Daneane -:- A double feature -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:33:25 (GMT)

__ ex-mug -:- bollocks (nt) -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 10:52:38 (GMT)

__ jondon -:- A double feature -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 12:19:17 (GMT)

__ __ Daneane -:- FA: Can racists comments be deleted? -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:08:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ Forum Admin -:- FA: Can racists comments be deleted? -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 16:59:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- FA: Can racists comments be deleted? -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:21:55 (GMT)

__ A premie -:- A double feature -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:56:44 (GMT)

__ __ Daneane -:- To clarify -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:25:45 (GMT)

__ __ __ A premie -:- To clarify -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 04:37:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Oliver -:- To clarify some more -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 05:31:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Answers to 4 questions -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 15:45:54 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- A premie a Comet? -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 02:34:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Oliver and Daneane -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:50:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Put your money where your mouth is -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 16:26:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Put your money where your mouth is -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 18:45:24 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Boy, am I glad I'm not you -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 23:45:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Boy, am I glad I'm not you -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:17:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- You 'actually get really high in M's presence' ? -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 19:22:21 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- You 'actually get really high in M's presence' ? -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:19:07 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- high in the presence of ... what? -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 15:31:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- high in the presence of ... what? -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:27:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Great post cq! Thank you! (nt) -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 15:39:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Blood -:- That floating feeling -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 23:05:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- That floating feeling -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:06:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- Times are a changin' -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:30:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- To:a premie -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:08:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- To:a premie -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:12:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Back with ya, now -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:46:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:Back with ya, now -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 14:05:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Re:Back with ya, now -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 16:33:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Debunking van Praagh - Pt 1 -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 15:43:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 15:44:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 18:05:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Re:Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 -:- Tues, May 02, 2000 at 01:03:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 -:- Tues, May 02, 2000 at 14:37:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What kind of an answer is that? -:- Tues, May 02, 2000 at 15:20:02 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Blood -:- What the hell does Christ know -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 05:16:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Michael -:- Quite a claim... -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 14:41:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Blood -:- Quite a claim... -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 16:04:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- Josephus -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 23:37:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:00:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:41:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Michael -:- Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 00:29:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 01:58:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ blood -:- very thorough rebuttal... not trying to disprove -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 01:20:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ J Edgar -:- Xtianity - Churchianity - same origin no? (nt) -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 18:23:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Xtianity - Churchianity - same origin? yes and no -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 13:04:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Or are you a 'Hoover,' J Edgar? (nt) -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 13:21:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Well ... I could be a bit of a sucker, Stonor!(nt) -:- Tues, May 02, 2000 at 16:13:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Blood -:- thanks for the link -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:23:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- What the hell does Christ know -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 15:53:23 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- Thanks, Daneane -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:38:13 (GMT)

__ __ Daneane -:- LOTU -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:18:47 (GMT)

Jim -:- Uh oh! Am I fucked or what?? -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:16:47 (GMT)

__ silver -:- Uh oh! Am I fucked or what?? -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 21:31:53 (GMT)

__ __ Stonor -:- Anger a factor? (Thanks Mili) -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 13:39:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- Anger a factor? (Thanks Mili) -:- Tues, May 02, 2000 at 14:27:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ Elaine B. -:- Anger a factor? (Thanks Mili) -:- Mon, May 01, 2000 at 18:10:47 (GMT)

__ JohnT -:- Uh oh! Am I fucked or what?? -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 11:00:09 (GMT)

__ Nigel -:- Shit - if this guy has a doctorate... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:22:43 (GMT)

__ __ cq -:- Shit - if this guy has a doctorate... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 19:00:50 (GMT)

__ __ Runamok -:- Similar statistics have been around for years. -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:48:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- Hard to prove anything from this data. -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:36:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Runamok -:- Is it data or a conclusion? -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:07:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Is it data or a conclusion? -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 22:50:14 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- Is it data or a conclusion? -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 02:14:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Is it data or a conclusion? -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 02:53:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- cool/i follow (nt) -:- Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 07:05:56 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Relax, Nige, I've just found the answer -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:26:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ Za-Za Gabor -:- darlink, I've tried it,do you think it verks? (nt) -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 19:05:26 (GMT)

jondon -:- BM in BeanTown -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 19:43:40 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- BM in BeanTown -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 01:35:30 (GMT)

__ __ bb -:- Bean bag -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 18:30:30 (GMT)

Jim -:- Mili, Why don't you ever write anything like this? -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 14:50:06 (GMT)

__ Nigel -:- Mental illness is no joke... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:04:08 (GMT)

__ Stonor -:- OK, Jim, now you've got me REALLY mad!!! -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 20:39:43 (GMT)

__ Baseball Phil -:- Mili, Why don't you ever write anything like this? -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 15:29:45 (GMT)

__ __ Oliver -:- Here's a little trivia for ya: -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 04:40:09 (GMT)

__ Gregg -:- Mili, Why don't you ever write anything like this? -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 15:28:24 (GMT)

james flynn -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 12:14:19 (GMT)

__ dv -:- I did those St. E trips also. The St. E staff -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 13:58:47 (GMT)

__ Katie -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 11:52:25 (GMT)

__ __ james flynn -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:45:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ Katie -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 14:28:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ james flynn -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 11:30:02 (GMT)

__ Mili -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 12:58:09 (GMT)

__ __ G -:- Do you have anything of substance to say? (nt) -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 00:53:45 (GMT)

__ __ msmind -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 20:17:22 (GMT)

__ __ __ Mili -:- guru maharaj ji -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 09:35:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Please explain: guru maharaj ji -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 03:01:32 (GMT)

__ __ Way -:- Re:guru maharaj ji -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 14:00:21 (GMT)

__ __ __ Marianne -:- Ignore Mili -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 16:00:28 (GMT)

Angry -:- Powerman's excellent point!...half-assed premies -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 12:05:19 (GMT)

__ JW -:- You could NEVER 'Do it right.' -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 17:50:10 (GMT)

__ __ Blood Boils -:- You have the whole thing in a nutshell right there -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 22:46:58 (GMT)

__ __ __ A premie -:- You have the whole thing in a nutshell right there -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:32:02 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Hal -:- Congratulations Premie! -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 07:07:50 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ No condescension? -:- Now if only the ex-premies could do the same (nt) -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:15:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- How patronising of you (nt) -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 13:29:09 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- You got me -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 05:09:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- You got me -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 16:07:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ The Cloak -:- you don't have to apologize to anyone here, but... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:52:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- you don't have to apologize to anyone here, but... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 04:42:22 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- hoodwinked and duped.Too tired to consider it?(nt) -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 18:19:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ a premie -:- Hi cq -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:39:45 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Hi premie -:- Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 13:19:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yes, yes, Knowledge as a way to escape life -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:56:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Yes, yes, Knowledge as a way to escape life -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:01:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ A.P. -:- Yes, yes, Knowledge as a way to escape life -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 11:51:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Hi A.P. -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 16:49:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A.P. -:- Hi A.P. -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 21:54:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A premie -:- Hi A.P. -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:29:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- Meditation -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:03:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- inside the impossible -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:37:09 (GMT)

Loaf -:- Pauline Premie is BEST -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 06:54:54 (GMT)

__ Nogbad the Bad -:- with the bullshit and the blarney... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:36:56 (GMT)

__ __ Noggin the Nog -:- with the bullshit and the blarney... -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 06:06:13 (GMT)

__ Pauline Premie -:- I am to in synch to do anything like that.... -:- Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 16:52:56 (GMT)

__ __ Loafie Goldstein -:- Don't hide your first technique under a bushel -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 06:04:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ cq -:- Who to play PP? I vote for Billie Piper (nt) -:- Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 10:36:28 (GMT)

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:33:25 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Everyone Subject: A double feature Message:

Two months since I last went to a video presentation and I noticed in myself an odd sense of freedom. I realized, a major part of being an aspirant, is waiting. Waiting for the next fix, waiting to understand, waiting for questions to be answered, waiting for doubts to subside, waiting to hear you've progressed, waiting to learn more, waiting to be approved waiting, waiting to have your turn to learn the techniques and then waiting to get knowledge. And then I would imagine, and whole new world of things to wait for emerges. Prior to learning of M, I had just finished up a novel length story. Two months after bailing from aspiring to M, I have written two short stories and sketched out an outline for a second novel. I didn't even realize the distraction. So I sat myself down in front of the tube for a Big M double feature. Two aspirant videos loaned to me that I keep forgetting to mail back. One is titled, 'Learning More: Questions and Answers Part I' and the other, 'The Master Brings Knowledge to Life'. I watched both with a pen and paper in front of me. I am shocked at how little I wrote down. I am amazed at how different it all appeared. It was like one big lesson in circular logic. Lookeeehere: Q: 'Is this knowledge very different from ordinary meditation?' M: 'Yeah, very different. So different you don't know how different till you have it.' And what did I write to myself after writing that quote? WAIT. M: 'Knowledge. How incredible a gift it is can only be understood if you accept the experience that knowledge brings.' So, if I were to try to interpret this with a grain of logical thought process...Hmmmm....In order to know how incredible knowledge is, I have to experience knowledge. In order to experience knowledge, I have to accept knowledge. Sooo...until I have it, I can't know the value of it, but I have to accept it first? So I have to...WAIT? I can't how how different it is until I have it. I can't know how valuable it is until I have it. Aaaaannnnd....'without the master knowledge would be static, it would mean nothing. It would be frozen, you couldn't do anything with it. It wouldn't mean anything.' Okay. So I have to accept the master. Why? Because he brings life to knowledge. Sooooo, I have to accept the master, to accept knowledge, so I can see how valuable it is. Annnndddd....'Without knowledge words of the master must be very empty.' Sooooooo....I have to accept the master's empty words to accept knowledge to see the master's words are not empty. Annnndddd...'but because there is knowledge...that is the creedence required to the words of the master.' Soooooooo....I know now that the Master can only be understood with knowledge and knowledge can only be understood with the master. Well, that's deep. What could I possibly have to question?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 10:52:38 (GMT) From: ex-mug Email: None To: Daneane Subject: bollocks (nt) Message:

(nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 12:19:17 (GMT) From: jondon Email: None To: Daneane Subject: A double feature Message:

At this point I would just say 'Hey, Apu, Gimme a couple o' slimjims and a cherry slushie, wouldja?'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:08:08 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Forum Administrator Subject: FA: Can racists comments be deleted? Message:

This jondon has made them in both posts.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 16:59:04 (GMT) From: Forum Admin Email: None To: Daneane Subject: FA: Can racists comments be deleted? Message:

Daneane, I'm not sure which racist comments you mean. Could you explain a bit more please? Forum Administrator

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:21:55 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Daneane Subject: FA: Can racists comments be deleted? Message:

How's that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:56:44 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Daneane Subject: A double feature Message:

That first part about feeling freedom when you stopped aspiring for M - I think I have it right --- I just wanted to point out that when we stop aspiring for anything we feel a freedom. BTW. It's a relief to stop aspiring or working towards something ---- whatever it may be,no? I agree I would never go through what aspirants are expected to now. Never. It's actually cruel. M is not doing himself a service by making so many hoops for people with sincerity to jump through. I mean if you are not sincere a couple of hoops I think are ok. And then the mumbo jumbo vagueness. Many years ago - - say 1978? A close and sincere boyfriend saw an instructor speak (in Boston) and he said why doesn't he say what it is??? It's like he's dancing on a box up there. Needless to say, he never pursued K any further. And this was a boy that could clearly see in a split second when I changed because I focused on Holy Name. I wasn't trying to show him anything,I just remembered to focus (meditate) and he would jump all over me and say You're meditating aren't you?? And I would say no way,how do you know? He just did. I'm sorry I'm not such a good typist. Must be my years of meditating. Just kidding. I hope you pursue some other way to focus your senses inside that doesn't have alot of 'trips'. The simpler the better and one that doesn't charge. Maybe in a book or the techniques they show here on the internet. Empower yourself. I don't know you so I don't mean to tell you what to do.Please, don't take offense or get mad. Good luck.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:25:45 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: A premie Subject: To clarify Message:

A Premie, The freedom I meant is a freedom from waiting for something to the detriment of missing today; as I showed in the example of my writing. Not mad. But remember...your mention of meditation...that's very different than knowledge...so different you don't know how different, what could be more different? Or were you asking a different question? Or was a different post? Oh well, what's the difference.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 04:37:40 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Daneane Subject: To clarify Message:

I don't know ... is Knowledge different than meditation? Isn't it all just about focusing inside, whatever method you use? Finding some peace or satisfaction or even better having some 'high' experiences and insights? Learning about who you are and creation? Christ said the Kingdom of Heaven is within. So it seems pretty clear that's where to look. Whether that's even called meditation, it seems fair to say so. Oh, I don't know ---- I'm getting sleepy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 05:31:43 (GMT) From: Oliver Email: None To: A premie Subject: To clarify some more Message:

You have written a couple of messages today laddy and I must say, the sweetness and light shining from all of them was a change from the normal premie who passes through this place. But I want to know more and am sure you'll have no trouble giving a few details on the following:- 1) How much of your time, effort and resourses are taken up in propagation? 2) Do you feel the need to regularly attend video events etc to ensure that your positive experience of Knowledge will continue? 3) Have you ever appeared on this forum before using another name? 4) Can you think of anything negative about Maharaji? Thank you in anticipation of your pleasant and thioughtful reply.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 15:45:54 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Oliver Subject: Answers to 4 questions Message:

First, I feel like apologizing for any rude premies - But that's only a feeling - I can't speak for them. So I'm not really apologizing. Second, and you Oliver really made me feel good with such a nice post to me. Much appreciated, thank you. Third, how come you thought I was a laddy. Is that an Aussie spelling? Now ans.: 1.Zero 2.Never. Further more I stay away from video events in my community as a rule because I have a hard time even if I arrived 2 minutes before hand --- I'm always afraid I may have to listen to other premies inane,unevolved, judgement-filled banter. May I give my last example-someone's living room with chairs and garlic breath permeating offensively - 'How're you doing,Ralph' 'Oh,I've just been barely makin' it...but I'm HERE,man.' 'Yeah,man at least you're HERE.' 'Yeah, at least I made it HERE. Whew, really.' End. I don't know - is it me? 3.Yes. Long time ago.You weren't around even. 4.Well,yeah - said like a Valley Youth. You didn't ask what though :) ok. I think it is appalling that he doesn't answer premies questions whether they have written, e-mailed or phoned. Like who does he think he is anyway. The purity and sincerity and confusion that is expressed - the direction that is requested what gives that he can't take an hour a week and help people. His own 'lovers' for God's sake. Like he's above or too busy to be bothered. And that goes back through to the seventies. Umm,let's see. I can't stand that he gives no regard to planning events to give premies time to even get that 2 wk cheaper advance plane fare. Umm, Wish,like a manager of a store,he would have more control over the jerks! that he has seemingly representing him. Whether it's an EV seller behind a table or worse the instructor type at aspirant gatherings in the big cities that are so unkind to everyone.Premie, aspirant. Even a manager of a big store has instructions for his employees. Take Disney World - all the employees are told in many ways - make everyone happy. Now is that so wrong? Umm, I'll think more today. Oh, and of course, the ridiculous hoops that aspirants have to jump through. I know people in my community that have 'sought Kn' for SOOOO long. ( My close friend of years is an active premie - in fact 'the aspirants' are her baby.) She goes to all videos weekly. Stuff like that. But, ya know ---- he can 'run his business' anyway he wants.Into the ground or make it a success. It's his business. But, you asked. I probably shouldn't have started posting. I lurk. Sometimes, I just want to say I am sorry someone didn't experience anything. And want to just raise my hand like some obnoxious know- it- all in the class and say 'But I did:) - See me, back here... I know the answer - call on me.' You know the type in every class room. The smarty pants no one likes. See ya later,probably

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 02:34:05 (GMT) From: Oliver Email: None To: A premie Subject: A premie a Comet? Message:

Thanks for your reply. I see that a veritable throng of interested correspondent's have jumped in the queue shouting for your attention so I shall try to be brief. Despite your latest alias, you would appear to be more of an ex-premie than a person who practices Knowledge. If given the opportunity to discuss your 'experience' with that man you call Master he would have to tell you that you are living under an illusion. Where is the service, sorry participation, where is the 'stay in touch' and where is that devotion to that Perfect Master? And most importantly to Maharaji, for let's face it he's not cheap, where's the bucks. Instead there's just meditation taught by this guy who is just running a business helped by incompetant arseholes who invariably get it wrong (but in fairness to them, you know the adage 'pay peanuts and you'll get monkies'). The only way that Knowledge is able to be sold at all is that it's all a dream. That is why thirty odd years down the track, ex-premies out number practising premies by something around ten to one. If it was real the majority of us would still be there with you. The dream is over and it is time for us all to wake up and say OK, I was sold a crock of shit. I can do, feel and believe anything I like and my happiness is not dependant on anyone other than myself. You say that you 'lurk' in Forum 5 and feel sorry for people who didn't 'experience anything. You say that you have posted before but before I arrived. 'You weren't around even.' What do you do? Keep a log on people as they come and go? If things go to script, I predict that 'A premie' will be here for a day or two longer and then will disappear over the horizon never to be heard from again. Of course some new one will appear to 'stir the pot' using some new ploy before disappearing. I call them 'premie comets.' They appear briefly to shine the brightest before disappearing, never to be seen again. Have a nice day, Oliver

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:50:17 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Oliver Subject: Oliver and Daneane Message:

Nope, I listened to Charnanand singing sp? bajhans - 'Downpour of the Holy Name'. I'm a premie. I think you may have had contact with premies that were just different than me. I'm a rebel in the ranks - but still in the ranks. I think I have less judgement than the one's I know. Makes me less passionate. Some would say mellow. Whatever floats your boat. I originally came on just Thurs (2 days ago) because I felt compelled to say Blood and JW's experience wasn't mine. My motive was probably for others to read that there WAS another experience for some out there. It wasn't really for JW and Blood probably. I like to check my motives. Sometimes I don't know why till after. I'm working on it. Comet - yeah,I wish. But NICE image. And Oliver,I just don't remember seeing your name. No log.Tho if I were more efficient generally I would because I forget and mix people up here - I waste time re-reading because I may start to post to the wrong person. See ya later

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 16:26:00 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: A premie Subject: Put your money where your mouth is Message:

1) You admit that you posted here before under another name. But why not just say the name? Are you ashamed of what you said before? Do you stand by it all? What was the name? 2) Okay, so you're willing to criticize Maharaji. Anonymously. But do you hesitate to do so openly under your own name? You know, it's not like he's L. Ron Hubbard or anything. Don't you think it looks cowardly and perhaps hypocritical to snipe at him like this? Have you ever written or called him or otherwise tried to get some response from him? What happened? Did you ever write back and tell him just what you said here but over your own signature? 3) You mention a number of really shitty things Maharaji's responsible for yet you dismiss your own criticism of him away in a single gesture: But, ya know ---- he can 'run his business' anyway he wants.Into the ground or make it a success. It's his business. Do you know what this makes you look like? What do you think it says about your own moral fibre? Besides that, don't you see some pretty serious discrepencies between Maharaji's decidedly unloving behaviour as you yourself have noticed and his protestations of 'love' for his followers? If so, tell me about that. Something more than a mere 'yes', 'no', 'I don't know' or 'maybe'. Tell me how you can reconcile following such a callous 'Master of Love'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 18:45:24 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Jim Subject: Put your money where your mouth is Message:

Got a break- 1)Ashamed is a pretty big word. Hmm,was a while back and only a few times, didn't admit I was a premie, just interjected here and there. No big deal, but back again and just felt like saying I was a premie is all. If you object I'm sorry - don't continue with me then. End now. Okay for those that stuck..... 2) No, I don't hesitate to criticize M openly under my own name. I'm just not going to,period. With my premie friends,yes. On an international forum,no. 3) Do I think it cowardly etc... No. I have my opinion, so... and the big deal is???... 4) No, never felt any inkling of a desire to write M. When someone has an opinion about something it doesn't automatically change their basic make-up. I'm not a crusader or whistle blower. I think it's good there are crusaders in the world. But I'm not one of them. 5) Hey, when I don't like a restaurant I may say it and then say oh well, it's their business to run it into the ground. Oh well. Same here. Remember, I'm not a crusader. My partner in dining could have been outraged and written a letter to the BBB. Different styles. (((Do you know what this makes you look like?))) 6) Now how can I say this in print so it doesn't sound sarcastic or flippant but rather in the Zen type fashion you would perceive in person with me...'.Jim,I don't care.' 7) My moral fiber's just fine,thank you for asking. Now if you're still with me - I doubt you are Jim because I didn't give my full name up above... but for the other interested readers here... Those last questions really did get me thinking. Yes, WHY would I 'follow' M still after everything I don't like about the way he does things. Jim, asked for something other than an 'I don't know'. Very fair. I pondered why do I love my mother,hmmm big ques. Why my father,even bigger. Then why do I still befriend my friends who have countless times disappointed me, not lived up to my expectations, done hurtful things sometimes even to me or others...and my parents, well, don't get me started. Yes,why,well for now anyway I'd have to say - I'm a tolerant person? Ah, I don't have alot of hate in me? Ah, I'm selfish and I actually get really high in M's presence. Ah, I'm a naive little shit that is full of hope that maybe he'll continue to say things that inspire me to go inward on my journey. To follow that candle flame in my heart that brought me seeking in the first place. I don't really know exactly. I do have forgiveness in my heart. And I don't think M is perfect. I was taught a perfect way to go inside. Just as he said. I will probably get back to this why ques. I have to go again.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 23:45:46 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: A premie Subject: Boy, am I glad I'm not you Message:

Look at you. Got into a cult when it was all about crossing over the river of birth and death, piercing the veil of this illusory existence and merging one's consciousness in the infinite glory of satchitanand. The Lord of the Universe had incarnated with more power than ever before and you recognized Him and solemnly surrendered yourself back to Him. And now? Now you think he's a bit of a prick but you still get a hit of some sort when you see him. So you see him every once in a while. You're not willing to openly tell him what you really think about him; indeed you're so damned blase about it all you probably don't care yourself what you think. So why should he? Do you consider yourself a superficial person? I ask because, in my opinion, you sure as hell seem so. No room for curiosity about this prick you call Master. No room for any passion. In a way, I think the Happy Clappers on ELK are better off.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:17:33 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Jim Subject: Boy, am I glad I'm not you Message:

Now see? We do agree on something. I'm glad you're not me either,Jim. I knew there was common ground between us. I could feel it right from the start. Couldn't you all feel it too?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 19:22:21 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: A premie Subject: You 'actually get really high in M's presence' ? Message:

So you 'actually get really high in M's presence' That's the main pay-off for you, no? Ever wondered why? Have your symptoms anything to do with SGS - sycophantic groupie syndrome? Rubbing shoulders with the rich and famous/infamous can trigger such feelings, regardless of their 'worthiness' (or lack of it).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:19:07 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: cq Subject: You 'actually get really high in M's presence' ? Message:

'That's the main pay off for you,no?' Why, yes. It is. I mean why would anyone pay hundreds of dollars to fly in a thing that could go down in flames, let alone breathe that stale air, next to God only knows who --- then go through the indignities of having to see the military service premies. ( Some are nice) To only be seated in some dark, concrete hall far away sometimes from M unless they were getting really high. I mean really. And that's only part of the troubles at or going to a program. Ever wondered why what? Sorry. Is there really something called SCG? It's crazy enough I believe you. There's no rich or famous people I'm rubbing shoulders with at these programs, let me tell you. Unless - are you meaning M? No rubbing going on there. I've been in the audience at many a speakers talk when they pass through town - the Wayne Dyer types, know what I mean - they write a book do a curcuit---I've gotten inspired and even felt really clear after. Not even close as with M. I actually have wondered why I get so darn high. Like is it just me - that I WANT to get high after all I've been through to be sitting there. But then sometimes I don't feel much of anything- well, that's me too I figure. I was distracted,pre-occupied. There have been programs that I was miserable. Just as the old premie expression goes - my brain was frying. I'd look thru my binoculars and grit my teeth and DEMAND internally to M to just TAKE me to a place that I feel something - words similar to that. And I am telling you - I don't know if I walked or floated to my hotel room. Like I was on a drug for hours!!! I just don't know - what the hell happens. But it's pretty damn cool. I'm not going to any of these programs happening now tho. I'm just fine and who needs to spend the money and take off work. I may have seen M in LA in, gee-'91 or 94 --- I don't even know. Don't care. Regards

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 15:31:29 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: A premie Subject: high in the presence of ... what? Message:

Well, AP each to his or her own, but to step back for a moment at look at this whole 'getting high in his presence' number objectively, you have to put your own subjective experience on hold for a while. Would it be fair to say that your ... infatuation too strong a word? ... with the personality of the Maha says a lot more about you than it does about him? It strikes me that the code of dependency he encourages is really not too healthy at all. I say this as an addictive personality-type myself - having been into gurus, dope, booze, tobacco, and probably this Forum could count as an addiction as well. I've had darshans too, and can remember that wooly, fuzzy, almost drug-induced-type high that resulted from large numbers of hyped-up/blissed out premies all focusing their energies on one charismatic target. There's a word to describe that - Auto-hypnosis. I'd like to draw your attention to the following - though it might not yet strike a chord with you, it could come in handy when you feel like establishing your own independence from the Maha. The website's called http://thewellspring.com/Journal/authors/gurusynopsis.html and deals with 'The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power', by Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad: Gurus and Followers 'The guru/disciple relationship is a particularly pure example of authoritarianism. The student comes to the teacher in an attitude of complete and constant surrender; the teacher is the absolute authority on everything. According to tradition, the disciple can expect a certain payoff from the arrangement - the eventual attainment of enlightenment through exposure to a living saint. Also, for the student the experience of surrender opens psychological boundaries, evoking feelings of love. The guru's rewards are seldom explicitly stated since they are regarded as clearly deserved: He has complete control over the thoughts and actions of another person, he can expect to be showered with gifts and attention, and he is deferred to in every instance as a superior being. The costs of this form of power relation to both disciple and guru are almost never elaborated in religious lore. The disciple is expected to give up his personality, his very sense of self. His life is no longer his own. The guru, meanwhile, even though he may be a fountain of love and goodwill, comes to live behind a wall of separation from others: he is a 'knower'; others are merely 'seekers.' The guru is different; this is why he deserves to be deferred to. But this difference undermines intimacy. 'Gurus and disciples need each other, but as roles, not as individuals, which makes real human connection almost impossible. So gurus must create other ways of turning themselves on besides intimacy, the most usual ones being adulation, material wealth, impersonal sexuality, and power.' Gurus usually don't even have authentic peer relations with other gurus. On the face of it, one would think that enlightened beings would naturally seek each other out in order to find respite from having constantly to deal with spiritual inferiors. But in fact they seldom visit one another because when they do, their disciples are always watching to see who comes out best. The mere fact of who goes to see whom carries implications of dominance. While the guru/disciple relationship is, strictly speaking, a product of the spiritual traditions of ancient India, a similar pattern of authoritarian control can be discerned in virtually every religion or cult among every civilized people. Prophets and visionaries seem always to attract followers. The prophet's vision makes him special. Playing upon this specialness, he eventually gets caught in the trap of always having to be right (or to appear to be right; meanwhile, everybody else simply stops thinking. )After all, the prophet has all the answers.' (emphases mine)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:27:23 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: cq Subject: high in the presence of ... what? Message:

Whoah,very cool. Of course didn't have time to read the link. But will soon - promise.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 15:39:15 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: cq Subject: Great post cq! Thank you! (nt) Message:

Great post cq! Thank you! (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 23:05:34 (GMT) From: Blood Email: None To: A premie Subject: That floating feeling Message:

It is probably the endorphin release and hormonal uptake failure caused by having to sit on the airplane and then be crammed into the concrete building for hours with lunatics...after having told your boss a lie about why you needed to take off work with only a weeks notice...without having to reveal that you are a cult member for fear that you would lose your job. Both inanity and insanity are frequently accompanied by hormonal releases which cause uplifting sensations. Probably wouldn't be a bad idea to talk to a therapist about theses floating sensations prior to developing full blown psychosis. The therapist will be well aware of the delusional effects of cult involvement, symptoms of which you have demonstrated in your writing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:06:10 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Blood Subject: That floating feeling Message:

Ya think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:30:56 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: A premie Subject: Times are a changin' Message:

I remember when A Premie first posted. He/she seemed warm and open and not terribly focused. Seemed to be passing through and offering a comment. Yet, as questions to her/him become more focused, her/his answers seem to be getting more direct and more premie like. I wonder why this happens? Is it just about reacting differently to different people? Or is the process of asking for clarification bring out panic? Honesty? A running back to the same safe trite phrases? Or maybe just the ease of anonymity?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:08:13 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: A premie Subject: To:a premie Message:

a premie, I'm not sorry you posted here. Your posts are somewhat interesting. I've read your replies to Oliver's four questions. I have another question. Were you ever a fan of Shri Hans' satsang? I was. All that glorious satsang corresponded with my yearnings for higher consciousness. When I reread the Hans Yog Prakash or the bio of Shri Hans, I can't believe how different Rawat is from his father. You seem to have fairly low expectations of Knowledge. I'm just wondering if you ever had aspirations for enlightenment.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:12:25 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Way Subject: To:a premie Message:

Everyday. Loved that Shri Hans. Back to Jim's long ques. later this eve.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 01:46:37 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Way Subject: Back with ya, now Message:

Let's see...low expectations of Knowledge was it? I don't have low expectations of where the human spirit can and will ascend to. I use meditation and any inspiring book I can get my hands on to help me attain insight. Right now I'm reading James Van Praagh's second book 'Reaching to Heaven'. 'Talking to Heaven' was so wonderful. He was just on Entertainment Tonight I was told because another book ( about Grief) just came out. The insights into the spirit world - where we're all going one day - are so inspiring. His website is his name .com. Brian Weiss is my next one 'Many Lives,Many Masters'. Same thing .com. No I truly believe the answer is inside 100% - and the Knowledge or the Knowledge techniques whatever one feels comfortable saying can take you to 'it'. That's not to say if you were following Kriya or Kirpal or Zen you couldn't also. I think praying and being a good person helps,I mean the Catholic mystics were pretty amazing. I'm also reading about a Saint Therese - there are so many. She lived in France around 1880 and beyond. Not Avila. This one is so inspiring. I want my soul to be polished and to grow. And just living and learning lessons can do alot of that. Premie's that are just going inside like automatons drive me nuts. I stay away from most. Practicing K is wonderful. Enlightenment - not in this lifetime for me. It's major hard. Lots of work ,lots of polishing,man. And I'm not talking about the Lotus Feet. Polishing me. Refining me...MY thoughts...giving to humanity...being an example...being humble. If Maharaji can help me by reminding me of a wonderful place that I sometimes lose sight of - yea. Darn I have to cut this short again. Regards

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 14:05:10 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: A premie Subject: Re:Back with ya, now Message:

Dear A Premie, I wish you would change your pen-name. Too ambiguous. Sorry for the late response. I don't usually check in here on the weekends - I don't know if you will see this reply. We have lots in common. I saw James van Praagh in person last November. Was very impressed. I've read all the books on your list, I would wager. See my own 'Unbounded Light' over at Amazon. Includes Theresa (the Avila one), St. Augustine, Hui-Neng, George Fox, St. Seraphim, Yogananda, and (I'm sorry to say)Da Love Ananda (yuck!) I've moved on a bit. If you want to find yourself, accept your finite self first. Dump the guru. Don't rush.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 16:33:26 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Way Subject: Re:Back with ya, now Message:

I know the name thing... I thought I'd go with Elaine B. How do you tell people you've changed? Don't think alot of people care really - I mean about me or what I say.(Which is fine,don't get me wrong.) So in that sense I guess I could just go ahead and do it - since 'premie' came on it's been different - though, I went back to the archives and I saw 'premie' has been here before. Had I known I wouldn't have started with that. Oh yeah, And I think I accept my finite self fine - now I'm working on realizing I'm spirit - you would know what I mean by that after reading Van Praagh. Others might judge that phrase and I may read some flak. Due to reading Van praagh I actually, in the last week, resolved almost 90% of a long time resentment,anger,almost hate for someone that has 'passed over'. It really ate away at me I could see in my dealings in the world. Since I saw a bigger, more spiritual picture, I ACTUALLY AM FORGIVING this person. It is very huge. My being is lighter, happier. It's quite profound. Couldn't quite do it in therapy - I wanted to hang on to the anger, felt justified and all that rot. Sorry, don't mean to use you as my diary. Thanks for getting back, appreciate the author list. Now to decide if I want to read the following post, Ok I've decided...naw. See ya, Way

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 15:43:49 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Way Subject: Debunking van Praagh - Pt 1 Message:

James van Praagh is about as transparent a charlatan as I've seen in a long time. I can't believe you'd think otherwise. He's been easily debunked several times. The following is excerpted from HOW WE BELIEVE: The Search for God in an Age of Science (W. H. Freeman, 1999, Chapter 3), by Michael Shermer.) How Psychics and Mediums Work: A Case Study of James Van Praagh By Michael Shermer Talking Twaddle With the Dead Throughout much of 1998 and 1999, the best-selling book in America was by a man who says he can talk to the dead (and so can you, if you buy his book). It turns out that our loved ones who have passed over are not really dead, just on another spiritual plane. All you have to do is fine tune your frequencies and, like Sri Leachim Remresh, you too can turn off the Here and Now and tune into that Something Else. I am referring to James Van Praagh, the world’s most famous medium…for now anyway. He appeared three times, unopposed, on Larry King Live. He was featured on NBC’s Dateline, The Today Show, and on ABC’s 20/20. He made the talkshow rounds, including on Oprah (who was mildly skeptical) and Charles Grodin (who was not skeptical at all), and even had Charles Gibson on ABC’s Good Morning America talking to his dead dad. Cher met with him to talk one last time with Sonny. Denise Brown received a reading to make a final connection with her sister, Nicole Brown Simpson. What is going on here? Who is James Van Praagh, and why do so many people believe in him? An Actor in Search of a Role A brief glance at Van Praagh’s biography is revealing. According to Alex Witchel of the New York Times (February 22, 1998), Van Praagh is the third of four children, born and raised Roman Catholic in Bayside, Queens, New York. At one point, he considered becoming a priest. He served as an altar boy and even entered a Catholic prep seminary—the Blessed Sacrament Fathers and Brothers in Hyde Park. His father is Allan Van Praagh, the head carpenter at the Royale Theater on Broadway (where his brother still works). His mother was Irish-Catholic and one of his sisters is a eucharistic minister. While att ending college he found part-time work at the theater where, says Witchel, while the other stagehands were playing cards during the shows, Van Praagh “was out front watching, picking up pointers he still uses for his numerous television appearances.” The lessons were well learned. His college career was checkered, including enrollments at Queensboro Community College, State University of New York at Geneseo, Hunter College, and, finally, San Francisco State University where he graduated with a degree in Broadcasting and Communications. Subsequently he moved to Los Angeles and began working in the entertainment industry, including Paramount Studios and a stint with the famed William Morris agency in Hollywood. He confesses in his book, Talking to Heaven, “I dreamed of a career as a screenwriter. As luck would have it, while coordinating a conference with the creative staff of Hill Street Blues, I became friendly with one of the show’s producers. When I told him I would be graduating soon, he offered what I thought was my first big break.” After graduation, Van Praagh moved to Hollywood where “I vowed that I would not leave Tinsel Town until I realized my dream and became a writer.” Through a job at William Morris, Van Praagh met a medium who told him “You know, James, you are very mediumistic. The spirit people are telling me that one day you will give readings like this to other people. The spirits are planning to use you.” Van Praagh had found his role in Hollywood. He would act the part of a spirit medium. In 1994 he was discovered by NBC’s The Other Side, for whom Van Praagh made numerous appearances in their exploration of the paranormal. This, and other media appearances, generated countless personal and group readings, pushing him above the psychic crowd and eventually leading to his status as a bestselling author. Who does James Van Praagh say he is? According to his own web page, “Van Praagh is a survival evidence medium, meaning that he is able to bridge the gap between two planes of existence, that of the living and that of the dead, by providing evidential proof of life after death via detailed messages.” Van Praagh calls himself a “clairsentient,” or “clear feeling,” where he can allegedly “feel the emotions and personalities of the deceased.” His analogue, he says, is “Whoopi Goldberg in Ghost.” He claims that the “spirits communicate by their emotions,” and even though they do not speak English or any other language, they can tell you, for example, “that you changed your pants because of a hole in the left seam or that you couldn’t mail letters today because the stamps weren’t in the bottom right desk drawer.” He readily admits that he makes mistakes in his readings (there are so many he could hardly deny it), rationalizing it this way: “If I convey recognizable evidence along with even a fraction of the loving energy behind the message, I consider the reading successful.” In other words, if he can just get a few hits, then “convey” the all important emotional stroking that your loved one still loves you and is happy in heaven, he has done his job. From the feedback of his clients, this is all most people need. The forty-year old medium’s message cuts to the core of most people’s deepest fear and loftiest desire, as he told the New York Times: “When a reunion between the living and the dead takes place it may be the first time the living understand that death has not robbed them of the love they once experienced with family and friends on the earth plane. With the knowledge of no death, they are free to live life.” No one has explained the attraction of this message better than Alexander Pope did over two and a half centuries ago, in his 1733 Essay on Man: Hope springs eternal in the human breast; Man never Is, but always To be blest. The soul, uneasy, and confin’d from home, Rests and expatiates in a life to come. By itself, however, this does not explain precisely how our Belief Engine drives us to be compelled to believe such claims. Why are we so willing to suspend disbelief when it comes to the afterlife? Gambling on the Afterlife By way of analogy, consider the gambling games of Las Vegas. Gaming is big business, as anyone can see driving down the ever-burgeoning neon-glaring strip. In fact, gambling is the best bet in business, far superior to the stock market, as long as you are the house. With only a tiny advantage on any given game, and heaps of customers playing lots of rounds, the house is guaranteed to win. For the roulette wheel, for example, with eighteen red slots, eighteen black slots, and two green slots (zero and double zero), the take is only 5.26 percent. That is, by betting either black or red, you will win eighteen out of thirty-eight times, or 47.37 percent, whereas the house will win twenty out of thirty-eight times, or 52.63 percent. If you placed one hundred $1.00 bets, you would be out $5.26, on average. This may not sound like a lot, but cumulatively over time, with millions of gamblers betting billions of dollars every year, the house take is significant. Other games are better for gamblers. For straight bets in Craps the house take is a mere 1.4 percent; for Blackjack, with the most liberal rules and optimal (non-card-counting) player strategies, the house earns just under 1 percent. These are the best games to play if you are a gambler (that is to say, you will lose more slowly). With other games it is downhill for the gambler. The take for some slot machines, for example, is a staggering 25 percent. That is, you are losing 25 cents on the dollar, or, the house wins 62.5 percent and you win 37.5 percent of the time. Yet people still play. Why? As B. F. Skinner showed in rats, pigeons, and humans, organisms do not need steady reinforcement to continue pressing a bar, pecking a plate, or pulling a one-armed bandit (slot machine). Intermittent reinforcement will do just as well, and sometimes even better at eliciting the desired behavior. A “Variable Ratio Schedule” of reinforcement turns out to be the best for gambling games, where the payoff is unpredictably variable, depending on a varying rate of responses. Payoff comes after ten pulls, then three pulls, then twelve pulls, then seven pulls, then twenty-three pulls, and so on. When I was a graduate student in experimental psychology in the mid 1970s I worked in an operant laboratory where we created these variable schedules of reinforcement for our subjects. It is remarkable how infrequently the payoffs need to come to keep the subjects motivated. And this was for such basic rewards as sugar water (rats), seed (pigeons), and money (humans). Imagine how much more motivating, and, correspondingly, lower the rate of reinforcement can be, when the reward is the belief that your lost loved ones are not really dead and, as an added bonus, you can speak with them through a medium. This renders intelligible, in part, the success of someone like James Van Praagh, whose hit rate is far below that of even the lowest-paying gambling games in Las Vegas. It also helps explain the more general case of how we believe. I once sat in on a day of readings with Van Praagh and kept a running tally of his ratio of hits and misses for each of ten subjects (one of whom was me, all filmed for NBC’s Unsolved Mysteries). Being generous with what kind of information counted as a “hit,” Van Praagh averaged 5-10 hits for every 30 questions/statements, or 16-33 percent, significantly below that of roulette where the player wins almost half the time. But because Van Praagh’s payoff is the hope of life after death and a chance to speak with a lost loved one, people are exceptionally forgiving of his many misses. Like all gamblers, Van Praagh’s clients only need an occasional hit to convince them. How to Talk to the Dead Watching James Van Praagh work a crowd or do a one-on-one reading is an educational experience in human psychology. Make no mistake about it, this is one clever man. We may see him, at best, as morally reprehensible, but we should not underestimate his genuine theatrical talents and his understanding, gained through years of experience speaking with real people, of what touches off some of the deepest human emotions. Van Praagh masterfully uses his ability and learned skills in three basic techniques he uses to “talk” to the dead: 1. Cold Reading. Most of what Van Praagh does is what is known in the mentalism trade as cold reading, where you literally “read” someone “cold,” knowing nothing about them. He asks lots of questions and make numerous statements, some general and some specific, and sees what sticks. Most of the time he is wrong. His subjects visibly nod their heads “no.” But he only needs an occasional strike to convince his clientele he is genuine. 2. Warm Reading. This is utilizing known principles of psychology that apply to nearly everyone. For example, most grieving people will wear a piece of jewelry that has a connection to their loved one. Katie Couric on The Today Show, for example, after her husband died, wore his ring on a necklace when she returned to the show. Van Praagh knows this about mourning people and will say something like “do you have a ring or a piece of jewelry on you, please?” His subject cannot believe her ears and nods enthusiastically in the affirmative. He says “thank you,” and moves on as if he had just divined this from heaven. Most people also keep a photograph of their loved one either on them or near their bed, and Van Praagh will take credit for this specific hit that actually applies to most people. Van Praagh is facile at determining the cause of death by focusing either on the chest or head areas, and then exploring whether it was a slow or sudden end. He works his way down through these possibilities as if he were following a computer flow chart and then fills in the blanks. “I’m feeling a pain in the chest.” If he gets a positive nod, he continues. “Did he have cancer, please? Because I’m seeing a slow death here.” If he gets the nod, he takes the hit. If the subject hesitates at all, he will quickly shift to heart attack. If it is the head, he goes for stroke or head injury from an automobile accident or fall. Statistically speaking there are only half a dozen ways most of us die, so with just a little probing, and the verbal and nonverbal cues of his subject, he can appear to get far more hits than he is really getting. 3. Hot Reading. Mentalist Max Maven informs me that some mentalists and psychics also do “hot” readings, where they obtain information on a subject ahead of time. I do not know if Van Praagh does research or uses private detectives to get information on people, but I have discovered from numerous television producers that he consciously and deliberately pumps them for information about his subjects ahead of time, then uses that information to deceive the viewing public that he got it from heaven. Leah Hanes, for example, who was a producer and researcher for NBC’s The Other Side, explained to me how Van Praagh used her to get information on guests during his numerous appearances on the show (interview on April 3, 1998): I can’t say I think James Van Praagh is a total fraud, because he came up with things I hadn’t told him, but there were moments on the show when he appeared to be coming up with fresh information that he got from me and other researchers earlier on. For example, I recall him asking about the profession of the deceased loved one of one of our guests, and I told him he was a fireman. Then, when the show began, he said something to the effect, “I see a uniform. Was he a policeman or fireman please?” Everyone was stunned, but he got that directly from me. Deception or Self-Deception? When I first began following Van Praagh I thought perhaps there was a certain element of self-deception on his part where, giving him the benefit of the doubt (he does appear likable), he developed his cold- and warm-reading techniques through a gradual developmental process of subject feedback and reinforcement, much like how gurus come to believe in their own divinity when enough of their followers tell them they are divine. Human behavior is enormously complex, so I suppose it is possible that Van Praagh is both deceiving and self-deceiving, but over the years I have observed much more of the former than the latter. During the Unsolved Mysteries shoot, which lasted ten hours and was filled with numerous breaks, Van Praagh would routinely make small talk with us, asking lots of questions and obtaining information, which he subsequently used to his advantage when the cameras were rolling. Is it possible he does not consciously realize that he is doing this? I contacted numerous mentalists about Van Praagh and they assured me that it is very unlikely he is self-deceiving because these are techniques that they all use, and they do so consciously and purposefully. I was told that I was being naive in trying to give Van Praagh the benefit of the doubt. I spoke to an individual who works a 900-psychic hotline, who knows Van Praagh and many of the people who work with him in that industry, and he assures me that Van Praagh is not self-deceived. The psychic industry consensus, this source tells me, is that James Van Praagh knows exactly what he is doing. That may be so, but as a general principle self-deception is a powerful tool because if you believe the lie yourself your body is less likely to give off telltale clues, making it more difficult for an observer to detect deception. I am fully convinced that cult leaders, after being told for years by hundreds and thousands of followers that they are special, at some point begin to believe it themselves, making them all the more convincing to other and potential followers. Caught Cheating Even for seasoned observers it is remarkable how Van Praagh appears to get hits, even though a closer look reveals how he does it. When we were filming the 20/20 piece for ABC, I was told that overall he had not done well the night before, but that he did get a couple of startling hits—including the name of a woman’s family dog. But when we reviewed the videotape, here is what actually happened. Van Praagh was failing in his reading of a gentleman named Peter, who was poker-faced and obviously skeptical (without feedback Van Praagh’s hit rate drops significantly). After dozens of misses Van Praagh queried, “Who is Charlie?” Peter sat there dumfounded, unable to recall if he knew anyone of significance named Charlie, when suddenly the woman sitting in back of him—a complete stranger—blurted out “Charlie was our family dog.” Van Praagh seized the moment and proclaimed that he could see Charlie and and this woman’s Dad taking walks in heaven together. Apparently Van Praagh’s psychic abilities are not fine-tuned enough to tell the difference between a human and a dog. The highlight of the 20/20 piece, however, was a case of hot reading. On a break, with a camera rolling, while relaxing and sipping a glass of water, Van Praagh suddenly called out to a young woman named Mary Jo: “Did your mother pass on?” Mary Jo nodded negatively, and then volunteered “Grandmother.” Fifty-four minutes later Van Praagh turned to her and said: “I want to tell you, there is a lady sitting behind you. She feels like a grandmother to me.” The next day, when I was shown this clip, one of the line producers said, “you know, I think he got that on the break. Too bad we don’t have it on film.” After checking they discovered they did, so Van Praagh was caught red-handed. When confronted by 20/20 correspondent Bill Ritter with the video clip, however, he demurred: “I don’t cheat. I don’t have to prove…I don’t cheat. I don’t cheat. I mean, come on….” Interesting. No one said anything about cheating. The gentleman doth protest too much.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 15:44:28 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 Message:

As an example of the power of the Belief Engine, even after we caught Van Praagh cheating, Barbara Walters concluded in the wrap-up discussion: “I was skeptical. I still am. But I met James Van Praagh. He didn’t expect to meet me. He knew that my father’s name was Lew—Lewis he said—and he knew that my father had a glass eye. People don’t know that.” Ritter, doing his homework on this piece to the bitter end, explained: “You told me the story yesterday and I told you I would look and see what I could find out. Within a few minutes I found out that your father’s name was Lew and that he was very well known in show business. And this morning I was looking in a book and found a passage that says he was blind in one eye—an accidental incident as a child—and he had a glass eye. If I found that out, then he could have.” While Walters flustered in frustration, Hugh Downs declared without qualification: “I don’t believe him.” Where have we heard all this before? A hundred years ago, when mediums, seances, and spiritualism were all the rage in England and America, Thomas Henry Huxley concluded, as only he could in his biting wit, that as nonsensical as it was, spiritual manifestations might at least reduce suicides: “Better live a crossing-sweeper than die and be made to talk twaddle by a ‘medium’ hired at a guinea a seance.” The Tragedy of Death The simplest explanation for how James Van Praagh can get away with such an outrageous claim on such questionable techniques is that he is dealing with a subject the likes of which it would be hard to top for tragedy and finality—death. Sooner or later we all will face this inevitability, starting, in the normal course of events, with the loss of our parents, then siblings and friends, and eventually ourselves. It is a grim outcome under the best of circumstances, made all the worse when death comes early or accidentally to those whose “time was not up.” As those who traffic in the business of loss, death, and grief know all too well, we are often at our most vulnerable at such times. Giving deep thought to this reality can cause the most controlled and rational among us to succumb to our emotions. I experienced the full force of this reality on April 2, 1998. The events of that day prompted me to consider what I would say to someone who is grieving. The ABC television program 20/20 came to my home and office, then followed me to Occidental College to shoot some background footage in my critical thinking course. I thought I would ask the students to respond to a question I routinely receive from journalists: “What’s the harm in what James Van Praagh does?” The students had plenty to say, but one woman named Melissa told a personal story about how her Dad had died when she was ten and that she had never really gotten over it. She was sad that her father never got to see her play volleyball or basketball, or to see her graduate from High School. Her opinion of James Van Praagh was less than charitable, to say the least. She could not imagine how such a performance could make someone feel better about death. In a maturity beyond her years, she expressed her opinion that one does not really get over such a loss; one just learns to live with it: “When my dad first died I just wanted to get on with my life and not let it bother me too much, now I’m just trying not to forget him. Next year when I turn twenty I will have lived ten years with my Dad and ten years without him…so I guess that is when my life will begin…like a new chapter or something.” At this point she was fighting back her tears. It was a very touching moment. When I returned home I was preparing to send Melissa an e-mail expressing how tragic it must have been to lose her Dad at such a young age, when I read this e-mail from my sister: I was thinking of Dad today on this 12th anniversary and how proud he would have been of you and all you have accomplished with your life. For some reason, I have really been missing him lately, more than I have in a long time and it’s still so hard to be without him. I really hope there is a heaven, even though I know otherwise, but the thought of never seeing him again, ever, is almost too hard to bear. Love you, Tina. Our father died twelve years ago that day, April 2, 1986, and it is probably a good thing I had not realized that in class as it would have been very difficult to remain composed. This was such a peculiar conjuncture of events that it prompted me to give some thought about what I would say to someone experiencing grief. Having watched James Van Praagh now for over five years, I would imagine he might say something to this effect: It’s okay Melissa, your Dad is here now in the room with us. He’s telling me he loves you. He says he watches over you. He loves watching you play basketball and volleyball. He saw you graduate. He is with you always. Don’t be sad. Don’t cry. You will get to see him again. Everything is fine. My response to Melissa, and to everyone who has ever received a “reading” from Van Praagh, is as follows: First of all, no one knows if any of this is true, but even if it is, why would your loved one talk with this guy you don’t even know? Why would he choose to make his appearance in some television studio or at some hotel conference room with hundreds of other people around? Why doesn’t he talk to you instead? You’re the one he loves, not this guy getting $40 a seat in a hall with 400 people, or $200 a private reading, or two million dollars for a book filled with this sort of drivel. Why do you have to pay someone to talk t o your loved one? In the St. Louis Post Dispatch (March 1, 1998) Van Praagh called me a “rat fink.” I take this as a compliment because to “rat” on someone is to tell the truth about them. In Mafia circles it means a crime has been exposed. On the 20/20 show Van Praagh offered this view of the difference between my work and his: “He makes his life beating people down, putting people down. I make my life healing and bringing people up. I’m not a circus act. I’m not a side show. It’s God’s work.” By now nearly everyone in America has heard what James Van Praagh says to aching hearts. Here is what I might say. It is not God’s work, but you judge who is putting people down or bringing them up. To Melissa, to my sisters Tina and Shawn, and to my own daughter Devin should I die before my time, I close with this statement: I am sorry this happened to you. It isn’t fair. It isn’t fair at all. If I were you I would feel cheated and hurt; I might even be angry that I didn’t get more time with my Dad. You have every right to feel bad. If you want to cry, you should. It’s okay. It’s more than okay. It’s human. Very human. All loving, caring people grieve when those they love are gone. And all of us, every last one of us, will experience this feeling at some point in our lives. Sometimes we grieve very deeply and for a very long time. Sometimes we get over it and sometimes we do not. Mostly we get on with our lives because there is nothing else we can do. But loving, caring people continue to think about their loved ones no matter how far they have gotten on with their lives, because our lost loved ones continue to live. No one knows if they really continue to live in some other place—I suspect not—but we do know for sure, with as much certainty as any scientific theory or philosophical argument can muster, that our loved ones continue to live in our memories and in our lives. It isn’t wrong to feel sad. It is right. Self-evidently right. It means we love and can be loved. It means our loved ones continue to live because we continue to miss them. Tears of sadness are really tears of love. Why shouldn’t you cry for your Dad? He’s your Dad and you love him. Don’t let anyone try to take that away from you. The freedom to grieve and love is one of the fundamentals of being human. To try to take that freedom away on a chimera of feigned hope and promises that cannot be filled is inhuman. Celebrate your love for your Dad in every way you can. That is your right, your freedom, your humanness.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 18:05:23 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: Jim Subject: Re:Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 Message:

Jim, The verdict on Van Praagh is not yet in. Michael Shermer is premature in his conclusions and has not proven his case against Van Praagh. I have seen Van Praagh several times on television, including on Oprah, 2020, the Other Side, and the Charles Grodin shows that Mr. Shermer mentions in his piece, above. Oprah was totally unprepared - she was doing her show from Texas, in the midst of the lawsuit against her by the beef industry. She totally missed out on the opportunity to have Van Praagh do his thing. Charles Grodin was much better, as was Larry King on more than one occasion. As I said, I attended a 'program' with Van Praagh in person last November. He 'did his thing.' I have also attended a very similar program by another medium, John Edwards, who is equally impressive, although less well known. Van Praagh is amazing. Whether his whole thing is a sham or somehow legit, either way, he's awfully good at it. Mr. Shermer has claimed many times that he can do a 'cold reading' everybit as well as Van Praagh, but he has never proved it, and I don't believe him. The Van Praagh phenomenon remains intact, and a mystery. It is my understanding, from first hand experience, that he is either cheating and tricking the audience shamelessly, or he does have some type of mysterious ability. Many of his 'hits' are just too impossible. For example, he is 'reading' someone and gets an image of 'rope in the front yard.' It doesn't hit, but he goes on and satisfies the audience member. Then he says, 'I'm still getting a rope in the front yard.' A near-by person stands up. Her son had just killed himself a few weeks earlier with a rope right in the front yard. Van Praagh says, 'Oh, it's for you. The young man was so anxious he was interrupting the other reading.' There is no way to get a hit like 'rope in the front yard' from a cold reading. The only way to get it fraudulently would be for Van Praagh to have spies that informed him earlier about those facts involving someone in the audience - i.e. outright cheating. Or the audience member could be in cohoots with Van Praagh, but I ruled that out in the rope case because the woman's tears, and those of her husband, were just too sincere. I also personally saw many other similarly unexplanable hits. For instance, a very old man was being 'read,' he was told that he had his brother's watch in his dresser. The old man nods. 'This brother is telling me that he died very young in a car accident, and that once in the 1930's, you both went together to buy groceries but ate them before you got home with them.' I was sitting about eight rows away. The expression on the old man's face proved to me that he was genuinely shocked, and both the early death in a car accident and the grocery incident were hits. Again, this kind of hit simply can not be obtained by cold reading techniques. But even behind-the-scenes cheating must be ruled out sometimes. During the Charles Grodin show, people called in from around the country. Van Praagh made undeniable hits even for these people who he could not have any pre-knowledge about. If Van Praagh is a fraud, he is an extremely adept one. Jim, before you accept Mr. Shermer's explanations, you should attend a program with Van Praagh and see him work for yourself. I think you would definitely agree with me that he's very very good at what he does, (and Mr. Shermer could never do as good a job). Now, whether he is actually communicating with departed spirits, of course I cannot say. Some people have offered up the explanation that it is 'merely' telepathy: Van Praagh is just reading people's minds. But Van Praagh has on occasion given people information that they originally didn't agree with only to find out later that it was true. Well, who knows? I'm been fooled before.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, May 02, 2000 at 01:03:28 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Way Subject: Re:Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 Message:

Way, I'm not nearly as impressed as you are by your examples of van Praagh's supposedly strong hits. We could argue about those, about how strong a hit has to be to escape random guesswork, and never even approach the issue of so-called 'hot readings'. But I don't have to go there myself. To me, the matter's much simpler than that? Did van Praagh really suggest that he didn't know that the guy was a fireman in Shermer's example? Yes or no? If he did, he's a fraud, plain and simple. Unless, of course, you have some alternative explanation. Beyond that, I've seen the guy on Larry King a couple of times (and fuck King for not asking him any tough questions. King is a joke as an interviewer. I used to like him but have grown to have little respect for him.) Van Praagh struck me then as a phony. But this fireman question is piviotal, don't you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, May 02, 2000 at 14:37:15 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: Jim Subject: Re:Debunking van Praagh - Pt 2 Message:

Jim, This discussion is about to disappear, which is for the best, since we won't be able to come to any conclusions at all. No, I don't think the fireman example is of particular significance. He could indeed have received the images he was describing. It seems impossible that he does his thing by talking to people behind the scenes and then remembering all the details that he had learned. In fact, I think Shermer has very very little to support his argument against Van Praagh, in comparison to the pro arguments. Van Praagh goes on live national television, again and again. He goes before live audiences hundreds of times. He reads for many celebrities. His success rate is truly remarkable, whether he is faking it or not. I've seen people reduced to a puddle of tears many times. If Van Praagh is consciously fooling people for the sake of money, then he is indeed a rogue of the worst order. I'm not surprised about your reaction to the Larry King interview, given your world view. But I'm wondering if there were any 'hits' on that show that at least intrigued you. There aren't really any 'hard questions' that Larry or anyone else could ask that would settle the issue. I think the only way to make a conclusion about van Praagh is to (1) fix up some sort of sting operation and catch him on film blatantly cheating; or (2) have a personal reading with him that convinces you of his authenticity. Short of that, the question remains open. (You hate that, don't you!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, May 02, 2000 at 15:20:02 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Way Subject: What kind of an answer is that? Message:

No, I don't think the fireman example is of particular significance. He could indeed have received the images he was describing. What are you talking about? Here's the part of Shermer's article I was referring to (with appropriate emphasis): 3. Hot Reading. Mentalist Max Maven informs me that some mentalists and psychics also do “hot” readings, where they obtain information on a subject ahead of time. I do not know if Van Praagh does research or uses private detectives to get information on people, but I have discovered from numerous television producers that he consciously and deliberately pumps them for information about his subjects ahead of time, then uses that information to deceive the viewing public that he got it from heaven. Leah Hanes, for example, who was a producer and researcher for NBC’s The Other Side, explained to me how Van Praagh used her to get information on guests during his numerous appearances on the show (interview on April 3, 1998): I can’t say I think James Van Praagh is a total fraud, because he came up with things I hadn’t told him, but there were moments on the show when he appeared to be coming up with fresh information that he got from me and other researchers earlier on. For example, I recall him asking about the profession of the deceased loved one of one of our guests, and I told him he was a fireman. Then, when the show began, he said something to the effect, “I see a uniform. Was he a policeman or fireman please?” Everyone was stunned, but he got that directly from me. And all you can say is that 'he could have received the images'? What are you saying? That Shermer's lying? That the show's producer was? That maybe she was mistaken and it was some other so-called psychic she was mixing up with van Praagh? Way, get real here. The guy's busted. If the story's true he can't be trusted. The end.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 05:16:23 (GMT) From: Blood Email: None To: A premie Subject: What the hell does Christ know Message:

You are going on nothing but hearsay evidence about the cookie cutter christ clone. Archeological and historical data demonstrate that christ was complied by combining at least 22 previous myths. Please don't try to justify your maharaji obsession by quoting the cookie a mythological cutter christ as your main argument. You are trying to prove one the validity of your current myth with another myth.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 14:41:39 (GMT) From: Michael Email: None To: Blood Subject: Quite a claim... Message:

Can you back this up? What is your background as far as biblical archeology and history is concerned? Is this simply information you gathered on the internet? Are you quoting Kuhn? Are you up on the latest historical Jesus research? And to all the Bible-thumping premies who quote 'The Kingdom of Heaven is within you;' that is a mistranslation from the King James version. If one reads the Greek, it states 'the Kingdom of Heaven is among you' which is a very different meaning, isn't it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 16:04:33 (GMT) From: Blood Email: None To: Michael Subject: Quite a claim... Message:

Thank you for asking. I have been a student of ancient mythology for 30 years. I have been aware of the prior incidences of the death and resurrection myths long before the internet existed. The only claim that I am making is that there is very strong evidence which suggests that the character in the Bible named Jesus was a fabrication comprised of all of the best components taken from at least 22 death and resurrection myths which predated the Council of Nicea. There is significant evidence supporting the premise that the books of the bible were selectively chosen from a number of popular myths contemporary to the time period. There is no concrete archaeological evidence that any one human being named Jesus ever existed other than in the Bible which didn't become available until after the Council of Nicea. There is abundant evidence that myths about god men who were resurrected after their death existed. No one can really know if Jesus existed or not, unless you wish to count what people say they feel in their hearts and souls as evidence, which is questionable at best. People seem to be able to believe anything if they have a need to do so. I am not asking anyone to give up what they are believing in. I am only suggesting to those who may be interested that there is a lot of research available to anyone who is thinking of believing in anything which may be comprised by some elements which are irrational.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 23:37:04 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Blood Subject: Josephus Message:

I think the historian Josephus' reference to the person of Jesus would constitute a legitimate citation, although not an archaelogical one. Considering that the Gospels contradict each other, I can't see how anyone would deny that there is embellishment at work, but that wouldn't seem like evidence against Jesus' existence. The embellishment of history and/or the selective recording of it are normal occurences. They don't disprove Jesus' existence, although your mythological sources could certainly be at work in the tale we are told today.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:00:39 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Blood Subject: Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario Message:

Hi there, Michael and Blood The ugliest thing that really turns me off Xtianity is this vicarious substitution trip - that some kind of scapegoat can wipe out another person's guilt/'sin'. I don't buy the guilt trip that Genesis infers in the first place, but to suggest that someone else's suffering somehow makes me a better person ... well, ugly is the only word for that kind of transference of responsibility. BTW, might I recommend Acharya S's 'The Christ Conspiracy' (review at http://www.magi.com/~oblio/jesus/BkrvTCC.htm) as a slightly more modern approach to territory that Kuhn and others touched on about 60 years ago?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:41:52 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: cq Blood and Michael Subject: Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario Message:

Might there not be a difference between Churchianity and Christianity? Someone (Blood?) referred recently to different translations and interpretations. More Bucke, anyone? (haven't got the time to check out that link now. I'm going to turn off my computer so that it can't Hoover me in.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 00:29:34 (GMT) From: Michael Email: None To: Stonor, Blood, Run, cq Subject: Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario Message:

Blood, I was asking because people come to this site and make wild claims about Jesus all the time. As far as your accusations regarding the Council of Nicea, there were already lists of books accepted by many different Xtian communities before Nicea. The Emperor Constantine called the Council to settle the argument between the Arians and the Orthodox regarding the nature of the Christ. This Council is where the Nicene Creed comes from. There were many different books and gospels in circulation, but that does not mean that everyone accepted them. To infer that the Council of Nicea invented the Christian scriptures is a mis-reading of history. You are right, there are many resurrection myths, but this doesn't dis-prove the existence of Jesus. Did Paul adopt the Mithriac myth to Christianity? There is some discussion on the subject, but nothing conclusive. Runamok, there was some doubt regarding the Josephus citation for a while, but now it is accepted, except for the 'he was the Son of God' stuff which was probably added by Xtians later. cq, I agree regarding atonement theology, and your reading of Genesis is a Xtian reading, it is not the orthodox Jewish reading, that's for sure. Atonement theology is only one theological position regarding the crucifixion and why it happened. Stoner, there is no Christianity with out a church, it is a religion about community. La paz, Padre

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 01:58:51 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Michael Subject: Quite a claim ... as is the 'scapegoat' scenario Message:

I've never heard the 'Son of God' quote that you mention. Are you sure it isn't the edition in question which was controversial. I've never heard of Josephus as anything but reputable in as much as there is no evidence to the contrary. Josephus was half-Jewish or Jewish by birth, employed by Rome and considered to have been a historian, not a propagandist or any kind of fabricator.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 01:20:25 (GMT) From: blood Email: None To: Michael Subject: very thorough rebuttal... not trying to disprove Message:

That would be as futile as trying to prove.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 18:23:31 (GMT) From: J Edgar Email: None To: Stonor Subject: Xtianity - Churchianity - same origin no? (nt) Message:

Xtianity - Churchianity - same origin no? (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 13:04:35 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: J Edgar Subject: Xtianity - Churchianity - same origin? yes and no Message:

(written anonymously?, or are you new?) On the surface, if you have followed the conversation that cq, Blood, Hal, and occasionally myself and others have been having for a few weeks or longer, you might have visited the Kuhn site that cq first mentioned a couple of months ago. Or maybe you're aware of the effects of translation/interpretation/application/institutionalization in (many) different books/experiences/religions. By the very 'nature' of the subject, writing about 'other states of consciousness' is usually allegorical/symbolic. Or have you heard of the difference between exoteric and esoteric? Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 13:21:38 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: J Edgar Subject: Or are you a 'Hoover,' J Edgar? (nt) Message:

Or are you a 'Hoover,' J Edgar? (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, May 02, 2000 at 16:13:51 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Stonor Subject: Well ... I could be a bit of a sucker, Stonor!(nt) Message:

Well ... I could be a bit of a sucker, Stonor!(nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 17:23:51 (GMT) From: Blood Email: None To: cq Subject: thanks for the link Message:

I remembered seeing it before and am glad to read it again

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 15:53:23 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Blood Subject: What the hell does Christ know Message:

I am? Huh? Trying to prove? Huh? Argument? Obsession? Lost me there,bye.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:38:13 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Thanks, Daneane Message:

Frame-by-frame analysis of a mind fuck. I love it. BTW, did you get LOTU yet?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:18:47 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Jim Subject: LOTU Message:

Hey Jim - Hopefully very soon. I will let you know as soon as I get my grubbing paws it. -dg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:16:47 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Uh oh! Am I fucked or what?? Message:

Belief in afterlife can make you live longer, study says Lack of faith blamed for 43,000 deaths Richard Foot National Post TORONTO - Going to church may not guarantee you a heavenly afterlife, but it will help you live longer in the here and now, according to research by a medical professor at the University of Toronto. Dr. Chandrakant Shah, a physician and professor of public health sciences, says a fifth of all Canadian deaths -- about 43,000 deaths each year -- can be blamed on poor spiritual beliefs. Dr. Shah says that if Canadians attended religious services more frequently, said their prayers more often, or placed more faith in the powers of a celestial creator, they would live longer and healthier lives. 'There are beneficial results from being a spiritual person,' he says in research released yesterday. 'It reduces stress, promotes healthy lifestyles and increases social connectedness: all improve the health and well-being of individuals and are associated with lower mortality.' The study is the first in Canada to take a widely held academic assumption that spiritual people have healthier lives and apply that theory to Canadian public health and mortality statistics. Dr. Shah describes spirituality not only as a belief in God or participation in traditional religion, but as 'the beliefs, values and behaviours a person holds concerning his place in the universe, and which reflects one's connections with a higher power and one's social and physical environment.' He says spirituality takes two forms. The inner form involves faith in a 'higher power' and the sense of security or 'inner peace' that comes from that faith. The outer form involves the connection someone feels with their fellow humans. Feeling more connected makes someone more 'caring, sharing, compassionate and respectful' as an individual, says Dr. Shah. If spirituality brings more 'inner peace,' it also lessens the need for 'pleasure-seeking behaviours' -- drinking, smoking, gluttony, promiscuous sex or material gain. The study says that both forms of spiritual faith bring with them better physical health. 'Many individuals consider that having material things such as a Mercedes or Lexus will make them happy,' writes Dr. Shah, who describes himself as a spiritual, but non-religious person. 'To achieve material gains, people are constantly on the go and face all types of stress ... However, people with inner peace are contented people and are not in a rat race.' Drawing data from Canada's National Population Health Surveys in the mid-1990s, Dr. Shah used three measurements to gauge the spirituality of Canadians -- weekly attendance at religious activities, levels of 'social connectedness' [or personal relationships] and levels of personal stress. With information from those studies -- including the fact that in 1997 only 59% of Canadians took part in regular religious worship -- Dr. Shah used epidemiological formulae to calculate that 43,000 deaths each year are 'potentially attributable' to low levels of spirituality. If as many as 80% of Canadians participated in weekly worship, the research predicts the number of deaths attributable to low levels of spirituality would fall to 23,000.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 21:31:53 (GMT) From: silver Email: None To: Jim Subject: Uh oh! Am I fucked or what?? Message:

a fifth of all Canadian deaths -- about 43,000 deaths each year can be blamed on poor spiritual beliefs For real. What's the point of living if you don't know who you are? where you came from? how long you've got? or where your'e headed.. So GM is not the man he/we thought he was? We're still all in this together. Silver

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 13:39:53 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: silver Subject: Anger a factor? (Thanks Mili) Message:

Good post silver, where did you get the data? Viktor Frankl did some excellent studies on the importance of finding meaning in life (see Man's Search for Meaning/Logotherapy). Mili's post in another thread seemed to have some timely relevance here: Anger Triggers Harmful Chemical It's already known that angry people are at a higher risk for heart disease, but a new study attempts to explain why. Researchers at Ohio State University in Columbus say angry people have higher levels of a chemical called homocysteine, which has proved harmful to the heart. The new study is based on 33 women and 31 men, all healthy and not taking medications. They were questioned about their levels of hostility and anger, and samples of their blood were examined. Those who reported more feelings of anger and hostility tested positive for higher homocysteine levels, researchers report in the April 28 issue of Life Sciences. Researchers found that participants who held in their anger had high homocysteine levels, too. Men had higher homoecysteine levels than women overall, and men also were more likely to bottle up their anger. 'These were healthy people with no known cardiovascular disease or major risk factors ... ,' says study co-author Catherine Stoney. 'One potential picture emerging from the current data is that men, particularly high-hostile men, have a ... nervous system that is always turned on, resulting in higher homocysteine levels.' Homocysteine can damage the walls of arteries, which can contribute to the buildup of plaque, the fat that clogs arteries. --By Katrina Woznicki I believe in getting into and understanding the pain underlying the anger. Just 'venting' anger seems to create more. One of my colleagues says that all anger comes from an inability to communicate. Worth considering IMO. Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, May 02, 2000 at 14:27:10 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Stonor Subject: Anger a factor? (Thanks Mili) Message:

Stonor: No argument that anger isn't healthy, but just to preserve a little balance in the discussion: men have played a more anxiety fraught role in the family for millions of years, so it's not at all surprising that it's more dangerous being a male, for a host of reasons. It is also true that males remain attractive to the opposite sex for a longer period of their lives... also a matter of genetic endowment with perfectly reasonable explanations. Perhaps this is by way of compensation? :-) (This is something not even contested by most feminists, BTW. I suppose you could argue that women have more forgiving standards, but that's still related to genetic endowment more than culture, and in my opinion probably doesn't explain the entire disparity.) Of course there are women who go against the trend, like Sigourney Weaver, and there are some really ugly middle-aged men out there... no argument. It's hard to claim that more hair in the ears and less on the head are marks of beauty, exactly. But the overall disparity is one reason that the 'sexual revolution' had better consequences for men than women. Just out of curiosity, what are the homocysteine levels for 'female, head of household?' If they are significantly higher than for the famale population in general you'll have to adjust your policy recommendations. BTW, one reason given for income disparity between men and women has to do with job and career preference. Most valid studies in this area attempt to hold preference for certain kinds of jobs constant, and much of the disparity disappears. Not all of it, mind you, but a lot. It would be interesting to see a 'present value' analysis of lifetime income for men vs women that takes both preference and longevity into account. Great dissertation topic! --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, May 01, 2000 at 18:10:47 (GMT) From: Elaine B. Email: None To: Stonor Subject: Anger a factor? (Thanks Mili) Message:

Stonor, Not to be deceptive-I have to change my name because of some confusion. So I'm 'A premie'. If you want to stop reading here - that's cool. But I thought( and my experience has been) since 1970 when I was in a drug re-hab program briefly - that once you get the anger out - it's way gone. Rather than begets more. Ex. Once a friend wanted to go to dinner -I said I was SOO pissed at my boss that I couldn't be good company. She was SOOO disappointed. So I said ok and while on the drive there I screamed into a pillow (at my boss). And then said ok - I'm fine. And she absolutely couldn't believe the change in me. I was actually smiling. We learned in that center that if you don't get rid of it - it builds up and we then would go back to drugs as an escape. It was a release tech. Anyway, didn't want to disagree but, I am . Elaine B.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 11:00:09 (GMT) From: JohnT Email: None To: Jim Subject: Uh oh! Am I fucked or what?? Message:

Perhaps you should be, in the nicest possible way of course :-) Check this from the UK's Sunday Times a while back. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Middle-aged men with active sex lives have a far better chance of reaching a ripe old age, according to research published today. The more often they make love the longer they can expect to live, a report in the British Medical Journal says. The authors say the findings are convincing enough for a health fitness campaign to be based on them. 'Most of the health messages are about telling us to stop doing things and they tend to have disappointing results,' George Davey Smith, Professor of clinical epidemiology at Bristol University, said. 'Making love may be the only form of exercise for some people and telling them to do more of something they enjoy could be beneficial.' The report says that health messages could be based on the 'at least five times a day' campaign to increase fruit and vagetable consumption - 'although the numerical imperative might have to be adjusted'. The study was beased on a group of 918 men aged between 45 and 59 living in Caerphilly, South Wales, and five nearby villages, between 1979 and 1983. They were volunteers for a study carried out to investigate health and social patterns in their age group. When recruited they were all asked how often they had sexual intercourse and were classified into categories ranging from 'never' to 'daily'. After ten years it was found that a total of 150 had died; 67 from coronary heart disease and 83 from other causes. Comparing the deaths with the medical records, the researchers found that the mortality risk in the group with the high frequency of intercourse was less than half that in the other group. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Some of us need help on this one!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:22:43 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Jim Subject: Shit - if this guy has a doctorate... Message:

..is a doctorate worth having? Seriously - this pisses me off.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 19:00:50 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Shit - if this guy has a doctorate... Message:

Doctorate? He's Professor Chandrakant P. Shah, Professor and Director, Development & Communications MBBS, FAAP, FRCP(C), SM (Hyg.) on the Faculty for Public Health Sciences at the University of Toronto!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:48:13 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Similar statistics have been around for years. Message:

There's Roizel at realage.com- a commercial site but the guy is an MD. There are statistics about what makes people live longer and (I think)in this case most of the relevant material is based on church attendance.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:36:29 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Runamok Subject: Hard to prove anything from this data. Message:

Run: I'm not as offended by this stuff as Nigel, but what else is correlated with church attendance that might have an impact on longevity? Income? Marriage stability? Extended families? I don't see how you could conclude from this correlation anything more than that there's a correlation, which *does not* indicate causality. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:07:12 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Is it data or a conclusion? Message:

Wouldn't that be true for this as a general class of information? We don't actually have the data, we have (with realage.com) a conclusion taken from data that church attendance raises the average life expectancy by 1.9 years (as with the original post where the conclusions seem more speculative but nonetheless are plausibly drawn from data that isn't included). This is the kind of stat I've seen for a long time. Yes, it's difficult (or ultimately impossible) to make conclusions free of possible correlations, although I'm sure some effort is made. A correlatable stat is the effect of marriage on longevity (also lengthening life). I would think the statisticians stear clear of the other factors they analyse and produce stats on (in this case, as you're thinking where church members prob have a higher rate of marriage). Regardless of this, there is value in this kind of research even if, as always, there is inherent controversy in anyone's conclusions. The raw data is there, even if it's not in the CNN version and reflects some kind of real information gathering.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 22:50:14 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Runamok Subject: Is it data or a conclusion? Message:

Run: There was a whole spate of research a few years ago indicating that black students had lower test scores than whites and hispanics on stardardized achievement tests. On one side people said that black schools were underfunded. However, black students in predominantly white schools also had lower test scores. And then there were the racists who said... So, it turns out if you use a reliable measure of family income the difference between the races disappears. It *is* possible to infer cause based on statistical data, but it usually requires a particular type of data from something called a 'panel study.' I have not read the piece of research, or the others you mentioned, but 'church attendance' is probably just a surrogate for 'increased propensity to rule following behavior.' Note that this fellow develops a very broad definition of 'spiritual' so that it covers what most of us would consider merely 'ethical.' But the point is that there is just no evidence at all (yet) that spirituality broadly defined, or church attendance narrowly defined, lengthens lifespan. That is definitely something that *cannot* be inferred from this data. What you *could* say, I suppose, is that the sort of person who attends church regularly tends to live longer, but there are probably millions of 'that sort of person' who never attend church. They are just as likely to have a long life, I'll bet. The *real* issue is: 'Why?' A panel study could probably sort that out too. Only problem is that panel studies are expensive. There is lots of bad research out there, and most of the bad stuff is ideologically motivated. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 02:14:51 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Is it data or a conclusion? Message:

Look Scott, I don't go to a church. I read one thing years back where they were analysing why they come up with this stat and it reasoned that group support was a plausible explanation. Seems to me you're jumping the gun assuming it's a worthless statistic without reading any of it first. I don't seek out peer review of studies I take notice of. I'm usually relying on CNN or some other news service to take some role in screening studies for pure garbage. Admittedly, they are hyping news not researching stats. I know that stats can be structured to lie as a promotional device, a la soft money in politics. For this reason, I usually will try to examine how large a sample is involved and anything else available (usually in a mass media news article). The problem is, I've seen this stat for so long with discussion of the cross-related factors I suspect it has some reliability. Do you think the stats about people who are married living longer are biased also?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 02:53:39 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Runamok Subject: Is it data or a conclusion? Message:

Run: When did I say the statistics were biased? It's a technical issue. You can't infer cause from this sort of cross-sectional data. You might get closer with time series, but to settle the question you'd still need a panel study. Now, there might be a well-articulated theory about what's going on, but theory is one thing and empirical verification is another. People make the causal inference fallacy all the time. According to the paraphrase of the article this fellow infers that spirituality increases longevity. If he actually makes that inference, and hasn't been misrepresented, then he's just plain wrong, and peer review has failed. People who are in stable marriages, extended families, or social situations where they get a lot of deference late in life tend to live longer. We know this from empirical data. To conclude that 'spirituality' enhances longevity, given only cross sectional data, reveals more about the researcher than about the issue. It is a simple causal inference fallacy, and it's completely non-controversial. Bias is something quite different. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 07:05:56 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: cool/i follow (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:26:26 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Relax, Nige, I've just found the answer Message:

Scientists turn back the clock By Roger Highfield, Science Editor Advanced Cell Technology achieves reversal of cell ageing [27 Apr '00] - Advanced Cell Technology Science Human Genetics Commission Human Cloning Foundation Cloning special report - New Scientist SCIENTISTS have achieved a medical first by reversing the ageing process in animal cells. Six cloned calves have been born with cells appearing younger than a normal animal and they could live for 50 per cent longer. Cloned: five cows that could live for 50 percent longer after their cells' 'clock' was turned back by scientists The benefit for humans is that cloning could be used to create youthful tissue from elderly patients to treat degenerative diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and diabetes, as well as heart, liver and kidney conditions. Scientists still do not fully understand why the ageing process was reversed. Dr Michael West of Advanced Cell Technology (ACT) the American company which made the breakthrough, said: 'We can run biology in reverse.' He said the cellular clock in the aged cells used to clone the calves had been wound back beyond the embryonic state so they live longer than normal. A cell's life ends when it can no longer divide. Cells from a normal new-born calf divide 60 times in the laboratory. Cells from the clones divide 90 times, so the calves could live up to 50 per cent longer, to an age of 30. But because ageing takes place at the level of the organism as well as the cell, Dr West will have to wait decades to see if these calves really do live longer than normal. He doubts the method could rejuvenate a human although he accepts that, combined with genetic modification, it could lead to tinkering with the rate of ageing of a cloned embryo. If the results could be transferred to humans, and if the rate of cell ageing is reflected by the entire organism, then humans cloned in a similar way could live up to 200 years. Dr West said the advance will have an immediate impact on efforts to create 'young' tissue to treat the diseases of old age, for instance by recreating the bone marrow of a cancer patient. He said: 'With this research we have shown that it may eventually be possible to improve the quality of life for millions of people. In addition to patients with heart, liver, and kidney disease, over 16 million patients worldwide suffer from neuro-degenerative disorders such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease. Millions more suffer from diabetes and other diseases that may one day be treatable using these new technologies.' The researchers describe how they rewound the ageing clock in cells in the journal Science. The clock consists of a strand of DNA on the end of all chromosomes called telomeres. Every time a cell divides they become shorter. The ageing clock is eventually run down when the cells stop dividing. The results of previous research indicated that even cloned cells retained the ageing clock of the clone donor. For example, the technique used to clone Dolly the sheep turned back time in one sense, converting an adult cell into an embryonic cell. But it did not reset the cellular ageing clock, so that her telomeres were shorter than for a normal newborn. Today's report describes the cloning of six calves generated from cells at the end of their lifespan, after 1,900 attempts. The calves suffered the usual problems of cloning, being large at birth and suffering breathing problems and high blood pressure. But they were normal at two months, except for their telomeres. Dr Robert Lanza of ACT, first author of the report, said: 'The old cells were not merely returned to a youthful state. They were actually given a longer life span than those from normal animals.' The team suspects rejuvenation is linked to the type of cell used, a skin cell called a fibroblast, rather than the mammary cells used for Dolly. If the feat can be routinely accomplished it will be possible to regenerate and rejuvenate cells and tissues for the repair of age-related disease. The cloned animals, one of which celebrates its first birthday this week, have telomeres that look like newborn calves although they were cloned from senescent cells. The company aims to create human stem cells - the basic cells that form all the cells in the body. These cells would then be capable of differentiating into a variety of human cells, such as heart cells, neurons, blood cells or islets for transplant therapies. By showing the cellular clocks of these stem cells can be reset, ACT has shown that human therapeutic cloning may give scientists the potential to grow young cells, tissues, and organs for an ageing population. Therapeutic cloning is controversial because it requires creating a human embryo and harvesting stem cells, which would destroy it. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics says the potential benefits outweigh ethical concerns and a committee is expected to approve research.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 19:05:26 (GMT) From: Za-Za Gabor Email: None To: Jim Subject: darlink, I've tried it,do you think it verks? (nt) Message:

darlink, I've tried it,do you think it verks? (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 19:43:40 (GMT) From: jondon Email: None To: Everyone Subject: BM in BeanTown Message:

The big man is coming to Boston soon. My roommate is a premie and is pumped up for going to listen to this dothead talk about what we all have inside and tell everyone how to hear it. Man doesnt this guy have anything else to say? Well, my roomy has hooked up with a guy who has been a premie since the very early days and figures to get a good seat and possibly a back stage invite to rub shoulders with the upper echelon premies. I will let you know what happens and fill you in on anything I may learn. It should'nt be much different than the same ole shit. His plane may be located at a small airport close by, just outside Boston. I will try to get some pics of it, maybe even the big man getting off it, I have a friend who works at the corporate airport. I saw his yacht last year in Newport Rhode Island. This year I will photo it for you all to see. It's fuckin' huge. My roomy thinks it's oKay for this 7-11 owner to own all this stuff and live this life style. Go figure, he's brainwashed, but I'm working on him. Stay tuned.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 01:35:30 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: jondon Subject: BM in BeanTown Message:

Thanks, dude. Without fresh gossip the soup wears thin. And yes, it's fun to gossip about the Lord of the Universe. Pictures would be great.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 18:30:30 (GMT) From: bb Email: None To: Jim Subject: Bean bag Message:

What a good idea. If you need another photographer, bburke@rocketmail.com

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 14:50:06 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Mili, Why don't you ever write anything like this? Message:

Over on ELK there's a new contestant in the Kabir Poetry Contest. Her love is really something else. You think you've got some love happening? Yeah, well check out Eleni's. Too much, eh? But what about Mili? And @#$%! Or Url? How about them, Jack Tuff? Or how about Jack Tuff himself (if there's any difference?) Why don't any of our premie friends who post here ever sound like this? See, if they talked this way, who knows? We all might listen. You know, like all the people who listened to Kahlil Gibran and stuff. Fisherman, I think. How about it, Mili? Coo for us, will ya? Eternal love I close my eyes and I meet you in my heart. With what can this love be compared? Is this the love the almond tree feels when it blooms in spring? Is this the love the nightingale feels when it sings at dawn? Is this the nectar the bees drink from each flower all day long? I can feel this universe pulsing with this love! Eternal love Timeless love Love of your Heart in my heart! Eleni Kyriakopoulou Athens, Greece

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:04:08 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Jim Subject: Mental illness is no joke... Message:

But it had me chuckling... So fucking sad that real people have to look to the faraway master of the mysterious, lord of the unicorns, to catch those basic life-affirming feelings we can best find from talking to and eating with people around us, or doing drugs with or shagging till dawn or whatever. Love can be elusive but is SO necessary - for me at least and probably all of us. I mostly despise the semi-literate, morally crippled Mr Rawat for claiming love as his own invention: for proclaiming it as his own fucking gift. Maharaji loves love and especially loves himself. You, ladeez an gennelmen of the highly-evolved hominid species wot is known as human beings - roll up, roll up - are invited to join him and learn to love both love itself and the big boss ape appearing on stage for yew roight 'ere this very night - without neither a net nor safety 'arness. The highly evolved and esteemed gennelman will perform for you a logical triple-back somersault on stilts - and landing upright on the self-same spot he started. Then he will miraculously leave the building and relax for a month or two by means unknown to science, but leaving the lila engine ticking over. I understand there are exciting new developments about to happen. The alcohol dependant alpha male speaker of stage, screen , sawdust and universe is about to move on. Are you big and bold enough to move with him? Do you have a credit card? Are you completely fucking stupid?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 20:39:43 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Jim Subject: OK, Jim, now you've got me REALLY mad!!! Message:

I'm NOT a fisherman!!! Not that there's anything wrong with being a fisherman of course. Are you still teasing me because he's my 'quote' in the highschool annual?? ;-) I STILL love him, and not YOU, so there! Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 15:29:45 (GMT) From: Baseball Phil Email: None To: Jim Subject: Mili, Why don't you ever write anything like this? Message:

Hey Jim, I'm there , see if you can find me. (edited)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 04:40:09 (GMT) From: Oliver Email: None To: Baseball Phil Subject: Here's a little trivia for ya: Message:

On this date in 1983, Nolan Ryan of the Houston Astros broke Walter Johnson's strikeout record. He struck out the 3,509th batter of his career. The Astros won 4-2 over Montreal. Johnson's record had been in the books for 55 years before being eclipsed by 'The Ryan Express'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 15:28:24 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Jim Subject: Mili, Why don't you ever write anything like this? Message:

Jim...these EV poems you post now and then...are they for real? Treacly, cloying, syrupy, and insipid, these poems are abominations. And I'm not against devotional poetry. I like Kabir and Rumi. But these premie poems....ewww.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 12:14:19 (GMT) From: james flynn Email: sharkdc@aol.com To: Everyone Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

I recieved k in 1972, I was 12 years old and was looking for somthing that my alcoholic, materialistic, familiy could not provide me with. I was seeking to fill an emptiness inside with somthing meaningful on the outside. I wanted to feel that my life had a greater purpose, that I had somthing to live for. I was underwhelmed by organized religions and felt that essentially they were dead, that is not practiced by those who professed to believe in them. I felt that this was wrong and I wanted to join with people who the courage to try and live up to their ideals. I believed in the concept of utopia and was thrilled to become a part of the Divine Light mission because I was under the impression that Guru Maharaj Ji's goal was to establish peace in this world. I believed this was his goal because I heard him state this as his goal over and over again. Millenium 73 which I did not attend because my parents forbid it was suppose to be the beggining of 1000 years of peace. According to premie friends who attended it was not only a very dissapointing experience because of all the hype and the sparse turnout, but they were very concerned about the security. The World Peace Organization was the name of Maharaj Ji's goon squad (Orwellian Doublespeak). They were concerned because they saw this security force use excessive force against people in the astrodome to keep them in line. I heard several very devoted premies who loved Maharaj Ji describe them as the gestapo. Do any other oldtimers remember this? This I guess this was a warning sign of the Jim Jones type atmosphere that possibly would develop later on. At one point there were some small efforts on the part of DLM to do good works, I remember visits to Saint E's Hospital to put on shows for the mentally ill, and being trained by Dr. John Horton and Dr. Bob in the alexander technique in preparation to do community service with it. By and large these plans never got off the runway. But divine sales and divine home repairs and divine donation drives were always going on, anything that would produce enough money for Maharaj ji to indulge himself in his latest whim. And we alway's thought it was adorable, like he's just a big kid with toys. And he played on this by telling us cute little stories about God and Superman comics. After all he was the Lord he could do miracles, these little trinkets of the world were symbolic, they didn't mean anything to him, he created the whole world and everything in it in 7 days right? Besides nothing was to good for our Lord. Is this not what we told ourselves? The whole point is that people fell for that old bait and switch they thought they were getting involved in a plan to spread peace and love and spirtual wisdom through-out the world and they wound up working at the Divine Garbage Collectors Coop trying to raise money for some fat kids next mansion or jet. And yet denial (not a river in Egypt) played as much a role in this process as it does in any addiction. We really, really wanted and needed to believe that we were not being decieved. And this explains the cruelty and self-centeredness of Maharaj Ji and the whole situation. Most premies had hearts of gold. This is not to say that we were perfect, but we were very, very sincere and good natured. Maharaj Ji exploited us and robbed of our innocence and our good intentions. In short we were spirtually raped so he could have a free ride and do whatever pleased. Unfortunately he continues to run the same con on people today.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 13:58:47 (GMT) From: dv Email: None To: james flynn Subject: I did those St. E trips also. The St. E staff Message:

finally stopped our visits, because the patients felt very relaxed the following day, but came down hard the 2nd day, to the extent that they would go into lockdown. I guess they needed that 'perfect Alexander technique' inside!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 11:52:25 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: james flynn Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

Hi James - I remember a lot of the events that you mentioned. I think that most of the premies (at least during the time I was involved) were genuinely caring and altruistic people who wanted to help other people. Thus the trips to Saint Elizabeth's (I did this too), and so forth. This was supposed to be part of DUO (Divine United Organization) - do you remember that? Anyway, JW, who is a former community coordinator, has said on this forum that that kind of thing was stopped because Maharaji and company decided that it wasn't really 'service' because it wasn't done directly to Maharaji. Were you upset when your parents would not let you go to Millenium? I was not living at home at the time, but my younger sister, who was also a premie, was, and my parents wouldn't let her go. She cried for days because she was going to miss out the greatest event in the history of the world. I don't remember excessive force being used at Millenium, but the truth is that I signed up to do service and they actually put me in the WPC (ha ha). So I spent most of my time directing people where to go in the food lines during the day, and guarding a door (why???) in the Astrodome at night. I guess they thought this was appropriate 'service' for a 17-year old female! Anyway, I didn't see most of the programs - only got to hear Maharaji talk at night. The whole event was very disillusioning for me, and I think for most people, but we rationalized the fact that nothing 'happened' in many ways. Thanks for your post. By the way, I got your e-mail and will reply. Hillary was one of the ex-premies that I was living with when I broke free from Maharaji. She put her life back together and is doing really well now. Also, if you're interested, Dr. John Horton is an initiator now - still with Maharaji. One of the people who posts here actually received knowledge from Dr. John. Dr. Bob got into trouble for misconduct with patients, and I think he might have lost his license to practice (not sure). Take care - Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:45:46 (GMT) From: james flynn Email: sharkdc@aol.com To: Katie Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

Katie I was not at Millienium 73' and yes I was very upset when my parents did not let me go. Perhaps it was easier for me to ignore what a flop it was because I was not there. In regards to the WPC's conduct, I only have the remarks of my friends to go by, maybe it was the nazi-like armbands that made them think they were the gestapo. I had to take a long trip down memory lane to retreive this data so maybe I don't have it exactly right. Many of my premie friends were jewish and I don't think armbands on a security force went over big with them if you know what I mean. I am not surprized about dear old Dr. Bob for sometime he was supplying someof my non premie friends with narcotics, specifically with percodan, one of my friends became a full fledged junkie. I am one of the people who dropped a dime on dear old Dr. Bob, glad to hear they finally caught up with the bastard and took away his liscence. Also glad to hear that Hillary broke free of M and is doing well, I always liked her alot.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 14:28:26 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: james flynn Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

Hi again, James - I really don't know how the WPC acted at Millenium because I was working (oops, I mean doing service!) the whole time. I know that they imported a lot of British WPC guys to do security there, and that those guys could be kind of scary. Maharaji's brother, Raja Ji, was in charge of the WPC, and I think he was on some kind of weird power trip - maybe he watched too many gangster movies or something. Also, I'm not really sure what happened to Dr. Bob - my friend LouAnn (known as 'Shine' when she was a premie) told me about it a few years ago. She had saved all the newspaper clippings from Dr. Bob's trial - this all happened in Gaithersburg, MD. I was so naive when I was a premie that I didn't even know that premies drank and did drugs until I found this site a few years ago. I was SHOCKED to learn that Maharaji actually drank! I guess I thought that everyone had given up drugs & drinking like I did when I became a premie. Take care - Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 11:30:02 (GMT) From: james flynn Email: sharkdc@aol To: Katie Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

I did not use drugs for my first couple years in DLM and i stayed close to the Ashram premies who by and large did not use drugs but when I was about 14 I started to get to know alot of people on the fringes and in the premie houses and believe you me there was alot drub use going on! Do you remember Harris Ball or Jerry Dunyitz?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 12:58:09 (GMT) From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: james flynn Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

There, there... It's alright (pat, pat). You got it all out of your system now. Must've held it all down real long, real hard, right? Too bad you missed the barf bag - you got it all over your clothes, dammit. Take a deep breath now. Have a drink of cool water. You're going to be just fine now, don't worry.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 00:53:45 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Mili Subject: Do you have anything of substance to say? (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 20:17:22 (GMT) From: msmind Email: None To: Mili Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

Mili, you're a patronising geek. You sound like a dysfunctional adolescent.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 09:35:00 (GMT) From: Mili Email: mili@cheerful.com To: msmind Subject: guru maharaj ji Message:

Spoken with all the spite of a barren woman renounced...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 03:01:32 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Mili Subject: Please explain: guru maharaj ji Message:

Post to msmind: Spoken with all the spite of a barren woman renounced... Please explain. Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 14:00:21 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: james flynn Subject: Re:guru maharaj ji Message:

james flynn, Thanks. Would you post your story on the journey section of this website? As for Mili, he is one of our resident premies. He often brings the peace and love from practicing Knowledge to our site.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 16:00:28 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: James Subject: Ignore Mili Message:

James: I got k in '72 at 16, and was part of a roaringly dysfunctional Irish Catholic family. I was in Houston. As my Journey says, we all went back to the ashram and did acid, because it seemed like the only appropriate response to the debacle. The exes on this site are wonderful people who are in the process of sorting out the effect M, DLM/EV and all of the assorted trips had on our lives. I think you will find the discussion here insightful, but often hilarious. Have you read Pauline Premie's report of the knowledge review in Santa Monica, several threads below? As for Mili, ignore him. Just another insensitive premie jerk. Many of them float through, reminding us all why we fled the cult. I was very affected by your comments and remember when my feelings about the whole experience were just as strong. Welcome. Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 12:05:19 (GMT) From: Angry Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Powerman's excellent point!...half-assed premies Message:

In a thread below, P-man reminded me of something I always wondered when I was a cult member. Most premies only made a half-assed effort in proportion to how convenient it was for them. Fatso Ji would address this issue by telling us we should fit our lives around K rather than fitting K around our lives. Looking back on it now,I never really knew anyone who 'did it right'. Although there were many then and I'm sure many now who would claim they do.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 17:50:10 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Angry Subject: You could NEVER 'Do it right.' Message:

That was the catch 22. No matter how much effort you made to do EXACTLY what Maharaji described, no matter how much you tried to refrain from thinking, from being 'in you mind,' from having doubts, no matter how much you meditated, LOVED Maharaji, went to satsang, had darshan, did propogation and were as surrendered as you could be, it was NEVER enough. No one, from the most spaced out, dope-smoking, 'fringe premie' to the most diligent, straigh-laced ashram/initiator premie, could ever 'do it right.' It was the convenient catch 22. So, when knowledge, inevitively didn' work, as most of the premies I knew were miserable much of the time, despite practicing knowledge, you could blame yourself for not being devoted enough, not trying hard enough, not having enough faith, and all the rest. You could also objectify this by blaming your MIND, which Maharaji preached was something different from you 'true self.' So, Maharaji was totally off the hook and the premie lived this horrible, self-hating existence. The sad part is, this still goes on. This is still the essential element of what it means to be a premie. It's the glue that holds the whole cult together.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 22:46:58 (GMT) From: Blood Boils Email: None To: JW Subject: You have the whole thing in a nutshell right there Message:

That was the catch 22. No matter how much effort you made to do EXACTLY what Maharaji described, no matter how much you tried to refrain from thinking, from being 'in your mind,' from having doubts, no matter how much you meditated, pretended to love Maharaji , went to satsang, had darshan, did propogation and were as surrendered as you could be, it was NEVER enough. No one, from the most spaced out, dope-smoking, 'fringe premie' to the most diligent, straight-laced ashram/initiator premie, could ever 'do it right.' It was the convenient catch 22. So, when knowledge, inevitably didn't work, you could blame yourself for not being devoted enough, not trying hard enough, not having enough faith, and all the rest. Most of the premies I knew were miserable much of the time, despite practicing knowledge, except for those that were really good at faking it. You could also objectify this by blaming your MIND, which Maharaji preached was something different from your 'true self.' So, Maharaji was totally off the hook and the premies lived this horrible, self-hating existence. The sad part is, this still goes on. This is still the essential element of what it means to be a premie. It's the glue of allowing oneself to be constantly in a state of self humiliation that holds the whole cult together.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:32:02 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Blood Boils and JW? Subject: You have the whole thing in a nutshell right there Message:

I'm sorry, I understand what you're saying and truly understand how you feel and all but, my experience was different. I'm not trying to be holier than thou,really. It just wasn't like that for me. I really can make my mind quiet and use the techniques and am very peaceful and calm almost like a Buddhist. The good doesn't ruffle me and the bad doesn't ruffle me. It is just all the same .... changing ... and so doesn't really even count. There was no Catch 22 for me. Like Padarthanand used to say,it's so simple,so simple. Sometimes if I was having a bad day and it was more difficult to get centered I saw so clearly I was trying too hard. Don't try. Just sit and become an empty vessel with no expectation and just sit...now here I would actually picture the expressionless face of Ira Woods for inspiration and would then just sit like a clump,that I saw him as,(clump is a good word here) I would round my shoulders like him and sit as if I was a depressed person,now this would settle me down from my active day,and soon I would feel such a wonderful peace...usually practicing Holy Name...but sometimes Light and Sound. No Catch 22. I'm sorry, I am a premie, but because it has worked for me, I don't have the problems alot of you have with it. We are all so different. I am really sorry it did not work for you and you are so upset. But I believe you when you say it didn't and you are upset. I honor that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 07:07:50 (GMT) From: Hal Email: None To: A premie Subject: Congratulations Premie! Message:

You may not get any applause on this forum for your attachment to Maha's methods but I complement you on being one of the only premies I've seen come on here without a condescending and arrogant tone. I appreciate your sincerity and honesty. Hal the Referee

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:15:08 (GMT) From: No condescension? Email: None To: Hal Subject: Now if only the ex-premies could do the same (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 13:29:09 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: No condescension? Subject: How patronising of you (nt) Message:

How patronising of you (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 05:09:56 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: A premie Subject: You got me Message:

I have to admit, I thought you were serious until the Ira Woods bit. This is Nigel, right?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 16:07:37 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: You got me Message:

Scott, Really laughing out loud still. That was so cute. NO really, I really find Ira Woods' lack of expression inspiring in a truly Zen type of way. I guess because my mind can get SO over active and analyzing that when I would be around him he was such a dullard next to my speedy mind. But in a grounded way. I mean when you're miserable in your own self - you'll do anything to feel better,no? Some people maybe think of a beach or something...me, I've thought of Ira. I'm actually laughing now at how ridiculous I am. I make myself laugh alot. Isn't that a sign of something? I'm not familiar with Nigel - I'll do some catch up. Does he say nutty things, too? :) See ya...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:52:39 (GMT) From: The Cloak Email: None To: A premie Subject: you don't have to apologize to anyone here, but... Message:

One day you will have a lot of apologizing to your self to do when you figure out that you have been so completely hoodwinked and duped.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 04:42:22 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: The Cloak Subject: you don't have to apologize to anyone here, but... Message:

Huh? By going inside and feeling some peace after a busy,hard day, I'm going to have to apologize to myself for being completely etc, etc ... huh? I'll probably be too tired.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 18:19:05 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: A premie Subject: hoodwinked and duped.Too tired to consider it?(nt) Message:

hoodwinked and duped.Too tired to consider it?(nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:39:45 (GMT) From: a premie Email: None To: cq Subject: Hi cq Message:

In the sense of after a long day,yes. I was tired last night when I posted that. Answer me something while I'm at it... if capitalizing letters means you're shouting on the net, then what do you picture when someone like The Cloak or Jim uses those extra big dark letters. I was thinking someone would be standing on the Empire State Bldg or something with a megaphone. Or how about when they write in huge red letters what does THAT signify. Do you have an image you think of? Anyone?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 13:19:47 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: a premie Subject: Hi premie Message:

huge red letters? er, let's see ... ... overdrawn at the Bank of Placidity? Those extra big, bold fonts are fun though, especially when used creatively. yes?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:56:01 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: A premie Subject: Yes, yes, Knowledge as a way to escape life Message:

Jamming the brainwaves is a good way to avoid life, isn't it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:01:26 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: Jim Subject: Yes, yes, Knowledge as a way to escape life Message:

Yes. Jamming brainwaves,interesting. Thinking of Ira Woods can jam the waves. :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 11:51:06 (GMT) From: A.P. Email: None To: A premie Subject: Yes, yes, Knowledge as a way to escape life Message:

Not just jamming brain waves but also avoiding the problems you are dealing with. Maharaji asks you to go inside and deal with stuff. But isn't talking about things better than keeping them inside and thinking you can straighten it out yourself. So many relationships are lacking because of all the premie look inside BS. If you had the answer inside than why do you feel bad in the first place. Do you actually think that when you meditate you are solving anything? All you do is bottle the stuff up to mess with you later. Well that will give you something else to meditate on. It's a vicsious cycle. The meditation may help relax you a little bit but the REALITY of a bad day does not just go away. Eventually the more you go inside, the more you shut off the people that are around you. Is this a good thing? I don't think so. I think eventually all of that compounded bad day stuff builds and builds and probably makes you withdraw from everyday stuff more and more. Try dealing with your problems in the reality world. The reality world that caused them in the first place. I'm sure You will find this works better tham cramming them all in.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 16:49:04 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: A.P. Subject: Hi A.P. Message:

I'd like to reply --- that was a long post though. Yes, I would be the first person saying loudly - Please talk about things - please, deal. Yes, it is not healthy to keep things inside. Yes, I've always felt premies are stunted socially and emotionally probably due to the 'look inside' bull. If the ans was inside...hey, so I have a bad day - so shoot me. As far as solving anything by when I meditate. If I have a bad day...like 15 cars cut me off ( not just one blind, old lady) or nothing has gone right all day - like I have 3 paper cuts and I'm dropping and breaking everything I touch, along with every solicitor has my number as my hands are covered in mud or paint and I can never find my remote phone anyway and my back is 'out' ok....sorry you get the picture - just a bad day...well yes, I must tell you meditation is like a hot bath with candles and a good book. So shoot me for that answer. Shutting off people around you can be a very bad thing - but, ya know - actually, laughing now - shutting off some people is an answer to alot of my prayers. :) Big time. Oh, my gosh, do I ever deal with the 'reality world'. Oh, A.P.,if you only knew the processing and communicating I do. And let me tell you, not all my 'dealing with my problems in the reality world' comes out with the greatest results. I'm not talking to my neighbor, the mean lady, I call her now. Gee, I wish I could meditate her away.:) Actually, I kinda do. Cause all joking aside the problem is my reaction to her - not her. I ask myself ALL the time 'Why am I reacting so intensely to her. Oh, because she reminds me of my family of origin. Mean,unhappy etc...' She can be any way she wants... its up to ME to be ok with it - Meditation smooths my ruffles and sometimes gives me insight into her pain so I can truly 'see' instead of 'react' to her. Her meanness doesn't have to enter me and wreck my day. Meditation seems to strengthen my aura or something. So I do disagree that the bad day stuff builds and builds - it actually builds and builds when I don't meditate. Hey , you made me really take time for this reply. I tried to take it point by point. Now have to run. See ya...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 21:54:37 (GMT) From: A.P. Email: None To: A premie Subject: Hi A.P. Message:

Try Meditating without the thoughts of M. I think you will find you don't need him in your life at all. You could change your name to An ex-Premie. Thanks for your honest answers. A.P.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 22:29:38 (GMT) From: A premie Email: None To: A.P. Subject: Hi A.P. Message:

When I read -try meditating without thoughts of M -- I had to look twice - like was I on the wrong post?? I never meditate with thoughts of M - not even in my twenties. (or thirties or forties for that matter) And your welcome, A.P. It's been a pleasure.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 17:03:59 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: A premie Subject: Meditation Message:

A Premie, I think you should change your name. Or maybe just ask yourself if you really are a premie. Sounds more to me like you just are someone who meditates. What you describe, seems strayed from big M and I wonder why you would even consider yourself affiliated with him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 13:37:09 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: A.P. Subject: inside the impossible Message:

A.P., I agree with you...its like go inside and stew and avoid your problem instead of admitting humanness, ranting, having a bad day and getting through some suckitude. It's like a holier than thou trip sometimes...like you could really ever possibly be above a less then calm serene moment. That whole 'go inside', 'follow you heart' thing...it's so deceiving, there are times when it just ain't enough.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 06:54:54 (GMT) From: Loaf Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Pauline Premie is BEST Message:

Is there any way we could pursuade Pauline Premie to compile a little book of sayings, perhaps with some beautiful artwork. Something small that you could carry round with you whenever you needed to be reminded - or else just to keep by the loo. I should like to work with her on staging a one woman show - her car full of artifacts could be reflected in the set - as we follow her journey through life. Willy Russell could write the stage play - which could then be adapted into a major feature film starring ...... And here is where YOU get to vote for who YOU would like to see in this role. Casting suggestions please on the back of a stuck down envelope to ... Casting Pauline The Producers Office Round the Back Warner Bros Burbank California

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 02:36:56 (GMT) From: Nogbad the Bad Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Loaf Subject: with the bullshit and the blarney... Message:

Loaf me ole pal, I have been mostly off-line this last fortnight pretending to care for my offspring-durch-technik. Gotta meet up soon again, preferably somewhere I am allowed to smoke - the back yard has unhappy memories - and we'll lay some tracks down..

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 06:06:13 (GMT) From: Noggin the Nog Email: None To: Nogbad the Bad Subject: with the bullshit and the blarney... Message:

What exactly went on in my back yard ???

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 27, 2000 at 16:52:56 (GMT) From: Pauline Premie Email: None To: Loaf Subject: I am to in synch to do anything like that.... Message:

I am just so synchronized in participation with Maharaji right now that I can hardly stand it. Synchronization is such a gift. Just hold on a wait for the incredible changes Maharaji is about to begin to perhaps think about instituting in the near future sometime, that will really bring peace and that knowledge to the entire world. We will have world peace, everyone will be happy and fulfilled and lions and lambs will be be serving, I mean participating, together. So, there is not time to do anything as full of mind as some kind of a show. We are all toilet water without Maharaji and I just pray to him that he will use me to participate in any way he wants me to. I just pray I am worthy and don't completely screw it up. You see, if the latest plan to give knowledge via a video is an utter failure, it will not be due to Maharaji, it will be due to the fact that many premies are not as synchronized as I am, and because the people of the world are just too stupid to recognize the value of the video.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 06:04:59 (GMT) From: Loafie Goldstein Email: None To: Pauline Premie Subject: Don't hide your first technique under a bushel Message:

How much do you want... this is gonna be a BIG HIT its gonna run and run - its got more legs than a beragon or even the three legged S,S & M stool. Look at it this way - its a beatiful opportunity to spread Knowledge - M will be so proud of you. Don't play hard to get sunshine - we could just have the whole thing repackaged - Aspirant Annie - or summink. Think about it. You are sitting on a goldmine babe. Mr DeVito has said yes - we are all just waiting for you Bliss Cakes. Loafie Goldstein

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 10:36:28 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Loafie Goldstein Subject: Who to play PP? I vote for Billie Piper (nt) Message:

Who to play PP? I vote for Billie Piper (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index