Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum III Archive # 23 | |
From: Aug 26, 1998 |
To: Sep 22, 1998 |
Page: 1 Of: 5 |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 20:09:03 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: Well this is not on-topic about knowledge, but since it is about 'the world', I figure it's heading in the right direction. Anyone else seen some figures recently released by a United Nations report on global inequality: Bill Gates is worth more than the combined wealth of America's poorest 100 million people. He alone could afford the $68 billion needed to achieve and maintain universal access to basic education and health care, safe water and basic sanitation, the UN says. 1 child born in Britain, America or France will consume more in a lifetime than 50 children in developing nations. There are 84 individuals with combined fortunes worth more than the wealth of China. The world's 225 richest people have a combined wealth equal to the annual income of the world's poorest 47% of people (about 2.5 billion people). In addition, due to the prosperity depicted in films, on television and by aggressive global advertising, expectations have gone global, but not affluence. (it's no longer just about keeping up with a neighbour). The comment made by a Mr Speth: 'we will pay later and dearly in migration, in the environment, in other problems. There is no way even the richest country can build walls'. The cartoon accompanying the newspaper article: a reporter saying to Gates 'Mr Gates, what could you give to help the world's billions of poor people?' and Gates is saying 'Something to aspire to'. I don't mean to stir up a hornet's nest but thought this might make for an interesting discussion as we become ever more conscious of the world we live in. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 21:20:21 (EDT)
From: Maltheus Email: None To: Judith Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: There's just too damn many babies being born. As a species, we've been too successful, there is no ''in heat'' season for humans, we are living longer and we are just too damn smart for our own survival. Get fixed!!!!!!!!! Especially you Asians!!!!!! Listen to Mao!!!!!!!! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 16:32:22 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Maltheus Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: You can piss off Malthus, you did more damage to environmental awareness than hitler did for vegetarianism! Is the fact that you are now 'e'ed up, your secret to your extended life? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 18:55:55 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: The proposition that the distribution of wealth is problematic rests on at least one of two assumptions: 1. If the fabulously wealthy were kept from becoming so rich, by in income ceiling or something, then there would be more for everyone else. In other words, they 'stole' or appropriated their wealth; and their independent contribution is not worth the resources they tie up. 2. Such a wide disparity in wealth is, itself, a symptom of a larger social ill, or an unhealthy distortion of the market. It is easier to make the second case than the first. The existence of 'great fortunes' are then analogous to a tumor and are inherently 'morbid.' Louis Kelso, the inventor of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), made a very convincing case for the concept of 'morbid capital' based on Saye's Law. Basically, Saye's Law says that the amount available within the consumer economy has to equal the value of goods produced. If a large proportion of money never becomes available for consumption then it is 'morbid,' in the sense that it is only available for production… for expanding productive capacity. Kelso's argument was that this condition of 'morbid capital' is what led to the Great Depression. On the subject of 'great fortunes' I heard Paul Louis-Dreyfus, the owner of the European grain cartel (the equivalent of ADM in the US, or Carghill in Canada), indicate that he thought the era when a single family could control such a vital commodity was over. He said that he did not intend to pass on the family business to his heirs, especially since they were all girls with no interest carrying on those acquisitive traditions. One of those 'girls' did fairly well, by the way, as Jerry Seinfeld's pal, Julia. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 19:50:23 (EDT)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: Hi Scott, I always liked Bucky Fuller's idea of five billion billionaires and the reconsideration of our definition of wealth. Since you probably know more about Fuller than anyone else on the site, I'm interested in your thoughts on the subject. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 22:04:34 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Spaceship Earth: Livingry Message: Michael: As you probably know Bucky had a definition of wealth in 'Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth.' Basically it had to do with the ability to find whatever living circumstances you desire within a matter of 24 hours or less, and the ability to find any information you want or need within a matter of minutes. He promoted the idea of a sort of high tech tent stuffed full of communication gadgets. The 'tent' would have to be self-cleaning, and consume small amounts of resources to produce a high standard of living. He also imagined that it would be easily relocatable, and could withstand earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. So, in his view wealth production was a matter of technology fusion that brings together housing, transportion, and communications. He called the concept 'livingry.' -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 01:28:18 (EDT)
From: Runamok Email: out of order To: Scott T. Subject: the limits of one man Message: But Bucky was pretty far off in some of his predictions. Didn't he predict teleportation before 1990? I like Bucky tho, don't get me wrong. Distribution of wealth sure seems like it could help our dialogues if not the world- at least to some extent. Gates sure was nauseating on TV saying the money doesn't mean anything to him- I'll give it all away one day he said. Bull- relatively speaking he gives away next to nothing and gets it all recorded in stone. By the way- hello everybody- been without a working modem for a month or so. Hello newcomers. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 23:27:13 (EDT)
From: Sir Cheeseman Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Judith Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: Why don't you try my lottery winning system on the MMT forum? Sorry that's all I can contribute at this time of night. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 12:40:44 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Judith Subject: Hmmmm.... Message: Judith: Did you know that Bill Gates started his 'company' without any real working capital? Did you know that his 'wealth' is completely self-earned (new money, not inherited)? Did you know that he isn't even a college graduate? - Now you propose that he should just 'give it away?' I don't understand 'redistribution' of wealth as a concept. How hard would YOU work if all of your money (minus a few bucks for your subsistence) were 'given away' to those that supposedly need it worse than you? How innovative would you be under those same circumstances? Would you really want to work at all? OR would you rather be a ward-of-the-state and just be taken care of? - I know that some folks on this earth just need a few bucks to get a kick-start on their own way to (hopefully) personal wealth, but redistribution doesn't do that. Redistribution, in my opinion, just fosters the 'welfare state' and nothing more. - This is where people (like you and me) can DO something by giving some of our money to various charities or, better yet, give some TIME in active participation in the functions of those charities. But, to expect redistribution of wealth to fix this problem (poverty on a large scale) is just too simplistic an answer. Getting rid of 'stupid superstitions and practices' would do more to alleviate poverty than redistribution of wealth would (e.g. the 'gods' say we cannot plant now because of blah, blah, blah. The 'gods' say we cannot take medicine because it is evil, etc, etc). Look around, how many of the world's 'problems' are created/sustained by those idiotic superstitions? You mentioned medical treatment that could be given, but what if it isn't ACCEPTED? Redistribution of wealth would not correct any of these problems! - Self-esteem doesn't occur when you are 'given' something. Self-esteem occurs when YOU EARN the 'thing.' YES, again, some folks need a financial kick-start. But the kick-start wouldn't be worth much, even if Bill Gates gave away ALL of his money, if the 'receivers' didn't LEARN what to do with it FIRST! IMHO ;-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 17:01:54 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Mike Subject: Hmmmm.... Message: Sorry to be so rude Mike, but I think you've completely missed Judith's point. Apart from the one line about how his dosh would be enough to provide the absolute basics for everyone, her whole line of argument was about how the planet is completely fucked BECAUSE of financial aspiration and the inevitable consumerist desecration that's been taking place because of that aspiration. Personally Judith I think it is way too late, start saving now for the few VERY expensive seats to the moon station, especially now that they have found water there. Nothing will ever change, and the few people who bleed about this, including me, have NO idea how to get the message over. Money rules. 'Redistribution, in my opinion, just fosters the 'welfare state' and nothing more.' Tell that to the Beatles, the Rolling Stones and every other rock group that nicked their ideas from elsewhere, mostly ripped off sub-cultures in the U.S.A, developed them while either on the dole or conning their way through art college, and then re-exported them for loads of dosh to the point that it is now a bigger financial earner than manufacturing over here.(the u.k.) Your reply sounded like you had Judith as a leftie, end of argument! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 18:45:11 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Hmmmm.... Message: Yes hamzen I am trying to stand outside the whole boxing ring (which is in fact planet earth). btw, what good will all the money buy when there is nothing worth having? And what is the state of peoples souls? I was also reading how some people in our society basically refuse to die. Even in grossly sick bodies, for example one man paid over a million dollars to be kept alive for a few more months (so afraid of death. So non-accepting). 1 baby born terribly deformed: should millions be spent on keeping it alive ('artificially') when a couple of hundred dollars could vaccinate so many children - I should get the stats for that because they really tell the story. Who's right is it to a decent human life? Is it yours? What did you do to 'deserve' it - and did you really 'earn' it? This Forum is an example to me of how, someone thought that in sharing their own experiences, what they found out - they would actually be helping themselves I guess. Helping to stop something they hate - lies, deception, manipulation - by connecting with other people and being willing to share on an 'equal' platform. It has certainly helped me more than I can say. Those people who still believe they have the 'money' (Knowledge) - well I'm sure they have built very high walls. And that's sad. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 18:45:23 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: hamzen Subject: BTW Message: Ham: I try not to 'label' anyone as anything, at all. I've found that when I do, I'm almost always wrong because people have more than a single side. I LIKE A GOOD ARGUMENT, now and again, though! ;-) - No insults meant, no insults taken and hopefully the same applies in my direction as well. :-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 19:49:58 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Mike Subject: BTW Message: Fair do's Mike, it's just that this was & is a BIG topic for me and I have a LOT of empathy for what Judith said, I have felt very Baader-Meinhoffish about it for a long time and am likely to get very aggressive about it, no compromise. Having said that and increasingly seeing the weaknesses of my hippy route, I have a lot of agreement with your dad's comment re the two wings. Ah the complexities of living! No insults meant, no insults taken, except this topic area! When you know you're always going to be on the losing side you can get a bit desperate. Again having said that I don't mind insults and aggression, especially don't mind being pulled up if someone thinks I'm out of order, in fact appreciate it. :) P.S. Any idea where can I find out about all these net emotional symbols ? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 23:49:03 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: hamzen Subject: BTW Message: Dear Hamzen, Here is one my niece uses when emailing me... <3 it is a heart. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 08:53:15 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Robyn Subject: BTW Message: Thanks for that, it's really sweet & I'll definitely use it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 10:15:08 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Emoticons Message: They're called emoticons, hamzen. If you type that word in your search engine, you should find an endless supply of them. They're also known as smileys. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 16:08:29 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Emoticons Message: Nice one Jerry, much appreciated Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 21:53:57 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mike Subject: Hrrrrmmph... Message: Mike: Now you propose that he should just 'give it away?' I don't understand 'redistribution' of wealth as a concept. How hard would YOU work if all of your money (minus a few bucks for your subsistence) were 'given away' to those that supposedly need it worse than you? How innovative would you be under those same circumstances? Would you really want to work at all? OR would you rather be a ward-of-the-state and just be taken care of? Up to a point that all makes a great deal of sense, but under no circumstance can I imagine that at this point Bill Gates is working for money. No, it's power that he's working for, not money, and when money becomes almost exclusively power it ought to be limited. There is a good argument for an incentive system, but in my view Bill Gates actually detracts from that system. It's not an easy call though. I can see arguments on the other side, and I'm not doctrinaire. But, the argument that really convinces me is the notion of morbid capital, that people like Gates simply remove too much value from circulation and put it exclusively into production. That, in the long run, spells trouble. If he could find some way to actually spend a substancial part of it on himself, or his friends, it wouldn't be a problem. But, 'conspicuous consumption' has other negative consequences and in the long run it's not nearly as attractive or interesting as power acquisition. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 00:09:58 (EDT)
From: eb Email: None To: Judith Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: Hi Judith. Great topic. My husband minored in Economics and expresses his views in abstract terms. Me, I only know what I've lived. I get too depressed when I think globally. (Remember when Woody Allen said he could never be happy as long as there were people starving in Somalia? I adopted that philosophy for several years). I was raised upper middle class, in California, USA. Around the same time that I found Maharaji, I went on welfare and had kids. Lived in the same beach town as CD, and hung out with the revolutionary hippies who leaned towards communism. When I started working, I became aware of the horrible dependency welfare had engendered in me. It really wasn't enough money to raise kids decently, but somehow I convinced myself that having and raising kids was my purpose in life. I found lots of ways around the system, but lived in fear and without enough food or adequate housing for many years. I comforted myself by remembering that I was still better off than approx. 95% of the world. A couple of years ago I read a book called Ishmael. The author's last name is Quinn, I think. It really changed my perception of life on our planet! Afterwards, I was extremely depressed and sorry that I followed my faulty programming and bore 5 children into this already overpopulated world. I recognized how selfish I have been in choosing to have a large family; also egotistical, believing that my genes were superior and wishing to ensure their continuation into the next generations. At one point recently, I 'woke up' and looked around and said, 'My God, what have I done?' --David Byrne. Ever since, I've attempted to go back to sleep because when I get to thinking about global warming and overpopulation, I tend to be willing to leave and let others utilize the resources I would otherwise be using. But I don't want to damage my progeny emotionally by abandoning them. They are not stupid, however. They see the signs of the times and ask me for the answers. I haven't a clue, I tell them. Hopefully they won't get trapped by any cults, murdered by schoolmates, or infected with deadly sexually transmitted diseases. On good days, I figure my wealth in terms of the abundance of love I receive from my children and the depth of love I feel toward them. On bad days, I wonder what I was thinking. eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 11:46:42 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: eb Subject: Don't EVEN THINK about it! Message: eb: Don't you dare even THINK about 'leaving.' What the heck are you thinking about???? You know, YOU MAY BE the one with some important 'answers.' You may not have all of them, but you may have some. Even if it consists of 'only' raising your kids to be decent people, that is a MAJOR step in the right direction, these days especially. Now, cut that out!!!!! OK? ;-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 12:02:32 (EDT)
From: eb Email: None To: Mike Subject: Okay, I'll cut it out! Message: Hi Mike, I get rather morbid at times, but I'm not leaving anytime soon on my own volition. Thanks for your concern. With love, eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 12:22:21 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: eb Subject: Thank You! Message: eb: I know that we can ALL be pretty morbid, at times. I'm pretty sensitive about this issue (and pick up the 'warning' signs early) because my own mom 'left' of her own volition when I was 14 years old. I can't even begin to describe the horror and the 'damage' and guilt that this event had on me. Believe me when I tell you, IT IS NEVER the right answer. IT IS NOT an option, EVER! Just keep that in mind, ok? :-) :-) - I know that you were likely 'just being morbid,' but I 'takes no chances' when it comes to that issue. I hope you understand and YES, I really do care.... ;-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 12:01:44 (EDT)
From: Katie Email: None To: Mike Subject: to Mike Message: Dear Mike - I am really sorry to hear about your mom's suicide. You are right that the aftereffects of that must be indescribable. My mom tried to kill herself, seriously, when I was 15. Luckily, she changed her mind before she passed out completely, and she and my sister convinced my dad to call an ambulance. She was despondent because of an inability to get help for her alcoholism (she was seeing a psychiatrist who didn't believe in AA). She didn't wake up for three days, but finally did, and they put her in a rehab, which helped a lot. When she got out, the whole family, including my 7-year old brother, had to go to counseling together for several months. This helped a lot, believe it or not. We saw a psychiatric social worker who was very wise and kind. I hope you and your family got some help of that kind too. I know it's very difficult to lose a parent when you are in your early teens - I can't imagine what it would be like to lose one to suicide. Take care, Mike. I can tell that you really DO care about the people on the forum - it's much appreciated. Love, Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 05:42:11 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Katie Subject: to Mike Message: Dear Mike, I have to agree with Katie here. Lossing your mom to suicide is something I can't imagine but know it must have been awful. I know a man who lost his dad in this way and know how hurt he is still 20 years later and that it effected his life ever after but in a negative way. I don't know you that well be it seems that you are a strong person, intelligent, thoughtful and very caring. I think maybe you tried to make yourself a better person for yourself and those you love resulting from this trauma instead of it dragging you down. Also sharing that here for the benifit of others is very helpful to some people who may have had similar experiences or even 'lost' a parent to BM. Thanks Mike and take care. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 15:35:01 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Katie & Robyn Subject: To: Katie & Robyn Message: - Thank you for the very kind words. Yes, it was traumatic and is still a little hard to talk about. But, I WILL talk about it when I think that someone is 'in trouble.' I try to convey to them the emotions that occur in those that are left behind. I think if most people knew this (REALLY knew this), they wouldn't even consider it. They think they are doing everyone a 'favor' by leaving. It isn't possible for ANY CONCEPT to be further from the truth. It took a very long time to go thru all of the emotional turmoil that her death created. In fact, I think the 'last' of my anger was expressed when I retired and 'came home' to Arizona. I was really pissed-off that she didn't hang around long enough to meet my wife and my child. My kid doesn't have one of her grandparents now, either. My mom was a wonderful person and my kid doesn't even get to meet her. THAT REALLY, REALLY made me angry! - But, something happened this time that was 'new'; I forgave her. I thought I had done that many years ago, but this time it was 'real.' For the first time in more than 30 years, I really forgave her. Anyway, it should be obvious that it took a very long time to 'recover' and I'm not at all sure that the recovery is complete (maybe it never will be), but I can now look at a picture of her and smile. - I wasn't really expecting anyone to respond to my post, except eb. I just wanted to let eb know that 'voluntary leaving' is NOT an option. I'll use whatever tool I have at my disposal to do it, even if it hurts me a bit, too. Like I said to eb, I usually spot the warning signs very early. I'd rather cry wolf and be wrong than to wait and be right (when it's too late). - If I may 'harass' you two just once(?). Thanks, I thought you would let me, so here goes: You two are just a couple of sweethearts! Thanks for talkin' with this old right-wing, new-age redneck! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 20, 1998 at 20:39:28 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Mike Subject: To: Mike Message: Dear Mike, It's my honnor to talk to you Mike. Another good man from the forum. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:06:12 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Katie Subject: to Mike - & a ramble Message: It's even written in the 'big book' for addicts that psychiatrists couldn't help, it was so well known by addicts themselves. (I don't think psychiatrists can help with spiritual problems either, personally.) For me, psychiatric therapy came long after I put down drugs. When I first went to my doctor, he said 'oh, so you're off medication'. Just out of interest, some astrologers see addiction as a spiritual crisis: a craving which the person is attempting to fill in a physical way; and neither the flesh nor the spirit are satisfied. I quite like that analogy. It's interesting also on a slightly different topic that apparently Jung said that often people who came to him presenting with spiritual problems actually had sexual problems,and vice versa. Just some higgledy-piggledy thoughts to put in the pot. Are we having stew tonight? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:21:17 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Mike Subject: to Mike - & a ramble Message: Dear Mike Just wanted to say the above post was not 'to you' obviously - I have learnt to keep the same title if I want my post to appear in the right sequence when I am adding to a previous post. (make sense?) But after reading on a bit I do want to say something to you: I also want to thank you for sharing about your mum and for what you said to eb. It just seemed to me you had so much pluck about life, especially considering what the child in you must have gone though. It made me wake up to my dark thoughts (it was a bad week). And now a few days later I am feeling strong; and making new plans. I wonder if depression is the illness of not being able to believe in yourself. When someone else says a few magic words it seems to really help. ON ya. (aussie slang = good one, mate) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 11:07:47 (EDT)
From: Katie Email: None To: Judith and Mike Subject: to Mike and Judith Message: Mike - it's fine to call us 'sweethearts' (I am sure Robyn will agree', as long as you don't mind if we call you 'that sweet lil' old' thang' or something like it. I called Sir David a 'dollface' once, and he didn't bring charges against me. Judith - The psychiatrist that my mom was seeing not only did not believe in AA, he thought my mom would stop drinking as soon as he found out the reason WHY she drank and/or put her on the right kind of medication. This was in the late sixties-early seventies. Since she drank all day long, she was seeing him when she was under the influence of alcohol, which just doesn't work. I think the guy should have been disbarred (or whatever they do to doctors), personally. He put my mom on Thorazine and all kinds of weird drugs to try and get her to stop drinking, and she drank on all this medication, which is very dangerous. He also refused to admit her into the psycho ward after she tried to commit suicide unless she agreed never to be his patient again. Not a hard decision! Hence a lot of my prejudice against psychiatrists, although I have met one or two nice ones since then. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 21:35:33 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: mc@hamzen.demon.co.uk To: eb Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: Know that darkness too well Eb. Probably why I was so keen for personal transcendental experiences which lead to knowledge. If it wasn't for music these last few years........ And I was stupid enough to refuse to switch off from the global madness, which has made communication a little difficult at times!! But I'm coming through it, god knows how, again probably the music and the sense of purpose I gain from my work and now I've sorted the wheat from the chaff about my experiences in meditation, that too. But mostly it's been a refusal to compromise my feelings which I did do when I was really meditating, and felt so superior and detached from everything. Otherwise I felt I was just another self-indulgent white middle class hippy whinger/sentimentalist not doing anything because I can't accept the reality (oh so male an approach). Yet if I really cared I had to come to terms with my own pain about the topic, the majority of people on this planet, and the planet/life itself is suffering much more, and DO something. But I still see ALL of us on this planet as clinically insane and this whole planet as full of shit and life itself destroyed, but I can also now allow myself some happiness but certainly NOT the bliss I used to experience so much of the time. It's not the numbers that are the problem, Eb, there is more than enough resources and food to go round. I see no reason why you should whip yourself over that. One of the major problems anyone who is sensitive faces is guilt. This leads to a denial of the richness of life and lifes natural states of grace. We have to fight the bollocks, if for no other reason than providing a cultural niche for others so that they can still be & enhance the richness of life, hold onto the value of love and fight to preserve the wonderfullness of it. Otherwise IT IS a waste of time & resources because negativity and darkness has won completely. Don't underate your honesty and love for/with your kids. If you are like you come over in your posts I think your kids are really lucky, and I think you are creating exactly that kind of space that keeps values alive. Which as far as I can see is what it's all about. Yeah it's difficult but without people like you around it would be even more difficult. P.S. What became of the revolutionary premies you knew? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 08:39:48 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@ hotmail.com To: hamzen Subject: Distribution of wealth Message: Dear Hamzen and eb, Thank you for that post hamzen, It's not the numbers that are the problem, Eb, there is more than enough resources and food to go round. I see no reason why you should whip yourself over that. One of the major problems anyone who is sensitive faces is guilt. This leads to a denial of the richness of life and lifes natural states of grace. We have to fight the bollocks, if for no other reason than providing a cultural niche for others so that they can still be & enhance the richness of life, hold onto the value of love and fight to preserve the wonderfullness of it. Otherwise IT IS a waste of time & resources because negativity and darkness has won completely. especially this part and of course all the nice and TRUE things you said to eb. (love you too girl) Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 12:12:57 (EDT)
From: Katie Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Thanks, hamzen (and eb) Message: Dear hamzen - I wanted to echo Robyn in thanking you for your post about guilt above. I have a tremendous problem with feeling guilt over my own existence, and I have a very hard time being able to feel happiness or joy as long as other beings are suffering. This results in a lot of anxiety and depression (and probably makes me a not very fun person to be around sometimes!) I am unable NOT to remember the suffering and pain in the world - I know some people can do this, but it's almost impossible for me. It's an extremely difficult problem to deal with, and I appreciate some of the things you said very much - I think that they will help me. Thanks again, Katie P.S. to eb - thanks for articulating your feelings so well - mine are similar. I do agree with Hamzen in that you are a really good person, and thus are desperately needed in the world. (I know it's difficult to have teenagers though! Sheesh...) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 13:33:00 (EDT)
From: eb Email: None To: Everyone Subject: I started crying... Message: when I read through this thread. I just popped in for a moment and got my mind blown. I've never cried from reading the Forum before, although I know others of you have. I guess I sort of dissociate usually, but this took me by surprise and way over the top. Thank you Hamzen, Mike, Katie, Robyn, and everyone. I got a big hit of how important it is to be here forum-wise and planetary-wise. With gratitude and love, eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 21:49:33 (EDT)
From: Sir D Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: eb Subject: Sorry to be a wet blanket Message: but it is widely thought that if all the world's wealth was equally distributed so everyone had an equal share, then within a year or so, the people who were wealthy would be wealthy again and the people who were poor before, would be poor once more. I believe this theory to be what would happen. You may call it the law of the jungle or you may call it capitalism but in general, people get rich my their own talents or by exploiting other people and since such people are in a minority, everybody else has to get the crumbs that are left over. However, I believe that most of our societies are not decent. Meaning that many priorities are wrong. Health care, housing, food and clothing should be evrybody's divine right, wherever they live in the world. Unfortunately, too much of the world is suffering from famine or malnutrition and poor/no healthcare. Until these things are given to everybody free of charge, wherever they are in the world, our planet has yet to call itself civilised. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:27:07 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Sir D Subject: Sorry to be a wet blanket Message: Sir D, well said. I think 'money' is the wrong concept. That's the root of the problem - the way we are thinking. Going back to high school economics - money is a means of exchange isn't it? But I just get this picture that the whole framework - forget words like capitalism - of using money and the concept behind it - is what is wrong. I feel like I want to examine the primitive concept of 'barter' and see what lies underneath that rock. But I don't know if I have the brains to reason it out. Anyone with ideas on this? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 18:27:26 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Judith Subject: You're not a wet blanket Message: Judith: I think that going back to the 'barter' system would not be a very good solution. The reason is that the value of the item bartered will change with the desire of the person that wants it. I can demand much more from you for something that I know you want badly. I can then devalue the item you want to trade with me, for the same reason (I don't really want what you have). 'Money' tends to even out the playing field, in my opinion, because its value is standardized (at least, within a country). It ain't perfect, but I still think it's the best idea we have, short of giving everything away for free. There may be a better system, but I have NO IDEA what it might be, that's for sure. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 22, 1998 at 01:35:49 (EDT)
From: Runamok Email: out of order To: Sir D Subject: widely thought by whom if Imay Message: 'It is widely thought' (?)! By whom? I have never thought it or heard such a thing. On the contrary, if it were widely thought then rich people would be more carefree about redistribution of wealth. After all, they'd get it right back. For me the relevance is in having had a leftist consciousness at the time of being bit by the vampire Rawatt. Because you have to have peace to spread peace or whatever the going propaganda was at the time. Redistributing the wealth has all kinds of problems but life reversing such a redistribution in a relatively instantaneous manner isn't one of those. Isn't this about we would have to consider these things if we were or are going to bring peace to earth and thus should not abandon these questions? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 17:21:39 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: mc@hamzen.demon.co.uk To: jim,eb,jerry Subject: never trust a hippy (1) Message: Sorry for the late arrival of my responses but after reading through that music thread I had to post something that related to the turn of the millennium, even if the conversations were dead weeks ago. Apologies to you Jim, Eb, Jerry and I think I owed a response to you VP as well, but I can't find my print-out for that. Sorry. Jim when you set up 'sextacy' was there an english geezer called Darren involved? As for the rise of dance music in Canada I don't know, but over here (uk) it was fairly underground (but massive) from 1988-1995 before it hit the mainstream. What parts of dance music are taking off in Canada? For myself rock music has been yawn inducing for a long time, no real intensity, no challenge, too much ego- the spinal tapness of it all- and didn't seem very original. All rock music strikes me as retro, which is fine if that's what you want, but for myself........How can you compare rock with dance????? I can only think the raves you've been to have miles less community involvement & commitment than they had/have over here, or that the dj's you've been around are not good enough, the bass out of the sound systems not sub-sonic enough. But having said that most of my hippie mates from way back haven't got it either. For myself it's up there with the grateful dead/jefferson airplane, country joe & the fish, inhaling/acid period, taken me further than then, which is something that was completely unexpected. I hated most house music til 1990, til somebody gave me a chill-out tape, early orb etc, when the flash backs/flash forward stuff started all over again, 25 years on! Eb, although there are dance bands playing live, Prodigy, Orbital, Underworld, in my opinion the whole point of the dance scene was to get away from the star/ego system of an entertainer on stage being the focus. It's about the dancefloor which does mean that dj's have become the source of most good nights but the only people who focus on them tend to betrainspotters. Talking of which there was a lot of the music(especiallytechno) in the film 'trainspotting'. Yeah techno/raves is the general area, but it is now very diverse, from housed up acid jazz, (120-130 bpm) see Jamiriquaou-'emergency on planet earth', verysensuos/sexy-see any 'speed garage' compilation (130-140bpm), or mix compilations of uplifting house/garage, brazilian influences are strong at the moment in the new york house scene especially masters at work, todd terry..Drum & bass (150-170 bpm, dub bass) for all you bass heads,although that's getting a lot darker in the last year, from 93-97 I'm produced. For the spiritual end of d&b see l.t.j. bukem & anything up to 96 on the 'good looking' label, goldie and anything on metalheadz label for more experimental/mind fuck/dark stuff, for more rootsy stuff anything by roni size/dj krust/dj die, reprazent's album called I think 'new forms' sums up the rootsy into jazz d&b. But the man of d&b for me is PHOTEK. Absolutely top geezer, would recommend ANYTHING by him, although some people find him a bit serious. For simplicity and a laugh d&b, dj hype-his remix of 'ready or not 'by the fugees, best track, nothing else can get me laughing, horny as hell and hyped up as that track! But of course sony banned it and put out their own crap mix which no-one bought. There's also the early techno scene which originated in Detroit, Derrick May- very moving especially 'strings of life', Juan Atkins.... onto 90's european techno, see anything by orbital, prodigy, chemical brothers, although I think Underworld arethe best of the bunch- their lp 'dubnobasswithmyheadman' issuperb. There is also the hippy trance/goa scene, loads of compilations about. There's the slower lot influenced by hip-hop, -massive attack, portishead, coldcut,howie.b (who has worked with bjork), all very reliable. But dj mix compilations are the best intro for all formats. It's about making a journey. This is a very british biased view, apologies! Why is it that the u.s.a produces so many innovative music forms from it's black community which only gets followed up,developed and brought over for the u.s masses by the uk?(minor wind up!) Jerry, 'haven't you heard what neil young said? Rock will never die', yawn, yawn, isn't he the bloke that plays golf all the time now & thinks that the sex pistols & nirvana are radical, purlease........ It's not just dead, it was buried years ago, why else are the only popular rock acts still mining the sixties/seventies for ideas. No problems with that, I mean even perry como, andy williams and frankie valli still sell, but no-one tries to make any claims for their originality/social relevance/zeitgeist connecting/relevance for the future, for them. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 17:34:36 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: rick, katie, mickey, pete Subject: never trust a hippy (2) Message: Again aplogies for the VERY late response to THE scam. I got online the thursday evening when the thread was well developed. It was perfect, I had tears rolling down my eyes, my ribs were aching from laughing too much and how I didn't piss myself I don't know. Yes and even someone like me who never felt that close to mr freezebox himself had a little frisson of excitement as the limo window rolled down. It was a perfect intro for a couple of people new to the site. THANKYOU THANKYOU THANKYOU, can't remember the last time I laughed quite so much! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 18:08:26 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: everyone Subject: never trust a hippy (3) Message: The music thread set me off on one about our backgrounds. There appears to be an awful lot of hippies on this site, of which I would class myself as one. How much of our naivete, innocence, openess and gullibility can be blamed on the very obvious weaknesses in that very hippie culture, rather than just passing all the blame onto the fat one? (I've seen his name too often recently to spell it, one of the reasons I had to take a break from the site). I'm ambivalent about this whole topic, most of the key moments and deep pleasures in my life connect to that 60's culture, but also it's led to a lot of time wasting (the continual self questioning and search for the truth, going to satsangs past their sell-by date, always trying to connect to some deep love, staying in relationships too long, over reliance on synchronicity, too trusting with strangers, complete inability to integrate into a materialist culture, anti-consumerism to the point that I experienced burn-out and exhaustion , that whole superman mentality of saving the planet.......... Chatting to a semi-ex-punk a while back, he explained that one of the reasons that 'never trust a hippy' was a key cultural statement for him, was that hint that they knew something and used language in a deceitful way to cover that up when talking with people less empathetic, and that their overall use of language was very deceptive/flexible. In the group of people I tripped with the most, we talked of our experiences on acid as 'knowing'! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 19:07:44 (EDT)
From: Selene Email: None To: hamzen Subject: never trust a hippy (3) Message: It's too bad people get so cerebral about music. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 19:09:46 (EDT)
From: Selene Email: None To: all Subject: never trust a hippy (3) Message: Though I did like the subject line :) 'never trust a hippie with your television overnight' ---not quite the Pretenders well, that's not how the real quote went but it's fun to write. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 17:51:35 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Selene Subject: never trust a hippy (3) Message: Hey Selene, you been chatting to my mates :) But on a cerebral tip, it's one of the really bad by-products of disentangling everything about k, I over analyse everything but hey, get me on the dancefloor and I occasionally remember to let go. Occasionally! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 01:44:25 (EDT)
From: Katie Email: None To: hamzen Subject: never trust a hippy (2) Message: Dear Hamzen - I am real glad that you thought that the whole thing was funny. It was all Rick's fault, really! (Seriously, the idea was planted, unwittingly, by Michael, suggested to Rick by me, and then brought to full flower by Rick, with help from Peter). Glad you got a laugh out of it! Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 18:15:02 (EDT)
From: Rick Email: None To: hamzen Subject: never trust a hippy (2) Message: You're welcome, Hamzen, but I think Katie really hatched the plot by manipulating me to post the story. It was a play on bill burke's notion that an old poster named DOC, was actually maharaji. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 20:26:32 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: hamzen Subject: never trust a hippy (1) Message: Well, hamzen, you're going to have to forgive an old geezer like me who just isn't on the up and up with what's happenin', but as long as I live, rock lives. As for dance music, I'm not sure what you're talking about. What makes it so now? Dance music doesn't have it's influences from past acts? Is it really that dramatic and unique to what was before it? I doubt it. I'm going to have to check out these acts you recommend to really understand what you're raving about. Until then, I can't argue with you about it. I don't know enough about it. I've heard some techno stuff I was unimpressed by, but I'm aware that there's more so-so acts out there than there are truly great ones. This holds true for all genres of music. I think I'll check out PHOTEK to get a bead on where you're really at and what I think of your tastes. I hope he's as good as you say he is. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 20:06:45 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Jerry Subject: never trust a hippy (1) Message: Yeah it connects to the past, in the sense that Jimi Hendrix's roots were in 50's/early sixties rhythm & blues, but........ For me 65-70 is the only comparable period for speed of change and radicalness of change. The early detroit pioneers link back to kraftwerk, in the more uplifting housey garage stuff disco leaks out, in acid jazz-modern minimalist techno/trance there are jazz and brazilian influences, there have been fascinating remixes of jean michel jarre (in my opinion much better than the originals), the ambient stuff out of germany can get a bit new-age romantic, hints of pink floyd. But it's flavours rather than recognizable. As for most modern techno stuff I couldn't agree more. For me the drum & bass scene is the really original one, although hints of 70's herbie hancock and lonnie liston smith creep through in the lighter tracks, but something like goldie's 'inner-city life', or anything by optical, ed rush, jay majick, dillinja, doc scott, their speed of change is so fast their history is in their musical dialogue with each other. Speaking poetically, I feel my neural wiring has been completely altered by this stuff and totally changed my relationship with my body and my sense of self. There is loads of dance stuff about, 95% crap I think. But the good one's........ And it's kept the 12' vinyl scene alive over here, a minor miracle in itself. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 21:28:41 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: hamzen Subject: never trust a hippy (1) Message: Hamzen, I can't remember Darren by name. There was one particular English guy, Steve, who was around then. Maybe a few others. Maybe Darren. I just can't remember. You know, I think I understand dance music about as well as anyone who's been there from the start but isn't particularly into the scene. I love good techno of any kind. I also like bands that mix sampling, scratching and beats in with live stuff. But I don't at all agree with your dismissal of live music or your reasons for thinking as you do. In fact I think live music has more of the very elements you find wanting. More challenge, more intensity. As for 'ego' look who's carrying around his new raver ware in an old hippie suitcase? Performing art of any kind is, by definition, all about ego. Techno's offer to bypass that is just a big bid for safety which teenagers and young adults might find extremely comforting. We had our own ego-avoidance mechanism, didn't we? At the end of the day -- or night -- however, the best music touches and, although electronic gear can touch in its own way, it still doesn't come close to a voice or, in my humble estimation, the sound of a good rhythm section. I saw De La Soul the other day. Outdoor concert, completely doomed by the PA's inability to handle the bass. Besides that, though, I clearly felt that Cypress Hill, a few years earlier at Lollapalooza, was MUCH better to see, easier to get into. Why? Live players, that's why. Same music but live. What a difference. You know, it's possible that live music might indeed get back-burnered by kids who bad mouth it instead of learning to play it. That doesn't mean they're right, though. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 22:08:28 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: And furthermore Message: Hamzen, What about all the other arts? Do you decry the masters of those skills as egotists? How about 'art' art? Should we get rid of paintings and such in exchange for the latest computer art programs and thus enjoy an endless parade of faceless, 'egoless' displays of colour and form? And if the programmer or user puts too much of his own signature stamp on it, should we just hold our breath for the latest software that automates whatever it is he's doing? Take it up a step into anonymity? Get it all away from the messy human beings that want to say something about themselves and the world they find? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 19:38:27 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Jim Subject: And furthermore Message: (1) see my previous reply, substitute negative ego/self indulgence for ego. (2) my comments apply to the spinal tapness & unoriginality of so much rock music, marketed by spineless multi-nationals for nothing but sleep inducing commercial reasons. (3) are YOU implying that making house music is easy/automatic? Listen to Derrick May's 'strings of life' and get remotely close and I shall completely fall in love with you, or goldie's 'innner city life' or pretty much everything on a slightly less dance tip by photek, or'stella' by jam & spoon or............ I know so many people, including myself, trying to make dance or dance related breakbeat stuff, and failing miserably! Maybe we're all crap, but most of us are ok to decent dj's in love with the music. It's just as difficult making decent dance music as any other form of music. I've seen people when they aren't even on drugs get weepy at the thought of the sheer beauty of these tracks. So much for souless and lacking in feeling. (4) What music moves you? I don't remember seeing any post on your musical pleasures. I would be very interested to know. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 16, 1998 at 14:01:21 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: hamzen Subject: And furthermore Message: Hamzen, Can you play an instrument? Which one(s)? How much pleasure have you ever gotten from doing that? Ever played in a group? Ever performed for people? How'd that go? What'd that feel like? Yes, I think it's a MILLION times easier to put together dance/techno/rave stuff than to play it yourself. What a drummer has to go through in order to develop good meter is really incredible. And then to think that he can mix up that formal, repetitive structure with nuance and syncopation. Watching and listening to a good drummer is something else. Too bad you don't appreciate it. Guitarists? They're like writers. People can say all sorts of things, some of it derivative or bombastic, some sublime and profound. Guitarists are kind of like that to me. And what people can put into bass is pretty amazing too. Yes, I'm aware of the extra subsonic oomph dance music often hits. Now what's it take to do that? Hitting the octave key a couple of times and tweaking a couple of envelopes and filters. Great. Sounds great and sometimes, for sure, can be really moving. I love good dance, like I loved good industrial. But give me a break with your dismissal of all these players as echoes of 'Spinal Tap'. Do you have any idea how precious and stupid all the ravers, DJ's and beatmeisters could seem if someone wanted to parody that scene? Really! I like all sorts of music. I guess if my heart was racing on a meth-based drug like e I might prefer the steady drive of dance. Or if I'd been up for a few days partying I might want nothing better than some soothing Orb stuff until the speed left my bloodstream and I could finally fall asleep. Otherwise, though, I like country. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 20:38:17 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Jim Subject: And furthermore Message: Jim, just to make sure, I'm talking rock, nothing else. If you go onto jazz, especially jazz drummers then you're talking real skill. Also I loved the Grateful Dead for years and whatever you think of them, they were nothing if not a live band. The last time I saw them, Mickey Hart especially was superb, held them together. But as a group they'd lost the plot. And this is a band who were crucial to me for years. Over the years I got increasingly bored with the lack of skill, shallowness and increasing unoriginality and superficial ego of all rock groups I saw, which is why I got into jazz, especially those areas of jazz that explored polyrhythms and/or sonic possibilities. Live country I can't comment on, no experience. Always been more into the instrumental side of music. Can you recommend anything from a country angle? Country always struck me as a white blues, which has to be good, but most of the country I've heard on vinyl was the commercial end which was none too impressive. Messed around with the guitar and trombone for a while when I was younger but the desire wasn't really there to keep going long enough. But the person I'm having the most interesting dialogue with about dance music production loves playing live but wants to produce dance stuff even more. He's back at the weekend & I'll see what he says. The spinal tap comment was a partial wind up but compared to the area of dance, breakbeats/drum & bass, that I'm into compared to rock not that unfair in terms of performers. In terms of the overall scene couldn't agree with you more although the dance crowd is a lot more attractive, sexier, stylish and positive. But rock on vinyl I find unoriginal, stale & with nothing to say about living now but most importantly for me, sonically limited. As a genre it's dead and buried as far as I can see. As for chemicals, I'm an organic hippy, smoke, mushrooms and cider for me. Never done 'e's, not into amphetamines. As for producing dance stuff, god I'd never thought of that, hitting the octave key and tweaking a couple of envelopes and filters. Must try that tomorrow:) Nice try Jim, but you ain't winding me up that easily. Have a listen to 'Inner City Life' by Goldie. You still haven't responded to my comments re the star/passive audience nature of rock music and the prostitutional relationship of those groups with commercial multi-nationals. Isn't everything performance? Much respect. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:55:30 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: hamzen Subject: And furthermore Message: Hamzen , (from now on , I'm gonna punctuate like Keith .) Country was a joke. Although I do dig it, too, at times and tonight our band, the X-Flies, is going to polish up this cowpunk thing we're excited to debut Saturday night. But country, in general, isn't my scene. I'm a little hipper than that. I, too, grew up on the Dead. Only this eastern cult thing I was in from 73 to 81 weaned me of Garcia worship. In later years I still went to shows but was able to easily criticize bad ones and the group's limitations -- something impossible in my early fandom. You are SO unfair to rock! What's got in to you? I'm beginning to think you're not the same Hamzen I've known all these years. Joined any cults recently? The performer/audience disparity is just a problem if you make it one. After all, an audience opens and receives, a performer puts it out. All glory, such as it is, to the performer? Of course. I don't have a problem with that. Why do you? Envy, perhaps? I must say, I've been there. I can talk you down if you'll let me and, by all means, DON'T HANG UP. :) Jazz? Hmm... got a little problem with that stuff, myself. See, there IS a genre that I've enjoyed a bit here and there (used to love Miles Davis and the early fusion spin-offs, now find it all BORING). I like grooves as much as the next guy. Those jazz guys ... I don't know about them. Mind you, that's a BIG generalization so I'll retract it. I'd rightfully say I don't like noodling of any kind that detracts to much from pusle and groove. (Although, hypocrite that I am, I, myself, often offend). I won't talk about drugs here -- Maharaji's kids probably read this site and I wouldn't want to screw up the Holy Family's next generation. Alright, alright, I'll get Goldie for Christ's sake. I almsot did a while ago, now I will. By the way, you're English, right? Do you know/like Morcheeba? Well, I'm off to our regional Spinal Tap rehearsal. You ARE coming Saturday, aren't you? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 05:50:45 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: mc@hamzen.demon.co.uk To: Jim Subject: And furthermore Message: Jim, When rock started out it was fresh, about the moment, about being alive and celebrating that life, Elvis, Eddie Cochran, Gene Vincent etc which it basically nicked from u.s. black culture. There was a quiet period when the powers that be neutralised it. By then British culture had caught up and because of our welfare culture a safe place for exploration was created. It moved forward again with the Rolling Stones, Beatles. Back came Dylan, the Byrds in response. This challenged & created a response, Beatles 65-67 especially. And then we were off into psychedelia. Real experimentation. Sloppy and messy in parts but some real gems in there. By 71 that had burnt out and we were left with Yes and Genesis and their ilk. Toooooo safe. Back came the punks with their anti-hippy stuff to shake it up, Sex pistols etc, nicked ideas via New York Dolls etc. Into Joy Division (which mutated into industrial). But musically dead if full of energy(except for the connection to dub, Lee Perry etc. What has been the response in any really creative way since? The new romantics??!! Ten years later the u.s via nirvana etc caught up on punk and gently modulated it with melody but really there was nothing that new in what they were doing and bottom line it was negative. What are we left with. Oasis!!! End of argument. Now starting from the same source, black r&b stuff, which was about dancing basically. In their response to the Beatles phenomenon was all the Tamla Motown stuff, Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye, Sly, onto Isaac Hayes, then disco, then a quiet period, mutating into two lines, (1) hip-hop, rap (and the whole lifestyle that came with it), which has dried up as far as I can see & (2) Detroit techno (heavily influenced by Kraftwerk), chicago house and acid house, which mutated into various forms of trance, tribal, ambient, garage, NRG, happy hardcore, drum & bass(stimulated by dub and hip-hop). Speed garage is the latest response, circa 96-97 but that is already mutating into something else. In other words the strongly influenced black line keeps mutating, the white line dries up as soon as it gets too far from the body, dance and a positive energy. Grounded positivity & dialectic leads to mutation. Yeah you will always get little sub-genres but the real changes only happen when a critical mass level in terms of population numbers is reached and that only happens when a large element of joy is part of the musical format. Personally I hated disco and everything it stood for but I’ve had to acknowledge it’s had more long term positive effects musically than the psychedelic side of things. Having said that it could be argued that Kraftwerk who were absolutely crucial to the Detroit techno geezers have had as great an effect, but even they were anti-hippy. That doesn’t stop anybody from enjoying anything but if you are talking real exploration..............Life’s too short, I’m getting too old to waste time. Re jazz, I’m bored by it too because it stagnated & had nothing new to say about the moment. but drum&bass has taken it on board & taken it somewhere else and one of the interesting sub-texts in all house music at the moment is the way it’s using a lot of jazz elements and subverting them. Yeah Miles Davis and the fusion guys were big for me for quite a while but I also LOVED late Coltrane. Then went into Albert Ayler and a lot of the free jazz, for a while. I too hate noodling. Re Goldie, for god’s sake don’t get his latest album, it’s crap. His first album was the dog’s bollocks but if you can get “Inner City Life’ as a 12”, now you’re talking. That includes ALL the remixes by Roni Size, Nookie etc that came out then. In fact drum&bass circa 94-96, I think it will take at least 20 years before it’s appreciated. Which links to the cult argument. Rock is dependent AND controlled by the multi-nationals. It’s structure is based on dependency, it reinforces all of the values it supposedly despises, it’s the usual jobs for the boys but PRETENDS otherwise. Sound familiar?. So who is part of the cult, Jim?!!! Did rock build up it’s own shops in every small town in the country, did rock set up a functional alternative outside the multi-nationals that enabled people to survive financially, did rock get D.I.Y into the culture on a mass scale, did rock enable large numbers of people to tell the multis to fuck off till they came back on their knees salivating at the thought of all the money they were missing out on, did rock enable the musicians to get non-exclusive contracts, especially when it needed large amounts of money for worldwide distribution. Did rock encourage audience participation & empowerment. Did the rock stars meet people in those shops once they were big. Did rock encourage people to go out into the country and put on events for free for 2-300 people on a regular basis. Did rock link blacks with whites at events and as part of the culture, did it enable black people to set up events, did it incorporate gay culture big time. I think not . As far as I know it’s the first time that multi-nationals have EVER signed contracts of a non-exclusive nature with unknown individuals. Of all of the above, that I find the most impressive. I ‘m under no illusions that it will last and it is already breaking up, but for 10 years the whole culture survived COMPLETELY independently of the multi-nationals. We are also talking HUGE amounts of individuals led by working class not middle-class culture. That’s one of the things I hated about the psychedelic end of the sixties, it was so middle class, insular and reached so few people on the lifestyle level. Self-consciousness and fear of body exposure has meant that it has taken middle class indie/rock kids years to come to terms with dance stuff and it’s that refusal of dance culture to accept an attitude problem that I love because I’m so challenged by it myself. It’s the music I love, I’ll never be part of the culture, way too old, middle-class (now) and self-conscious about my body. Re performing/envy. Envy is an emotion I’ve hardly ever experienced and when I have it’s been about my own emotional stiffness and money, nothing else. I’ve run workshops in a work setting, dj’ed, run an internal radio station at work everyday, led quiz nights, run my own club and can understand the buzz of performing, but what I love about it is pulling people together, getting the grins right across the room, getting people to think for themselves, increasing assertiveness etc etc. Back in the early rave days I knew a couple of people who were big in terms of production, both of them said the first time they went to an event & heard their record come on and the whole dance floor went completely wild was the best buzz they had ever had, that I can relate to bigtime. I would love to be able to do that. Re Morcheeba, (and I’m too English for my own good, emotional repression etc) yeah they’re ok, an interesting attempt to mix the 60’s with the 90’s but a bit too commercial and predictable for me, a bit too safe. I find the sound processing side of their stuff deadly dull. But in a similar vein I really like Lamb, especially some of their remixed stuff. Re live versus dance. Have spoken to my mate who plays live, he says for him it’s much easier to get good stuff going live than producing , IF you are with the right musicians because you are getting constant feedback from others. But most importantly the variables about the sound itself are so limited that you can just focus on the playing, it’s also instantaneous, fun, light and not time consuming. Sorry Jeem!! Have a good one tonight and having said everything I have I’d love to see you live but on my income....... Get big and tour over here, heh, I’ll be the heckler at the front. Much love and as they say, big up to you matee. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 16:07:28 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: hamzen Subject: And furthermore Message: That's a relief. Last time, the heckler was my mom. :) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:38:47 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Jim Subject: And furthermore Message: Jim What about combining the two? For instance: walking on the hill above where I live recently and looking at the architect-designed houses, each one different, elegant, poised above the ocean. Sometimes just a balcony hanging out over a huge blue ocean; or a garage with a killer view. I wanted to photograph some of these images and then scan it onto computer disc and then add collages and slogans (existential kind of stuff). I was thinking: what a great way to express some of the stuff inside me - when I can't paint or draw yet I see these images. I suppose this is not really on the topic but I just feel like sharing today. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:38:48 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Jim Subject: And furthermore Message: Jim What about combining the two? For instance: walking on the hill above where I live recently and looking at the architect-designed houses, each one different, elegant, poised above the ocean. Sometimes just a balcony hanging out over a huge blue ocean; or a garage with a killer view. I wanted to photograph some of these images and then scan it onto computer disc and then add collages and slogans (existential kind of stuff). I was thinking: what a great way to express some of the stuff inside me - when I can't paint or draw yet I see these images. I suppose this is not really on the topic but I just feel like sharing today. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:46:53 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Judith Subject: And furthermore Message: Woops - hit the button twice. However this seems a good place to make a comment - am I wrong or recently anyway, does it seem that the males here share about their acitivites: what they are doing, what they have studied, what they know, etc: and the women share about their feelings. Is this where women get stuck and why we get so depressed, etc? I'm not embarassed for having posted twice about wanting to be creative. It has drawn my attention to this whole issue. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 21:59:05 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Judith Subject: And furthermore Message: Judith, Small sample size but you may be right. Anyway, there are bands that combine the two. In fact, we might do that a bit. Scratching is neat enough for texture and its rhytmic effect. Kind of like late nineties shakers. Yes, there are some bands that mix the two up really nicely. On the other hand, I kind of like what we do. Know what I mean? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 19:07:08 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Jim Subject: never trust a hippy (1) Message: Jim sorry, I've re-read my post and I wasn't very explicit. The reference to ego was about the star system, people being passively entertained. Although I loved a lot of the music from late acid house onwards, the most moving part for me was on the dancefloor. Although the dj sets the tone they are completely dependent on the dancefloor. As soon as a dj gets into their own trip in a non-communicative way, the dancefloor empties almost immediately until they completely change the direction of their set or the next dj connects. I've seen this happen a number of times, this is seen as a complete failure within dj culture.. Future bookings depend on their communicating and these bookings are weekly events at the same venues. Then I think of the number of crappy rock concerts I've been to where people have paid their dosh and don't walk out, or even where the sets are patchy. In my experience the previous comments apply to the majority of rock gigs I've been to. People going to 90's dance events expect a lot more which is why there are so many less dodgy dance nights. Because the event is so dependent on the people dancing and their communication, the social unacceptance of moodiness and any kind of attitude problem, the very high demands on dj's, means that the vibe tends to very good on a regular basis. That is exactly why even rock/indie fans over here have moved toward the dance scene. Most rock/indie fans were very anti-dance for exactly the reasons you mentioned.It was only because so many people were having so much better times so regularly at dance events that this change in guitar culture happened.This is less true now that people are moving away from being e'd up, smoking less and back towards charlie, amphetamine type adrenalin drugs and alcohol. Also the fact that the government over here panicked and got very heavy, especially when the ravers starting connecting with the free festival and traveller scene. That might also be because the brewery industry over here were really panicking. From 1988 the sales of alcohol were dropping between 8 and 10 % per year. The number of people going to raves was massive here for years and is why 50%+ of 15 year olds smoke dope on a regular basis. Replace my use of the word ego with negative ego and self indulgence and my views make more sense. Using ego in that context was a bit premiesh I have to admit. Re dela soul v cypress hill. Nobody I know equates the two at all. De la soul were a joke act who made one, at the time, bearable, album, whereas Cypress Hill were much more for real, especially if you go back a bit. Re bad mouthing rock music, that was a partial wind-up on my part, but most youngsters into the dance scene don't even discuss rock music, they see it more as an irrelevance designed for social inadequates/incompetents. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 00:56:38 (EDT)
From: eb Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Thanks for your response Message: Dear Hamzen, I plan to check out your recommendations as well as those suggested by other exes. My approach to music (because I get lots of opportunities to hear lots of different kinds, usually live) is to listen and find what it is about the music or band which draws the crowd. What are they saying that speaks to their fans? I do this on a feeling level. I was taken by surprise when I saw Beck last year. His was a great show. Same with the Artist (who did none of the Purple Rain era music). I appreciate talent, especially excellent guitar technique, no matter what genre. And I like theatre. It's fun! I was sitting around a campfire with about 25 old hippies this past weekend singing lots of oldies. Then a woman started playing guitar and singing and positively lifted my spirit into another realm. I can't categorize the music she played; hers is truly unique. No acid was necessary. I'll check out PHOTEK and get back to you Hamzen. With love, eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 10:29:21 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Everyone Subject: Dancing on the grave of a cult Message: Maharaji the hypocrite. Back in the early seventies when he was advocating celibacy for his followers, his Mother, Mata Ji, found some condoms and marijuana in a drawer in his room. He just told her to f**** off, or the equivalent in Hindi. All those years he was giving heavy satsang to premies about how they shouldn't have sex with each other and fucking up a lot of people's heads (cos here was God telling them that their natural desire for sex was a sin) all that time he was knocking off an assortment of different women, including his sister-in-law and of course, his wife. Maharaji, I for one will not let you get away with this hypocracy. The reason being that you damaged a lot of people's lives by your preaching of your vile beliefs. Yes, the beliefs which you didn't even follow yourself. I will gladly watch your cult diminish in size and following. You say you have enemies. Well that's the natural cause and effect of having preached such an abominable cesspool of lies and hypocritical falsehoods for all those years. The tide does turn in the end. Listen very carefully now, can you hear a bell ringing? The bell tolls for thee, Maharaji. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 17:19:47 (EDT)
From: RT Email: mmmm To: all Subject: Library Alert letter Message: Hi all, Feedback welcomed. This need editing, but should go out to your fair city: Public Library 123 Your street Your town, -- 12345 Dear Head Librarian; I am concerned about the brainwashing practices used under your unknowing approval at the local video events for 'Maharaji.' As a former member of the 'Knowledge' cult that is currently using your facilities, I have many years and stories of time wasted to tell. However, you can view the collective web site of former members and draw your own conclusion. The address is: www.ex-premie.org Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, An Ex-Premie PS: I suggest you give them 30 days to relocate. They are all volunteers and unaware that they are even in a cult; but many have doubts and are suffering fininacially. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 19:17:38 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: RT Subject: Library Alert letter Message: That's a good idea RT. Perhaps too people could write a few examples of how some people have been affected by Maharaji's cult. You know, families broken up, relationships cut and depression and disassociation with the real world etc. However, Elan Vital might have a comeback on this one. They might announce where video programs are being held just a day or two before the program. But it can cause Elan Vital some problems because it could mean that once a program has been held somewhere, the letters of protest that would result, would mean they would turn down any further applications to rent a hall or room. And of course, many programs are held in hotel conference rooms and the like. But when all's said and done, any letter of complaint or concern to the owners of these venues, would be a thorn in the side to this cult. Another idea would be to write to local newspapers in the area where a program is being held and let them know what is happening. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 19:35:55 (EDT)
From: Selene Email: None To: RT Subject: sneaky lies- how to stop them? Message: They don't say it's about maharaji, at least not where I live, they book the video events under the name 'World Wide Resources' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 17, 1998 at 23:24:49 (EDT)
From: Gail Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Dancing on the grave of a cult Message: Right on (in 70s speak). Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 21:09:42 (EDT)
From: youssef@scri.fsu.edu Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Sai Baba vs. Maharaji? Message: Hi, Does anyone have comments about Sai Baba? A friend of mine asked me about him (see e.g. http://sunflower.singnet.com.sg/~changfam/sai.htm). It seems very similar to the 70's version of Maharaji, but I was wondering if any of you know details or have first hand experience. Thanks, Saul Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 00:45:17 (EDT)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: None To: youssef@scri.fsu.edu Subject: Sai Baba vs. Maharaji? Message: He's pretty cool if you're looking for someone who can produce ashes from his palm. Otherwise, he's just another guru with a bad hair cut. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 04:46:10 (EDT)
From: Mark Email: None To: youssef@scri.fsu.edu Subject: Sai Baba vs. Maharaji? Message: they are both avatars or world saviors- Not ! each have Clintonian tendencies( see the neural surfer) yes they are similar tho Sai Baba seems to have actual psychic powers of some sort Beware them both/unless Domination turns you on. . . Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 04:56:48 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mark Subject: Sai Baba vs. Maharaji? Message: Sai Baba's feet are also definitely 'bonier' (ie skinnier) than M's Mel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 10:18:25 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: youssef@scri.fsu.edu Subject: Sai Bubba vs. Mahariachi? Message: Youssef: You should know that Sai Baba has been around at least as long as Mahariachi (sorry about the misspelling). He also made David Lane's list of the five most offensive gurus, including allegations of child molestation. He shares the honors with Duh Free John (Franklin Jones) and some others. Most of his miracles are well known parlor tricks. They are not even 'grand illusions,' as some of the greater magic tricks are known, just second and third-rate stuff. The skeptic, 'Amazing Randy' has revealed all of them. In addition, the psychological problems of his followers, once they leave the fold, are reputed to be worse than most. Don't put a match to gasoline expecting to get warm. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 01:09:23 (EDT)
From: Runamok Email: out of order To: Scott T. Subject: Sai Bubba vs. Mahariachi? Message: I saw some footage that was extremely compelling of SB reaching under a cloth for something he then 'materialised'. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 06:20:11 (EDT)
From: RR Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Sai Bubba vs. Mahariachi? Message: I met Sai Baba at his Ashram in Bangalore, in 1972, and became a follower for about a year, before receiving knowledge. He's another person who thinks he's God Almighty doing the wonderful service of coming to earth for the benefit of us ignorant souls. He performs 'magic tricks' producing stuff like medals, amulets, and magic powder, called 'Vibutti', that is supposed to be the ash from the temple fire of his last incarnation, as Sai Baba of Shridi. This is supposed to be a 'cure all', like 'holy water' from Lourdes. He's had at least one devotee at cabinet level in India. There's a bit of film of him 'materialising' a gold locket, where you can quite clearly see he's whipping out from something he's holding in his other hand. This bit of film has been banned from being shown on TV in India. He suffers from delusions of grandeur. I remember him saying once that, the day will come when his plane won't even be able to land at the airport, because all the runways will be packed with devotees. (Sound familiar? Time is coming soon etc....) So, to sum up, another pair of clay feet. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 16:58:57 (EDT)
From: Gail Email: None To: Everyone Subject: MJ says 'Anne, please take Message: the lint off my towels. I have noticed too much of it just lately.' Of course, Anne Johnston is more than happy to use the lint brush on his towels. She works there all day, looking after MJ's needs. Lucky lady! Not everyone can serve the Lord directly. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 19:46:30 (EDT)
From: nigel Email: nigel@redcrow,demon.co.uk To: Gail Subject: I remember Ann Johnston. Message: And I don't much care for the memory. She was staying with a married premie couple who made their house available to her while she gave some aspirants valuable lessons in premie-think (I was one of those happy aspirants). This couple willingly fed, housed, and cleaned after Ms Johnston and put their own lives on hold - assuming they had lives, which is debatable - while she stayed with them. Anyway, she was sitting on a cushion giving us all this lovely, long, horrible aspirant satsang when she broke off and called for a glass of water (for herself). The premie wife dutifully brought in the glass of water a few minutes later, but, because this premie was obviously frightened of Ann, she wobbled on her feet slightly as she negotiated the bodies and cushions that covered the floor of her own front room. The water spilled a couple of drips, thankfully causing no damage whatsoever to the carpet or Ann Johnston's fragile ego. The deeply ashamed premie tip-toed out, red-faced, but not before Ann informed the rest of us: 'See what happens when you're not properly focused on Holy Name'. yuk. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 20:45:37 (EDT)
From: Rick Email: None To: nigel Subject: I remember Ann Johnston. Message: 'See what happens when you're not properly focused on Holy Name'. Ugly, ugly, ugly! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 21:28:42 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Rick Subject: I remember Ann Johnston. Message: Anne Johnson - she's the bitch who disowned her own son and when she accidently saw him sitting in the same train carriage as her, closed her eyes and 'meditated???' in order to ignore his presence. She came to stay in an ashram I was resident in during the seventies. It was a most unmemorable time. Sugar coated Maharaji talk from a woman who kept her distance from us. There were plenty like her around then. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 06:00:06 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: nigel Subject: I remember Ann Johnston. Message: 'And I don't much care for the memory.' me too. I remember her admonishing young mother's publicly about having kids. The latest 'quote' from her came from a 'premie' friend of mine who saw her recently at a program. The quote was 'sex is mind', becuase prempal once said that to her and that was more than enough for her. I used to serve her freshly squeezed orange juice every day. Boy do I feel an idiot. I really feel like I have helped a war criminal. She has been responsible for the ruination of so many lives. She also used to get me to turn her light out in the evening. I wish I would have put out her lights. Have you noticed how prempal proptects scum like her and jagdeo? hearing her name sends me deeply into the most unholy name! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 18:58:46 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: jethro Subject: Anne Is A Victim Too Message: I actually got to know Anne Johnston pretty well in the late 70s. It is true that she fed on peoples' fear. But if you got to know her, and stood up to her, told her to shut up and stop preaching, she was really quite a loving person and she had more guilt than anyone I ever met. And underneath her 'super-devotee' exterior, she was very insecure and afraid. She felt incredibly guilty for abandoning her family to follow Guru Maharaj Ji. Because she had cut ALL her ties, it became all the more important to her that Maharaji and knowlege be real and true. So, she became incredibly rigid and heavy. I'm not defending some of the really shitty trips she laid on people, and I also waited on her from time to time, but I think it's the Big M who is truly responsible here. He was well aware of what happened to Anne, and he did nothing to set her straight, such was his megalomania and lack of caring for the people who followed him. Then, after she trashed her entire life to follow Maharaji, in 1983 Maharaji dumped her. Just threw her out when he fired all the initiators, with no severence, no nothing. From what Gail said she lived in virtual poverty and isolation for years, until she was 'allowed' to go to the residence and pull the lint from the Lord's towels for the rest of her life. I think it's an amazingly tragic story. I feel really sorry for her. I just wish she could see that the emperor has no clothes, but given her level of programming, that is probabaly unlikely. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 19:30:55 (EDT)
From: Gerry Email: None To: JW Subject: Everybody is victim Message: Until they choose not to be. Just takes some of us longer than others... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 20:43:37 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: JW Subject: Anne Is A Victim Too Message: '....she lived in virtual poverty and isolation for years, until she was 'allowed' to go to the residence....' I can think of several others like her who spent years 'waiting for him to call'...and some are still waiting. I am afraid that I am not forgiving as you. I see her as abusive as prempal in that they they both misused a position of the highest trust. I remember her long satsang about ashram premies are not meant to have friends. Holy shit..talk about anti-life!!!!! I really bought the stuff about these arseholes being prempal's 'channels'. Silly me... maybe I'll forgive myself one day. regards jethro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 22:10:06 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: jethro Subject: Anne Is A Victim Too Message: I really bought the stuff about these arseholes being prempal's 'channels'. Silly me... maybe I'll forgive myself one day. I did this too, for awhile, mostly until I got to know personally some of these people and found out otherwise. I saw the same thing with Anne. Again, I don't defend the trips these people laid on people in the name of the living god, but as I said below, I think we should keep a perspective on who is ultimately I mean, why were we (you, me, and other people) vulnerable to sick people like Anne Johnson and David Smith? It wasn't Anne or Smith alone, it was because we believed M and tried to surrender ourselves to his channels, and some of those 'channels' were really screwed up people. Plus, a lot of those 'channels' got pretty messed up in this process as well. I remember one time telling Anne, when I saw her using her position to get money (to buy designer clothes) and services (like getting those clothes washed and ironed) from premies in the community who were afraid of her, that was just using her initiator position to get stuff she selfishly wanted and that I really didn't have much respect for her. After that, she never tried to lay a satsang trip on me again. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 21:36:38 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Victim like a rabid dog Message: Yes, Joe, Anne was much easier to take IF someone actually called her bluff once or twice. The fact is, though, that she was an extremely extreme example of M's programming extended to some logical and forseeable conclusion. And it was ugly, anti-human and frightening. Anne was a victim just like those poor kids who get sucked into Hamas are victims. Hell, she was a victim like Fakiranand was a victim. No, I'm not saying Anne ever acted out her fanaticism like he did. But she bit the bullet in the same way. And yet, at the end of the day, she matters not. She's only an example of how destructive M's virus was. All of us who were around then bought into some outrageous and ugly shit and pressured ourselves and each other to maintain certain 'standards' of 'surrender' (read 'oppression'). The tragedy of Anne's life and how uncomfortable she made others feel is Maharaji's fault alone. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 21:43:05 (EDT)
From: Gerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: Victim like a rabid dog Message: The tragedy of Anne's life and how uncomfortable she made others feel is Maharaji's fault alone. Jim, I know you believe this with every fiber of your being, but I just can't see it. Didn't we participate in this in at least some degree? I'm really trying to understand this. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 04:14:21 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Gerry Subject: Victim like a rabid dog Message: The tragedy of Anne's life and how uncomfortable she made others feel is Maharaji's fault alone. I see Anne's story as the typical story of a long term dedicated premie (like I've been) luckily not all of them to the same extent. Waiting for m's call for years, etc I know you believe this with every fiber of your being, but I just can't see it. Didn't we participate in this in at least some degree? I'm really trying to understand this. My understanding of this phenomenon is that we HAD to help her (like other instructors, and so called 'dedicated premies') and comfort her in her trip, otherwise we would have had to question our OWN situation, which wasn't possible as long as we stayed in the k trip. I think I was also envying and jealous of the privileges that type of premies had. And helping them was sort of participating and making friend with some people who would maybe one day help me to be in the same position. I definitely see this phenomenon (helping pams) as a way (for some premies - some I know VERY well) to access to m. And some definitely succeeded. And m is very aware of this, and so are those pams too! What a game. And there is the 'doubt' issue: when you start questioning the pam's trip, and start to admit that m is really responsible for this, and that you're disgusted enough, I think you're out. Maybe not: I see some premies keep distances (in order not to be confronted to this game) with m, and that's good enough for them. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 17:18:00 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Victim like a rabid dog Message: We were also told(certainly in the ashram) that we should remember that these were HIS representatives(instructors, coordinators etc) and should follow whatever they say. The whole structure was a manifestation of his divinity which we should accept. So even if we felt things were wrong we should say and do nothing becaiuse we had totally dedicated our lives..etc..etc...blah ...blah ...blah. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 18:24:47 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Victim like a rabid dog Message: My understanding of this phenomenon is that we HAD to help her (like other instructors, and so called 'dedicated premies') and comfort her in her trip, otherwise we would have had to question our OWN situation, which wasn't possible as long as we stayed in the k trip. I think this is very true. Anne used to say to me, which sounded more like an excuse than anything else, that she was always demanding things from premies because it gave them the opportunity to do service to Maharaji, since she was a high priestess in his cult (my words, not hers). I think she half believed this, and half used her position to get attention for herself. And there is the 'doubt' issue: when you start questioning the pam's trip, and start to admit that m is really responsible for this, and that you're disgusted enough, I think you're out. I think this is also very true. It was only towards the end of my involvement in the cult that I began to see PAM as just people, with all the good an bad qualities of anybody else. The problem was, they were given positions of power, and some really abused it. It was only after I saw David Smith, who to this day is still a PAM, do some really sadistic stuff to ashram premies that I REALLY doubted the whole cult and Maharaji. It was just so shocking and devoid of love. From that I could no longer believe Maharaji had any real involvement with my life, other than from my belief in him. Once that happened, like you said, I was 'out' of the cult. I began to see everything with a different set of eyes, including Maharaji himself, and I noticed that he really didn't have any clothes, was pretty repulsive, simplistic, materialistic and incoherent. Then I found another premie or two who I felt comfortable discussing this with, and I realized they felt the same way, although we were all very hesitent to say it out loud at first. It was only a matter of time before I, as well as those other premies, left for good and became ex-premies. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 21:45:30 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: The Ultimate Responsibility Message: And yet, at the end of the day, she matters not. She's only an example of how destructive M's virus was. All of us who were around then bought into some outrageous and ugly shit and pressured ourselves and each other to maintain certain 'standards' of 'surrender' (read 'oppression'). The tragedy of Anne's life and how uncomfortable she made others feel is Maharaji's fault alone. Thank you Jim. This is exactly what I was trying to say. The real problem for Anne and the rest of us was that if you surrendered your life to someone who didn't give a shit about you, and just used the fruits of the dedication for his own selfish ends, to one degree or another, you get burned. Anne is an extreme example of that, partly because of her own screwed up nature. I know Anne did awful things; I just wanted to say that I had the opportunity to see below the surface to see a really screwed up and miserable person and that she has been, and continues to be, burned probably by Maharaji as much as anyone I can think of. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 01:31:37 (EDT)
From: Rick Email: None To: JW Subject: Being A Jerk Message: Nigel's story of Anne saying 'That's what happens when you're not in Holy Name' was a typical example of the premie mentality in the seventies. I used to think thoughts like that but never said them out loud. It's like a Fundamentalist addressing someone with AIDS by saying 'That's what happens when you break God's natural law'. It's all in the doctrine but you have to bring your own special assholeness to express it so eloquently. I don't let myself off the hook for being a jerk in those years and I don't think it does anyone a favor to do it for them, either. Yeah, maharaji is ultimately responsible but he doesn't get all the blame--we were still accountable for our thoughts and behavior. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 17:50:38 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Rick Subject: It Takes Two Message: I agree that individual behavior in the cult isn't excusable just because it's in the cult. I don't excuse Jagdeo, David Smith or Anne Johnston for the rotten crap they pulled. I just think it's important to identify the ultimate responsibity of the Big M as well. Also, it really takes two to be a jerk. It takes the jerk and the person who allows himself or herself to be jerked around. And why would someone allow that? At least it's partly because they were trying to surrender their lives to Maharaji and this leaves people open to all kinds of abuses by all kinds of jerks. If Anne Johnston was being a jerk and no one paid any attention to her, what is the harm? But if she's a jerk to people are made vulnerable to her trip because of a cult headed by megalomaniac with fantasies of divinity, then she really can, and did, do lots of harm. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 18:31:47 (EDT)
From: Rick Email: None To: JW Subject: It Takes Two Message: Point taken that BM fostered a paralysis in premies that allowed abuse to occur. But part and parcel to swallowing BM was wearing the 'suit' of Eastern religion and having it fit. Expressions of anger, frustration and disappointment were frowned upon in favor of being in a 'higher' experience. Once you agree that emotional expression is negative, you don't need a Perfect Master to enforce behavior that doesn't 'rock the boat'. I think swallowing BM and the condemnation of emotions went hand in hand. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 12:08:47 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Rick Subject: It Takes Two Message: Rick, good point. I recall having to shut down and repress feelings a lot in the cult. I thought I didn't get angry because of knowledge. Actually, most of the time, I was just repressing the anger. Also, as you mention, there was a lot of group pressure to conform in that regard. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 14:41:17 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: JW Subject: It Takes Two Message: JW: I can certainly confirm what you said about repressing anger. I thought that 'K' was doing it for me, too. Wans't it funny when 'someone let loose,' though? I can remember a few times when an individual would 'succumb to their mind' and let the fertilizer-hit-the-ventilator, so to speak. Looking back at it, it is quite comical (to a degree). - In line with the 'it takes two' theme, remember how you would see someone that looked blissed-out and you would try to meditate 'harder' and then would smile back because you 'might' have felt a bit better and back and forth and back and forth? Basically, convincing each other of our blissed-out-ness? It wasn't that obvious to me then, but it sure is now. It's kind of like the idea that if you do a good thing for a fellow driver (like smile at them or let them in traffic, etc), it seems to spread. In the case of K, though, it is that 'gee-whiz mom, I haven't got a brain'-type smile (I like to call it 'mindless' in the literal sense....he he he). If we hadn't 'convinced' each other so well, I think this movement would have fizzled a long, long time ago. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 22:02:15 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Rick Subject: Being A Jerk Message: I don't let myself off the hook for being a jerk in those years and I don't think it does anyone a favor to do it for them, either. Yeah, maharaji is ultimately responsible but he doesn't get all the blame--we were still accountable for our thoughts and behavior. Okay, Rick. Here we are again. I say the premies don't get special blame for being assholes -- not then anyway, you do. Ask yourself this: were there any COMMITTED premies who did not pressure and terrorize others if only by example? I'd say no. Any premie who'd bought the basic program (Maharaji -- true and good, world -- bad and illusory) easily fell into the kinds of acts we're now quite right in calling 'assholian'. That includes all the kinds of people you can think of. Gentle, aggressive, smart, stupid, sweet or sophisticated. If a premie was IN and didn't want to fall OUT, they'd act assholian such as the situation demanded. No one, that is, stayed IN yet begged off assholian maneouvres on account of their consciences. No one I can think of anyway. So, if that's true, and just BEING a premie made you assholian (or jerkastic) I'm prone to think NONE of us were assholes. We were just premies. Don't forget, we all truly believed our assholian stuff was in each others' profoundly best interest. Even Anne. Maybe even Fakiranand. No, you can't judge the actions alone. That standard is meaningless when you're talking about captured minds. Ultimately, we were just trying to do right by and for each other. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 10:40:12 (EDT)
From: Rick Email: None To: Jim Subject: Being A Jerk Message: I'll agree, Jim... we weren't without good intentions. But it's simplistic to write off accountability because one denomination of the currency was assholeness. Many cultures promote bad behavior (pre-1960's white southern United States came with standard-equipment bigotry) but joining in isn't free--even if your daddy was a racist and his daddy before him. After a certain age, if you act like a jerk or an asshole, you have to stand up and say 'I fucked up'. Otherwise, your complaint against the main agressor (in this case, BM) is empty. It's important to remember that our purchase of BM was mutifaceted. Yes, we sincerely sought divinity and we were misled into believing we'd found it. But we also bought a cheap ticket out of reality that included pretending, and gave us the frivolous luxury of arrogance. I really think we're down into the area of opinion now, but mine is that there's no way that was entirely innocent. Our minds weren't exactly captured. We were tricked and someone took advantage of our weakness, but the threshold where we could say 'I fucked up but it's all someone elses fault' is a long way off. Maybe Patty Hearst could say that... maybe. Maybe someone whose survival was at stake, like a concentration camp prisoner, could say it... maybe. But not a bunch of spoiled white kids who could afford to be hoodwinked into believing the lie of the century. On the grand scale of compassion, ex-premies deserve only a measured amount. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 11:12:01 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Rick Subject: Being A Jerk Message: Rick, We were definitely captured every bit as much as Patty Hearst. Furthermore, I would argue that 'assholeness' is a culturally relevant term. It doesn't make sense against some absolute standard of morality we might believe in. That is, I wouldn't agree that all the southern troops fighting to preserve slavery (bad!) were worse people than the northern troops fighting to eradicate it (good!). We premies lived in our own culture too. Whatever. I don't really want to argue about this again. Do you? Anyway, go ahead, take the last shot if you like. I think we're both probably repeating ourselves. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 12:10:57 (EDT)
From: Rick Email: None To: Jim Subject: Being A Jerk Message: Okay, last shot: Patty Hearst was kidnapped and held at knifepoint. She was held for ransom under the threat of death, for an extended period. Premies adopted a belief system and lifestyle out of naivete, and stuck around because of a delusional, fat, dumb teenage boy from India. Yes, not all premies were assholes and not all their behavior was bad, but if you hold up the specific individual behaviors to the same standards you now hold sacred, you don't get clean laundry. Fighting for slavery in the Civil War was a complicated issue and not always tightly related to an individual's racist beliefs, but if you take an isolated incident of an African-American spilling a glass of water, and a southern soldier condemning the action because of race, you come up with dirty laundry... just like one premie condemning another for not being on Holy Name. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 12:26:04 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Rick Subject: Being A Jerk Message: Yes, not all premies were assholes and not all their behavior was bad, but if you hold up the specific individual behaviors to the same standards you now hold sacred, you don't get clean laundry. Yes Rick, but, as you say, this is a judgment made in retrospect. A judgment made after the values of the premie system, especially the central underpinning of those values, are now known to be false. But I agree that there was some free will in accepting the belief system in the first place, but once accepted, the only choice left was how much, or how extremely, a premie would express those beliefs. Some people were more expressive and extreme than others, but it was still all an expression of the belief system. But I guess I fall somewhere between you and Jim. I think there were behaviors that occurred in the cult that were done because they gave certain premies certain sadistic satisfaction and pleasure, by letting them feel superior to other premies and aspirants. And I think they were aware of that, and made the choice to do it for their own purposes, using the cult belief system as an excuse. So, I would call that asshole behavior that was an individual choice, that was made possible by a situation in which the cult tacitly gave permission for the premie to do what they did and get away with it without having to take any personal responsbility for the action. But, nonetheless, if it weren't for the cult indoctrinating at least some of the premies and aspirants to be open and vulnerable to that abuse, the 'situation' where that could occur wouldn't have happened. As I have said many times, I think David Smith's sadistic behavior towards many of the ashram premies, at least the ones who were vulnerable to it, was the clearest example of this to me in the courses of my involvement in the cult. I guess because it was so methodical, while behaviors of nuts like Fakiranand and neurotics like Anne Johnston were more erratic. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 13:13:11 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: I agree Message: I said I wouldn't but I just have to say I agree with Joe. To the extent that premies actually ENJOYED cutting each other up for the Lord -- jerks. I know, it gets kind of subtle when you get into questions of people enjoying giving 'heavy satsang'. Was it their own minds they were balsting (as we used to say) or just their audience? But, basically, I agree it was a bit of a mix. Just being a zealous premie -- even a hard-liner -- did not make one a jerk. Kind of depends where you were 'coming from'. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 12:54:42 (EDT)
From: Gerry Email: None To: Rick Subject: At the risk of... Message: hurting your credibility, I have to agree with you, Rick. The whole post was great, my thoughts, exactly. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, Sep 14, 1998 at 17:39:38 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Jim Subject: Victim like a rabid dog Message: I can't be having with that Jim. I've had a couple of young mates who would have been hippies 25 years back, who've been bemused about my journey, especially around EV/GM. They asked to see videos of gm, this was 91-92, when he was much more subtle and non-perfect masterish. Afterwards they were even more bemused. 'he's so dodgy, one of the worst used car salesman I've ever seen', typical of their responses. Yet we went along with the lord of the universe, I will bring peace to the world etc etc. There will always be conmen in the world, the only way to counteract it is by looking at how we were SO easily deceived. See never trust a hippy (3). And increase that awareness. As I get older I have more and more sympathy with the punk attitude to ALL leaders. And before you respond, gm is completely responsible for all the damage he continues to make, but we all aided and abetted him by ultimately allowing ourselves to be victims. Self respect and empowerment is what it's about. Maybe it's easier for me because it was k I was interested in, and the damage has been more subtle but I think the argument still runs. The real danger of looking at things this way and this is why I suspect you take the position you do, is that people will end up taking on more guilt and pain. There is no way ANYONE should give themselves a hard time for a single moment over that fat c--t etc etc. But sooner or later we will all have to reach a point of strength to face this IF we are ever to truly let go of that pile of garbage and not just stay stuck init up to our noses. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 20:08:28 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Gail Subject: MJ says 'Anne, please take Message: Thanks for that Gail. I'm sure that the berieved reletives of the people who died in the floods in Bangladesh this week will find great comfort in their Lord's latest utterences. Anne Johnson is lucky to be at the spearhead of serving humanity in this way. I bet she feels less sorrow in the plight of all the children in the world who are dying like flies each day through malnutrition and lack of medical supplies. It must be good knowing that you're helping the Lord relieve the suffering in the world. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 09:17:43 (EDT)
From: KK Email: None To: Everyone talking about AJ Subject: MJ says 'Anne, please take Message: Here, here to all of you. I can only add that I found her to be an example of everything I wasn't, didn't ever want to be and never became. Phew! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 15, 1998 at 18:35:14 (EDT)
From: Gail Email: None To: KK Subject: In defence of Anne Message: I know Anne rubbed a lot of people the wrong way; however, she was never anything but good to me. For some reason, she always had kind words for me when I was young and on my own with a little girl. I got to know her a lot better when she moved to London two years ago. She came over and helped with the cleaning and preparation for my mother's wake. In short, she has always been good to me and I love her. I am sorry that I shall probably never see her again. Like all of us, she believed in MJ and K really strongly. Her devotion just wavered less. As for the designer clothes--why not? That's what she left behind. I remember her making a dress out of a sheet once. WE ALL SHOULD HAVE HAD DESIGNER CLOTHES! One time MJ gave Anne and Elliot Brye a holiday from their service. He gave them a hotel room and ten dollars each a week to live on. They were forced root through the produce garbage at the back of the grocery stores and buy stale buns from the Concordia (which no longer exits). Doesn't that sound like a great holiday in Miami Beach. She has paid her dues. Don't forget: 1. When she joined the ashram she was about 20 years older than everyone else. She was surrounded by a young mentality. She had to take orders from these young buffoons. 2. She slaved for years in Ashrams in Toronto and England. She has scrubbed houses, washed clothes and ironed them, and cooked more meals than you or I will ever do. 3. If we had been turned into initiators, we might have lorded it over others even more. Who knows? Suffice to say, she did mean well. She didn't/doesn't know about the harm of her message. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 17:12:12 (EDT)
From: Nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Everyone Subject: Presence Message: Hello everyone, Wow - what a day! Don't know where to start, but did you ever find yourself unexpectedly in the company of somebody very special? It happened to me today, and boy have I been lucky... I know I have written some very sceptical posts to this forum over the months, so what follows might come as a bit of a surprise. The man I spent several hours in close proximity with today is not quite like anybody I have ever encountered, and I think it is fair to regard him as a 'Master' - possibly even the Master. He might not use that term of himself, and it is not a term - you've probably noticed - that I ever normally use to refer to anybody who appears at first to be a regular flesh-and-blood human being. How was he special? Well, he stands about 5' 2' in height, is old, with a big white beard and when he speaks everybody listens entranced. He spoke for well over an hour without notes, cue cards, props or stage effects, practically without pausing. He spoke with profound insight into the human condition, with great wisdom and understanding - that, in a strange way, was ultimately no more than common sense. He was frequently very funny and always highly entertaining. Do you remember that feeling of elation when the satsang experience seemed to actually work and transport you elsewhere? - That is exactly what it was like - except satsang was never this good, this stimulating, this instructive - not by a billion miles. I only heard about the event at very short notice - there were only about twenty-five people present - and had to get special permission to avoid attending a long, important staff meeting that clashed with the Master's address. (This is not always the best kind of career move when you've just started a new job.) After his address, I found myself walking along a corridor alongside the Master, and was almost too tongue-tied to utter a word, but I managed to direct him to where he could get a cup of coffee. Then I followed him and hung around eavesdropping on his conversations, still not believing I had really been speaking to the man in real life. Later, in a quiet moment alone, I was overcome with emotion and a deep appreciation of the sheer miracle that anybody like this could exist on the planet, and that I should - almost by accident - find myself in his company. So I gathered my thoughts into a little poem to celebrate a day I will never forget: Said beardy-faced sceptic James Randi 'My conjuring skills come in handy For fake fortune-tellers And mind-bending Gellers I know their modus operandi' They say every job has its perks, but there can be few jobs that leave you feeling so blessed. Best quote (after Benjamin Franklin): 'There are no greater liars in this world than quacks - except, of course, for their patients.' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 19:20:04 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Nigel Subject: Presence Message: I saw James Randi on TV yesterday evening. He looks bigger on the box. He does have a certain charm and charisma. But then I guess so does Uri Geller, too. And Uri doers appeal to the masses who read their horoscopes every day. I know that Uri's making a comeback here in the UK. Perhaps we'll see more of both of them. Sorry, I have to go now to consult my spirit guides... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 19:39:13 (EDT)
From: Keith Email: None To: Sir Nigel Subject: Presence Message: What outstanding , outlandish , outrageous , out of this world , outflanked , outmanoeuvered , outshining example of misplaced , misappropriated , misguided and muddled sentiments . But then again , who are we to speak ? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 19:55:06 (EDT)
From: nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Keith Subject: Explain yourself, muddlehead. Message: nt Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 19:51:19 (EDT)
From: Nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Sir David Subject: Geller is a lying shit Message: Hi Sir Dave, I guess you might know Randi and Geller go way back. But it all came to a head about three years ago when Geller sued Randi for libel (for saying Geller possesses no psychic powers, was just a below-average conjurer who pretended his tricks were genuine psychic phenomena - which, of course, is exactly what they are). Geller, a multi-miliionaire, wasn't hoping to prove his powers in the law courts but frighten Randi off. This very nearly worked since Randi came close to personal bankruptcy, what with this being the American legal system. But people rallied round and sent in donations, and Randi won the case. He was awarded damages and expenses from Geller which to this day - as far as I know - have never been paid. But now the point of law has been established, it is now completely safe for the rest of us to say it out loud: URI GELLER IS A PARASITIC FRAUD with no psychic powers whatsoever. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 19:49:02 (EDT)
From: Laura Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Presence Message: I found your e-mail scary. Are you serious? You've got to be kidding. Will you let this happen to you again? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 20:07:50 (EDT)
From: nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Laura Subject: What are you scared of? Message: It's quite simple, really. There was a note of irony in the way I phrased the post, maybe. Sort of mimicking the stupid devotee mindset - but I guess that might not have come across too well (didn't you see my passing reference to 'common sense'?) If it looked like over-the-top hero worship then it was only in the same way that you maybe meet a pop-star in the street and think 'Just wait till I tell everybody who I've just met'. But that only works if the people you're telling share your viewpoint. Sorry you can't share this one with me, Laura. Randi is an ordinary guy - but master magician - and I admire him, and his quarter-century long battle with blatant psuedo-psychics who are taking an awful lot of vulnerable people along for a ride. OK? What's your position on all this, BTW? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 20:22:35 (EDT)
From: Laura Email: None To: nigel Subject: What are you scared of? Message: I was scared for you. Don't know your style and took you literally. I can't/won't/don't/try not to believe in anything these days. Too much belief in a certain someone for three decades has made me quite cynical. I have a twenty-year-old child who was recently writing a school paper, 'How do we know anything? Do you remember when we knew? I was so sure I had the key, the answer. I devoted my life to gmj, as did many other people - so when i read your post I thought OH OH! Someone getting sucked in to another go around! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 20:57:45 (EDT)
From: Nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Laura Subject: Phew... Message: Come to think of it, I can't imagine what my first post might have looked like to anyone who doesn't know anything about (a) me, or (b) James Randi. Too much belief in a certain someone for three decades has made me quite cynical. Exactly. Substitute 'skeptical' for 'cynical' and you, me, and Jimmy are all big buddies. I have a twenty-year-old child who was recently writing a school paper, 'How do we know anything? The scientific method is probably the best thing we've got, IMHO. Sorry for scaring you :) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 21:25:03 (EDT)
From: Gerry Email: None To: Laura Subject: Phew... Message: Good heads up, though, Laura. I can see where you would think that and be concerned. I know Nigel (slightly) better than that, so I wasn't worried, but your antennae are out and that's good. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 21:35:11 (EDT)
From: Nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: all Subject: bend your cutlery here Message: http://www.randi.org/jr/ptspoon.html Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 16:44:12 (EDT)
From: MataJi Email: None To: Everyone Subject: One Way to God Message: My son is such a great power that He has come to save the whole universe. But who will believe me? From the age of seven Guru Maharaj Ji has openly proclaimed, 'Come to me and I will give you peace. I have come in this universe to establish peace and tranquility for all time. Come to me. Recognize me by the Knowledge I give to you.' So it is the duty of the intellectuals to search among all mankind for that person who can save the whole universe. And then when they find Him, they should follow Him. You must collect all the mothers of this universe, and see who is such a mother who can save the universe, and then you should follow that Mother. She is the Holy Mother, and He is the Holy Lord. Divine Light - Internet issue I can't believe it, did you remember all this ? Jean-Michel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 17:34:22 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: MataJi Subject: But she can change her... Message: JM: But, of course, she can change her mind concerning the divinity of GMJ at the drop of a hat. After all, she WAS the mother of god, don't ya know! NOW it's official.... I'm losing my lunch! :-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 18:51:47 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: MataJi Subject: One Way to God Message: Actually it was all a dream...like when Bobby died in Dallas......apologies to those who don't remember JR Ewing..the TRUE satguru Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 19:44:22 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: M the P Subject: Attention, Mickey the P Message: Did you read that? Mata Ji said/implied that Jesus was devoted to this knowledge--ha ha ha ha! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 02:03:23 (EDT)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: None To: VP Subject: Attention, Mickey the P Message: VP wrote: 'Did you read that? Mata Ji said/implied that Jesus was devoted to this knowledge--ha ha ha ha!' Jesus did NOT teach Knowledge, he was trying to bring about the Kingdom of God, how many times to I have to tell you....oh yeah, she's dead. No use hollering at her. Never mind. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 04:16:56 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Attention, Mickey the P Message: oh yeah, she's dead. No use hollering at her. Never mind. Did you read that Divine Times magazine m released about 2 years ago for the LB event? The magazine was about the beginning of propagation in west. Not ONE word about his family, except for his father. M was a teenager at that time, and he doesn't say a word about his mother and brothers (and sisters). Shri Maharaji's first spouse had daughters, that's probably why he got another wife, to give him some sons. Don't you think newcomers have every right to know who's the Mother of the Universe? That's a big issue! Does God have a mother? Why doesn't he speak about her? How come she got 'confused', I mean she spent decades living with 2 satgurus, and she got confused! What about us! Did she have an experience of k? Big question! If yes, why did she leave? If no, how come that she was allowed to have programs and speaking on m's stage? I must be confused myself I guess. And his eldest brother was considered as Christ's reincarnation? I guess he still is! Otherwise they'll only hear the rumors .... People have to be able to read this and use their brains! The Mother of the Universe said so BTW. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 23:33:50 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: VP Subject: Attention, Mickey the P Message: Dear VP, I remember hearing this myslef and then yammering on about it to the fundemental Christians that stopped by from time to time to try to save our souls. Gawd! Love, Robyn I am having VP withdrawal! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 22:26:56 (EDT)
From: Memphis Belle Email: None To: Everyone Subject: M siad'I'm not saying there's Message: Hi, I am here visiting again. Hello to everyone! I have been still struggling with K. and M. I do not go to the videos hardly anymore. But I did go after a long period of time, and was giving K a fair chance. But this particular video night was awful. It was all about propigation. That's all he talked about It drove me crazy because here I was going to the video to hear the calling of the heart, when all I heard M talk about was getting more people. Spreading the K. HE spoke of numbers, and how many people are doing such and such...But no talk of the heart... I think he was giving a lecture to all the old premies who aren't doing their jobs of spreading K. He really lost me, a new heart in his world of K. I was bored, I did not learn anything except that I was bored spending a hour watching a video about how many people are in K. What about the Heart, why does it matter that you spread it to lots and lots of people, when what should matter is that you can touch the peopl Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 02:59:01 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Memphis Belle Subject: M siad'I'm not saying there's Message: It was all a bad dream. They were all raving mad. Maharaji, the premies. All barmy, the lot of them. See my post below entitled 'Definitely ON topic'. It's all lunacy, Memphis Belle. It's lunatic thinking. Don't get caught up in it. It will drive you crazy and do you no good at all. Believe me, I know. Sure, you can do some meditation if you want to and find some peace of mind if it can work for you (and sometimes it doesn't). But if you start believing all the bullshit about mind and heart, you will end up in a mental hospital. Maharaji's bullshit is totally destructive to a person and is potentially dangerous. He is not the Lord so that shows one BIG lie, doesn't it. Well everything else is lies too. There was the big lie that Maharaji propogated and then there were all the other lies about 'the path' and surrender and devotion and in your mind and in the word and all the other crap. It's all damaging and destructive bullshit, Memphis Belle. Maharaji said that he was going to make the Ramayana look like 'Noddy'. He said that this time he was going to be strict. He said that he had come with more power than ever before and that he would establish peace in the world in his lifetime. He said he was God. All lies, all bullshit and all damaging and dangerous illusions. Don't let this trip turn you into a split personality or worse still, turn you into a basket case. It has done that for many people. I've actually seen some premies become mentally ill through following Maharaji and seen their lives totally ruined. He's is an absolute bastard and I am his enemy. That's my true colours. He claims that a few meditation techniques is his divine knowledge. ANd if someone actually gets something out of the meditation through their own effort, he claims that their experience is his gift. He tells people that there is something seriously wrong with them. He tells them that their mind is their enemy and only he can save them from it. That can drive a person over the edge and into insanity and even suicide. Especially when they realise that Maharaji cannot and will not save them from this pretend enemy. Even the Christians are a bit more nice about it. At least they say the devil is a guy with horns and a tail who lives in hell. Maharaji tells you that YOU are the devil. He says that your own mind is the devil. And he will frighten the gullable or the mentally sick into believing this. And if you are not mentally ill, just keep going to his video events and very soon you will be. He doesn't care about the damage he is inflicting. He couldn't give a shit. There is no love there, Memphis Belle. He has no love for people. He vies them with contempt. I hope you can soon see that. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 15:40:34 (EDT)
From: Memphis Belle Email: None To: Sir David Subject: M siad'I'm not saying there's Message: Sir David, Thank you. I remember the most disturbing thing that M said at a program. He said, 'remember me, .... remember me in your final hour... remember me.' I thought to myself, this guy is really full of himself. He thinks that when I'm dying that I'll think of him. I hope I WILL BE THINKING OF my beautiful life. NOT HIM!!!!! Come on! give me a break! I don't even know M! Why should I think of him. I would rather think about the REAL god/creator of my life. Thanks again for your words of wisdom. I know, somehow, what is right and wrong, and everything has always seemed 'fishy' with M and K. but I kept going because everyone I meet involved with M and K 'seem' so nice. But something inside tells me there's something 'fishy' with the whole thing. Take care everyone. I'll be in and out from time to time. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 16:26:45 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Memphis Belle Subject: M siad'I'm not saying there's Message: Memphis: Why did you have to post the'remember me' quote? Jeez, I just ate lunch and now I'm going to lose it.... ;-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 16:32:14 (EDT)
From: Gail Email: None To: Memphis Belle Subject: MJ is worse than fishy--he's Message: the sickest bastard of the lot. How long have you been around, MB? MJ encouraged us to bow and scrape the floor, kiss his feet, obsess about him constantly, cry for devotion to him, beg for his mercy, donate our time, money and yes our love. At one time, techniques 3 & 4 were to be practiced 24 hours per day. That disgusting worm dips his fingers into the charity pot for personal gain. People are leaving faster than he can make new converts. Years ago, the Miami Beach Convention Hall was packed. Nowadays, hardly anyone is there. Please leave this dangerous cult before there is nothing left of you. PLEASE, PLEASE DON'T ENCOURAGE ANY NEW PEOPLE TO GO. IT'S ALL A LIE. IT'S ALL A LIE. IT'S ALL A LIE!!!!!!!! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 21:44:46 (EDT)
From: memphis belle Email: None To: Gail Subject: MJ is worse than fishy--he's Message: It has been one strange year! He never asked me to do anything. My problem with him is that his followers treat him like a king. I don't have the anger of what most premies from the 70's seem to be angry about. I never lived in an ashram. I only paid for my seat at programs. no donations. I did a little service, but that seem to be a authority trip. I only go to the programs to learn more about my heart. same goes for the videos. Some things that he says are very 'enlightening', but all the other weird stuff about devotion and service just confuses me. Maybe he could get rid of doing service. If Everyone could just forget about all the music, lights, seats, and whole shabang production, then there would be no need for service. And then he would stop talking about all that service crap and devotion trip. The only devotion we need is to our own heart. after all isn't that what he always says. 'what you are looking for is inside of you.' I guess I like some of the things he says, Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 22:58:27 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: memphis belle Subject: MJ is worse than fishy--he's Message: I only go to the programs to learn more about my heart. same goes for the videos. You really think you need M for this? Don't you think you can do this without him? Some things that he says are very 'enlightening', but all the other weird stuff about devotion and service just confuses me. I found all that weird stuff about devotion and service confusing, too. It never did make any sense, but it is a major part of the trip. M will never stop asking for it and premies will never stop encouraging it. Do you want to get into it? The only devotion we need is to our own heart. If you already know this then you don't need M to clarify it for you. He'll make you believe that he is your heart and once that happens, you'll be more confused than you already are. 'what you are looking for is inside of you.' Yeah, M likes to say that a lot. He says if he ever wrote a book, this line is all you'd find in it. But if this is all he's saying, then how come you're so confused? Is it because this isn't all he's saying? Devotion to M is what M is really aiming for. You think he's worth it? I don't. Good luck to you, Memphis Belle. I hope you haven't invested too much of your hope and faith in M where it's going to make it that much more difficult to break free. Just be honest with yourself and you'll be OK. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 07:51:36 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: None To: memphis belle Subject: Maharaji is a hypocrite Message: His whole lifestyle is based upon the exact opposite of what is within him. His obsession for material possessions, his drinking, his cigarette smaking and drug taking. He simply is not practising what he preaches. The truth is, that if you do some meditation you can find something there. But it is pretty elusive and you cannot base your whole life on it. In the ashrams, we tried to base our whole lives upon an experience from meditation inside. Quite simply, it doesn't work. If you meditate all the time, the experience still comes and goes. Sometimes you have good meditations and sometimes you don't. Even the good meditations don't fill you with bliss all day. You never get to this imaginary place which Maharaji pretends exists where you are completely fullfilled. And trying to base your life on a elusive meditation experience can drive you crazy. We are talking nervous breakdown terretory here. I had a good friend who believed everything he heard in satsang. He tried to seperate himself from his own mind because he thought his mind was evil. Not only did he have a complete nervous breakdown from which he never recovered, but he ended up in a mental hospital on medication for life and he now suffers uncontrolable shaking, due to the medication and his mind is completely scrambled. He tried to follow Maharaji. Before he came to Maharaji he was just an ordinary guy but he believed all the stuff that Maharaji said about all you need is within you and he ended up ruining his life trying to follow him. Would Maharaji give a shit about my friend? Would Maharaji come and visit him in the mental hospital? Of course not. The truth is, everything you need is NOT within you. Sure, there are experiences from meditation if you sit and do some. But such experiences come and go like the weather and are impossible to pin down. You cannot base your life on such elusive experiences. SOme things are within you and some things are without you. And everyone needs a little love and understanding. That is often far more important and necessary than some elusive butterfly from meditation. But I never saw Maharaji preach love and understanding between people. Did you? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 11:28:33 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: You are right! Message: Sir: I have experienced more peace from looking into a clear sky while hiking in the snow-covered mountains than I EVER received from K-type meditation. I experience more peace from looking at and listening to a small waterfall than I ever did from K. And my brains aren't getting scrambled, either! 100 percent correct, Sir Dave. Memphis, please listen to him! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 14:01:06 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Maharaji is a hypocrite Message: Hi, Sir David. Good post. I was just wondering how things are going with that problem you were having with the light a week or so ago. Are you OK? Did that clear up? I hope so. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 1998 at 19:07:16 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Jerry Subject: Maharaji is a hypocrite Message: Thanks for asking. The problem seems to have subsided now. If I do some meditation I don't do any light technique. It's definitely bad for me to do that. I've been getting into listening to 'the' music or whatever it is, when I'm in bed at night, before going to sleep. Hence my posts on the other forum. Now Memphis Belle; if you want to listen to something that's very close to your heart, try listening to that old divine harmony, music of the spheres or whatever they call it these days. It doesn't require too much practise to get to hear it and it's very comforting. Nice to listen to while drifting off to sleep, together with my fantasies of saving the world from aliens, fantasies of the Clinton kind and all else that goes on in my head at night. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 08:01:03 (EDT)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Everyone Subject: Fundraising follow-up Message: Just to let you all know that the fundraising project is officially closed. We raised a little over what we needed to fund the site for another year. However it's way too little to buy a plane or finance an Ex-Premie World Tour. Guess I'll just send it to the server.... [sigh] Thanks to those who contributed. A few people donated US cash, and they will be pleased to know that it will be converted to a money order reflecting a contribution to the site in the name of one 'Prem Pal Rawat'. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 09:56:54 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Brian Subject: Fundraising follow-up Message: I think that PPR should really fund this site, he's going to finally get rid of all these confused fringe and ex-premies bothering him so much. He's going to be able to have a lighter security, and send all these bongos to the site for therapy. I think this deserves some help. Jim, why don't you write him a letter on this? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 10:55:50 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Sophomoric, Becky Message: Jim, I never said I accepted the Muslim version of what Christ was over the Christian. I am simply STATING what it is. Whatever. Personally I don't consider my interesing in and feeling for Islam to be a wild goose chase. And unlike you Jim, as I have said before, I don't say guilty without trial. I don't allow myself to retreat into my Wesern cultural prejudices when judging other cultures and other religions. I see two ways (if not more) not one way. I am aware that human beings have fundamenally different percerptions, values and starting points on which they base their lives. You'd make a great colonialist Jim. Becky, I never said your interest in Islam was a wild goose chase. I said searching the Koran for proof of 'astonishing (divine?) anachronistic knowledge' is. And it is, of course. It's your game and, quite frankly, it's a silly one. You're the one who tried to defend Islam on the basis that Mohammed had some very impressive, preternatural scientific knowledge. So, contrary to your misplaced jibe about not 'retreating into Western cultural prejudices' (yawn!), that's exactly what you're doing. You're trying to dress Mohammed up in a lab coat to give him a nobel prize or something. Indeed, you're so eagre to do that you breathlessly reported this poppycock about Mohammed explaining human reproduction right down to modern scientific terminology. No, Becky, you can wipe that sophomoric sneer off your face. You're the one who's bending over backwards trying to satisfy your western cultural palate for a presentable Mohammed. Anyway, I'm still waiting for your explanation about the 'sperm' and 'embryo' story which you didn't mention in your last post. I assume you read that somewhere and weren't just making it up. Nonetheless, you can see, can't you, how someone's obviously trying to pull a fast one? Someone's trying to trick a bunch of gullbile readers into thinking that Mohammed had a very early subscription to Science. If I were you, I'd be a little pissed off and embarrassed, being made a fool of like that. But then that's just me. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 15:08:12 (EDT)
From: Becky Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jim,what's your problem? Message: Jim, why can't you discuss something, as I have asked before, in reasonable terms without succumbing to the temptation of sneering, insulting, belittling etc. etc? When you do that it makes me feel that I would rather not discuss anything with you. Unlike you, I have a busy life, and I have not had time yet to check out embryo and sperm, although the word 'sperm' is mentioned several times in the Qur'an. Just another little sentence for your info: 8 centuries before Copernicus, the Qur'an says this: God is the one Who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon, each one travelling in an orbit with its own motion'. Al Anbiya (21:33). Jim, I know you love to psychologically crucify people. You like to pin 'em against the wall and force them speak bricks. (I assume you are intelligent enough to understand what I'm getting at). However, your definitions of me are inaccurate and misplaced. First of all, I'm not trying to defend Islam by saying that Prophet Muhammad had preternatural scientific knowledge. I am not even defending Islam. I am raising points that exist in Islam. I am not, therefore, in the antagonistic, fighting position that you seem to think I am. How I feel with Islam, what I have learned about Islam is just a tiny fraction of what Islam is all about. The fact that many scientific, sociological and psychological facts are stated in the Qur'an a few hundred years before the West 'discovered' them, still does not even give a shadow of what Islam is. So where do you want to go from here darling? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 16:33:06 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Becky Subject: Jim,what's your problem? Message: Becky, Ah how easy it is to offend. See, I didn't particularly like it when you said that, unlike you, I call people 'guilty' without trial. (I'm not sure what that means exactly but I still don't like it. Are you saying you DON'T fault Maharaji for anything? If you do when was the trial. I must have missed it.). Nor did I like being told that. again unlike you, I can't see past my western prejudices and would, in fact, make a great colonialist. For one thing, I already pointed out how its nothing but your 'western prejudices' that makes you want to glorify Mohammed as a man of scientific understanding long before his time. But then you say: First of all, I'm not trying to defend Islam by saying that Prophet Muhammad had preternatural scientific knowledge. I am not even defending Islam. I am raising points that exist in Islam. and I get really confused. What do you mean you're not saying Mohammed had advanced scientific knowledge? Ot are you saying that he did but you're just not trying to defend Islam on that score? And then what's this about you're not defending Islam only 'raising points'? Becky, that's ridiculous. The fact is you're defending Islam -- as you have since you first raised the topic -- and I'm dissing it. Why quibble? Where's it going to get you? Now you're giving me yet another bit of text but why? You're playing hide and seek, Becky. You either do or don't want to rely on this supposedly incredible advanced knowledge as proof of something or you don't. Anyway, before we get into this one (which, incidentally, my translation has as follows :And He it is Who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all (orbs) travel along swiftly in their celestial spheres.) I think we should clear up this 'sperm' 'embryo' thing. Again you say the Koran uses the word 'sperm' several times. Yet my search finds none. What are you talking about? The fact is I'm starting to think that you don't realyl care that much. This is all a little fun for you. Hey, you're a western chick with a groovy schtick. You're up on an eastern religion and you can probably impress oodles of people with all sorts of 'contrary to conventional wisdom...' points -- like the sperm, embryo thing. Who cares if they're really accurate? How wonderfully non-eurocentric you are! Yes, you're right. You're free of those stifling cultural blinders and truly open-minded. People like me? Colonialists, of course. Becy, go for it. Please, help yourself. What do I care? The only thing I ask is that you first resolve this sperm/embryo claim. Where'd you get it? Why do you beleive it? How do you explain the fact that the Koran I find on the internet has no such language? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 20:35:00 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Jim Subject: Jim,what's your problem? Message: Jim, Wow! Why quibble? Where's it going to get you? I think you've got it! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 16:42:25 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Becky and Jim Subject: Jim,what's your problem? Message: Err, excuse me for butting in here, but I kind of think I can add a little worthwhile content here in a civilized manner. ;o) Modern science has indeed revealed some of the workings of the physical world, and has given us such wonders as weapons of mass destruction, cloning, and antibiotics that become obsolete all the time as the little buggers adapt ever so fast. Science hasn't done away with war, eradicated crime or established a welfare society so far. As a matter of fact, science is by definition impersonal, impartial, and many scientists have had their consciences rebel because they felt their research was being utilized for immoral purposes. The first scientist was the man/ape from Odyssey 2001 who first experimentally figured out how to use a thigh bone as a club with which to kill wild pigs and guys from the competing tribe. Science hasn't given any definite answers as to the origins or meaning of life yet. Just theories. At best, science can just enhance your awe of the universe - that's what it does to me. But that feeling of awe arises naturally just by witnessing a sunrise or a thunderstorm or the stars at night. You don't have to be a Ph.D. to feel that. Certainly Mohammad felt that awe, and he had some major experiences during the Hejira which turned his whole life around. Science deals with the objective world, it represents concensus opinion of scientists and relies on experiments which can be repeated in constrained situations with the same results. Yet, no experiment is 100% certain to have the same outcome There is always the possibility that the outcome will be different, or that more precise measurements can uncover inconsistencies and that adds spice to the whole thing because then new theories can be invented to explain it. Science is basically a convention, a language invented to describe objective events. But what science is incapable of is accurately describing the realms of subjective human experience. It is pretty one dimensional when it comes to that. That is why those phenomena have traditionally been described by poetry, literature, music and art and the inspired writings of sages. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 17:03:37 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Jim and Becky Subject: Jim,what's your problem? Message: Oh yeah, here's a nice link. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 17:16:13 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mili Subject: Huh??? Message: Mili: That link is terrible. It says nothing SPECIFIC about science or the scientific method, at all. It's easy to claim that science is based on half-truth when you don't have to supply any proof whatsoever. Heck, I can SAY that YOU are a total crackpot, but does that mean anything without PROOF? Of course not! When I followed the link to the author, it appears that he believes in alien abduction. (I didn't read all of his links, so I can't be absolutely certain). If that is the case, then HE is a crackpot in my book. He expects me to believe, without a shred of evidence, that this 'alien problem' exists. That would be like you expecting me to believe that M is god! I have one question (cliche, though it may be): Where's the BEEF? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 17:32:38 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Mike Subject: Huh??? Message: The 'beef' could be that 'truth' is based on concensus opinion. And you know, most scientists are pretty honest - they don't lay hold on to a claim of 'absolute truth' - just ever improving understanding. That's where the 'beef' of that article is for me. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 19:14:35 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mili Subject: Yeah, but Message: Mili: To be scientific, those 'opinions' must be based on evidence, a physical property or physical action; not on a 'hallucination.' The difference is in the nature of the 'evidence' (e.g personal experience vice physical evidence, for example). Consensus, in and of itself, really doesn't have anything to do with it because a mass hallucination is still just a hallucination, even though the 'vision' is by consensus. - There are some absolutes, as well. For example: absolute zero (temperature), the periodic table, Avagadro's number, the speed of light, to name a few. There is no evidence, at all, that any of these absolutes are incorrect (e.g. there is no physical evidence that there are any more elements than those that have already been discovered and we do have the means to measure/discover this, if it were so). So, to say that there are NO absolutes isn't quite correct. Now, if what you meant by absolute truth was 'ultimate truth,' then you would be correct. No scientist claims to know the 'ultimate' truth, whatever that is. The term 'ultimate truth' is so ill-defined that it's impossible to 'discover' what it is or is not. Again, specifics, specifics, specifics are the key. If you can't define the problem, then it's going to be pretty damned hard to find the solution (and recognize that you have found the solution, too!). This 'ultimate truth' thing reminds me of the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy: What's the answer to life, the universe and everything? 47 (I think that was the answer). With such an ill-defined question, what would you expect for an answer? - As always IMHO... :-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 20:33:17 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Mike Subject: Yeah, but Message: Well, according to John Gribbin, universes are possible with OTHER physical constants. So there goes THAT absolute. Of course, we'll never know cause we only live in this ol' universe for the time being. And it only exists in our heads. ;=) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 13:18:06 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mili Subject: May I disagree Message: Mili: Just because someone says something doesn't make it true, plausible or even possible. Where's the proof? I can say that Saturn is made out of cotton-candy, but without some proof to support my outrageous claim I'm just a another crackpot! Like I said in my last post, give me a measurement or a shred of physical evidence and I will be glad to change my 'opinion,' but until then the argument is pure conjecture. We can 'prove' that a molecule exists, can we prove that 'another plane of existence' exists? If so, show me the PROOF because I've never seen it and I am thoroughly interested. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 14:19:01 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Mike Subject: May I disagree Message: Mike, you got me there - evidence and proof are what make the difference in the physical world. And it takes a LOT of consistent proof to establish a fact. Take for example the soot layer which has been discovered around the world as evidence of huge meteor impact a long, long time ago which supposedly gave rise to the ice age and did away with the dinosaurs. That's still being discussed, although I think it makes a lot of sense. (I just saw 'Godzilla' in the movies by the way). But you see, with experiences, perceptions, feelings - it's different. If I love a certain girl, I just KNOW it. I might have to prove it to her (or maybe not), but as far as I am concerned it's beyond question! No need for any concensus opinion or approval by any institution, board or committee. It's an immediate, personal thing for me. Same thing with the Knowledge. I know what it is, I like it, I want more! Really couldn't care less about proving it to anyone, or whether it's a hallucination or not. As regards parallel universes, there's no need to look far to find them. You forget that we all perceive the world a little differently. Some people are even color blind. Stevie Wonder is completely blind! He lives in a slightly different universe then the rest of us. But, of course, we are hunters/gatherers by nature and we have to reach a concensus about our reality in order to get things done. That's why we have evolved to agree to share a common universe. Now, when it comes to the birds and the bees, it really becomes apparent just how different worlds co-exist with each other. Bees perceive a completely different universe and they make do pretty well with it. Birds live in their own worlds. Fish have their own special perception of reality. I am not presuming to answer any big questions here. Just trying to emphasize what a multi-faceted, flowing, multi-dimensional reality we actually live in, and if you take away the observer, then there is really nothing much left except some sterile, abstract, dry 'science'. And someone said it earlier - it is always going to be a theory, a model in somebody's head. A pale reflection of the living, moving, creative present moment. Bohm calls it the holomovement. Remember the slogan at the back of the first Whole Earth Catalog? There was a picture of the Earth in space there, and it said 'We can't put it together - it IS together!' And that's what we always try to do - dissect life and try to put it back together again. Doesn't work that way. The frogs never croak again! Regards. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 02:41:52 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: freewheeling@bigfoot.com To: Mike Subject: Yeah, but Message: Mike: To be scientific, those 'opinions' must be based on evidence, a physical property or physical action; not on a 'hallucination.' The difference is in the nature of the 'evidence' (e.g personal experience vice physical evidence, for example). Consensus, in and of itself, really doesn't have anything to do with it because a mass hallucination is still just a hallucination, even though the 'vision' is by consensus. If everyone believed in a 'something' then it would be ridiculous to question it, isn't that so? It makes not a bit of difference whether the 'something' is true or not if it's existence is beyond proof. For instance, death of the physical body is inevitable. Everyone dies, so it MUST be inevitable... but the problem is that that's a tautology. Suppose everyone dies because they believe in death's inevitability? Is it even possible that the reality is chasing the belief, rather than the other way around? Moreover, it could be the context of the mass belief that produces the result, so that a challenge from a small minority would not change the context enough to allow any evidence of the contrary. The ONLY thing that's logical about the inevitability of death is that everyone dies. Nothing else about it makes sense. (I could go on here, but there are no cells in my body older than the glasses I'm wearing, so the notion that things are 'wearing out' doesn't make sense, etc., etc.) Someone on the objective 'outside' has to make the judgment as to what is a mass hallucination and what is simply 'reality.' If no one is 'outside' then we could be just making up at least SOME of the rules as we go along, helped by a larger non-physical (not leaving a mark) reality that compels us to keep the rules straight. In other words, once you establish a 'constitutional' or founding rule you have to abide by it until the constitution is changed, according to the 'change rules' in the founding set of principles. That would be the tough one. Not a matter for the naive. If science is a matter of discovering what the 'rules' are, then who is looking into the possibility that there are 'rules about the rules?' Would that be science, too? Not trying to start an argument here. It's just what bothers me about 'scientism.' I mean, there may be an answer, but it's not simple or straightforward. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 11:13:18 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Yeah, but Message: That's an interesting hypothesis, that we die because we all agree that we're going to. Prove it, professor. I understand what you're trying to say, though. Reality is a matter of mass consensus, right? Again, prove it. You've presented a hypothesis, now you've got to prove it. That's science. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 20:52:08 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Jerry Subject: Yeah, but Message: Dear Jerry, Scott and all, My friend Clo swears that you can reverse or at least hault, I forget, the aging process. That is even to far fetched for me but I just thought I'd interject here that there are indeed some who belive that Scott's point is their reality. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 12:22:59 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jerry Subject: love, complexity and longevity Message: Jerry: Prove it? The point is that it can't be proved while staying within the definition of scientific method that we now have. We can't get outside it, at least not until we build a critical mass of opinion that's willing to consider another alternative, as a possibility. At that point we would, in fact, be able to test the theory. Meantime, everyone keeps dying. I personally think that the shortest route to dealing with these sort of 'contextual' problems is to familiarize people and institutions with the process of working on complex problems, because the complexity and multi-dimensional aspects of problem-solving are the primary reasons why we never get to the bottom of things. For instance, you can't listen to Bach, Rachmaninov, and Elvis and an African precussion demonstration at the same time, and be able to interpret the sounds as music. Another way to think of complexity is that it's associated with problems that have been around a long time w/o being solved. Another hypothesis about death, or one that supports the notion that it is an abberation rather than 'the nature of things' has to do with recent discoveries made by researchers at MIT. What they discovered was that there is a basic mistake in the 'copy program' located in the mitochhondria of human cells that causes them to make mistakes copying RNA. They speculate that this is the root cause of aging. It would be really revolutionary if we discovered that things were actually that simple, but who knows? I suppose Bill Gates would want the patent on the new mitochondrial program. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 13:01:34 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Yeah, but Message: Scott: Can you measure a hallucination (mass or otherwise)? I think not, Scott. If we take this argument all of the way to its conclusion, then potentially no THING is 'real.' This, to me, is the fallacy that got most of us involved with M in the first place. It's all maya/lila, etc, etc. I don't buy it anymore. There is only one observable universe (according to our measurements). When a 'new' dimension is measured vice theorized, I'll believe in it. Until then..... it's conjecture that doesn't have the slightest shred of evidence to support its existence. To put it another way, when someone figures out a valid method to measure the 'paisley patterns' that an lsd users sees while under the influence, I will be glad to acknowledge them as REAL. Until then, it's a hallucination and nothing more. To say that we are hallucinating the 'ruler' with which we measure the known universe is pure conjecture, in the absolute extreme. IMHO. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 18:18:40 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mike Subject: love and measurement theory Message: Mike: I don't think it's a matter of 'hallucinating the ruler.' Those are loaded terms in the sense that an 'hallucination' implies that we're nuts or something. To me it's merely the difference between local, special case penomena, and something that's not special case. I think it's reasonable to suppose that most of what we experience as humans is special case. Measurment theory is an interesting way to approach it, BTW. Radial angular displacement is a lot more general than length measurement, for instance. Someone I know said that topology (points, lines, planes and angles) is the metaphysics of mathematical theory. By definition measurment implies frequency subdivision, so the whole process starts with TWO (not one) events that are recognizably displaced from each other in time, space, or both. It doesn't matter much whether the process starts with 'recognition' or with 'displacement.' (Whether displacement is a function of recognition, or whether displacement is primary, and recognition is inevitable.) What we are usually talking about is something Buchanan calls the 'relatively absolute absolute.' It's another way of saying that we really don't need absolutes to function. All we need is a certain level of continuity. 'Ultimately' all one needs to consider is whether there is a cost associated with entertaining the notion that death might be a 'construct.' Personally, I think it probably is 'all maya' but the rules are a lot more consistent than the juvenile version of that sentiment implies. The fact that only one or two people have ever really challenged the 'death hallucination' and those demonstrations are controversial probably means it's not child's play. I doubt if religion gives us much purchase on this at all. I think science can help us here, but the conception of measurement implied in our version of scientific method is just not very clever in the last analysis. It begs paradox. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 18:41:23 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: love and measurement theory Message: Scott: (Big smile!) BTW, I like the 'hallucination' model because it is, in effect, what the metaphysical types are implying by their (as you say) view of the world as some sort of simplistic maya. In fact, I've heard a few of them refer to maya as a hallucination. But, you are right, it does infer some type of psychosis, which is not germaine here (well, maybe not... he he). Scott, you've got my attention. Why has the subject of death as a 'construct' come up so often in these posts? Have you been reading about something along those lines? What's up? Hey, in reference to your subject-line: Love CAN be measured. I'll prove it... Ask my daughter how much she loves me and she spreads her arms, as wide as she can, and says, 'this much!' Looks like a physical measurement to me..... so it must be real, eh? ;-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 23:01:17 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mike Subject: A frayed knot? Message: Mike: I was raised by a Christian Scientist, so what I'm doing is in part a complaint against their rather simplistic description, and in part an apology. Death is one of those foundations of what the phenomenologists call 'typicality.' The classical treatise on phenomenology, by Berger and Luckmam [sp?] is called 'The Social Construction of Reality.' Now, phenomenology didn't have an answer as to what 'reality' actually is. They basically just thought it must be terribly unpleasant, so the social network constructs an alternative that makes life bearable. It is not a very optimistic philosophy, but I think it made a contribution in the sense that reality, whatever that is, may be something quite different from what we believe it to be. P has that in common with CS, and a number of Eastern religions. What is absent from the philosophy is some sort of 'bracketing' scheme that could allow society to eventually begin to get some purchase on the real. What are life and non-life? Do we have to 'believe' in order to get closer to reality? B & L thought that belief was not trustworthy. They attempted to discover (w/o much success) what component of science was belief, and what was more substancial. I think this business about 'basic particles of matter' is belief. Nothing suggests that there is any such thing. Yet, it is something that defines what we take to by 'typical' in our world. Nothing is more fundamental than that matter is composed of some ultimately solid, but very small, 'thing,' and that if you pack or crowd enough of these together you get a big 'thing.' But, even if you take the atom to be the basic particle (which it isn't) then most objects we call solid are 99.99% space. Why do they seem so... real? It's all a matter of resolution, like the pixels on the screen that make up the image of these words. No doubt about it, it IS an illusion, but a very useful and fortunate one. The inevitability of death is another of those accepted-w/o-question constructs that looks less and less justified. So, we don't 'wear out' so much as our 'patterns degrade.' If 'solid' is a locally defined perception, just a typical experience, then we are actually a pattern integrity that has nothing to do with solidity except that it, too, has became part of the pattern. Why to we seem to age so gracefully until the last few weeks or months (in most cases) and then just race downhill to the end? It's almost as though a threshold has been reached. Like a belief that 'I am alive and that MUST continue' rather suddenly runs out of gas. (Sorry about the car metaphor.) It seems as though it's the 'me-as-a-totally-unique-and-separate-entity' that runs out of gas, but that was never physical in the first place. If you tie a knot in a rope you can slide the knot along the rope until it gets to the end and the knot ceases to exist. The knot was not the rope, and the rope is not sufficient to create the knot. It was just necessary. With a little dexterity you could probably manage to slide the knot onto another rope, so it's not even necessary to have complete continuity. The knot could 'live forever,' moving from thread to string to twine to rope to cable and back down. There you have it: eternal life. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 20:47:09 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Mike Subject: Where's the BEEF! Message: Dear Mike, Apparently it is on the dinner table, haven't you heard you don't have to be a vegitarian anymore either. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 12:10:56 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Oh...there it is! Message: Robyn: I lost track of it... doggone stuff keeps movin' 'round the table.... GOTCHA! Thanks :-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 20:48:07 (EDT)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Mike Subject: Where's the BEEF?!? Message: Dear Mike, Apparently it is on the dinner table, haven't you heard you don't have to be a vegitarian anymore either. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 18:04:06 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Mili Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Mili, I recently saw your web site and I wanted to ask you a question. Where was the new photo of you on your home page taken? It looks like a beautiful place. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 18:52:27 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: VP Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Hiya Veep, The photo was taken last year in the vicinity of Dubrovnik, on the Adriatic coast. Just happened to be at the right place at the right time, I guess! Why don't you come over sometime? Dubrovnik has an international airport, and there is even a regular ferry from Ancona in Italy that can take you there. The whole town is listed as an UNESCO World Heritage cultural monument. It is built entirely out of white limestone, full of baroque palaces and charming narrow, shady streets with cafes, and dates back to the 13th century. You can walk around, climb the city walls, and then exit thru a gate in the wall and have a dip in the most refreshing, azure, clear sea you can imagine. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 19:28:56 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Mili Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Mili, Thanks for sharing that with me. It sounds like a very amazing and beautiful place. Someday maybe I'll see it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 01:36:46 (EDT)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: None To: Mili Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Hi Mili! I was over at my friend's house last night and he showed me holiday snaps of his week in Dubrovnik; it looks like an incredible place. He said it was way too hot, though. He also said that he was in a bad mood because he was coming from several weeks at Lambeth Palace with all the Anglican bishops and their stupid pronouncements regarding homosexuality and women's ordination. But the photos were of a beautiful, historic city with some sub-tropical flora. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 03:53:36 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Well guys, here is a link, but alas, with too few pictures. This one is better but with too little text! You need to download the Quicktime plug-in to see the panoramic view. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 09:09:19 (EDT)
From: Katie Email: None To: Mili Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Hey Mili, long time no see! Hope everything is going well for you. What have you been doing lately? I would love to see Dubrovnik and the Adriatic - maybe some day! I'm not sure if you read the rest of the posts on the forum, but if you did, you'll read that my husband and I did go visit Joe (JW), Mickey, and Rick in the San Francisco Bay area a few weeks ago. (We saw the heavy metal that you sent to Mickey!) All those guys are really nice, too, believe it or not... Take care, Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 09:47:13 (EDT)
From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: Katie Subject: Mili, off topic Message: Hi Katie, Nice to hear from you. I am slowly getting back in the groove here - back to earning moola, after spending a beautiful summer on the Adriatic. Just counting my blessings and being thankful for every moment of life spent outside of 'my mind'. The 'mind' is such a party-pooper! Glad that you and your husband had a nice time, too. Yes, I sent an Yngwie Malmsteen CD to Mickey - wonder if he ever listens to it, though. Maybe I should have sent him Motorhead or The Cult instead! ;o) Regards. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 21:12:56 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mili Subject: Definitely ON topic Message: 'Outside of your mind'??? What kind of crap talk is that? The only time you are outside of your mind is when you are unconscious on the operating table. This kind of talk is idle bullshit. If you were outside of your mind, you wouldn't be able to read this post because it is your mind which is translating these letters into words inside your head. Do premies still claim to be above or out of their minds? I have rarely heard such nonsense. Where do you get these ideas from? Don't tell me, I know. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Wed, Sep 09, 1998 at 21:32:24 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Definitely ON topic Message: Outside of my mind there is a place it's big... When I'm out there I'm orbiting my mind the one place I am 'not' therefore the centre of my universe Outside of my mind... so much freedom - orbiting maya - must be heaven. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 02:30:50 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Judith Subject: Definitely ON topic Message: Not you as well. If you are outside of your minds then you must be mindless zombies. This is a myth which you choose to believe in, that you are outside of your minds. Even in my deepest experience of meditation or feeling of bliss I have never been outside of my mind. I have still been able to think and I was still me. I never left my mind. But I see little point in saying any more. It just proves that all the years I've spent away from premies has made an ever widening gulf between premie thinking and my thought processes. And I am left thinking, why do I meddle with this crap? Yes, I should just leave you all to it. It never got me anywhere. It's all bullshit. A load of myths built up around a meditation practise. A load of myths perpretrated by some fat Indian man who doesn't even practise the bullshit he preaches. And never did. My life has moved on. I'm not even an ex-premie. I'm so ex that I can hardly remember that identity. Yes, I shouldn't meddle in this crap. It was a bad dream that happened long ago. All this will do is remind me of it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 18:37:07 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Definitely ON topic:Sir David! Message: Dear Sir David Didn't you realise I was being ironic? Oh dear, it must have failed miserably. Sorry. I started out trying to write a few lines about what it feels like to be 'outside' the mind - where is that? What does it look like? Definitely NOT regressing!!! Jude Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, Sep 10, 1998 at 19:40:06 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Judith/Sir David Subject: I knew, Judith. I know, David Message: I knew you were joking around, Judith. Sir David, I know what you are saying, David. Often I feel like I don't need to be here because I have moved on past premie/ex-premie issues. It's almost like someone else besides me is talking about it. I'm not hung up on it anymore. I guess I stick around for the others who are still having problems with it. To talk to them. Not like what I say has a whole lot of value, but it is important that they have someone to hash this out with. I hope you think about staying for this reason. And I have gotten to like a lot of folks here. If you go who will keep us in the know on cheese rolling and other important issues? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 16:31:05 (EDT)
From: CD Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Definitely ON topic Message: >Even in my deepest experience of meditation or feeling of bliss I have never been outside of my mind. I have still been able to think and I was still me. I never left my mind. Words can be useful, deceptive, ambiguous and misleading. Ever hear of the terminology problem? Don't react so quickly to a few words with a damning conclusion. Aw, but these are just words again. Regards, CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, Sep 12, 1998 at 18:47:57 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: CD Subject: Definitely ON topic Message: Words should be used to say what we mean, as clearly as possible. Too often, I'm left pondering what it is you're trying to say, CD. You quoted a part of Sir David's post, then you said something about words and a terminology problem and I've given up trying to figure out what you're trying to say, unless of course you'd care to clarify yourself. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, Sep 08, 1998 at 17:02:14 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Becky Subject: Astonomy Message: Becky: That line, 'God is the one Who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon, each one travelling in an orbit with its own motion'. Al Anbiya (21:33)' could easily be interpreted as meaning the 'sun orbits the earth.' Additionally, 'night' and 'day' are not orbiting objects, they are indicative of the earth revolving on its axis. This quote is not a good example of astrophysical profundity. There may be other (and better) quotes from the koran that you could use (please do, if there are). The fact that objects in space orbit other objects was surmised by people long before the koran (and copernicus). There are some astro-archaeologists that have believable proof that the Anasazi knew of orbits. Their only problem was they didn't have a written language, so we have to go with pictographs and such. - Becky, this quote doesn't indicate any 'real' scientific research being performed, or sponsored, by a religious organization, either. Like I said in my last post to you below (before it scrolls into the inactive pile), I believe science thrives in spite of religion, not because of it. No religion (as a monolithic whole) will inspire scientific research because that research almost always threatens the existence of religion and its tenets. This 'threat' occurs whenever a scientific discovery is found to be in direct conflict with the contents of the old 'holy' book. - It IS a fact that some adventurous muslims, christians, jews, etc have made (and will make) great scientific discoveries. But if you examine these discoveries I think you will find that, in almost every case, the discoverers themselves were shunned, if not killed, by their respective religions. This is particularly true if the discovery flies-in-face of a tenet of that particular religion. As an example of a 'theoretical' future discovery: A jewish scientist discovers, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that milk and meat should always be eaten together because one counteracts the negative effects of the other (this is an EXAMPLE, not REAL, OK?) What do you think the result of this jewish discovery would be? How do you think the rabbi in the synagogue would react to this news? (If you are confused by this example, eating milk and meat in the same meal goes against ages-old jewish teachings). Again, the point that science thrives 'in spite of' religion, would be made and the discoverer would be shunned. - As to the existence of the word 'sperm' in the koran, please look up (when you have time) the arabic word for sperm (from a secular arabic dictionary) and then see if that word is in the koran. I don't believe it will be. Becky, this whole topic of science versus religion is VERY important. Until the 'versus' part is dealt with, there will always be a basic conflict. I don't see that happening until 'old' texts are dropped as 'scientific fact' and used for that which they are best suited: A compendium of human values. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |