reversed. Hormone replacement
therapy can reduce the rate of tissue loss.
Melanin is a dark brown to black pigment occurring in the hair, skin,
iris and choroid layer of the eyes. Melanin is contained within special
cells (chromatophores) in the skin, these are found in the dermis.
Production of melanin in the skin is increased by sunlight (producing
tanning) which protects the underlying skin layers from the sun's
radiation.
High impact activities by someone suffering from osteoporosis will cause
bones to break. Melanin does not thicken bones.
Jamie.
|
| 358.197 | No rain here yet...temps in the 90's...summertime! | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Fri Oct 04 1991 14:33 | 21 |
| re: .195 (Ginny)
I'm not sure about the fish issue, other than the mention
of pollution. To this end, in California, for example, we have
a long, rainless summer (about 100-150 days.) The first rains
not only clean the skies, but also all the auto/people pollution
on roads, which don't soak into the ground but instead find themselves
in nearby waterways. The fish are particularly active in turbulent
weather and are ingesting a great deal--of pollution and toxins.
Crabs, lobsters, oysters and other shell fish just hang around
all day long eating whatever they run across that has sunk to the
bottom of whatever body of water they reside in. Lazaris did
mention, however, that there are currently several "farms" raising
fish...and that these were a good alternative (I read about some
of these places that are in the Central Valley--big, elaborate
attempts to grow fish.) Other than that, I don't know.
Maybe Mikki can *add* or clarify some points when she gets
back next week.
Frederick
|
| 358.198 | Fructose is okay... | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Fri Oct 04 1991 14:37 | 24 |
| re: 358.192
CARTUN::MISTOVICH >>>
> It is, however, better than any junk beverage. Because of its high
> sugar content, fruit juice is best diluted with water. Eating the
> actual fruit lowers the proportion of sugar and slows its digestion --
> hence avoiding a sugar rush/insulin overproduction.
Actually, it depends on the fruit and what kind of sugar
it contains. Most fruits are high in fructose, which (no
matter what form it's taken in) does *NOT* cause any kind
of insulin rush. Some fruits (like grapes) are high in
glucose, which is absorbed almost immediately and causes a
hell of an insulin rush.
In general, the insulin activity caused by a specific food
is described by that food's "glycemic index" -- a measure
of how much like glucose the food behaves. Glucose has an
index value of 100 (i.e. lots of insulin generated); fructose
has a much much smaller glycemic index.
For details, see any decent text on biochemistry/nutrition...
-Art
|
| 358.199 | | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Fri Oct 04 1991 14:43 | 14 |
| re: 358.196
HOO78C::ANDERSON
> Established osteoporosis cannot be reversed. Hormone replacement
> therapy can reduce the rate of tissue loss.
Recent studies (somewhere in Science News in the last year
or so), have shown that, at least in things like the long
bones of the arms/legs, increased levels of structural calcium
can result from various kinds of exercise (particularly weight
training). This effect even showed up in people (both men and
women) who were fairly well advanced in age.
-Art
|
| 358.200 | Aha! | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Fri Oct 04 1991 15:02 | 7 |
| re: .198
Thanks for the additional info on fruit juices! Now I understand why I
have such a strong reaction to grape juice (which I dilute) and just
feel better after oj (which I don't usually dilute)!
Mary
|
| 358.201 | Confirmation | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Fri Oct 04 1991 16:12 | 9 |
|
Re.199
Art,
I saw that article in Science News too. Will see if I can locate it
this weekend.
Cindy
|
| 358.202 | Exercise and bone structure | PRMS00::TSTARK | Born to raise Exceptions | Fri Oct 04 1991 16:15 | 6 |
| re: .199,
I also think the reverse has been observed in weightlessness
studies, structural calcium depletion due to extended periods
of non-weight-bearing activity.
todd
|
| 358.203 | high impact vs weight bearing. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Fri Oct 04 1991 16:57 | 34 |
| However, the correlation is *not* specifically with "high impact"
exercise but with exercise which puts physical stress on bones, i.e.,
swimming is mostly out, but cc skiing and just walking are good.
The first phase of the mechanism is interesting. Bone is
piezzoelectric. Placing a stress on bone therefore generates small
local electric currents. Via further mechanisms which I don't remember
(and may not be firmly established) bone tissue is built up where
electricity flows. As a consequence, areas of stress are built up
until the stress is distributed over enough tissue to reduce the stress
to the "proper" level. This mechanism has been taken advantage of in
cases of severe or poorly-healing fractures by applying electrical
stimulation from batteries to the break, encouraging the build up of
bone tissue.
High impact exercise damages bones and joints. Maybe the damage will
be compensated by the resulting increased bone growth, and maybe not
(plus there is the joint problems). You are in a situation of perhaps
taking one step back then two steps forward for a net gain, or perhaps
taking three steps back then two steps forward for a net loss. You're
better off just taking the one step forward provided by low impact
exercise which places load on bones.
Studies strongly support the idea that the best "treatment" for post-
menopausal osteoporesis (far and away the most common kind, at least in
developed countries) is to premenopausaly build up the bones by
exercise and diet. There has been some support to the idea that the
right combination of diet and exercise postmenopausally can slow down
bone loss and even reverse it somewhat -- but the results are very
mixed. In any case, recommending high-impact exercise for those who
suffer from osteoporesis is about like recommending that heart patients
stick wet fingers into electric sockets.
Topher
|
| 358.204 | "It ain't the years, it's the mileage..." | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Fri Oct 04 1991 17:37 | 47 |
| re: 358.178
MISERY::WARD_FR
> Much of aging [skin, etc.] comes from "free radicals" which
> are often found in rancid oils [and Lazaris recommends only olive
A couple points about longevity:
For clarity, it's good to distinguish between two kinds of
lifespan measures: Average lifespan ("most people these days
live to be <mumble> years old"), and maximum lifespan (the
greatest age which it is *possible* for a human to attain).
Whether your life is longer or shorter than the average lifespan
depends a great deal on things like diet, exercise, hygiene, the
current state of medicine, etc.
Maxium lifespan, on the other hand, is limited by a piece of
cellular behavior called the "Hayflick limit". The Hayflick
limit is a curious habit that cells have of only reproducing
for a certain maximum number of generations before they quit;
almost as if there was a little counter in the cells. For
humans, the Hayflick limit is on the order of 50 generations
for most types of cells. Once the tissues of a crucial organ
(the liver for example) reach the maximum number of divisions,
no new cells are available to replace the old ones as they die.
Eventually, organ failure, system failure, death...
So far, there's been very little evidence showing that maximum
lifespan can be modified in any way. (The exception to this is
some work by Roy Walford of Stanford, who's apparently increased
the maximum lifespan of some mice by under-feeding them from
birth -- hence slowing down their rate of maturation.) So far,
the oldest (verified) human was about 113 years.
As to free radicals, they come not only from rancid oils. Your
cells are constantly generating free radicals as a byproduct of
cellular metabolism. Cells contain a number of free-radical
fighting substances for just this reason. Taking additional
free radical scavengers may have some effect on reducing tissue
damage from sources that go beyond the norm (environmental or
dietary sources). There's no evidence to support the notion
that they do anything to increase the maximum lifespan; the most
they might do is get you closer to that 113 year limit without
as much decay.
-Art
|
| 358.205 | Don't forget the spiritual side...to physical longevity | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Fri Oct 04 1991 18:56 | 27 |
| re: .204 (Art)
Thanks for the information.
From the information given by Lazaris, he said that if
we do these things, we can double our life expectancy. Now, then,
by "these things" he wasn't simply talking about diet, hygiene
exercise and work, but he was also including the spiritual aspects.
These I mentioned in .174 or .175, (I think it was.)
Moreover, what you mention in terms of limited generations of
cell reproductions fits in very well to what he has told us about
encoded DNA. That is, that our DNA is encoded with a "death
script" and "death urge." This is why, in both that workshop
over one year ago and again in this workshop, he has helped us
by doing a meditation which alters our DNA. I haven't talked about
this, because most of the people reading this probably won't
accept this. However, I accept it, and I have done the meditations.
And, no, I won't describe the meditation or what it does. There
are reasons for me to not do this (dealing with my own negative
ego.) So, the best I can do is acknowledge that what you say is
correct and then caveat that by saying that while the consensus
may hold that there is "no way out" Lazaris has indicated that
there is. Those who really want to know, can find a way to discover
how.
Frederick
|
| 358.206 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | crackling wrack and shells | Fri Oct 04 1991 20:11 | 8 |
| Does Lazaris actually know anyone who, by doing these things,
has lived to be 145 or so years of age?
BTW - does anyone remember those old yogurt commercials,
the ones with the really OLD folks?
Joel
|
| 358.207 | I said PREVENTATIVE | POCUS::FERGUSON | Zappa for President in 92 | Sun Oct 06 1991 07:27 | 17 |
| Jamie and Topher,
I did NOT say osteoporosis patients should do high-impact excercises.
The whole idea of "prevention" is to do something before there is a
problem. I should have said "weight bearing" but there's no proof that
high impact exercise in moderation (3 times per week maximum on non
consecutive days) is harmful.
The primary cause of osteoporosis is a reduction in the production of
bone marrow due to lowered estrogen levels, usually caused by
menopause. I will go back and check my references on this but as I
recall: 1) melanocytes, the cells which carry melanin, are produced
within the bone marrow; 2) there is definitely a melanin/osteoporosis
connection -- the darker your skin and hair, the less likely you are to
get it.
Ginny
|
| 358.208 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words. | Mon Oct 07 1991 09:30 | 41 |
| Re .199
>Recent studies (somewhere in Science News in the last year
>or so), have shown that, at least in things like the long
>bones of the arms/legs, increased levels of structural calcium
>can result from various kinds of exercise (particularly weight
>training). This effect even showed up in people (both men and
>women) who were fairly well advanced in age.
Yes this is of course true. However it has nothing whatsoever to do
with the fact that established osteoporosis cannot be reversed. The
people studied were healthy in the first place and produced sturdier
bones. They did not have diseased bones that recovered after exercise.
Re .207
> -< I said PREVENTATIVE >-
Exercise will not prevent osteoporosis in patients who have reduced
hormone levels. Nor will it avoid the disease when the hormone levels
start to drop.
>1) melanocytes, the cells which carry melanin, are produced within the
>bone marrow;
I can find no reference at all to melanocytes occurring naturally in
the bone marrow. The only places that I can find are the ones that I
cited.
>2) there is definitely a melanin/osteoporosis connection -- the darker
>your skin and hair, the less likely you are to get it.
Nor can I find any connection between melanin and osteoporosis. If
there was any connection the disease would be unknown in Negroes and
prevalent in Caucasians. This sort of link is inevitably cited in any
description of the disease again I can not find it.
Perhaps you could give us you references.
Jamie.
|
| 358.209 | | PLAYER::BROWNL | ack, no, none, GAL | Mon Oct 07 1991 09:54 | 13 |
| Hang on a minute...
I'm in difficulties here again.
Fred, you're saying that encoded in everyone's DNA is the control for
natural death, and that by meditation one can alter this and then live
to be 140+ years old? Well, I'm fairly open-minded, as I've said
before, but this, I'm afraid, is OTT.
Naturally, you won't tell anyone how it's done, and can't cite any
examples of its working. Naturally, I don't believe a word of it.
Laurie.
|
| 358.210 | | SMIFFY::ELBOW | | Mon Oct 07 1991 10:01 | 7 |
| Oh I don't know, I think he's right. I often alter my DNA on the way to work,
just for kicks. For example, right now my DNA is such that if I got a girl
pregnant she'd give birth to a leprechaun with a yearning for butterscotch
Angel Delight (so not entirely without intelligence). Of course, as I'm
currently "single" I can't prove this, but I believe it.....
Elbow.
|
| 358.211 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words. | Mon Oct 07 1991 11:06 | 22 |
| Re Frederick and Elbow.
The more that I read in this conference the less it seems to have any
relevance to the real world.
When I was very young they sent me to kindergarten. I didn't like it at
first and wanted to be home with my mummy. Later as I grew they sent me
to primary school. I didn't like that at all. I had known what I was
doing at kindergarten and I was one of the most senior, now I was in a
new place and one of the most junior.
Time passed and I grew, by the age of 12 I was again one of the seniors
at the primary school. So it all happened again. The took me from
primary school and stuck me into a secondary school and once more I was
bottom of the heap. When I left school I was ready for the change and
went back to the bottom to work my way up yet again.
My question to Frederick is this; you appear to wish to live forever,
or at the very least a very long time, why do you want to stay in the
kindergarten of existence and not move on up with the rest of us?
Jamie.
|
| 358.212 | "Their fun comes at the expense of others..." | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Oct 07 1991 12:14 | 48 |
| re: .211 (Jamie)
Yes, you're right...I *should* want to join you, shouldn't
I? For tea, maybe, but that seems to be about it.
Frankly, I don't see much point in joining you or the rest
of the consensus, for that matter. I have a pretty good idea of
where you and the consensus are headed. You can impress everyone
with your having grown up past kindergarten...congratulations.
As long as competition and comparisons are important to you, however,
you'll be a very distant second to the potentials available. Maybe
you should move your standards up a notch.
re: Laurie and Elbow
The arguments/discussions in here the past several weeks have
focused a great deal of energy on creating one's own reality...and
the power of "mind" over "matter." That you choose to accept it
or not is not terribly important to me. However, accepting that
premise is a basic tenet of understanding not only the power of
meditation but how meditation, which can alter time/space, can
impact the physical reality we live in. That you cannot believe
it, accept it, understand it, or live with it is not my problem.
I accept it, live with it and watch it function. That it's altering
my DNA, when I do that type of meditation, I cannot "prove."
Proof of these types are unlikely to do any reader of these notes
in this current year any good...for those who aren't practicing
these beliefs are all likely to be dead within 100 years...and
wouldn't be around to witness the *possibility/probability/actuality*
of this reality.
No one is asking you to do this...don't, if it doesn't appeal to
you. Instead, maybe ask Jamie or someone like him what the best ways
to live long are and then religiously follow that advice. Oh, by
the way, ... good luck.
As for telling you the meditation, forget it. "Casting pearls
before swine" comes to mind... The meditation is intricate and
lots of separate resonances are set up by following a precise
procedure...since I was *doing* the meditation (and following
Lazaris' guide imagery) I did not memorize it. I cannot be certain
that the process I would delineate would be the proper one. I
do not wish to be responsible for potentially erroneous information
of this type. That's it. No more explanation needs to be given.
re: Joel (.208 or thereabouts)
Yes, according to what he has told us.
Frederick
|
| 358.213 | | PLAYER::BROWNL | ack, no, none, GAL | Mon Oct 07 1991 13:19 | 21 |
| Fred,
I'm not making fun of you at all. The image California has in the UK is
such that I'm not in the least bit surprised you come from there, and
making fun of you would be pointless.
No, I'm not making fun of you, I'm just amazed that you came up with
something to top the last amazing claim you came out with. Frankly, I
think the best thing I could do is get the next plane over and start
making money, cos it must be like shooting fish in a barrel.
And, before anyone jumps on me for being horrible to Fred, I'm not
being horrible at all; I simply think he's flipped. You watch, he'll be
telling us next that he can alter other people's DNA (or is it someone
else who does that ;^)).
I've listened to, and accepted all that has been said about people's
reality etc., but altering DNA is just too much. I'm sorry, try as I
might, I just can't come to terms with that one.
Laurie.
|
| 358.214 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words. | Mon Oct 07 1991 13:25 | 8 |
| No Laurie you are wrong! Frederick can alter DNA, but only in his
personal reality, which is of course not a reality at all it is merely
his fantasy.
As your reality is the normal one that everyone shares you will find
that Frederick's powers do not actually reach into it.
Jamie.
|
| 358.215 | So you did. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Mon Oct 07 1991 13:28 | 54 |
| RE: .207 (Ginny)
> I did NOT say osteoporosis patients should do high-impact excercises.
No you did not, sorry that it seemed to you that I implied otherwise.
I was adding a caution that you failed to make -- especially since you
failed to specify at what point your preventative measures are to be
applied, or what precisely they prevent. There is no evidence at all
that they prevent osteoporesis -- i.e., bone tissue loss. What they
prevent, as far as anyone has been able to determine, is the worst of
the effects of the syndrome by compensation. The evidence is rather
mixed on whether exercise after menopause does any good -- under many
conditions it clearly does not. The caution was particularly important
because the recommendation is frequently made by others.
> but there is no proof that high impact exercise in moderation is
> harmful.
But there is no particular reason to believe it to be safe (and we are
of course only talking about people without bone or joint problems to
start with). The imediate damage to bones and joints has been very
well documented. It is purely a matter of faith that by only
undergoing the damage three non-consecutive days a week the body
recovers from the damage without any cost at all. Furthermore a good
percentage of the injuries treated by "sports medicine" specialists can
be traced directly to high impact exercise much of which is "moderate"
(of course, the high-impact believers need only assume that every such
case is a result of poor warmup or improper exercise; an essentially
non-falsifiable position).
If there was any reason to believe that high-impact exercise was in any
way better for you than low-impact exercise then there might be a basis
for debate. But there is no such reason that I've ever seen put
forward that seemed to be more than a statement of faith. For example,
if you want to be good to your body exercise-walk the same distance you
would have run/jogged. It'll take you a bit longer, but it has the
same benefits, much less chance of immediate injury, and a lower
logical liklihood that it will result in chronic accumulated damage.
Can't say that I'm terribly expert in osteoporesis but I've read a fair
amount about it here and there. I've never heard of a relationship
with melanocytes -- I would be interested in a reference. I can't say
that I've heard of reduced bone-marrow being involved either -- this
would seem to lead more immediately to anemia rather than to
osteoporesis. Again a reference would be nice. If there are
melanocytes in bone marrow, I don't see why their number or activity
would correlate with skin color -- they would be serving a radically
different function and would be under radically different selective
pressure (if they have such a fundamental role in laying down bone
tissue they would not be a recent evolutionary development). And I
can't say that I've noticed fewer classic osteoporesis "hunched back"
among old black women than among old white women.
Topher
|
| 358.216 | Point of clarification | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Mon Oct 07 1991 13:42 | 18 |
|
Jamie and Laurie,
Frederick is not alone in the belief that one can alter DNA. I've
heard of the ability to do this from other sources...one other source
being a healing class that other people from this conference attended a
while ago.
If you choose not to believe that you can do this, then that's fine.
Nobody is saying you have to believe it, much less try it, or accept
that it works or not.
That Frederick won't share the meditation - that's another issue
entirely. His unwillingness to share vs. the possibility to alter
one's own DNA - I see these two things as being very separate.
Cindy
|
| 358.217 | Lots of DNA is totally not understood...guess where the secret lies? | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Oct 07 1991 14:04 | 18 |
| re: .213? (Laurie)
Yes, you should come to California...you very well might
make some money. However, you should avoid metaphysics...there
are already enough people doing these things and, to be sincere,
I think you lack the dedication to pull it off. What you *might*
try, however, is stand-up comedy. THere is always more room
for comedians of either gender. How good is your delivery?
Do you have any charisma? I'm sure you can find lots of sympathy
for your point of view in your audience, so finding suitable
topics shouldn't be a problem...
California is a heavily populated state. One more right-winger
or redneck or conservative or consensus reality personality won't
make much difference...enjoy the weather.
Frederick
|
| 358.218 | | DSSDEV::GRIFFIN | Throw the gnome at it | Mon Oct 07 1991 14:16 | 9 |
|
I', too, must object, Jamie, to your use of the word everyone.
And altering DNA, provided you have the background knowledge to do so
safely, IMHO, is no more impossible than altering the weather, or
healing someone, or any other numerous types of reality alterations.
Its just a matter of macrocosm to microcosm.
Beth
|
| 358.219 | Im not sure its quite that conclusive | PRMS00::TSTARK | Priorities confuse the mind | Mon Oct 07 1991 14:22 | 26 |
| re: Gene alteration
I believe that the theory that heredity to the children
can be influenced by the parent was originally called
Lamarck's Theory, after the person who proposed it.
Subsequent attempts to find such a mechanism by which
the hereditary mechanisms can be deliberately influenced
in a non-random manner have usually been lumped into the same
category with the discredited Lamarckian Theory, which
does not due them sufficient justice.
This theory was originally an alternative to Darwin's.
Lamarckianism went well out of favor for a long time, and in its
original form was discredited, but new variations on the
general ltheme have made some resurgence recently in some genetic
research circles. I believe the preponderance of evidence *so far*
is that this does not generally occur, aside from mostly-random
mutations due to environmental factors usually considered harmful.
However, I do not believe from my readings that the result is yet as
conclusive as I infer from some of the viewpoints stated here.
As always, any pointers to further information would be
greatly appreciated !
todd
|
| 358.220 | Song of the yoghurt eaters... | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Mon Oct 07 1991 14:45 | 19 |
| re: 358.206
RIPPLE::GRANT_JO
> BTW - does anyone remember those old yogurt commercials,
> the ones with the really OLD folks?
The "old folks" from Soviet Georgia were proven to be
fakes. It turned out that (in order to escape military
service many years earlier) they had been using their
fathers' birth certificates. The scam went unchallenged
for a long time because the current head of the USSR (was
it Breshnev ?) was from Georgia, and he liked the idea
that his countrymen were somehow superior.
The oldest of those guys turned out to be only 83 or 84.
Dannon, of course, bought into it all the way...
-Art
|
| 358.221 | | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Mon Oct 07 1991 15:00 | 20 |
| re: 358.209
PLAYER::BROWNL
> Fred, you're saying that encoded in everyone's DNA is the control for
> natural death,
There's actually a lot of support for the notion of death being
encoded in the DNA structures. The Hayflick limit (which seems
to hit warm-bloods more than cold-blooded species) is just one
example of how it might be implemented.
For a really good look at pre-programmed aging and death in
many, many species, take a look at a (very thick) volume called,
_Senesence,_Longevity,_and_the_Genome_ by Fitch, et al. It's
interesting to note that not all species exhibit time-related
decay (aging); several types of reptiles and fish, for example,
show no signs of aging, and have only been known to die because
of injury or infection.
-Art
|
| 358.222 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | crackling wrack and shells | Mon Oct 07 1991 15:03 | 6 |
| re: .220
At last - a really good reason to stop eating yogurt!
Joel
|
| 358.223 | | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Mon Oct 07 1991 15:18 | 25 |
| re: 358.208
HOO78C::ANDERSON
> Re .199
>
> >Recent studies (somewhere in Science News in the last year
> >or so), have shown that, at least in things like the long
> >bones of the arms/legs, increased levels of structural calcium
> >can result from various kinds of exercise (particularly weight
> >training). This effect even showed up in people (both men and
> >women) who were fairly well advanced in age.
>
> Yes this is of course true. However it has nothing whatsoever to do
> with the fact that established osteoporosis cannot be reversed. The
I think you're making a rather broad generalization here. Given
that this study shows that some mechanism exists for strengthening
bones through exercise, it's not unreasonable to hypothesize that
this same mechanism might be applicable to people with osteoporosis,
perhaps in conjunction with some other therapy. If other work shows
this to be incorrect, then fine -- one more dead hypothesis. But
I think your statement that this study "...has nothing whatsover to
do with...[etc]" is a bit rash and ill-considered.
-Art
|
| 358.224 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words. | Tue Oct 08 1991 06:56 | 26 |
| Re .208
Sigh.
If you had a child suffering from rickets, a disease that stops bone
growing, do you think that exercise would in any way help?
Well it wouldn't because the vital element, vitamin D, required to move
calcium around the system is missing and without it the child is
incapable of making proper bones.
In the case of osteoporosis the hormone that is missing is causing the
disease. Exercise will not produce this hormone and any strengthening of
the bone cannot take place without it. Any previous exercise will not
have strengthened the bone enough to avoid the the consequences of the
disease when it comes.
Re Cindy.
The number of people who believe in a theory has nothing whatsoever to
do with the validity of the theory. So the fact that Frederick has
others who share his belief does not make it true, or even more
probable.
Jamie.
|
| 358.225 | | ROYALT::NIKOLOFF | More than words | Tue Oct 08 1991 11:53 | 19 |
| >> Maybe Mikki can *add* or clarify some points when she gets
>> back next week.
Well, I am sorta back.. I am home sick with a cold....8-\
Wow, great workshop and I will quickly tell you what I have
and than I am going to put together my notes and Janices...
The fish thing he mentioned twice over the weekend, once and
than a recap.
The first one that he mentioned 'was don't eat fish, especially
shellfish 'because they are scavengers. He later added they eat the garbage,
chemicals, whatever that is being found in our waters and than we eat them!
Made sense to me. He also mentioned the waste material that was found on the
Jersey shores last year...
Mikki
|
| 358.226 | reply | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Tue Oct 08 1991 13:15 | 15 |
|
Jamie,
I was not implying that the ability to alter ones DNA is true. I see two
issues involved - the first is attempting to prove whether it is indeed
true/possible, and Frederick's decision not to reveal the meditation.
It appeared to me that you were lumping them both together. Nowhere did I
ever imply that altering ones DNA is true/possible. I simply said that
I've *heard* this from other sources completely separate from Lazaris,
so perhaps (PERHAPS) there might be something to it. I neither believe
nor disbelieve at this point. Unlike you, I prefer to keep an open
mind about these things, so at the moment I neither believe nor
disbelieve this claim.
Cindy
|
| 358.227 | | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Tue Oct 08 1991 13:25 | 23 |
| re: 358.224
HOO78C::ANDERSON
> Sigh.
>
.
.
.
> In the case of osteoporosis the hormone that is missing is causing the
> disease. Exercise will not produce this hormone and any strengthening of
> the bone cannot take place without it. Any previous exercise will not
Had you been a little more careful in your reading of my note, you
might have noticed that I qualified my statement with, "...perhaps
in conjunction with some other therapy..."
I suppose that "sigh" is because you're so exhausted from carrying
the weight of all the world's knowledge on your shoulders. It must
be very difficult for you, living in a world where no one is quite
as right as you are. You have my sympathies.
-Art
|
| 358.228 | Sigh, yourself! | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Tue Oct 08 1991 13:35 | 38 |
| RE: .224 (Jamie)
The analogy is badly flawed, Jamie. Even if your conclusions are
correct (an open question among researchers studying osteoporosis, as
I understand it) that does not justify sloppy reasoning. Vitamin D is
an essential part of the chemical process by which bone tissue is laid
down. Bone physically cannot be grown without it -- so a deficiency
limits bone growth.
Estrogen, on the other hand is, as you say, a hormone. It serves as
part of an elaborate control system for laying down bone tissue which
has other paths modifying and supplementing estrogen's role (please
note that neither younger nor older men resemble postmenopausal women
as far as osteoporosis is concerned). For a given level of estrogen
exercise has been shown to increase the rate at which new bone growth
is laid down.
It is plausible, therefore, that exercise which avoids increasing the
loss of bone tissue (i.e., low-impact exercise) might slow or even
reverse the bone loss associated with women's post-menopausal
metabolism. A number of studies have found just this, though others
have not. The issue is therefore still open with the simplest
conclusion being that conditions (existing state of bone loss, overall
health and fitness, precise kind of exercise, nutritional details,
etc.) are very important in whether or not post-menopausal exercise is
beneficial.
And, of course, your final "conclusion":
> Any previous exercise will not have strengthened the bone enough to
> avoid the the consequences of the disease when it comes.
does not even vaguely follow from your analogy, and is strongly
contradicted by a number of studies. It seems, not too surprisingly,
that those who have more bone mass, as a result of exercise and diet,
at menopause will suffer the consequences of bone loss less.
Topher
|
| 358.229 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words | Tue Oct 08 1991 13:38 | 18 |
| No Art the sigh was having to explain something over and over again to
someone who is determined not to understand.
Your vague assumptions of "other therapies" is rather all encompassing.
How would you know that exercise is doing anything to help the other
therapy.
For example hormone replacement would work on its own. Hormone
replacement and exercise would also work but might just break the
patient's bones.
>You have my sympathies.
Thanks. Attempting to bring some facts into this conference is not an
easy task.
Jamie.
|
| 358.230 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words | Tue Oct 08 1991 13:47 | 23 |
| Re .244
The point of the analogy was that if an essential part of the process
is missing exercise will not make up for it.
>It is plausible, therefore, that exercise which avoids increasing the
>loss of bone tissue (i.e., low-impact exercise) might slow or even
>reverse the bone loss associated with women's post-menopausal
>metabolism.
Everywhere I look there is the sentence that once established it is
not reversible, this is not an opinion it is in the medical textbooks.
>does not even vaguely follow from your analogy, and is strongly
>contradicted by a number of studies. It seems, not too surprisingly,
>that those who have more bone mass, as a result of exercise and diet,
>at menopause will suffer the consequences of bone loss less.
If you are producing too little estrogen and you have more bone tissue
to service with it then there will be less to go round. The net result
would be more bone tissue loss.
Jamie.
|
| 358.231 | This is a gem :-) | PRMS00::TSTARK | Priorities confuse the mind | Tue Oct 08 1991 14:22 | 7 |
| re: .230,
> this is not an opinion it is in the medical textbooks.
And the remark above should be in the quote books. :-)
todd
|
| 358.232 | And I can find textbooks which recommend bloodletting. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Tue Oct 08 1991 14:59 | 64 |
| RE: .230
> The point of the analogy was that if an essential part of the process
> is missing exercise will not make up for it.
That may have been the point, but it missed its mark. The analogy you
presented simply assumed that it was essential in the same sense as
vitamin D. Since its role is not comparable, and its "essentialness"
debatable and certainly of a very different character the analogy was
simply wrong. If your conclusions are correct -- as they very well
might be, IMHO -- they are correct for rather different reasons than
implied by your analogy. One cannot reason a priori on this basis that
one would *expect* exercise to be ineffective. It would be like saying
magnets stick to pieces of iron but not to aluminum so we should expect
the same from electrical solder.
> Everywhere I look there is the sentence that once established it is
> not reversible, this is not an opinion it is in the medical textbooks.
Then you should look in some books which are more up to date and/or
less dogmatic. (I assume that what you mean is that it is not simply
*your* opinion but also the opinion of the rather well qualified people
who wrote the medical textbooks. It is, of course, nevertheless an
opinon -- absolute knowledge is for religionists not scientists.)
I did not say it *was* reversable, of course. What I said was that it
is not illogical to suppose on a priori grounds that it might be. What
the books should have said is not that it was "irreversable" but that
there was then/now no known method which has been firmly shown to
reverse it. As I said, there *have* been some recent studies --
inconclusive as of yet -- which indicates that some reversal may take
place or at least the rate of loss may be slowed.
But in any case, you cannot prove a bad argument sound by showing in
other ways that its conclusions are correct. Unsound logic is unsound
logic, whether it gets to the right place or not. Take the argument:
4+3 equals 7 because 3 is 2 less than 4 and 4+4 equals 9 so 4+3 is
2 less than 9, i.e., 7 QED
That argument is incorrect even if 4+3 does equal 7. You cannot prove
that 4+4 must equal 9 because 4+3 does equal 7.
> If you are producing too little estrogen and you have more bone tissue
> to service with it then there will be less to go round. The net result
> would be more bone tissue loss.
Sounds plausible, though far from convincing (bones only account for a
percentage -- I would guess a small percentage -- of the estrogen use
in the body, so if you double the bone mass you will less than halve
the "available" estrogen, therefore less than halve the estrogen per
unit volume of bone mass. If these things were simple, which they are
not, this would spell a net gain). I can only repeat that there have
been a number of studies in the last decade which contradict your
opinion and which are (unlike the "exercise after menopause" studies)
pretty much in agreement. My understanding is that the current, though
recent, concensus is that you are likely to reduce the effects of post-
menopausal osteoporosis. I may be mistaken about it being a concensus
-- I may have by chance listened to a biased sample of opinions -- but
there is no question that that is an accepted position held by many
experts in the disease.
Topher
|
| 358.233 | explanation vs assertion. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Tue Oct 08 1991 15:05 | 9 |
| RE: .229 (Jamie)
> No Art the sigh was having to explain something over and over again to
> someone who is determined not to understand.
I'm still waiting for you to explain something rather than simply
telling everyone that they are wrong because you know better.
Topher
|
| 358.234 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Avoid using polysyllabic words | Wed Oct 09 1991 08:28 | 17 |
| One of the books that I found it in is the Oxford Handbook of
Clinical Medicine (last updated in 1990). It is aimed at newly
qualified doctors and contains an excellent amount of data which lets
you see how the medical mind works. The exact quote from page 646 is,
"Established osteoporosis cannot be reversed."
As far as I see it, the bone structure of the body is continuously but
slowly replaced, the hormone is used in the replacement. When the
hormone is not present the removal of the old bone structure continues
but the replacement is only partial. One description of the bones is
that they look like Swiss cheese on microscopic examination.
I still cannot see how exercise will help once this disease has
started. And, as exercise can only make a small percentage enlargement
of the bone, I doubt that it will prevent the disease attacking.
Jamie.
|
| 358.235 | Pulling teeth from a stone ... ;-) | PRMS00::TSTARK | Priorities confuse the mind | Wed Oct 09 1991 12:34 | 8 |
| re: .234,
Thanks very much for supplying a reference on osteoporosis. I for
one find it a whole lot easier to follow a discussion involving a
difference of opinion if I know what sources the opinions are based on !
delightedly,
todd
|
| 358.236 | soon as I find the right box... | HOCUS::FERGUSON | Zappa for President in 92 | Thu Oct 10 1991 04:16 | 24 |
| re 215 (Topher)
I haven't come across my articles yet; I'll have to do a more through
search this weekend. My comments on osteoporosis was a reaction to
Frederick's note on Lazaris recommending boron and magnesium
supplements (I assumed the context was prevention). My feelings about
megavitamin therapy are probably similar to yours on high-impact
exercise; I threw that in as an alternative.
When should you start prevention? Now, I'd say (if you've already got
the condition it's obviously too late for prevention). My podiatrist,
who's a sports medicine doctor, sees nothing inherently harmful about
running but he thinks that wearing high heels are the second worst
thing you can do to your feet, joints, and back. (The worst thing is
to become a professional dancer, ballet in particular). I don't
believe that the majority of sports medicine doctors think running is
harmful; it's just "in" to be down on running, just as ten years ago it
was "in" to proclaim that running would add years (decades even!) to
your life.
Yes I do walk, but I do that for recreation/transportation rather than
exercise (to me, exercise=work).
Ginny
|
| 358.237 | Running into the wind...is this the same as breaking wind? | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Thu Oct 10 1991 11:54 | 26 |
| re: .236 (Ginny)
...and while we're on the subject of Lazaris ( ;-) )
I don't know if I mentioned this in here somewhere or not, but
he has mentioned running several times. Mostly he has "frowned"
upon it. He mentioned that many of us would be having knee
and leg problems, eventually, if we continued it, especially on
hard surfaces. I paid attention to this, because running is the
only real (formal) exercise I do (I try to run a couple of miles
daily.) As a concession to what Lazaris has said, I no longer
run competitively ("against" others) and I have reduced milage
from 4-6 miles daily down to only about two (I can built up
a sweat, get some anerobic breathing and avoid the impact on my
knees, etc. Plus it still helps keep my tummy down and doesn't
take as much time. ;-) )
What he has recommended instead, also several times, is
"rebounding." This is jumping up and down on a trampoline...those
little $19.95 trampolines are just fine. This does not impact
the legs anywhere near as much, and accomplishes one of the main
"goals," which is to have the internal organs be freed from gravity...
By the way, one of the goals of the diet I outlined earlier is
to "GIVE THE IMMUNE SYSTEM A REST."
Frederick
|
| 358.238 | an ancient prescription | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Thu Oct 10 1991 12:39 | 13 |
|
Re.236
Ginny,
Yoga is an excellent preventative method as it is non-impact, at the
same time it strengthens the muscles. Deep breathing is part of
practicing yoga, and while holding the postures - particularly the ones
done while standing up - heat is generated in the body this providing
an aerobic workout without impact or excessive movement. Yoga also
improves circulation and helps calm the nervous system.
Cindy
|
| 358.239 | | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Thu Oct 10 1991 14:43 | 36 |
| re: 358.237
MISERY::WARD_FR
> from 4-6 miles daily down to only about two (I can built up
> a sweat, get some anerobic breathing and avoid the impact on my
"Anaerobic breathing" is a real good trick; how do you
do that ? ;-}
re: 358.238
CGVAX2::PAINTER
> Yoga is an excellent preventative method as it is non-impact, at the
.
.
> done while standing up - heat is generated in the body this providing
> an aerobic workout without impact or excessive movement.
Aerobic exercise isn't just a matter of breathing a lot; that may
increase the oxygenation of your blood, but it won't give you any
of the other conditioning or fat-reduction effects associated with
aerobic exercise. To get those kinds of results, the large muscles
of the body need to be worked at a specific rate for a specific
minimum time interval; in response to this stress, the muscles cells
themselves adapt in certain ways. It's real unlikely that a fairly
static system of exercise like hatha yoga would affect your aerobic
conditioning. Maybe if you did something like 500 "sun salutes"
in quick succesion -- but then that wouldn't be much different than
a low-impact workout.
For a good discussion of the changes that occur during aerobic
training, take a look at chapter 21 of _Exercise_Physiology_, by
McArdle, Katch, & Katch [1991].
-Art
|
| 358.240 | Sigh! | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Thu Oct 10 1991 14:57 | 37 |
| RE: .234 (Jamie)
> The exact quote from page 646 is, "Established osteoporosis cannot be
> reversed."
Jamie, have you been reading what I've written at all? I really don't
wish to repeat myself yet again, but this quote is in no way in
contradiction to anything I have said.
> One description of the bones is that they look like Swiss cheese on
> microscopic examination.
Yes, I have seen photomicrographs showing this. Pretty gruesome when
you think about what you are looking at. But we *are* talking about
the most extreme stages of degeneration. I said nothing specifically
about those (all to common) extreme cases.
> I still cannot see how exercise will help once this disease has
> started.
So now your lack of imagination stands as an argument? I can think of
a number of ways that it might (just one example, exercise might result
in bone-building being given an increased "priority" in use of the
less-available estrogen. In those cases where the estrogen loss is
relatively marginal, reversal -- not necessarilty complete -- might
occur). Perhaps these are individually or even collectively unlikely
but, once again, I never said that reversal does in fact occur.
> And, as exercise can only make a small percentage enlargement of the
> bone, I doubt that it will prevent the disease attacking.
First off, who said anything about enlargement? There is a wide range
of *density* found in healthy bone. Second, who said anything about it
preventing the "disease" from "attacking"? Third, why should your
personal doubts take precedence over substantial experimental evidence?
Topher
|
| 358.241 | Running into bad breath... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Thu Oct 10 1991 16:18 | 19 |
| re: .239 (Art)
Nit, nit, nit!!! ;-)
Well, the breathing that comes from anaerobic work is unmistakable
and definitely noticed! :-} As you say, time impacts not only
aerobic but anaerobic exercise. Since two miles at six or so minutes
per mile (well, maybe less these days...;-} ) isn't long enough to
really get the aerobic stuff working, I'm just running along hoping
that the pain means that I'm doing something anaerobic. (Although
very, very fast running would leave little doubt.)
So, okay, it's not anaerobic breathing...I just coined a term
to represent the breathing accompanying what I feel is anaerobic
exercise.
Okay, Art, happy now?
;-)
Frederick
|
| 358.242 | | WBC::BAKER | Joy and fierceness... | Thu Oct 10 1991 17:41 | 16 |
| re: 358.241
MISERY::WARD_FR
> So, okay, it's not anaerobic breathing...I just coined a term
> to represent the breathing accompanying what I feel is anaerobic
> exercise.
Fred, I think you're missing a golden opportunity here; you
could start a new exercise school, give seminars, sell workout
tapes and paraphernalia ("yes, with each 30-minute anaerobic
breathing tape, we give you, absolutely free, a plastic bag
to put over your head..."). Wow, and franchises...
Without marketing, life, itself, would be impossible.
-Art ;-}
|
| 358.243 | Frederick Simmons School of Anemic Anaerobic anenomis | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Thu Oct 10 1991 17:51 | 8 |
| re: .242 (Art)
Wanna buy the first franchise, Art? With a salesman
like you, I could get rich soon!
;-)
Frederick
|
| 358.244 | oops! | CGVAX2::PAINTER | | Thu Oct 10 1991 18:26 | 10 |
|
Re.239
Hi Art,
Yes, having looked at the definition of 'aerobic' in my dictionary, you
are correct - yoga does not satisfy that definition. Thanks for the
correction.
Cindy
|
| 358.245 | | SHIPS::GORE_I | Bar sinister with pedant rampant | Mon Oct 14 1991 14:42 | 14 |
| Re .237
> What he has recommended instead, also several times, is
>"rebounding." This is jumping up and down on a trampoline...those
>little $19.95 trampolines are just fine. This does not impact
>the legs anywhere near as much, and accomplishes one of the main
>"goals," which is to have the internal organs be freed from gravity...
I don't see how trampolining achieves this "goal". During the
acceleration/deceleration phase of each bounce the body is
experiencing more than 1g. Now swimming...
Ian G.
|
| 358.246 | Internal organs vs whole body. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Mon Oct 14 1991 14:59 | 12 |
| RE: .245 (Ian G.)
While one is coming down, all your internal organs are accelerating
at the same rate and so there is no apparent "force" felt by them
relative to each other. This is called free-fall.
When swimming on the other hand, your body as a whole is buoyed up and
so it experiences something like 0-g, but the internal organs continue
to be pulled down, and so they experience 1-g.
Topher
|
| 358.247 | Gravity | STORIE::KALLIS | Pumpkins -- Nature's greatest gift | Mon Oct 14 1991 15:33 | 19 |
| Re .245 (Ian):
>>little $19.95 trampolines are just fine. This does not impact
>>the legs anywhere near as much, and accomplishes one of the main
>>"goals," which is to have the internal organs be freed from gravity...
>
> I don't see how trampolining achieves this "goal". During the
>acceleration/deceleration phase of each bounce the body is
>experiencing more than 1g. Now swimming...
Swimming doesn't free the internal organs from gravity; only a free-fall
in a vacuum comes close to this. The body is bouyed by the water, but
the internal organs are subjecxt to gravity.
A trampoline produces a transient deceleration with a shallower (and broader)
peak, reducing the momentary stress on the bones, etc., that high-impack
running, etc. would produce.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 358.248 | okay, here's something | POCUS::FERGUSON | I'm working on it | Sun Oct 27 1991 00:46 | 74 |
| Well, I couldn't find anything on melanin and oesteoporosis (maybe it
was a logic leap on my part, but I'll look again), but I did find this
in a book called _Stand Tall! Every Woman's Guide to Preventing
Osteoporosis_ by Morris Notelovitz, MD, PhD, and Marcia Ware:
ETHNIC DIFFERENCES
Fewer black women develop osteoporosis than white women. Though
scientists are not sure of the reasons, there are several factors that
may account for this, at least in part.
Black women have larger bones at skeletal maturity. Studies of young
children have shown that even early in life there are differences in
bone mass between blacks and whites. Black women tend to have larger
muscles, and muscle mass and bone mass are closely related (the bigger
the musles, the greater the stress on the bones and the larger the
bones).
In addition, black women seem to lose bone with aging at a slower rate.
This is probably due to hormonal differences between blacks and whites.
There is evidence to suggest, for example, that blacks have higher
levels of calcitonin. A recent study at Auburn University of men and
women ages 56 to 91 showed that white women tend to lose more calcium
in their urine than black women. (The men did not have this racial
difference.)
What all this means is that if you are a black woman, you can withstand
a greater amount of bone loss before reaching the osteoporotic,
fracture-prone state. This is not a total immunity, however. In a
recent survey at the University of Florida, 11 percent of women
hospitalized for hip fracture were black, although they tended to be
much older than the white women with such fractures. A black woman
whose ovaries are removed at an early age is theorectically at nearly
the same risk as her white, surgically menopausal counterpart, though
she has some degree of protection since she started with more bone.
Studies of other ethnic groups have been less extensive. It has been
found that women with ancestors from the British Isles, northern
Europe, China, or Japan are more likely to develop osteoporosis than
are those of African, Hispanic, or Mediterranean ancestry. The risk for
Jewish women seems to lie somewhere between the low risk for blacks and
the high risk for whites. Overall it appears that *skin pigmentation*
is related to risk, and that for white women, the fairer your
complexion, the greater your risk.
[end of excerpt]
The phrase "skin pigmentation" was italicized in the book, hence the
asterisks. So Topher, this means the stooped over black women you've
been seeing are much older than the white ones.
Frederick,
Just about everyone disapproves of running. My brother likes to remind
me that Jim Fixx dropped dead of a heart attack while out running.
Well, what can you say to that ... (it wasn't a bone injury?)
Surface is very important. (I used to assume that was a no-brainer but
everyday I see people running on concrete sidewalks.) I stopped
running 6 years ago when I moved away from Central Park and couldn't
run around the reservoir anymore (a well maintained dirt track). Now
I'm back but I have trouble dragging myself out of bed at 5:30 AM.
Maybe next spring.
Cindy,
I agree that yoga is an excellent exercise - IF you have a good
instructor. The last good yoga instructor I had was fired from the
health club I belonged to because her looks didn't conform to the
anorexic model/musclebound weightlifter body type that the owners
wanted. I haven't found a class I liked since then, but you reminded
me; I'll keep looking. Thanks.
Ginny
|
| 358.249 | Running is not a Fixx for everyone... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Oct 28 1991 14:45 | 21 |
| re: .248 (Ginny)
Thanks for the info...
As for Jim Fixx, there is "consensus speculation" as to his
demise. Some pointed out that he didn't start running until relatively
"late" in life (near age 40 or something, as I remember.) Also,
he ran to reduce weight, and there is lots of debate on the stress on
a heart due to weight and weight loss. Further, he had a propensity
for poor diet, as I seem to remember reading. Anyway, metaphysically
I'd answer differently, but since this "debate" seems to be limited
and focused on science, here's a small dose...
From a Lazaris workshop that I recently attended:
"Most relationships are based on wounds."
Frederick
|
| 358.250 | More on yoga | CGVAX2::PAINTER | let there be music | Mon Oct 28 1991 17:17 | 10 |
|
Re.248
Ginny,
I was just looking through the list of Yoga Journal backissues offered
for sale, and found one with a title "Preventing Osteoporosis" that I
plan on ordering at some point. So there is some sort of a connection.
Cindy
|
| 358.251 | A little hit of fresh air... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Nov 25 1991 15:46 | 78 |
|
From Nov. 22, 1991 "The True Magic and Power of Waking Up and
Staying Awake"
Qualities of being awake:
1. Exist within a paradigm of positive motivation that becomes our
own. Expand the width, breadth and length of our dimensions...
do it for the thrill of it.
IT IS POSSIBLE TO BE FREE OF THE CONSENSUS WITHOUT BREAKING IT...
BY STEPPING OUT OF IT.
2. Create personal depth (trust, love, creativity, character,
powers, strengths, responsibilities, etc.)
3. Live without stagnation, nobility.
4. Live your own dream.
5. Give yourself permission to act (know that you are loved.)
6. Actualize--live your thoughts and feelings.
7. Live in a paradigm of freedom.
From 2-day "Keys to Ultraconsciousness--A New Realm of Power-
A New Realm of Spirituality" Nov. 23-24, 1991 [some excerpts...
lacking in anything beyond mental/intellectual value...therefore
representing only a fraction of the 2-day experience]:
Exploration has always been a part of the human experience. Among
seekers, there are those who are the enlightened ones, who know about
worlds "out there" with consciousnesses grander than we believe. They
keep seeking, keep looking...among these are a small handful who have
WALKED these worlds--these are the exceptional (not *better*) ones.
AMONG THESE, a very rare few have entered this realm of power,
but they've done so accidentally and they've either backed off or
gotten lost. Some very, very few, perhaps as many as ten, have done
so alone--some have lost their sanity, some have lost their battle.
It is this realm of power which (by Lazaris) is called
ULTRACONSCIOUSNESS...it is the never-ending journey to never-ending
power. IT IS MORE MAGIC THAN PRAGMATISM.
If we don't make vision, vision may be lost.
We know power, but it lacks consistency.
("Can't you ever be satisfied?"--> means, "Settle [for anything.]")
("Feel guilty." "Be complacent.")
Something inside of the seeker, however, won't let us settle...we
want more success...we aren't better than, we are more responsible
than. We *NEED* to have more. In order for the world to survive,
we need more power (and the world will survive anyway.)
We have a *RIGHT* to more, but we must claim that right.
We are pushing up against not only personal boundaries, but
boundaries of the human condition. The boundaries are 1. belief
2. imagination 3. love 4. trust. So we need a way to not extend
the beliefs, but to step BEYOND our beliefs.
In 1982, a seed was planted...this was the seed of a different
future. In 1985, it imploded/exploded-->became embryonic. A whole
new future never imagined/dreamed became available. We can dream
of a positive future (which is WITHIN our beliefs) or we can
dream of a virgin future (which is BEYOND our beliefs.)
The most difficult choices are between good things.
The consensus will be proven wrong more and more...reality is
more and more being proven according to quantum...the consensus holds
onto Newtonian views. The past is rapidly losing its power.
The consensus doesn't work!
Our reality is a holographic illusion using lights and mirrors.
There will be a polar shift when the world turns upside down...but
not of physical poles. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE PISSED!
There will be a mental war of insanity *UNLESS* we make a map!
Tapping into ultraconsciousness blows obstacles out of the water!
* * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.252 | "1992--The Year of Achievement" | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Dec 23 1991 14:27 | 97 |
| from Dec. 18, 1991, San Francisco evening...
(excerpts--whole workshop is available on tape):
Internationally:
It will be a teeter-totter year; both wonder and failure and
also that in-between.
--Internal strife in many parts of the world (coups, revolutions-->
out of "lack", striking out, lashing out, aimless violence
It will look like world violence, threats to world peace.
On the other side, there will be greater international involvement
and reforms and cooperation.
--Economic strife--World-wide recession and great despair
On the other side, economic reforms and an eventual stronger
position for the world.
--Leadership strife--Lots of replacements/shifts and despair
Along with that, however, great hope-->new forms of democracy
Freedom without responsibility will be changing to freedom with
responsibility.
Old enemies will find new ways of getting together and cooperating
while old friends will find innovative ways of problem-solving.
Nationally:
Economic issues will be "king." Recession will continue
throughout the year, but some signs of it's ending will show up
in May-July with concrete evidence by October. Recession will end
either at the end of 1992 or at the very beginning of 1993.
--The crises of the decade will be more evident: (crisis of
vision, self-determination, dignity, character, etc.)
They will surface out of frustration, impotence, guilt...
--As a nation, we will need a "new enemy." In 1992 it will be
internal. The new enemies:
1. The homeless (someone for us to blame; the solution for many
people will be to "send in the police.")
2. Welfare people ("they take and take and take...")
3. The unemployed/unemployable
4. Illness/health care ("should people have health care?"--
the answer will be determined by the person's ability to
produce...non-producers-->no health care.)
--Lots of teutonic activity...earthquakes, volcanoes, storms,
issues of water, fires... "nature will still seem to be attacking."
This will have a tremendous impact of world economics.
On the plus side:
--New Passion, compassion, generosity--the "American Spirit"
(humane spirit)--positive responses to homeless, health, etc.
--New solutions, reforms, answers for various crises.
--Election year--those who are afraid to lose office will make
grand promises--->out of which will result positive change.
MORE THAN in other years, there will be true accomplishments;
many making their promises will actually carry them forth
(and will even surprise themselves.)
Personally:
1. Consciously activate and hold the resonance of optimism, power,
strength and depth. The year starts the 1st with the punch
coming by the 18th.
2. Survival--Separate more and more from the past. History is
coming to an end; do it actively. We survived in our childhood
and adolescence by using resources of self-pity, arrogance,
martyrhood, etc. But now we have other resources: spirituality
and metaphysics. Don't diminish the past, *release* it.
3. Pieces of our dream will start manifesting...(Jan., Mar., April)
Embrace and accept this manifestation [and this is why it is
important to have a dream in place.]
4. We as individuals make a difference...the "make a difference"
slogan of the '70's is going to be ironically true now.
What tips the scale is "us." We need to demand reform as a
consumer public.
WHEN WE STOP BEING THE (MARTYR, VICTIM, ETC.)--IT'S NOT JUST
THAT THERE IS ONE LESS (MARTYR, VICTIM, ETC.), BUT THAT THERE
IS *LESS* (MARTYRHOOD, VICTIMHOOD, ETC.) *IN THE WORLD*
5. Focus on getting our "homes" in order. Some of this will be
pragmatic, whether it be physical home, friends, or job
we need to come to peace...and create a new floor.
This will have impact--will put "homelessness" at peace.
6. Release martyrhood, blame, etc. which used to be an asset but
is now a liability---release hidden agendas such as control,
vindication.
Replace and embrace: *receiving* (from God/Goddess/All-That-Is,
from Higher Self, from the underworld, etc.)
also, *forgiveness* ...embracing love, intimacy and caring
also, empowerment...
Doing this will help in manifestation
7. The unconscious will open more and more--energy will be
released; the Real Self will become more evident.
[from here Lazaris talked about techniques to make all this happen
more elegantly, etc.]
Frederick
|
| 358.253 | cortical vigilance in all things\ | SALSA::MOELLER | Sax and Violins | Mon Dec 23 1991 17:44 | 5 |
| >--Lots of teutonic activity..
So United Germany is the place to watch ?
;-) karl
|
| 358.254 | | VERGA::STANLEY | what a long strange trip it's been | Mon Dec 23 1991 17:51 | 1 |
| :-)
|
| 358.255 | The SHADOW--(from a 2-day 10-20-1988.) | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Fri Jan 03 1992 15:19 | 95 |
| The "goal" of the sub-conscious mind is to create consistency
and to fulfill choice patterns, behavior (decision) patterns, response
(thoughts/feelings) patterns and resonance patterns.
Standing in the way of this are the persona, the shadow, the unknown
self and unknown ambition.
We need to penetrate, make a hole, in our persona, go into our
shadow's muck and stench, then turn on the light. Ironically, the
real "us" is like the persona.
Borrowing the term "shadow" from Jung, it is best seen as the
side of ourselves we are afraid is the real side. We can get stuck
in it: the freedom of the child within or the curiosity of the
adolescent within is void--adaptiveness fills the void (which then
leads us to be the "grown-up", not the adult.) Supposition also fills
the void, including the nobility of what and who we are: "If I can
get enough people to believe the persona, then maybe *I'll* believe it.
It's a good act, but the *real me* is ugly."
Why do we keep the shadow?
1. We pretend it's overwhelming.
2. It gives us license to manipulate and to continue to play at
not being responsible.
3. We don't want to deal with success or rock the boat.
4. Many have habituated the problem.
What is the shadow comprised of?
1. Secrets or shame--Potentials or things we've actually done.
Shames are sometimes deeper--from someone we've hurt or pleasure
from the thoughts of hurting. It is an act of being, but more
than that it is an act of doing (power, violence or sex.)
2. Humiliations or rejections (or fear of)--whether of job, relationships,
friendships...
3. Failings--where we have tried things that didn't work. Success is
sometimes hollow, so we settle for failures and their meanings or
we don't admit failings at all.
4. Manipulations and meanness--we punish by not speaking; we want the
power, then the hurts we *do*, mean to make others feel hurt.
5. Mediocrity--that we only do half a job, not terrible but not exciting.
6. Ugliness (emotionally.)--that we don't like. The physical reality
sometimes indicates it.
7. Nightmares--literal or not; dread failures
Each of these components is self-perpetuating and compounding.
What does the shadow do?
1. Makes us feel guilt, which in turn putrifies into resentment; it
stops positive feelings; it fosters self-pity (victim, martyr);
it disables us; it numbs us; keeps the past alive (still cry
at events from childhood, e.g.); it imprisons us.
2. It supports -->blockages/bravado; refusal to receive love (every
relationship becomes a dance with no intimacy "I have to buy my
relationship because I don't deserve one."); justifies & perpetuates
blockages and payoffs.
3. Avoids success; creates terror of loneliness (if we're alone, we
have to be with our self and we don't like that self); fear of
visibility/vulnerability because if successful, shadow will be seen;
lack of dominion/need to dominate--keeps us running with no time
for new things since we have so much old stuff to fix.
4. Prevents deep relationship with Higher Self, future self, God/Goddess/
All-That-Is (colors but doesn't eliminate relationship); don't have
a relationship because of our fear that it will see our shadow and
we "have to fix ourself, first." We get so used to this, we don't
know what it feels like to be without it.
Drugs cover the shadow. The shadow may be ugly or, even worse,
very attractive. Usually, a couple of events form the core of
the shadow, with other events clinging like barnacles.
How to release/breakthrough the shadow:
I. Discover the core (which if found, can end its existence):
1. If it's secrets/shame, it's a symptom. What are the attitudes/beliefs
underneath? What excuses does it allow?
2. If it's a humiliation (one of the most difficult components,) or
narcissism, play it through over and over (mentally) and realize
that "I survived it." Then play it out of context (again, in
meditation) with cartoons, e.g. playing around it (to shatter
current context.)
3. If it's failure, sit in front of mirror and tell person in mirror
what the failure was--own it.
4. If it's manipulation, write apologies in letter (but don't mail it.)
If necessary, talk to person in meditation. Burn letter. We
don't want the responsibility of making it up to them, so we can
balance the imbalances maybe by simply not doing it again.
5. If it's mediocrity, talk to person in mirror and admit it.
6. With ugliness, work on not needing the crutch.
7. With nightmares, write it down. Then meditate it out/play it out.
II. Personify the shadow; see it as it "is." Make it real whether it is
innocent or not. Acknowledge it.
III. Forgive yourself.
IV. Change (work on part of self that's out-of-whack.)
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Frederick
|
| 358.256 | | SALSA::MOELLER | Chihuahua Punting Champion 1987-1990 | Tue Jan 07 1992 16:34 | 8 |
| .255 makes a wonderful case for 12-step programs.
You know, ACCESSIBLE spirituality with a practical result -
functional, healthy people.
Step one : Admitted we were powerless...
karl
|
| 358.257 | Going after the 98% disfunctional or 2% "actualized"? | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Wed Jan 08 1992 11:37 | 13 |
| re: .256 (karl)
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. But if there's
ONE thing I rail against in regards to 12-step programs, it's
the "...I am powerless..." approach ("I have no control over
my xyz.") I'm not sure whether Lazaris would agree or not, but
based on what he has said, it would seem to be very much counter
to creating one's own reality---having responsibility and power
to determine the outcome of one's existence.
Are you suggesting something different?
Frederick
|
| 358.258 | Which I is powerless? certainly the drinking I | KARHU::TURNER | | Wed Jan 08 1992 14:28 | 2 |
| The "I am powerless" refers to the ego. There is more than ample power
available, but the ego can at best only misuse it.
|
| 358.259 | | SALSA::MOELLER | Chihuahua Punting Champion 1987-1990 | Wed Jan 08 1992 14:39 | 10 |
| Frederick, many people misinterpret Step 1. Yes, it uses the word
'powerless' in relation to our character defects, which were well
described in .255. However, the second half of the message says that
we CAN move toward health with the help of our Higher Power, however
that is defined. As Gurdjieff said, we have no 'will power'.
Something else has to change, long-term, and my will can't hold for
more than 15 minutes at a time, and I'll fall back on old constructs.
The higher power can help uproot these old, unhealthy constructs.
karl
|
| 358.260 | "taking back one's power" who does it? | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Wed Jan 08 1992 16:28 | 12 |
| re: .259 (karl)
Perhaps you are confusing "will power" with "power of the
will." There is a difference between the two. If you are talking
about will power, I agree. I also agree that addictions often rely
more heavily on outside help (i.e., "higher power") than other
situations. But to say "powerless?" I still don't think so. That
power may have been given elsewhere, but the owner still has control
of it.
Frederick
|
| 358.261 | | SALSA::MOELLER | Chihuahua Punting Champion 1987-1990 | Wed Jan 08 1992 17:07 | 24 |
| Frederick, it's only after accepting our powerlessness that we can
accept the help of our higher power, which has all along wanted to help
but was blocked by the ego. 'Who does it' if we have no power ? The
individual can ask his/her support group, sponsor, and the higher
power. Yes, 'powerless'. Would you please clarify the statement
>Perhaps you are confusing "will power" with "power of the will."
because I make no distinction between the two. We may be in violent
agreement. And I also don't see that the 12 Steps are only useful to
hard-core addicts. Many people are getting support, clarity on their
issues, and mental health through attendance and participation in
groups like
Codependents Anonymous
Adult Children of Alcoholics
Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous
Emotions Anonymous
even Arts Anonymous (!)
I really see 12 Steps as real, available sprituality for this age.
Non-denominational participatory human evolution.
karl
|
| 358.262 | | DSSDEV::GRIFFIN | Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty | Wed Jan 08 1992 19:03 | 10 |
| Re: .55-.59
Would it help to point out the usage of past tense in .55? First admit that
you have no power, then, through growth, you gain power (over whatever it is).
I have seen these twelve steps, and I have questions about some of them, but
not the first. The first is an acceptance of what is, without accusation or
guilt or shame, etc.
Beth
|
| 358.263 | | DSSDEV::GRIFFIN | Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty | Wed Jan 08 1992 19:06 | 3 |
| Re: .262
Ooops, should be Re: .255-.259
|
| 358.264 | re .261 | HOCUS::FERGUSON | | Thu Jan 09 1992 18:27 | 4 |
| Arts Anonymous???
^^^^
Dare I ask?
|
| 358.265 | Very, very powerful. | MISERY::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Mon Jan 13 1992 18:41 | 33 |
| re: .261 (karl)
Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner...
To understand the difference between will power and power of the
will is to understand the difference between masculine energy and
feminine energy and also in understanding the difference between
domination and dominion. "Will power" conveys domination, masculine
energy (abused,) and a determination to "force reality."
The "power of will" is more subtle, it is acknowledging that one
can flow with masculine energy, that dominion is not about forcing
will onto anything or anyone...it is allowing the feminine energy
of being by utilizing the masculine energy of doing.
To talk about powerlessness as though that is somehow part and
parcel to our reality is erroneous, in my opinion. We all have
power---whether it is in our conscious mind, our sub-conscious mind,
our un-conscious mind, or in our higher conscious mind ("Higher
Power.") All of these parts of the self are capable of manifesting
(as is the negative ego, as you implied.) But the trick is in
determining which part; if not the conscious *you* then it MUST
be one of the other parts. Abnegating responsibility, however,
by determining that the conscious part has no power, is copping out.
The name of the game is to bring the power back into the conscious
mind, which is where we initially want it, and THEN giving that
power to whichever other part is relevant, first to the sub-conscious
then to the unconscious and finally in merging with the Higher
consciousness. Dominion is the act of consciously merging with
the Higher Self. It is not the surrendering, in the usual sense
of that word, to that energy. It is first in learning to create,
so that co-creation can follow.
So, no, not powerless, sorry.
Frederick
|
| 358.266 | | SALSA::MOELLER | Some dissembling required. | Mon Jan 13 1992 19:37 | 14 |
| Arts Anonymous
Step 1. Admitted we were powerless over our creativity.. ;-)
Yes, there is indeed a very active ARTS (Artists Recovering through
Twelve Steps) Anonymous nationwide with the main chapter in New York.
It uses the twelve step model and sponsorship. It equates facilitating
our creativity with sobriety, and blocking our creativity with
addiction. It doesn't always map, such as Step 9, making amends.. I
don't know who exactly besides myself has been hurt because I haven't
made as much music, or as often, as I might've if everything was
different.
karl
|
| 358.267 | I substitute needy for powerless IWFM. | DNEAST::BERLINGER_MA | LIFE IN THE ASTRAL PLANE | Thu Feb 13 1992 14:57 | 11 |
|
re: to no one in particular
My interpritation of "powerless" is that "IT" is too big
for me to deal with alone, I can't fix "IT" alone. I am still creating
my own reality, I just need some help taking care of "IT".
Later,
Mark
|
| 358.268 | Faith | ACE::MOORE | | Tue Mar 31 1992 03:12 | 8 |
|
what is faith, unless it is to believe what you do not see? St.
Augustine
Ray
|
| 358.269 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | Zeker is dat niets zeker is. | Tue Mar 31 1992 05:24 | 6 |
| Faith is a very good way of keeping the general population under
control, whilst permitting an elite class to live a more luxurious
lifestyle. This has been shown many times down through history and is
currently being demonstrated again with modern religious cults.
Jamie.
|
| 358.270 | Who's got the power? | 31294::WARD_FR | Making life a mystical adventure | Tue Mar 31 1992 13:38 | 12 |
| re: .269 (Jamie)
It doesn't end with religion, however. You can also add
political cults, social clubs, gang activity, work ethic, etc.,
etc. As we have discussed elsewhere in this conference, blind
faith is particularly foolish, and should be at best a desperate
move. Personally, I avoid the use of the word faith, for faith
implies giving away too much power to something held superior...
I prefer hope and trust as alternatives.
Frederick
|
| 358.272 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | So I said - Blow it out your ear! | Thu Apr 02 1992 04:36 | 32 |
| Re .271
>re: .269 (Jamie)
>Huh?
I assume from this monosyllabic reply that you failed to understand my
opinions, so let me try again.
Currently there are several religious cults in which faith in a leader
is encouraged. By use of this faith the leader has loads of money,
houses, cars, etc while the minions at the bottom live a lifestyle of
an unpaid servant or slave.
Until recently in America TV evangelism was using faith to con millions
of dollars out of thousands ordinary Americans just to keep a few in a
very luxurious lifestyle indeed.
If you now look at history you will often find faith being used to
cover up the process of parting the poor from what little they had to
keep those at the top of the heap in comfort.
The inevitable promise to keep the lower orders in place is the old,
"Pie in the sky when you die" ploy. Or in other words if you suffer in
this world you are rewarded in the next. Thus down through the ages a
handful have controlled the majority using faith in something which
cannot be proved.
I trust this makes it clearer, however should this not be the case
perhaps you could be more specific with your comments on it.
Jamie.
|
| 358.273 | minor correction | ENABLE::glantz | Mike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng Littleton | Thu Apr 02 1992 12:19 | 6 |
| > Until recently in America TV evangelism was using faith to con millions
The news of its demise is greatly exaggerated. Aside from the
publicity, the recent scandals haven't made a dent in the operations of
TV evangelism.
|
| 358.274 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | I hate quotation; R W Emerson 1849 | Thu Apr 02 1992 12:31 | 13 |
| Well I believe that one Jimmy Baker is not making as much as he was.
Mind you when he was sentenced I thought that it was a bit crass for
his wife to rush out of the courtroom and burst into song, she could
have waited until she got home.
Actually the were poised to extend their activities to Europe when the
scandal hit. Seems that their plans got dropped by the cable companies
over here.
BTW do you have to have an enormous sexual appetite for younger people
before you become a TV evangelist, or does that bit come later.
Jamie.
|
| 358.276 | | ENABLE::glantz | Mike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng Littleton | Thu Apr 02 1992 20:34 | 5 |
| > It isn't faith that's the problem. It's greed and deception.
Good point. You can't sell snake oil to a vigilant, thoughtful
consumer. Only to one who is lazy or greedy.
|
| 358.277 | I have a rusty snake at home. | DWOVAX::STARK | To Serve Man | Thu Apr 02 1992 20:46 | 9 |
| >> It isn't faith that's the problem. It's greed and deception.
>
>Good point. You can't sell snake oil to a vigilant, thoughtful
>consumer. Only to one who is lazy or greedy.
And if you can, then maybe they have a use for it you haven't thought
of. :-)
todd
|
| 358.278 | | HOO78C::ANDERSON | I hate quotation; R W Emerson 1849 | Fri Apr 03 1992 05:20 | 22 |
| Religions only seem to work if you believe in something that is clearly
impossible. This varies from religion to religion, in fact there can be
quite wide variations in the various subsections of the same religion.
As these things are demonstrably impossible you must take them on
faith. While you are doing this you will usually be asked to contribute
to the upkeep of the religion and if you look carefully at the top of
the religion you will usually find someone who has a very nice
lifestyle indeed.
Apart from the modern cults you will find that the dominant religion
and the country's rulers were usually hand in glove, the religion
supporting the ruler and vice versa. Thus faith in believing something
that is impossible has been used to keep the masses in order for
centuries and no doubt the same will be true in the future.
I must admit that the greed of the common man looking for a good time
for eternity and the deception of those who make this promise are
contributory. However take away the faith and the whole house of cards
falls down.
Jamie.
|
| 358.279 | | PLAYER::BROWNL | Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle. | Fri Apr 03 1992 06:34 | 16 |
| Jamie's right, you know.
Speaking personally, my inability to accept any religious faith or to
become part of any religion, is due partly to the fact that I have an
in-built scepticism, and partly to a deep mistrust of those promoting
said religions. Looking back over history, the leaders of all the
"normal" or accepted main-stream faiths, have been corrupt,
blood-thirsty, greedy, and selfish.
Over the years, more blood has been spilt, more inhumanity has been
executed by man against man, in the name of "God", than for any other
reason. Even today, religion is the root of much discord on our planet.
It's not for me, I'm afraid.
Laurie.
|
| 358.280 | Remember, confidence is a form of faith. | COMICS::BELL | Hear the softly spoken magic spell | Fri Apr 03 1992 07:53 | 13 |
|
<-- Only too true.
The question remains though : is faith the problem or is it the poor
choice of subject for that faith ? ie., is it the ability & willingness
to believe in *anything* unprovable (as an abstract quality) that is a
weakness/failing or is it that most people choose to believe in subjects
that are inherently weak (due to the failings of the humans involved) ?
To paraphrase : is "faith" a strong house that has [historically] tended to
be built on weak foundations or a weak house regardless of the foundations ?
Frank
|
| 358.281 | | ENABLE::glantz | Mike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng Littleton | Fri Apr 03 1992 13:03 | 35 |
| .278> Religions only seem to work if you believe in something that is clearly
.278> impossible.
.278> As these things are demonstrably impossible you must take them on
.278> faith.
.279> Jamie's right, you know
I have to disagree.
It is not demonstrably impossible that God exists, for example, only
impossible to *prove*. This is because, as I've said before, existence
of God is a proposition which has the hallmarks of axiom, not theorem
or theory supported by incontrovertible evidence. You can't demonstrate
or prove that God does not exist, either. As far as the evidence is
concerned, it is inconclusive. It can be interpreted either way.
The fact that the doctrines and dogma of organized religions are full
of contradiction and falsehood, and that dishonorable and insincere
people use religion to their own selfish ends, does not discredit the
essential truth which may lie behind them, and which may be perceived
by some people.
Consider, for example, the possibility that the entire universe is a
simulation running on some inconceivably powerful computer. How could
we -- artifacts of this simulation -- possibly determine whether the
universe is a simulation or not? Would it even matter? Maybe -- if the
"programmer" ever decided to take an interest and intervene in the
simulation by, for example, causing seas to "miraculously" part. This
would be as simple as hitting control-C, entering the debugger, and
depositing new values in some of the variables. For example:
DEBUG> dep mike_glantz[0:2147483647]=0
and Mike Glantz vanishes without a trace.
|
| 358.282 | Rooster and egg :-) | DWOVAX::STARK | To Serve Man | Fri Apr 03 1992 13:14 | 16 |
| re: -.1, Frank,
> choice of subject for that faith ? ie., is it the ability & willingness
> to believe in *anything* unprovable (as an abstract quality) that is a
> weakness/failing or is it that most people choose to believe in subjects
> that are inherently weak (due to the failings of the humans involved) ?
There's even some question about whether people even do truly
'choose what to believe' in all cases. Or whether the belief comes
first in some respects, and then the illusion that it was chosen.
I think that probably both the choose-to-believe idea and the
believe-then-choose idea capture a little piece of the puzzle
of mentality and belief.
todd
|
| 358.283 | apples and oranges... | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Fri Apr 03 1992 13:34 | 7 |
| Jamie and Laurie,
I largely agree. Which is why I am always careful to maintain a
distinct separation in my mind between organized religion and
spirituality/belief systems/faith. Very different things.
Mary
|
| 358.285 | | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Fri Apr 03 1992 13:35 | 4 |
| actually, I think the last title should have been "rotten apples and
oranges!"
Mary ;-)
|
| 358.286 | Jamie and Laurie, you might like this religion. | TNPUBS::PAINTER | let there be music | Fri Apr 03 1992 15:25 | 139 |
|
From: "Meet the Unitarian Universalists", by Jack Mendelsohn
What Do Unitarians Believe?
The heart of Unitarian Universalist religion is a positive faith in
working principles rather than doctrines. The distinguished
international scholar and historian, Earl Morse Wilbur, wrote, "When the
Unitarian movement began, the marks of true religion were commonly
though to be belief in creeds, membership in the church and
participation in rites and sacraments. To the Unitarian of today, the
marks of true religion are spiritual freedom, enlightened reason, broad
and tolerant sympathy, upright character, and unselfish service. These
things, which go to the very heart of life, best express the meaning of
Unitarian history."
Because we find the essense of religions in character and conduct rather
than in doctrines, creeds, dogmas, and catechisms, those who customarily
think of religion as a series of theological definitions sometimes have
difficulty understanding the liberal religious position.
We are believers, but our beliefs are centered in a method, a process of
the religious life, rather than in closed articles of faith.
"But what do Unitarian Universalists believe?" we are asked. "What is
your creed?"
We have no creed. On matters normally frozen into creedal statements,
we are expected to follow the dictates of reason, conscience, and
experience. Our churches made no official pronouncements on God, the
Bible, Jesus, immortality, or any of the other theological questions
generally answered with unabashed finality by more traditional religious
groups.
To us, creating a religious way of life is far too important to be left
to the propounders of creeds and dogmas.
We become Unitarian Universalists not by substituting one confession of
faith for another, but by opening our minds to receive truth and
inspiration from every possible source.
The most fundamental of all our principles, then, is individual freedom
of religious belief - the principle of a free mind.
Most religious beliefs are based on some outside authority. The prophet
or priest dictates, the Bible dictates, or the creed dictates what must
be believed. For those who have no special urge to do their own
thinking, this is an effective and logical approach. But what of those
who have an intense need to think independently?
For us the most vital fact is this: in order to advance, humans must be
free. There is no area of life in which it is more important to be free
than in religion.
Those who differ with us argue that we must be directed by infallible
religious guides, or else our frailties will corrupt and destroy us.
But when we begin to examine closely the "infallible" religious guides,
what do we discover? The church that claims authority to dictate
beliefs is a human institution, and its final truths are no more than
the conclusions arrived at by earlier human leaders.
The same is true of the Bible. It was written by mortals.
No creed exists that was not originally composed by human beings like
ourselves.
Churches, Bibles, and creeds are the creations of those who once
exercised their freedom to create. Is there any reason why we should
expect to do less?
Thus the distinctive characteristic of the Unitarian Universalist is our
insistence that we will not bind our present and future in religion to
the tutelage of the past. We will attempt to learn all that the past can
teach us, but we will do our own thinking about current matters of faith
and belief.
John P. Marquand, Pulitzer-Prize-winning author, believed that as
democracy is our freest form of social life, so is Unitarian
Universalist the freest form of religious life, and that like democracy,
the Unitarian Universalist religion depends upon the separate thinking
of every Unitarian Universalist to give it significance and vitality.
In one of our congregations and agnostic may sit beside one who believes
in a personal God; at the after-service coffee hour a believer in
personal immortality may chat with one who accepts "utter extinction".
Such are our wide diversities of individual belief.
We are together in our devotion to freedom; each living by a thought-out
covenant with oneself and with life as a whole; each understanding that
one's beliefs may change as insights deepen and experiences broaden.
You can see how boundless the opportunities are for an earnest,
thoughtful person in this "open" approach to religion and the spiritual
life.
Second only to our belief in the free mind is the principle of reason
and responsibility. We must accept responsibility for our own acts. We
believe that this sense of responsibility reflects the teaching of the
great Biblical prophets from Amos to Jesus. We believe also that it is
the essense of one of our noblest achievements, the scientific method.
In brief, we believe that our religious concept of ethical
responsibility is much more in tune with reality, and much more
productive of good than the traditional doctrine of inherent depravity
through "original sin."
How do we cultivate responsible behavior? For us a chief resource is
human reason. Reason holds the place that is ordinarily accorded to
revelation in orthodox religions. That person is likely to behave the
best who exercises reason most.
This does not mean that we are unmindful of the limitations of human
reason, nor that we look upon it as an infallible guide. In our way of
life there are no infallible guides. Dr. E. Burdette Backus, a
prominent Unitarian minister, described our faith in reason:
"...intelligence is an instrument which has developed in the
process of evolution to enable us to satisfy our needs more
adequately. It had originally a very earthy and practical
purpose, namely that of solving the problems that pressed in
upon us in daily life. Although it continues this
immediately pressing function it has far outsoared it and
seeks to penetrate beyond the stars to find an answer to the
riddle of the universe. Our reason makes many mistakes; it
is frequently taken captive by our desires, so that we
believe things not because they are true, but because we
want to believe them. It cannot give us absolute and final
certainty, but it has established a substantial body of
verified truth; it is steadily increasing the amount of that
truth. For all its limitations it serves us very well, and
those who advocate its abandonment are simply telling a
person who is groping through the dark by the light of a
candle to blow out the light."
Unitarian Universalism, then, is an ethical rather than a doctrinal
religion, with individual freedom as its method and reason as its guide.
The path of logic leads from freedom, through reason, to a third
fundamental principle: a generous and tolerant understanding of
differing views and practices.
|
| 358.287 | Unitariansim is non-dogmatic, etc... | BTOVT::HARAMUNDANIS | | Fri Apr 03 1992 16:48 | 8 |
| Re: .-1
Thank you Cindy for posting that excellent article. Couldn't have said
it better myself!
Best regards,
Sergei
|
| 358.288 | More ? | DWOVAX::STARK | To Serve Man | Fri Apr 03 1992 16:50 | 13 |
| re: Unitarian Universalists
Very cool, Cindy.
>How do we cultivate responsible behavior? For us a chief resource is
>human reason. Reason holds the place that is ordinarily accorded to
>revelation in orthodox religions. That person is likely to behave the
>best who exercises reason most.
How exactly do they suggest that their members learn to do this ?
Does anyone have a further reference ?
todd
|
| 358.289 | ...some world-wide differences in Unitarians... | BTOVT::HARAMUNDANIS | | Fri Apr 03 1992 16:57 | 9 |
| Re: Unitarianism
It is important to recognize however that Unitarianism in England is
different than North America and the Transylvanian Unitarianism much
different from both. As far as I know the biggest difference is how
close they are to keeping ties with Christian values and differences in
trinitarian and non-trinitarian origins. Also the unity or "merging" of
Unitarians and Universalists only came about in North America fairly
recently in 1961.
|
| 358.290 | Pointer | TNPUBS::PAINTER | let there be music | Fri Apr 03 1992 17:34 | 6 |
|
For more info on UUism, check out the notesfile on NOTED::UU.
I belong to the church in Groton, Mass.
Cindy
|
| 358.291 | add'l | TNPUBS::PAINTER | let there be music | Fri Apr 03 1992 17:36 | 48 |
|
From: "Meet The Unitarian Universalists", by Jack Mendelsohn
Some Hows and Whens of Unitarian Universalist History
To find the roots of our religion we must go back to the prophets of
ancient Israel and the Socratic tradition of Athens. Modern liberal
religion heartily acknowledges its debt to these founts of reverence for
human dignity and the primacy of ethics in religion.
The Christian origins of our movement are anchored in the moral teaching
of Jesus, as exemplified in the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount.
Early Christianity was neither Trinitarian nor Unitarian. For nearly
three centuries after Jesus' death, no specific doctrine of this type
was enforced as part of an official Christian creed. When doctrinal
controversies became too stormy and violent, the Roman Emperor
Constantine summoned church leaders to a council, where, in 325 - almost
300 years after the death of Jesus, the Nicene Creed was voted into
existence. The divinity of Jesus thus became the official orthodoxy of
the Christian religion. The Nicene formula declared by a divided vote
that Jesus was of the same essential substance as God.
A half century later, at another gathering of church leaders, the
General Council of Constantinople, the assembled dignitaries added the
Holy Spirit to their formula, thus completing the Trinity. This was the
very human manner in which the Trinitarian dogma of "Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit" came into existence. From the beginning there were sincere
and thoughtful Christians who felt that the essential message of Jesus
was being drowned in a sea of metaphysics, but those who could not
conscientiously accept the Trinitarian position were expelled,
condemned, and martyred, as heretics. Nevertheless, a spirit of
independent thought and belief continued to flicker through the
centuries.
The ferment of the Protestant Reformation furnished adventurous
opportunities for leaders of a more liberal mind. Some began to
question the Trinity, and to call for less rigid religious conceptions
and practices. Their cause was immortalized by the shameful burning of
Michael Servetus in Switzerland by the order of John Calvin. Servetus'
crime was the writing of a book, "On The Errors Of of the Trinity", in
which he argued that the Trinity was a grotesque and distracting
addition to the true Christian life. Servetus was burned and many
others were tortured and slain for expressing personal convictions in
opposition to official orthodoxies, but insuppressable ideas were in the
air. In Italy, Switzerland, Hungary, Poland, Holland, and England,
spokespersons for a liberalized Christianity appeared in ever-increasing
numbers. Ministers and entire congregations began to secede from the
orthodox ranks in rebellion against theological dogmatism.
|
| 358.292 | and more | TNPUBS::PAINTER | let there be music | Fri Apr 03 1992 17:36 | 88 |
|
From: "Meet The Unitarian Universalists", by Jack Mendelsohn
Some Hows and Whens of Unitarian Universalist History
Religious Freedom
In 1568, the only Unitarian king in history, John Sigismund of
Transylvania, issued the Western world's first edict of religious
freedom. In Koloszvar, a small Transylvania town, is found the world's
oldest Unitarian congregation. It left the ranks of orthodoxy in 1568
to follow the leadership of the brilliant reformer Francis David. By
1600 there were more than 400 Unitarian congregations in the surrounding
area.
Later, in England, the cause of liberal religion was advanced by the
powerful advocacy of such people as John Milton, Issac Newton, and John
Locke. With footings established in spite of constant persecution, the
Unitarian religion began to assume organizational form. Journals,
schools, and new churches appeared whenever fierce objections of
orthodox authorities could be overcome. In Poland, the orthodox
reaction was violent enough to exterminate the strong liberal movement.
Early in the eighteenth century, liberal thought began to find
expression in American pulpits. During the last half of the eighteenth
century, a few isolated religious leaders in England and America began
to preach the doctrine that it was unthinkable for a loving God to damn
any personal everlastingly to hell. The Nicene Creed must then be in
error. In the 1740's these heretical notions were preached in
Pennsylvania by Dr. George de Benneville. In the 1760's similar ideas
brought about the excommunication from Methodism of John Murray. These
Universalists proclaimed that the final harmony of the human soul with
God. Murray in 1770 helped to found the Universalist church in America.
The Calvinist majority in the colonies was disturbed by this wandering
from "sound" doctrine. There was immediate denunciation of the
Universalists as an irresponsible lot bent on encouraging a life of
reckless wickedness, counting on escaping the tortures of hell. (;^)
Standing against the orthodox majority, Universalists stressed the
ethical nature of God.
In 1800 a man of outstanding preaching ability appeared on the New
England scene, a courageous, persuasive, and scholarly Universalist
preacher named Hosea Ballou. In 1803 the Universalists adopted the
'Winchester Profession', which became the standard expression of
Universalist views, emphasizing God's universal love and the example and
leadership of Jesus, and coined the phrase "salvation by character."
The first churches in America to assume the Unitarian name were founded
by Dr. Joseph Priestley in Northumberland, Pennsylvania (1794) and in
Philadelphia (1796). Though known as the discoverer of oxygen and as
one of the most celebrated of English scientists, Dr. Priestley was by
profession a Unitarian minister. After orthodox fanatics burned his
famous laboratory in Birmingham, England, Priestley came to the New
World to seek a religious atmosphere less contaminated by orthodox
bigotry. His arrival in America was a catalyst. Intellectual and moral
revolt against orthodox doctrines was sweeping across the eastern
seaboard. Churches of many denominations were caught up in the desire
to re-examine their theological beliefs and backgrounds. Boston's
historic King's Chapel, the first Episcopal church in New England, led
the way in 1785. the congregation called a minister of Unitarian
persuasion and revised its book of common prayer to eliminate all
objectionable Trinitarian references.
In 1802 the oldest Pilgrim church, founded at Plymouth in 1620 became
Unitarian by congregational vote. This pattern was repeated in more
than 100 cities and towns.
Meanwhile there had emerged in Boston a Unitarian leader of eloquence
and force of personality, Dr. William Ellery Channing, under whose
inspiration the American Unitarian Association was founded on May 25,
1825. By coincidence, the British Unitarian Association was officially
organized on the same day. In each country, the scattered, independent
liberal congregations thus pooled their strengths in a formal,
cooperative way, and their futures were assured.
In the early days there was little enthusiasm for close ties between the
Unitarians and the Universalists. This pained Ballou, who wrote
eloquently of the affinity of the two groups, recalling their common
aspirations and frustrations, and calling for intellectual and spiritual
unity. During the next century the two groups grew increasingly aware
of one another, and passed more than a dozen resolutions calling for
union. Finally in 1947, a joint commission was established to lay the
groundwork for Federal Union, and by 1951 it presented a recommendation
for immediate union in the fields of religious education, publications,
and public relations, with a gradual trend toward complete merger, which
was effected in Boston in May, 1960. Total consolidation was completed
in May, 1961.
|
| 358.293 | and some more | TNPUBS::PAINTER | let there be music | Fri Apr 03 1992 17:37 | 107 |
| From: "Introducing Unitarian Universalism", by John Nicholls Booth
Who's Who of UUism
------------------
What kind of people are Unitarian Universalists?
The calibre of a movement may be judged by the type of person who follow
it. Does it command the loyalty of thoughtful, progressive, substantial
individuals? When Thomas Jefferson penned a letter which flowed from the
enthusiasm of his own faith, saying: "I trust there is not a young man now
living in the United States who will not die a Unitarian," he knew that
many eminent persons of his day espoused this religion and that countless
others would go through life without being aware that, in their religious
attitude and belief, they, too, had been Unitarians. No group of people
stood closer to the foundations of democracy in America than the Unitarians
and Universalists.
Let us look, first, toward the past.
Men of the Unitarian persuasion in the White House have included John
Adams, John Quincy Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Millard Fillmore and William
Howard Taft. Charles Sumner and John Marshall were distinguished lay
persons of this faith.
One is astonished to discover the number of literary figures represented in
this church: Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Samuel Longfellow, Oliver Wendell
Holmes, Ralph Waldo Emerson, James Russell Lowell, William Cullen Bryant,
Edward Everett Hale, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Bret Harte, Louisa May Alcott,
and others. The historians George Bancroft, John Lothrop Motley, Francis
Parkman and William Prescott must not be forgotten.
Because Unitarian Universalism places prime emphasis upon helping people to
live supremely in this life we shall find its truest exponents among the
pioneers in philanthropic, humanitarian and educational work who have been,
or are, of this religious movement.
The Universalists were the first body of religionists to go on record as
opposed to human slavery in any form, doing so in 1790 in Philadelphia. One
of the twelve charter members of the first Universalist church to be
organized on American soil was "Gloster Dalton, an African." Dr. Benjamin
Rush, a Universalist layman and signer of the Declaration of Independence,
helped organize the first antislavery society. He pioneered in the field
of psychiatry, the first to call the American medical world's attention to
mental diseases. In 1791, he established the first non-sectarian Sunday
School in America.
Universalists have founded over four dozen universities and colleges
including California Institute of Technology, Tufts University, University
of Akron, St. Lawrence University, Goddard College, Westbrook Junior
College and others. These schools are no longer controlled by the
denomination, their affairs have been transferred to private corporations.
Lombard College (now part of the Meadville Theological School) and Oberlin
were among the first American colleges and universities to adopt
co-education.
The Universalist Church was the first to bring women into its ministry.
Instrumental in gaining for women rights they now enjoy were such
Universalist and Unitarian women as Julia Ward Howe, Mary Livermore, Alice
Cary, Carolyn Soule, Susan B. Anthony and Margaret Fuller. A Universalist
minister edited the first journal dedicated to the welfare of working
women.
Horace Mann, initiator of reform in education and the first great champion
of universal, nonsectarian public schools; Elizabeth Peabody, first
American to set up a nursery school; Cyrus Pierce, who put vitality into
the crusade for Normal Schools, and Peter Cooper, the founder of Cooper
Union in New York City - all these sat before Unitarian ministers who were
crying out against the evils these men and women later helped to reduce.
Include among the Unitarian humanitarians Dorothea Dix, whose unflagging
energies started the movements which resulted in more humane treatment for
those confined in prisons, public charity institutions and hospitals for
the insane; Dr. Samuel G. Howe, who founded the first school for the blind
when he established the Perkins Institution; Henry Bergh, who created the
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; a Universalist laywoman,
Clara Barton, who did saintly work during the War Between the States and
founded the American Red Cross.
Others who have applied their religious ideals to public welfare include
George William Curtis, a Unitarian pioneer in advocating civil service, and
the Unitarian pastor, LeGrand Powers, the first official State Labor
Conciliator, appointed in 1887 in Minnesota.
The first prisoner reforms were sponsored by Universalists. The earliest
prison paper, "The Prisoner's Friend", was edited by the Rev. Charles Spear
who prepared the ground for many later reforms. Universalists were the
first to propose parole and oppose capital punishment.
A Unitarian clergyman in Dublin, New Hampshire opened the first library in
the United States free to all inhabitants of a town or city. The United
States Sanitary Commission, which preceded and aided in the organization of
the International Red Cross, was originated by the Rev. Henry W. Bellows,
minister of the Unitarian church of All Souls, New York City. In grateful
appreciation of the Rev. Thomas Starr King, whose eloquence and untiring
efforts prevented California's secession from the Union, that State
selected him as one of its two most distinguished citizens and placed his
bust in the Hall of Statuary, Washington, D.C. Joseph Priestly, Charles
Darwin, Louis Agassiz and Charles Steinmetz are Unitarian names prominent
in the scientific world.
These representative people have shown us what it means to be truly
religious; to effect salvation not through belief in closed ecclesiastical
doctrines but by thoughtful, unselfish and exalted living. Their lives
reflect a faith in the potential goodness of all people, in the need to
liberate them in body and mind so that they can live nobly as befits the
divinity in their souls.
|