Keith -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:00:50 (GMT)

__ John T. -:- 10 questions. -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 09:06:01 (GMT)

__ VP -:- 10 questions-a personal answer -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 23:38:41 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- TO BE CONTINUED IN NEW THREADS. Thanks.nt.ot -:- Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 00:24:06 (GMT)

__ Robyn -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:37:13 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- good God! -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:32:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ Robyn -:- good God! -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 12:55:45 (GMT)

__ Peter Howie -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 06:29:32 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- mystical paper bags! -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:43:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ Peter Howie -:- mystical paper bags! -:- Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:27:10 (GMT)

__ __ Robyn -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:41:23 (GMT)

__ hamzen -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:27:15 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:01:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ Keith -:- addendum -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:16:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ hamzen -:- addendum -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 00:31:29 (GMT)

__ Ben Lurking -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:35:45 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:09:16 (GMT)

__ Daneane -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:31:53 (GMT)

__ __ Jerry -:- Stigmata -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 23:44:30 (GMT)

__ __ __ Daneane -:- Stigmata -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 00:19:40 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:11:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jerry -:- Forget about Stigmata -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 15:53:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Keith -:- Forget about Stigmata -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:12:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Paper bag you silly duffer! -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:19:58 (GMT)

__ (Sir) David -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:16:14 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- 10 questions. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:21:11 (GMT)

__ Know It All -:- Answers -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:14:08 (GMT)

__ __ Daneane -:- Answers -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:44:10 (GMT)

__ __ Keith -:- Another question. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:20:44 (GMT)

__ __ __ Elaine -:- Keith -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:54:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Keith -:- Seth -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:26:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Elaine -:- Essence of Reality -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 14:32:02 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Essence of Reality -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 16:06:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ ham -:- Beautiful Jerr, luv ya -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:50:07 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Ham is really a pig! -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 00:13:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ham -:- Wheres your sense of humour now Keith? :) -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 01:00:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Humour is up my arse obviously! -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 03:34:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Elaine -:- Essence of Reality -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 18:36:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Essence of Reality -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 21:07:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Elaine -:- Essence of Reality -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:15:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- fuck off Elaine -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 23:15:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Bobby -:- my web page -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 20:05:24 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Hi Bobby! -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 02:17:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- To Bobby and Elaine. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:01:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Elaine -:- my web page -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 20:41:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ gerry -:- Elaine, don't hang up, please -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:49:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Don't wait for an answer -:- Elaine lost her glasses....nt -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 13:29:50 (GMT)

gErRy -:- Get ready for another Hallmark Holiday... -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:30:19 (GMT)

__ Robyn -:- Get ready for another Hallmark Holiday... -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:18:53 (GMT)

__ Selene -:- aarrggghhhh fuck that day I'm with you gerry -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:32:46 (GMT)

__ __ Gregg -:- aarrggghhhh fuck that day I'm with you gerry -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:49:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ Robyn -:- aarrggghhhh fuck that day I'm with you gerry -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:21:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ Selene -:- I'm sorry Gregg abuse leaves it's scars -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:08:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Deputy Dog -:- Not repeating the cycle . . . . . . -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:24:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- no -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:46:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- Just noticed a thread above -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 05:38:02 (GMT)

__ __ __ Marianne -:- You're a good dad -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:00:23 (GMT)

Stonor -:- Le plus que ca change . . . (and FA) (0t) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:20:20 (GMT)

__ Monmot -:- Une question pour vous (ot) -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:57:53 (GMT)

__ __ Stonor -:- Oui, mon choux! (ot) (what topic?) -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:53:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ Stonor -:- Excusez moi, . . . ma chouette! (nt) -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 17:52:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Stonor -:- and also Monmot, now that the coast is clear . . . -:- Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 18:26:27 (GMT)

Keith -:- I'm not sexist but this is funny. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 19:17:02 (GMT)

__ Deputy Dog -:- I'm not racist but this is funny. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:55:25 (GMT)

__ __ Deputy Dog -:- I'm Irish so I'm entitled to tell jokes like this. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:58:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ Keith -:- I'm Irish so I'm entitled to tell jokes like this. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:14:47 (GMT)

Jim -:- A river of answers (from ELK) -- annotated -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:23:42 (GMT)

__ Nigel -:- I suggest all premies read Jim's post... -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 16:39:44 (GMT)

__ Gregg -:- thanks, Jim... -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:44:51 (GMT)

__ G -:- Answers? -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:13:28 (GMT)

__ la-ex -:- A river of answers (from ELK) -- annotated -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:15:08 (GMT)

__ Jerry -:- Some answer -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:38:12 (GMT)

Jean-Michel -:- Major Update on the EV-DLM Papers download page -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:36:40 (GMT)

Jim -:- When I find you I'll have you charged -- FA'S -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:45:27 (GMT)

__ cq -:- The plot thickens -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:43:53 (GMT)

Nigel -:- ** Request for more info from Francis Wheen ** -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:42:53 (GMT)

__ Jean-Michel -:- I've gathered all relevant suff on this very issue -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:01:47 (GMT)

__ __ Nigel -:- Great work, J-M! Thanks. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 16:47:56 (GMT)

__ Nigel -:- Roger / J-M / Sir D. Read the above post - thanks! -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:48:28 (GMT)

__ __ Roger eDrek -:- Just read it. See above. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:39:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ Nigel -:- Thanks to you too, Roger... -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 18:10:51 (GMT)

Jean-Michel -:- Even more new criminal pages online today! -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:26:06 (GMT)

__ Jerry -:- Let's save the world! -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:22:25 (GMT)

__ __ Jean-Michel -:- Let's save the world: he REALLY believes it IMO -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:38:54 (GMT)

__ __ __ Rob -:- No he is, and he's starting in Malaysia -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 05:30:40 (GMT)

(Sir) David -:- Maharaji's latest satellite broadcast now online -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 12:57:31 (GMT)

__ Jean-Michel -:- Believe it or not, my cat got fascinated !! -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 07:19:39 (GMT)

__ __ (Sir) David -:- Believe it or not, my cat got fascinated !! -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 11:21:16 (GMT)

__ Daneane -:- Hmmm, sounds like his voice got deeper(nt) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:14:37 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- That's fantastic. Very funny. (nt) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:17:59 (GMT)

__ Stonor -:- I still can't hear it - anyone else? -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:07:01 (GMT)

__ __ Stonor -:- Got it with 'Explorer' :-) (nt) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:43:14 (GMT)

Keith -:- Story time for sci-fi fans. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 03:36:45 (GMT)

__ Stonor -:- Sci-fi? This is your brain on 'm' -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:31:03 (GMT)

hamzen -:- Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:39:27 (GMT)

__ Marianne -:- Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:44:33 (GMT)

__ __ hamzen -:- Much appreciated Marianne -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:45:10 (GMT)

__ G -:- Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:48:23 (GMT)

__ __ hamzen -:- 2nd order cybernetics -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:17:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ G -:- 2nd order cybernetics -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:15:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ hamzen -:- 2nd order cybernetics -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:23:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ G -:- 2nd order cybernetics -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 19:24:20 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ ham -:- 2nd order cybernetics -:- Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 17:08:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Is it me, ham or FV? - no message above (nt) -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:53:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Sod it, nothing showing on mine either,g (FA help) -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:40:14 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ ham -:- Twuly bizarre, it's back up again now (nt) -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:41:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Keith -:- 2nd order cybernetics -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:06:19 (GMT)

__ Robyn -:- Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:23:46 (GMT)

__ __ ham -:- Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:32:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ Keith the aggressive. -:- I just ham it up sometimes. -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:12:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ hamzen -:- If only you did around this topic! -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:33:43 (GMT)

__ Keith -:- choose your box please. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 03:51:20 (GMT)

__ __ Robyn -:- choose your box please. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:31:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ Keith -:- Keith's spirituality. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:23:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ hamzen -:- I am neither a materialist nor an atheist -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:49:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Keith -:- Keith's spirituality. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:34:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Robyn -:- Keith's spirituality, my comments on the same -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:08:04 (GMT)

__ __ hamzen -:- choose your box please. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 12:04:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ Robyn -:- choose your box please. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:26:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ G -:- me too! -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:53:20 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Keith the incoherent. -:- God magnets. -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:53:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Is your committment to truth really that -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:38:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Is your committment to truth really that -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:42:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Except that -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:38:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Except that -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:52:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- If you're not certain, then don't make statements -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:57:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- correction -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:56:22 (GMT)

Jim -:- Hey, what's with the spam? -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:34:24 (GMT)

__ Ben Lurking -:- Hey, what's with the spam? -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 19:14:43 (GMT)

__ __ Selene -:- I get those spams a lot -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:03:47 (GMT)

__ hamzen -:- Use alias and seperate e-mail add when here!(nt) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:42:48 (GMT)

__ __ Selene -:- good good point I sometimes wish I had -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:06:20 (GMT)

__ __ __ ham -:- Sensibly paranoid maybe, but wise, I doubt it! -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:02:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Selene -:- exactly ham, this is what questions me -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:51:22 (GMT)

Jim -:- MY MOST IMPORTANT POST EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:14:56 (GMT)

__ Jerry -:- Auto_Knowledge? -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:34:31 (GMT)

__ __ (Sir) David -:- Auto_Knowledge? -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:28:16 (GMT)

__ A premie told me today -:- Not even a leaf moves without Maharaji's will.... -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 04:04:44 (GMT)

__ ham -:- Don't get too excited until -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:23:35 (GMT)

sam -:- old days, old ways -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:04:03 (GMT)

__ Gregg -:- old days, old ways -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:47:07 (GMT)

Roger eDrek -:- Attention Joey and others - I am not Roger Drek -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 22:48:08 (GMT)

__ Forum Administrator -:- I am not Roger Drek -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 11:43:28 (GMT)

__ __ Katie -:- Thanks, FA -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 13:37:53 (GMT)

__ Katie -:- You should complain to the FA, Roger -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 00:26:43 (GMT)

__ __ Roger eDrek -:- Actually, I think it's nice -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 01:01:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ The Real Roger eDrek -:- Funny thing about that Peanut Gallery -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:17:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Selene -:- no I don't think you are! nt -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 06:15:18 (GMT)

jondon -:- Premies are all back from the Boston Event... -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 19:07:33 (GMT)

__ cy -:- Premies are all back from the Boston Event... -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 21:31:52 (GMT)

__ __ Observer 500 -:- Premies are all back from the Boston Event... -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:08:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ jondon -:- O 500 cy fy nt -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:58:27 (GMT)

Keith -:- 10 reasons why I do not hate Maharaji. -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 18:42:54 (GMT)

__ SHHHHHH -:- SHHHHH nt -:- Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:15:33 (GMT)

__ Elaine -:- BTW,ditto...needless to say. (nt) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 19:41:53 (GMT)

cq -:- Watch out Elan Vital - especially in France! -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 17:43:28 (GMT)

__ Jerry -:- Very interesting... -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 20:31:19 (GMT)

__ __ sam -:- Very interesting... -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:16:17 (GMT)

__ Joey -:- Vive la France!!!! -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 18:37:41 (GMT)

thin mann -:- short stories altmannm ? -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 17:29:24 (GMT)

__ Loaf -:- Ulster has always been a problem -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 23:02:02 (GMT)

__ __ Ian Paisley -:- Ulster has always been a problem -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 23:08:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ Gerry Adams -:- You mean the 'amster's ulster??? (nt) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:22:53 (GMT)

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:00:50 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: 10 questions. Message:

1) Is 'consciousness really explained fully by science?' 2) Is mind ,including any mental reactions or responses to these ten questions fully explainable as biochemical,neurological and magnetic forces? 3) What is d.n.a? How did d.n.a originate? 4) Why if scientific knowledge changes continually and sometimes radically do some adherents discount any possibility? Would not a true scientific spirit allow for any possibility? 5) Forget about the word God with all its connatations. Is there a Creator? Not in time. But omnipresently? 6) Everything we experience through our senses was created. Do you agree? If you do agree, then why should there be an exception to this law ? 7) How does something (anything) come from nothing? 8) Why do so many scientists (many eminent ones included) believe in God/Creator? 9) Why do some 'non believers' balk at the air of certaintity surrounding 'believers' when they themselves have the 'air' of certaintity themselves(regarding their own views)? 10) Why do 'non-believers' often assume that 'believers' all agree in their understanding of God/Creator? Or of matters 'spiritual/esoteric'?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 09:06:01 (GMT) From: John T. Email: None To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

1) Is 'consciousness really explained fully by science?' What is the nature of scientific explanation? What is the purpose or nature of consciouness? 2) Is mind ,including any mental reactions or responses to these ten questions fully explainable as biochemical,neurological and magnetic forces? No, not yet. Some people believe this will happen - others believe it will not. The scientific view is to say, 'we'll try - if we cannot, we may need to introduce a new type of force' 3) What is d.n.a? How did d.n.a originate? It's a very stable chemical. Most of the DNA is your body was made by your body. 4) Why if scientific knowledge changes continually and sometimes radically do some adherents discount any possibility? Would not a true scientific spirit allow for any possibility? It's not a perfect world ;-) YES! but, there's a thing called the scientific method. This way of thinking was used in my answer to (2) above, and (5) (6) below. 5) Forget about the word God with all its connatations. Is there a Creator? Not in time. But omnipresently? Is it useful to think this way? 6) Everything we experience through our senses was created. Do you agree? If you do agree, then why should there be an exception to this law ? ? Is this a way of saying that the world is somehow and in a sense created by perception? There's certainly more to it than that - the world is other people's dreams as well as our own... 7) How does something (anything) come from nothing? How indeed? 8) Why do so many scientists (many eminent ones included) believe in God/Creator? How not? It would be reasonable to expect people (yes, even eminent scientists!) to be a product of their time and culture. 9) Why do some 'non believers' balk at the air of certaintity surrounding 'believers' when they themselves have the 'air' of certaintity themselves(regarding their own views)? Possibly because we have an understanding (of the scientific method) that you have yet to come to terms with. 10) Why do 'non-believers' often assume that 'believers' all agree in their understanding of God/Creator? Or of matters 'spiritual/esoteric'? I cannot speak for other rationalists. I do not think that way.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 23:38:41 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Keith Subject: 10 questions-a personal answer Message:

Here's the deal, Keith. You are never never never going to KNOW the answer to those questions, no matter how hard you search nor whom you ask, nor how much time you spend pondering. But if it entertains you, ask as often as you wish :) At best, you can come up with something that makes you comfortable and that answers your questions to your own satisfaction. Some people call this religion, or superstition, or science or witchcraft or astrology...take you pick or make up your own belief system outside of those boxes. It has taken me years to be comfortable realizing that I just don't know and won't. But, hey, to the people who know and love me, I am damn important--religion or confusion. With that knowlege, why does it matter so much that I know about things like God? I know my children love and look up to me. For me that is enough--maybe I am simple. I'm not saying it's not fun to think about this and to talk about this, but it's a lot more honest to say that we won't ever know than it is to find empty answers like Maharaji. Hey, one more thing--live so that if there is no sequel, i.e. death is a black nothingness, that it would be okay. Then you won't be disappointed. Peace, VP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 00:24:06 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: VP and John Subject: TO BE CONTINUED IN NEW THREADS. Thanks.nt.ot Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:37:13 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Dear Keith, '7) How does something (anything) come from nothing?' Yeah sure, those little bugs that show up in old flour! Must be creation was something like that bag of flour, I don't buy the Adam and Eve explination. Just teasing, of course. If I were to answer this post it would be very long and take me very long to compose it...but I find Jim, or should say found him, when I read his posts, to be like what you say in #9 and have told him as much, likening him to a Jehovah's Wittness in his approach which is why I too, am an agnostic. The only place I use to 'feel' god was in nature and I still get that same feeling there but relate to it more on a level of the commonality to all living things. I guess I'd wonder if scientist that believe in god can because it helps them explain what they don't understand and haven't been able to get right with through science. They can't believe in Adam and Eve and be worth their salt, you think? In not believing in this 'story' they are not fully taken in by the whole ball of wax and if you believe in God then how can you pick and choose what of his words are true or not. Flys in the face of that true beliver stance, which to me is a good thing. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:32:04 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Robyn Subject: good God! Message:

Dear Robyn, could it be that God provided the screen and we provide the pictures. God provided the blank page and we provide the words. God provided my brain and now look what's happening? Just a thought!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 12:55:45 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Keith Subject: good God! Message:

Dear Keith, It is a possibility, a big maybe but for me, the possibility seems remote. Doesn't, feel right but it is possible. Maybe each of us, you and me, are traveling the middle road but you are a bit to one side while I am a bit to the other because we can't both occupy that space exactly in the middle. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 06:29:32 (GMT) From: Peter Howie Email: None To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Dear Kieth, I am slightly underslept but these occurred to me. A few extra questions. Where does the need to 'know' come from and how come some people are quite confortable to not know? What is the down side for you if, in reality, there is not God/creator/force/etc and death is a great finality? There is a great book called 'Searching for memory' by Daniel l Schacter, Basic Books 1996 - it is both delightful and scary. I think you might find it worthwhile to cogitate over. Why? you ask - well he is a luminary in the arena of brain/neuro-problems. A bit like and not like Oliver Saks. The scary bit for me was as he was creating a very convinving road to wander down it reached a point where he suggests that what he has presented is enough of an explanation for all the ideas about 'unconscious', souls, feelings from other places, etc etc without having to get mystical at all. And I had to agree -adn I sigh even as I remember and write this. So the question is 'what is the value of belief?' Cheers Peter Howie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:43:27 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Peter Howie Subject: mystical paper bags! Message:

How mystical a paper bag blowing in the wind can be! A reference to a post below regarding 'American Beauty'. Seriously Peter we are playing with words and meanings of words. We all use many words with individual connatations attached . That's why it takes time for people to really understand what the heck someone else is really trying to say. Life for me is very mystical when I'm in THAT groove. But that is not to say I'm suddenly experiencing things as if I'm in another universe. The ordinary becomes extra-ordinary. Like being in love. As for facing the possibility that death is the final scene. That would indeed be cruel. I like sequals. But every instinct aided by logic and experience (mystical ones at that!) tell me it ain't so. The limited I will end for sure but I am more than this limited I , imho. If I'm wrong I wont come back and tell you so. What a depressing thought. I like it here!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 05:27:10 (GMT) From: Peter Howie Email: None To: Keith Subject: mystical paper bags! Message:

Hi there again. You're doing well with all the responses. Words and the meaning of words. I believe that the meaning of words is all important. That is; what is your meaning - and is it any relation to my meaning. When I say 'universe' I don't mean a literal universe. What I do mean is that when we get together in a real manner that it is as though we were experiencing different universes. We can actually notice quite different data, and hence literally 'see' different things from each other and for all intents and purposes, be in different universes. I reckon that this is what is happenning most of the time on this forum. Along with the insistence, as I am doing with you now, that others get to know how I see the world (or my universe) before I will relent and get to know theirs. Cheers Peter Howie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:41:23 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Peter Howie Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Hi Peter, Told myself no more replies just read and get back to sleep! Ah well. 'What is the down side for you if, in reality, there is not God/creator/force/etc and death is a great finality?' I can easily believe there may not be a god etc but somehow still believe in the possibility of reincarnation, just as the way things are, same as my day time visions or meditational experiences. Part of the human experience. Maybe, of course. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:27:15 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

1) Is 'consciousness really explained fully by science?' What do you mean by consciousness? What do you mean by fully? Assuming you mean everything, of course not, nothing can ever fully explasin everything, because it would need a definition that included it's own definition, so you would constantly be in an infinite regression. ( see Godel on this one) 2) Is mind ,including any mental reactions or responses to these ten questions fully explainable as biochemical,neurological and magnetic forces? Not thast I know of , but certainly the mechanisms have been explained in much greater detail than any other approach I've come across. Also since randomeness is a key factor in the universe nothing can be completely explained 3) What is d.n.a? How did d.n.a originate? Think that's 2 questions, as far as I know there are no historical documents to 'prove' how dna originated, but say it wasn't a historical 'accident' but arranged by a 'creator' (differnet to 'god'?), how did it do it? 4) Why if scientific knowledge changes continually and sometimes radically do some adherents discount any possibility? Would not a true scientific spirit allow for any possibility? Because of the impact of the church on information & research in the psat, true that the possibility of the creator can't be discounted, but 'it' has a tendency to shyness if it does exist, and even if 'it' does exist, and did create the universe, to understand anything, agreed understanding, verifiable research, not tittle tattle & spiritual hoodoo gossip would be needed. 5) Forget about the word God with all its connatations. Is there a Creator? Not in time. But omnipresently? What's the difference between a 'creator' & 'god'? What does 'omnipresently' mean, and how using language can any discussion of such a concept have any meaning whatsoever? 6) Everything we experience through our senses was created. Do you agree? If you do agree, then why should there be an exception to this law ? What do you mean by created? How can you seperate your 'we' from your 'senses'? 7) How does something (anything) come from nothing? This is so vague, how does something come from nothing, you tell me? Have you never read anything on emergent systems? 8) Why do so many scientists (many eminent ones included) believe in God/Creator? Probably because they are as insecure as anyone else who believes in god, but also I would add that science is nothing to do with god, they have to earn a living, and I'd bet that very few of them were certain that god existed, ie it's a belief not a fact I also know scientists who believe in Tottenham Hotspur winning the league next year! 9) Why do some 'non believers' balk at the air of certaintity surrounding 'believers' when they themselves have the 'air' of certaintity themselves(regarding their own views)? It's not the 'air' of certainty in believers I baulk at, but certainty full stop. See comments earlier re destructive effects of religion on research. They might have the air of certainty, but any scientist who says they know for definite that god doesn't exist are talking rubbish, since it would be impossible to prove. Most scientists I know don't discuss the topic, because language is based on duality, and since any 'god' would be beyond duality, it's logically ridiculous wasting a single word discussing it, or even using such a concept. 10) Why do 'non-believers' often assume that 'believers' all agree in their understanding of God/Creator? Or of matters 'spiritual/esoteric'? Do they? That one is new to me

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:01:32 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: hamzen Subject: 10 questions. Message:

I enjoyed those responses. I had a dream last night. I can't quite remember the details. But the gist of it was trying to get somewhere but even when I arrived I still hadn't got to the end. And so I had to get somewhere again. Finally I realised that there was no end. And I gave up. I do see that discussing or thinking about these issues cannot reach a definate endpoint. My posts with 0 cover some of this ground too. (Rambling thought thread.) The only question remaining for me is, can 'That', which if existing exists outside time-space-thought , be acknowledged by consciousness itself? What do I mean by consciousness? Good question. I mean is there a core part of consciousness that exists independently outside of time-space-thought and yet parallel to it in human experience? And is the term 'randomness' the same essentially as 'free will'? Or the law of uncertaintity? And if 'randomness' is a universal law then does that suggest one way or another that there a Creator? What I meant by omnipresently is that a Creator that does not imply limitations imposed by space-time-thought. A creative power that is always (eternally) present. Await your thoughts even if this discussion is infinitely regressive.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:16:40 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: hamzen Subject: addendum Message:

After reading your response to me in the below thread I want to add a word or two. Let's bring it up, so to speak. You seem to think that because something can't be proven it should remain unexpressed. Just 'hot air or on-line wanking!' I disagree. Isn't so much art, music, literature, and so on attempts to give form to that which defies any final conclusive expression? philosophical debate can fall into this catagory too. You may find some of these attempts to express the unexpressable boring and a waste of time. You every right to do so. But that does not invalidate them in terms of their worthiness. I might find equally boring and a waste of time discussions that really turn you on. For me this type of discussion is a form of entertainment. I enjoy it. It exercises my mind and helps me , I think, sharpen and refine my modes of communication. And it increases my 'knowledge'. As for 'wanking'. It could be that all forms of entertainment are forms of wanking. Depends I guess on how one defines words.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 00:31:29 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith Subject: addendum Message:

Fair do's Keith, but how about answering one of my questions for once specifically, yet again, if an experience of god's presence or a sense of cosmic consciousness can be activated by a magnet and switched off by that same magnet being removed how can you be certain that your experience or anyones experience of god is a 'reality'? doesn't stuff like that at least make you a bit less 'certain', it can also be triggered by electrical probes, g-force generators, drugs etc all the stuff that took me from the land of certainty to the land of uncertainty/agnosticism, how can you avoid a simialar journey if you are committed to treuth in itself?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:35:45 (GMT) From: Ben Lurking Email: None To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Yes god exists but we are certain he (it or she) is not M because he told us he wasn't god (after he told us he was) M - god the confused, lord of all take it from ya and must live with the most riches. the problem with the hampsters spiel is the same as any good con mans spiel - its close to the truth with just enough trappings to make it seem real.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:09:16 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Ben Lurking Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Yes, in my own words I would agree with you. Close to the truth. Or Truth mixed with illusion. But then again, one must ask , what isn't? Pure Truth is contaminated by our attempt to define it. Do you agree? And yet I acknowledge that pure Truth exists. I choose to not name That Truth God. Too many connatations that confuse the issue.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:31:53 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: Daneane@justice.com To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Hey Keith, You seen a movie called, 'Stigmata'? I'd never heard of it but happened to catch it on Pay TV...I think you might like it...it sort deals with some of your questions. I liked it very much.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 23:44:30 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Stigmata Message:

Daneane, I'm sorry if I was a little crass in my counter 'review' of Stigmata, but overall, I was unimpressed. Just wanted you to know that it was nothing personal :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 00:19:40 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Stigmata Message:

Conflicting opinions is hardly anything new on this message board.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:11:27 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Daneane Subject: 10 questions. Message:

No Daneane,I haven't seen the movie 'Stigmata'. But I shall try to get out on video next time I hire some. Thanks for the 'tip'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 15:53:53 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Keith Subject: Forget about Stigmata Message:

It was a crazy, moronic flim with lousy acting that has nothing to do with what you're talking about. The movie you should see is American Beauty. Pay close attention to the scene of the bag blowing in the wind. It's everything you talk about. There are no words necessary for it. If anything is to be said about it, I'd just chalk it up as great art. No reason to think about it in a manner beyond that. After all, should great art be thought about? Isn't it just something to enjoy, to relax into? Besides that particular scene, I think you should enjoy the movie, overall. It really was a wonderful film.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:12:23 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Forget about Stigmata Message:

I'll watch Stigmata anyway and then I'll give my own film review but thanks Jerry for trying to save me the hire fee. Appraising films is like life in general. One persons meat (not intended for vegetarians) is another persons poison. As for American Beauty. I've seen it. I thought it one of the two best films I've seen in years. The other one being the Sixth Sense , which is typical for a middle aged new ager like myself(ha ha hic ha ha). I agree Jerry. A wonderful film that had me leaving the cinema very inspired. I could 'feel' (which I do quite well despite cq's assumption in a recent post that I have problems in this area...ha ha hic ha ha)the films meaning on many different levels. I was thinking about this film for days. The part about the leaves blowing in the wind was very subtle and zennish. Nice touch! Some people I know felt somewhat offended by the film. It was confronting to some.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:19:58 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Paper bag you silly duffer! Message:

Jerry. Paper bag blowing in the wind. Mixing it up with a scene from another movie. It's early here. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it! Anyway the 'paper bag 'scene was in essense the same. A moment in time being an eternity. An experience that transports one to a wordless appreciation , even awe of the simple 'beauty' of a seemingly mundane event. Love it!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:16:14 (GMT) From: (Sir) David Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com To: Keith Subject: 10 questions. Message:

The only one I have already thought about and can answer is number 7 - 'How does something (anything) come from nothing?' To which the answer I will give is, that something cannot come from nothing. But I will also further say that in my opinion, 'nothing' is a myth as there has never been a 'nothing'. The logical progression from that is that there has and always will be 'something'. Some scientists think along these lines but in a different way to me. They say that there was no 'before' to the universe, since time as we know it here, started at the conception of this universe. If we could stand outside of time and space then we would see that time and space are directly related and from our outside observation post, the universe would contain all past present and future time and we would see it all at once, rather like looking at a giant calendar on the wall. This is what Albert Einstein has theorised. Being in the universe is like being in a calendar. The time is linked to space, rather like the squares of the days on a calendar. On a calendar, we measure time by the number of squares from one day to another across the month and our space/time universe works in the same way. We cannot disassociate time from space. Therefore, the space/time universe began when space and time came into being. If there was no space, there was no space-time. Is there another sort of time outside of space-time which exists on another dimension? It's possible to theorise about it and as mentioned above, in such a dimension, this universe would be seen in its entirety with all of its time, past present and future and all of its space, all linked together and presented in an easy to read calendar mechanism. Both Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking have theorised the above.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:21:11 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: (Sir) David Subject: 10 questions. Message:

Thanks Sir David for an interesting post. I would like to make a few comments. I believe also that time-space arise and exist together. but the question would then be , is there something(language is difficult here because a 'thing' would have to exist in space-time) some existence or consciousness that exists, outside as it were, space-time? This from a more scientific approach would be the question, I think. I know that physisists including Einstien pondered and still ponder over this. And some claim they have 'realised' the answer is yes. Space-time would then be a secondary condition of existence. Although without this secondary condition it would seem there could be no recognition of the primary condition,which some refer to as God. Hence there is a type of ultimate paradox when thinking about these matters. Hence thought can only go so far. Hence the question, is there another way to approach? I feel yes. Some will disagree.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:14:08 (GMT) From: Know It All Email: None To: Keith Subject: Answers Message:

Keith: Ponder this stuff over on Anything Goes, or on ELK. This is the ex-premie forum. It seems like you are consistently trying to divert the discussion. KIA

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:44:10 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Know It All Subject: Answers Message:

Was thinking about this Forum boundaries thing. If I wanted to share a recipe for wheat gluten, would it be okay as long as I put 'OT' or maybe just named it 'I hate Maharaji special Wheat Gluten?' I'm wondering too. I was just a crappy aspirant for six or so months...nuthin like some of the full-on jump in and didn't come up for air for a year or decade ex-premie... but I think if this Forum really was strictly on M... it would scare me silly. Crazy crap, off-topics, personal disputes...at least they offer a little perspective and glimmers' of life after, beyond and besides and all things Big M. And by the way...I don't even have a recipe for wheat gluten..I'd like one though.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:20:44 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Know It All Subject: Another question. Message:

Why do you not reveal yourself ? Who are you? And what you say I find so ludicrous. Is there some official listing on what should or should not be shared on this forum? What defines the boundaries of what is kosher or not kosher here? The topics shared on this forum are so broad. I am an ex premie sharing about many things including about Maharaji and related matters. Could it be that you are simply threatened by my questions and/or my general content? And who are you anyway?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:54:06 (GMT) From: Elaine Email: None To: Keith Subject: Keith Message:

Keith, Go ahead and post anything you want - people have a choice to skip over what they are not interested in.(But, I'm sure you already know that:) Do you ever read any of the Seth Speaks Books? I was just curious. Also have you ever been over on another sight here - 'Essence of Reality'? As I recall you get to it by clicking onto 'Links' off the Ex-premie Homepage. If you're interested I'll retrace my steps sometime for you. Elaine

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:26:17 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Elaine Subject: Seth Message:

Hi Elaine. I read a couple of Seth books some 25 years ago. I'll check out the site 'Essence Of Reality' . Thanks. Also for your support. Take care, Keith.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 14:32:02 (GMT) From: Elaine Email: None To: Keith Subject: Essence of Reality Message:

It's not so easy to find so I thought I'd help you - You go to the ex-p. Homepage -Links-Sacred Transformations-Mystical/Religious Exp----finally to Essence of Reality. Lots of fun stuff there. :) Regards,Elaine

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 16:06:00 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Elaine Subject: Essence of Reality Message:

It's not so easy to find so I thought I'd help you - You're going to help Keith find the essense of reality? That's rich.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:50:07 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Beautiful Jerr, luv ya Message:

That's produced the loudest laugh in me for weeks here, & Elaine, if Keith's here much longer you'll know EXACTLY what he's getting at Some new agers are so up their own arses everyone else is just a ripple in the distance as though on a faded film only one person in the universe etc & by the way Elaine, I don't get that with you at all, personally I think Keith & raina should get off with each other!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 00:13:38 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: ham Subject: Ham is really a pig! Message:

Just being factual! But really haven't I rubbed you up the wrong way? You pompous ass.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 01:00:05 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: Keith Subject: Wheres your sense of humour now Keith? :) Message:

You just come across to me as someone who is pretty self-absorbed, doesn't give a toss about the subject matter of this site and really should be discussing this stuff in a new-age poodle parlour, that's all could you actually go a week say, without once mentioning anything about 'spirituality', I hope for your sAke I'm wrong, but I doubt it the reason I said this about you & raina was that you never discuss anything else ever, if you do I've never seen it, but then I can't say I read every post you put up, I just had this vision of raina and you chatting, where she is going on endlessly about how wronged she is, and how everyone but her lives by assumptions, and you endlessly going on about spirituality, and neithewr of you hearing a single word that the other was saying, ie actually listening without any sense of superiority AND IN TERMS OF THIS SITE, IE AN EX PREMIES SITE YOU SEEM IMPERVIOUS THAT YOU MIGHT BE WINDING PEOPLE UP BIG TIME, in fact you sometimes sound like a mini maha, god is the only thing worth talking about etc etc Maybe I'm being naive, but I always thought god for believers was about a living experience, not a new-age jerry springer topic, but again I'm not a believer, so what do I know the reason I've even bothered responding is that you've shown signs when you first came here again of a thinner new age reflector bubble around you now, but it seems to be expanding at the moment, and this from someone who can recognize pomposity because I have plenty of it in myself, as your counsellor I'd reccommend focusing on the lower chakras, getting down the pub regularly every time you feel a new-age chat coming on, and a bit of an ear floss but then what do I know

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 03:34:12 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: ham Subject: Humour is up my arse obviously! Message:

Please mister therapist, sir, ham, pig, possible savior to those lost new age, spiritually (damn it, just had to use that s word again) deranged souls like myself, please forgive me, help heal me, mister pig sir! You see, ever since my childhood I've needed people to think I am funny. So I've become so self absorbed. And so insensitive to reasonable people like yourself. And I've somehow lost my sense of humour along the way. Unlike yourself mister ham. So given my obvious problems, could you perhaps be lenient with me. Yours eternally , your devoted patient, Keith.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 18:36:15 (GMT) From: Elaine Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Essence of Reality Message:

Just felt the urge to be hurtful today ,Jerry? There, feel better now that everyone saw how incredibly witty you are at someone else's expense. Big man,eh? Fun at parties too,are ya?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 21:07:11 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Elaine Subject: Essence of Reality Message:

Just felt the urge to be a little melodramatic today, Elaine? I wasn't trying to hurt your feelings. I even thought twice about posting the little dig, wondering in what spirit you would take it. I guess now I know. So, now that you've successfully instilled the proper level of guilt in me, I grovel before you, and humbly apologize for the thoughtless, heartless, hurtful, remark of mine. Sheesh.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:15:47 (GMT) From: Elaine Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Essence of Reality Message:

Was afraid the old Catholic guilt would kick in... I wasn't hurt - bec I'm tougher now- but,I think it's beneath you,Jerry. Not beneath others - but, you. And I hope the proper level of guilt was over after you posted me. TY Elaine

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 23:15:12 (GMT) From: gerry Email: None To: Elaine Subject: fuck off Elaine Message:

I wasn't hurt - bec I'm tougher now- but,I think it's beneath you,Jerry. Not beneath others - but, you. What's this bullshit, other than a transparent attempt at manipulation. I hate it !!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 20:05:24 (GMT) From: Bobby Email: None To: Elaine Subject: my web page Message:

Hi. The link to 'essence of reality' is off my web page Sacred Transformations. It's an old link. Here's the new link: Essence of reality My Sacred Transformations site is about personal stories of spiritual encounters and experiences. I can't vouch for every story, only my own. Some of my stories are posted, and a few other stories on the page are of people I know personally. My page is in serious need of updating and I hope to get to it in the not-too-distant-future. I need to update links, update the formats and significantly edit some of my past writings. In the meantime, I've written up my own personal experiences with cancer and buddhism that have happened within the last few years: Visionary Encounters with Cancer and Buddhism

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 02:17:12 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Hi Bobby! Message:

Hi Bobby! How's it been going - haven't seen you anywhere for a while. Glad to get your links again - lost everything web in a recent crash and burn. Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:01:23 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Bobby and Elaine Subject: To Bobby and Elaine. Message:

Thanks Elaine for the tips. And you too Bobby for the link. Hi there. I've bookmarked both sacred transformations and essence of reality. I'll read them later.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 20:41:55 (GMT) From: Elaine Email: None To: Bobby Subject: my web page Message:

Hey, I didn't realize you read over here. I read you're story with great interest a few weeks ago. I'm sorry my memory of it isn't exact - so I won't comment much. I'll review it this weekend. Glad you did a web page. Happy to 'meet you.' :) Elaine

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:49:59 (GMT) From: gerry Email: None To: Elaine Subject: Elaine, don't hang up, please Message:

I read this website fairly thouroughly a couple of years ago. I don't recall all the details but I don't understand how you could read something like this and still believe of GMJ.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 13:29:50 (GMT) From: Don't wait for an answer Email: None To: gerry Subject: Elaine lost her glasses....nt Message:

zzzzzz

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:30:19 (GMT) From: gErRy Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Get ready for another Hallmark Holiday... Message:

Father's Day--my personal fav. Luv to get together and chew over old times with the old guy...like hey Dad, remember the time you exposed yourself to Patty??? Anybody know how to make a letter bomb?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:18:53 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: gErRy Subject: Get ready for another Hallmark Holiday... Message:

Dear Gerry, First off, I am glad you talk about your dad here, reminds me of me birthday buddy. My 40 yr old married sister, Fanatical Christian (GAK) and controlling husband just found out she is unexpectedly pregnant with her 2nd child. When she called to tell my mother she said my mother went off on her! What is wrong with that woman! I told my sister I'll be calling my mother today and unlike my pre 37 yr old self I will tell her what I think of her behavior! I bet it would be liberating to wish your father just the greeting you described, well minus the letter bomb! :) I found being honest with my mother and not letting her dance around the issue of her abuse was the way we finally got through it enough so I could stop hating her. My dad was the good parent but was also fucked up, to this same sister actually, so she may have a problem with both Mother's and Father's day. Love your term, Hallmark Holiday and it reminds me of being at a friend's when they put on some live cop show or something. They know I can't watch horror movies but didn't think of this in the same group but after watching one of their outings I called the show, home made horror movies and your term made me think of that. What about Patty's dad, must be he is a better dad to think of on the day. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:32:46 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: gErRy Subject: aarrggghhhh fuck that day I'm with you gerry Message:

and how appropriate we picked a gooroo who likes to celebrate it with his 'MEDITATION STUDENTS' oh well at least mine is dead. (I'm so nice)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:49:33 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Selene Subject: aarrggghhhh fuck that day I'm with you gerry Message:

Yeah, but for me, it was heartwarming today to see my wife and daughter whisper about what they were going to get me for Father's Day. I know it's a Hallmark holiday, and that's why my mom and dad didn't celebrate it, but, still..aren't there better things to be cynical about? Like war and land mines and global corporate disregard for happy family life?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:21:51 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Gregg Subject: aarrggghhhh fuck that day I'm with you gerry Message:

Dear Gregg, I love to read that you saw your wife and daughter 'scheming' (sp) on what to get you. It helps to know there is good stuff going on and for those people, dads like you must be, it is well deserved. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:08:51 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Gregg Subject: I'm sorry Gregg abuse leaves it's scars Message:

You are of course right. Thanks. I see it in my own family, the new generation. Thankfully they are not repeating the cycle.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:24:15 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Selene Subject: Not repeating the cycle . . . . . . Message:

Not repeating the cycle eh Selene? I wonder if Knowledge had anything to do with short circuiting that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:46:34 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: no Message:

no no no but thanks for asking

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 05:38:02 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: the Dep dog Subject: Just noticed a thread above Message:

anyone Irish well I gotta give em a little bit of a break. just a little. which means I will take back my other post and answer your posts again. not that any males on here seem to care. this place is so fucking sexist. oh did I say that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:00:23 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: Gregg Subject: You're a good dad Message:

Gregg: I'm not surprised that your wife and daughter are planning something special for you. You are special, warm, kind hearted. I think these other dads are something very different. Happy Father's Day to you! Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:20:20 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Le plus que ca change . . . (and FA) (0t) Message:

Couldn't add this to the thread below, no message box. The Genie and the Gay Man  A gay man was walking along the beach when he stumbled upon a Genie's lamp.  He picked it up, rubbed it, and lo-and-behold a Genie appeared..  The amazed man asked if he got three wishes. The Genie said, ' Girl, get a grip!!!...  Due to inflation, constant downsizing, low wages in the third-world countries, my new pumps pinching my big toes, and fierce global competition, I can only grant you one wish. So what will it be? Jeff Stryker videos, a 2ft dildo, a copy of Marilyn Monroe's Happy Birthday Mr. President sequined dress in your size with matching shoes?' The man did not hesitate. He said, 'I want peace in the Middle East.  See this map?  I want these countries to stop fighting with each other.' The Genie looked at the map and shrieked 'Miss Thang!!, I don't think so, not in this lifetime!!!!!!  These countries have been at war for thousands of years, I'm good but not THAT good!!!!  I don't think it can be done. Make another wish!!' The man thought for a minute and said, ' Well I've never been able to find the right guy. You know, one that's considerate and fun, warm and affectionate, gorgeous, well hung, only wants sex with me, does not do drugs or drink, has a great job with good income, likes to cook and helps with the housecleaning, gets along with my family, doesn't watch sports all the time, tells me I always look fabulous and that I'm great in bed. That's what I wish for...the perfect guy to have as a lover.' The Genie let out a long sigh, clutched his hand to his heart and said 'GIRL FRIEND ...... let me see that map again.' (A gay friend in Toronto sends me a lot of jokes - and I think this one's funnier than the version below - is it sexist? ;-) Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:57:53 (GMT) From: Monmot Email: None To: Stonor Subject: Une question pour vous (ot) Message:

Stonor: Just bought a book written by Frances Stonor Saunders. Any relation? The author lives in London. It's called The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters. Looks like it'll be an interesting read.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 22:53:23 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Oui, mon choux! (ot) (what topic?) Message:

Bonjour Monmot! A family connection? Absolutely, but distantly. Toward the end of the 18th century, a young Stonor male fell in love with, and wanted to marry, a woman of whom his family did not approve. He eloped with her to Denmark. When the British invaded Denmark to take their fleet in 1801, he apparently fought against them with the Danes. My father's grandmother on his father's side was a Stonor, and Stonor Werner, an artist is also related to us. if you're curious, visit Stonor House in England A la prochaine! Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 17:52:31 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Excusez moi, . . . ma chouette! (nt) Message:

Excusez moi, . . . ma chouette! (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 18:26:27 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: apoul@netscape.net To: Monmot Subject: and also Monmot, now that the coast is clear . . . Message:

Dear Monmot, I want to thank you for your kindness and support during the reign of terror a few weeks ago. I was so shocked and hurt, and did not want to trigger and suffer any new attacks, that I lay very low. Again, thank you for your compassionate posts. You were the only ray of light in that dark time. Much appreciation, Love, Stonor (no need to email me, just adding it because)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 19:17:02 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: I'm not sexist but this is funny. Message:

The old lamp A man was walking along Bondi beach(here in Australia) and stumbled across an old lamp. He picked it up and rubbed it and out popped a genie. The genie said 'OK,OK. You released me from the lamp, ... blah blah blah. This is the fourth time this month and I'm getting a little sick of these wishes so you can forget about three. You only get one wish!' The man sat and thought about it for a while and said, 'I've always wanted to go to New Zealand, but I'm scared to fly, and I get very seasick. So could you build me a bridge to New Zealand so I can drive over there to visit?' The genie laughed and said, 'That's impossible. Think of the logistics of that. How would the supports ever reach the bottom of the sea? Think of how much concrete...how much steel!! No, think of another wish.' The man agreed and tried to think of a really good wish. Finally he said, 'I've been married and divorced four times. My wives always said I don't care and that I'm insensitive. I wish that I could understand women ...know what they are thinking when they give me the silent treatment, know why they are crying, know what they want when they say 'nothing'....' The genie said, 'You want that bridge to have two lanes or four?'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:55:25 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Keith Subject: I'm not racist but this is funny. Message:

An Irishman is walking along a beach and stubs his toe on a magic lamp. He picks it up, rubs it, and out pops a genie who tells him he can have three wishes. Without hesitation the Irishman says he wants a bottle of Guinness, at just the right temperature and age. The perfect bottle of Guinness immediately appears in his hand. He opens it and takes a drink. It is perfect, absolutely perfect! He takes another drink, and another, and another, and the genie starts getting restless. 'You'll never finish that Guinness,' he says, 'It's an endless bottle, that will always re-fill.' The Irishman smiles and takes another sip, and another, and another, and another, until the genie can stand it no longer. 'What about the other wishes,' he says impatiently. The Irishman thinks for a minute and says, 'I'll have two more of these.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:58:17 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: I'm Irish so I'm entitled to tell jokes like this. Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:14:47 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: I'm Irish so I'm entitled to tell jokes like this. Message:

Loved it , you funny Irish dog , you!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:23:42 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: A river of answers (from ELK) -- annotated Message:

A river of answers The 12 June Boston Event: a report by Michael Borden I have to admit I was sceptical at first. Premies can admit they were skeptical, doubtful, negative, any of a number of things. But it's always got to be a reference to a past thought or attitude. Just imagine a premie posting 'I am skpetical ....' Ain't gonna happen. And look how easily that skepticism falls away, huh? Nary a trace left, nothing further to discuss. 'Auto-Knowledge.' Sounded like picking up the techniques at a drive-through convenience store. One minute into Maharaji's new tool for giving Knowledge in inaccessible locations, however, it all began to fall into place. Knowing he was backstage not 30 yards away, of course, probably didn't hurt. Again, the only way premies can voice any real ideas, indeed, the only time there's even the slightest true colour in their expression and not just gaudy, candy-stripes, is in the past tense. The first line sounds real. What do I mean by that? I mean it sounds like the guy really thought that. In fact, he probably still does but is afraid to admit it. So he talks premie code: express the doubt at arm's length and see if someone, anyone, can do something interesting with it. It's like a whole bunch of people like that teacher guy in South Park. You know, the guy with the puppet on his hand that he uses to say what's really on his mind? What's the puppet called? Mr. Hand? Well, in this cult he's Mr. Mind. Same diff. Now, don't forget this premie, like all this posters on ELK, writes under his own name so he can't afford to fuck around. Thus he throws in the gooey devotional glop to throw premie critics off his trail. It's a sop to the cult and nothing more. Outside the cult it sounds sleazy as if he was waiting for Maharaji in some public restroom or something. In a way, understanding - that deep sense of questions simply falling away - ran as the motif throughout the entire program. In both the morning and evening sessions Maharaji talked of the distinction between questions and answers in the world of Knowledge and how, unlike in other realms, there wasn't necessarily a one-to one correlation between the two. Here's typical new-age bullshit, premie-style. Fuck with words and call it insight. You never knew that 'understanding' meant that before? Well, I got news for you: it didn't. Anyway, note how Maharaji's trying to grease the rails for his own ultiamte defense against the criticism that he stonewalls his critics. He's trying to redefine something as basic as what a proper answer is to a question. Boy this is so exciting! You learn something new every day in Maharaji's World. Rather, he explained, with Knowledge there's a river of answers and a river of questions. Immerse yourself in the right river and you'll have all the answers you'll ever need - answers to questions, in fact, that you didn't even know you had. And what about the answers to the questions you already know you have? What about them, eh? Okay, so here's the set up. How could any premie feel good about standing up afterwards and saying, 'By the way, Maharaji, I've got this question...'? He can't. Doing so would prove he hasn't 'immersed himself in the right river' and you know where that goes. Silence, fake knowing smiles. Cult worship of a fraud artist. With that giant disclaimer (and the fact, as he said, that he was fortunately in a very good mood) he opened a big black binder full of questions from people about practicing Knowledge. It was time for some fun. Maybe not for the folks whose 'important' questions Maharaji found 'cute'. Again, this last sentence says way too much! He's really hit the nail on the head. But? Well, let's see how Mr. Premie-Ji recovers..... But from the perspective of Knowledge, which is so astoundingly simple that it sneaks beneath the radar of explanations and mechanics, Stealth Knowledge, as it were, all the answers are already given. The secret to having your questions resolved? Be open to the answer. Especially the one sitting right there on the stage. Yes, of course. An absolute abdication of common sense, rationality and -- here's where Mr. Premi-Ji sounds so much like all the other cult members who post here -- depth. The guy has to seek refuge in the abject superficiality. This can't be good for the soul, even if the soul does'n't really exist. It can't be good for anything. Disgutsing, in fact.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 16:39:44 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Jim Subject: I suggest all premies read Jim's post... Message:

...then ask yourself a few questions: How do you feel reading Premie-ji's feeble rationalisations? Not good, surely..? Would you use a similar line to Premie-ji's('Be open to the answer. Especially the one sitting right there on the stage') when addressing doubts expressed by family or friends? And how would you feel whilst doing that? Like a cult member, perhaps? Not good, surely..? Is it really so easy to disagree with Jim's analysis? And if you do share Premie-ji's perspective and are prompted to reply to this post, well how do you feel about that struggle to frame a reply that might be acceptable to 'Maharaji', acceptable to other premies, or acceptable to your own conscience? Not good, surely..? And how will you feel later on when you read back the words you have posted here? Certainly not so good you will wish you had signed your own name to them. (CD's lack of anonymity here is the exception which proves the rule: his posts here are so brief and lacking in discussion there is nothing for him to feel uncomfortable about.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:44:51 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Jim Subject: thanks, Jim... Message:

...for displaying these EVisms for us. These quotes make it clear that nothing has changed since the halycon days of the cult, in the seventies. It's still about worshipping Maharaji. Period. The glossy gloss does not pass muster with those of us who are aware of what the essential message is. If you watch an introductory video (and I, to my horror, watched one last month), you might think EV is about meditation instruction. Like a lost college student might attend a Moonie event because it was about 'World Peace.' Cult. Cult. Watch out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:13:28 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Jim Subject: Answers? Message:

Maharaji said that during this tour he would try to answer questions that are 'synchronized' with what he's 'trying to do'. There's that impersonal synchronized word again. It brings to mind a synchronized robot that is surrendered and compliant to the wishes of its master. So he won't answer any unsynchronized questions. He'll answer questions like 'How may this humble servant - who is not worthy to lick the dust off your shoes - serve you, oh most magnificent Lord of the Universe Guru Maharaji Ji?' Oops! that's old-style, not properly synchronized talk. Now it would be 'How can I participate in the Master's work?' or 'Who do I write my check out to?'. Ask any other type of question and he'll try to make you feel like an idiot or just not answer. For anyone who wants to ask him some unsynchronized questions, see the following page on his web site: Special Request These q&a business reminds me of the section called ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS from the old Instructors' Training Manual (which I would assume he wrote) where it says: The opposite chair. ... When seated upon this chair ... many odd things have been known to happen. First of all, the person pretends to know it all. It doesn't matter which question the audience throws at this person they seem to have an answer, even if the answer is wrong or irrelevant. ... ... If you don't know the answer, then it seems obvious that the appropriate answer would be 'I DON'T KNOW'. If you are unsure, then get clear on what the question is. Remember that the question asked is not always the intended question. Try to be aware of what is going on inside the person. Here are some helpful hints: a. What does this person want to know? b. What is the question behind the question? c. Take your time. d. Confirm or clarify the question as necessary. e. Do not take inflections or the question personally. f. Try to get to the point. g. Try to answer in such a way that includes everyone. h. Never attack the person asking the question. i. Do not be put off if you cannot answer the question. Remember, you may be able to help someone else if you couldn't help this person. j. If you are not perfect, don't pretend.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:15:08 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: Jim Subject: A river of answers (from ELK) -- annotated Message:

Jim-nice work with the translation of premie-speak... I think this would make a great section on EPO-an analysis of some of these absurd posts, with a translation of them. It might make people think a bit about the silly answers m likes to give...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:38:12 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: Some answer Message:

But from the perspective of Knowledge, which is so astoundingly simple that it sneaks beneath the radar of explanations and mechanics, Stealth Knowledge, as it were, all the answers are already given. The secret to having your questions resolved? Be open to the answer. Especially the one sitting right there on the stage. Yes, Jim, this is disgusting. The implication is, even if you don't feel you've been answered, the answers are already given. You're made to feel stupid if you don't agree with this cockamamie nonsense. Typical mind fucking, brainwashing, cult copout, bullshit. Fuck you, Michael Borden. How do you sleep at night knowing you're just fucking with peoples' heads? Go fuck yourself. There's a time when I would have been had by your bullshit. Not anymore, asshole. Nicely deconstructed, Jim. You really nailed it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:36:40 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Major Update on the EV-DLM Papers download page Message:

at EV-DLM Papers Dowload Site If you've already downloaded the first 5 archives dated March 17, 2000, only download Archive 6. If you've none of them, then you'll have to download all 6 archives to have all the stuff Mr Rawat hates on your own PC or Mac's hard disk.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:45:27 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: When I find you I'll have you charged -- FA'S Message:

As I said yesterday, someone, using my name and email address and pretending to be posting as a representative of this page has been submitting the EPO site as a link to a number of sites. I've been unwittingly spammed by a large number of sites with email like this: This is a confirmation message your successful submission to http://linkplace.com/globalads one of the many Links pages at http://linkplace.com Your submission of: Title: ex-premie.org URL: http://www.ex-premie.org Was processed successfully. Visit our site to verify your link and get more information on how to get more free services http://linkplace.com/globalads and then it goes on. Anyway, I assume that even if the person doing all this has used some sort of proxy it's all eventually traceable. Well, guess what? I'm going to find who's done this. And when I do I'm going to have you prosecuted and that, I can assure you, is not an idle threat. If anyone, including the FA's, can assist I'd be most grateful. After all, it appears that EPO's being linked to a bunch of irrelevant sites or something.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:43:53 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Jim Subject: The plot thickens Message:

Just out of idle curiosity, I went to http://linkplace.com/globalads. I noticed they had a box entitled 'Report fraud or abuse', under which was a link to their email address, which is: lp@globalads.com Worth trying?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:42:53 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Everyone Subject: ** Request for more info from Francis Wheen ** Message:

I recently emailed Francis Wheen (the Guardian columnist who last summer had bit of a run-in with Jonathan Cainer and Elan Vital over an article he had written about the Lord's richest stargazer), telling him the news about the enforced closing-down of anti-cult websites. He has requested further specific information which I don't have to hand but which I am sure is available. >>> Thanks for your email, which the Guardian has belatedly forwarded to me (via snail-mail). Do you have the name of the American lawyers representing EV, and copies of any of their letters, or a list of sites they have been threatening? In your message you mention that they have successfully closed down Roger's House of Drek: do you have any more news of this? Any further details would be gratefully received. >>> Can anyone oblige? (Anything posted here or emailed to me I can forward to FW, plus I'll suggest he keeps an eye on the forum or other links for any further developments.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:01:47 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Nigel Subject: I've gathered all relevant suff on this very issue Message:

on my new page, at Mr Rawat vs. Exes' Websites there might be some stuff I don't have. BTW: In case you own some relevant documents on this, please get in touch with me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 16:47:56 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Jean-Michel Subject: Great work, J-M! Thanks. Message:

I'll make sure Francis Wheen gets to see all the salient detail. (Hmm... the Lord's divine lila takes some unexpected twins and turns, doesn't it?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:48:28 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Nigel Subject: Roger / J-M / Sir D. Read the above post - thanks! Message:

Especially useful would be lawyers' letters etc., and any news on the current state of play - or links to relevant web-pages.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:39:34 (GMT) From: Roger eDrek Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Just read it. See above. Message:

Gosh, I posted my I have not yet begun to fight (apologies to you Red Coats) without even reading this request first. So, there's the documents I've gotten and sent, but I've yet to see the complaint sent to my ISP by Maharaji's lawyers, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley, and McCloy, where they claim I have illegally used religious texts and have pejorative images of the Maharaji. Fuck you, Maharaji and fuck you, Bob Jacobs. Hey, I think I just got a hit on my webpage from an ISP located in New York State.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 18:10:51 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Roger eDrek Subject: Thanks to you too, Roger... Message:

Your decision to challenge your ISP and fight the Lard's bully boys is probably NOT what any of them were expecting when they kicked off this extremely misguided course of action. It looks like you are on pretty strong ground from a legal perspective and I reckon there's an excellent chance that EV, probably already more involved in this than they had intended to be, will chicken out somewhere along the line (like when someone shows M the legal bills they are rapidly accruing, or a spate of articles appearing in national newspapers...) Anyway, nice one Rog - and stick in there.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:26:06 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Even more new criminal pages online today! Message:

The whole booklet 'Antidote to Nuclear Bombs' now fully online ! This document first published in June 1962, by the old Indian DLM, is the oldest DLM publication available for the moment... Some excerpts from the last part I've just added today: The constant meditation of His Real Name provides mental equanimity, tranquillity and complete concentration which brings true peace. Hence true peace in the world can also be achieved by helping each individual achieve concentration of and control over mind. No other method-disarmament, ban on nuclear bomb test, agreements, negotiations, world government or the like-can bring true peace. Unless the very instinct of doing harm to others is changed to an instinct of love for all, true peace is never possible. Hence for peace acquisition of concentration of mind by each individual who is the primary unit of the world is absolutely necessary. Since individual man is the primary unit of a nation and ultimately of the world the peace attained by an individual man alone will bring peace in the world. No peace can be attained at any cost with an agitated and unsteady mind. A question may crop up whether it is possible to help individual to acquire concentration of mind. We know that academic education is imparted to individual student by a planned programme. Similarly the knowledge of acquiring concentration of mind can be disseminated individually by a planned programme. The academic education takes years for a man to achieve, but this True knowledge can be acquired even within a twinkling of an eye. And as such it will not take much time to disseminate this knowledge to every individual provided adequate facilities for reaching the masses are made available. It is time therefore that leaders of the world should try to disseminate this knowledge to the mankind if they really wish to have peace in the world. And the individual man should acquire concentration of mind, if he wishes to attain the highest aim of his life. And what is the 'highest aim of this life' ? Dedicate at the Lotus Feet, and 'participate' funding Mr Rawat's 25 million dollars toys?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:22:25 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Let's save the world! Message:

Unless the very instinct of doing harm to others is changed to an instinct of love for all, true peace is never possible. Hence for peace acquisition of concentration of mind by each individual who is the primary unit of the world is absolutely necessary. Tell it to a psycopath. This line of reasoning would lead you to believe that the default frame of mind is to destroy whatever it sees. Wrong. The default frame of mind is to protect the organism it lives in. If that means destroying a threat to it, well, then, so be it. What's got to be done has got to be done as they say. But the default frame of mind is not destructive. It's protective. No peace can be attained at any cost with an agitated and unsteady mind. This goes without saying. But an 'agitated and unsteady mind' has an underlying biochemistry at the root of it that meditation isn't necessarilly going to correct. It depends on the degree of damage to the balance of this neurochemistry that's going to determine the effectiveness, or lack of, of meditation. Generally speaking, people who are genuinely troubled aren't assisted by meditation. It's not that powerful an instrument whereby it can establish the right balance in a person's brain to effect the desired change. I speak from experience on this. Meditation never did jack to ease my troubled mind, although I was assured that it was the miracle cure, and that Knowledge, in particular, was the magic elixer. What a joke. It is time therefore that leaders of the world should try to disseminate this knowledge to the mankind if they really wish to have peace in the world. Grandiose? Who, me?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:38:54 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Let's save the world: he REALLY believes it IMO Message:

Just read the stupid things he apparently said in Boston .... according to testimonies on ELK. Propagation is about to start, on a massive scale !!!!!! hahahahahaha Poor premies believing this BS......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 05:30:40 (GMT) From: Rob Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: No he is, and he's starting in Malaysia Message:

J-M Have you seen the Malaysian site at: http://www.primeacademy.com.my/index2.htm Here is their prime directive: Prime Academy Malaysia Berhad was established in 1989 as a company limited by guarantee without share capital. The Academy was established to undertake cultural and educational activities through seminars, conventions and addresses about the message of self-awareness conveyed by international speaker, Maharaji. Since its establishment, the Academy embarked on the course of contributing towards healthy productivity and the well being of society, and is committed to continuing with these aims. It is also the policy of the Academy not to be involved in issues of religion or politics, nor to advocate any particular belief or lifestyle. The Academy’s sole purpose is to present Maharaji’s addresses on self-awareness. The activities of Prime Academy Malaysia Berhad are funded mainly by voluntary contributions. There is no charge for attending events or video presentations or for receiving the techniques of self-awareness that Maharaji offers. At some events advance registration for pre-assigned seats is offered at a nominal-processing fee to cover administrative costs.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 12:57:31 (GMT) From: (Sir) David Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Maharaji's latest satellite broadcast now online Message:

I've managed to pirate the hamster's latest broadcast, before he's actually sent it out over the airwaves. No need to pay through the nose to get it on your dish in five weeks when you can see and hear it now, online. Click here for Maharaji's satellite broadcast and you will learn some more. Yes, it's really happening now, I feel a big change just over the horizon...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 07:19:39 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: (Sir) David Subject: Believe it or not, my cat got fascinated !! Message:

He ususally doesn't pay any attention of what comes out of those loudspeakers, but HE GOT FASCINATED AND LISTENED!!! If it works for cats ......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 11:21:16 (GMT) From: (Sir) David Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Believe it or not, my cat got fascinated !! Message:

I'll see if I can get the Lord to record a special message for your cat. Perhaps your cat is a premie in disguise. You have been infiltrated!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:14:37 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: (Sir) David Subject: Hmmm, sounds like his voice got deeper(nt) Message:

rrrrrrrrrr

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:17:59 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: (Sir) David Subject: That's fantastic. Very funny. (nt) Message:

ggggg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:07:01 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: (Sir) David Subject: I still can't hear it - anyone else? Message:

And I do so want to hear what I've been missing!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:43:14 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: (Sir) Dave Subject: Got it with 'Explorer' :-) (nt) Message:

Have I got 'k' now? Put your money where your mouth is m.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 03:36:45 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Story time for sci-fi fans. Message:

Story time for sci fi fans. Once upon a time there lived a God named ‘G’. He shared his abode with a human named ‘H’. One day they decided to experiment. They would create a new being. This new being would be named ‘GH’. It would be a hybrid of both. Two in one. They did this but this experiment created a few problems. Those who were attracted to GH experienced the G part and were deeply inspired. But GH was not always as they were wont to imagine. Sometimes GH was really acting in oneness(between the two parts) . At such times G would channel through H. But sometimes H would take over and this was not realised by a lot of those who were adorers of GH. G sometimes was present but was greately compromised by the H part. Sound a bit complex? What the heck. It’s my story ! The really interesting bit is this though. All those who were attracted and repulsed by GH were clones of the original experiment. Only some knew this and some didn’t. This post is not intended to inflame the ire of the sceptics on board. I would hope that the ex-premie org is not some type of branch of the ‘sceptics society’ ,unofficially of course.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:31:03 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: Keith Subject: Sci-fi? This is your brain on 'm' Message:

And I'm a big sci-fi fan. Like I've said, I thank 'whatever-it-is' that I've never received 'knowledge.' Talk about an oxymoron! Is m's holy breath nitrous oxide? Whatever . . . its effects would be laughable if they weren't so tragic. Are you sure you don't have too much ayahuasca in your diet? Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:39:27 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences Message:

Got a few questions if anyone can help. Re placebo effect, know about the effects re psycho conditions and the physiological changes that can happen, ie changes in blood pressure etc, but does anyone have any info re deeper level changes in physical effects on less psychological conditions? Similar question re bio-feedback mechanisms, what physiological systems can be affected etc? How can anyone have any 'faith' re spirit experiences, that they are being generated by 'god' etc when we know from research that there is a 'god' & 'cosmic consciousness' effect that can be generated by magnets around the brain, g-force experiences etc? Sorry Keith, but your 'certainty' I find obnoxious, and can only think that flying the flag the way you do must be a deliberate ploy to wind people up, or cover your own insecurity. Nothing like 'knowing' you have a connection to the superior power eh!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:44:33 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: MarianneDB@aol.com To: hamzen Subject: Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences Message:

Hi Hamzen. Sorry I didn't get to meet you when I was in London. I have an ex-premie brother who is also a therapist, interested in bio-feedback. He'd find your questions fascinating. If you want to email me, I'll put you in touch with him. Cheers, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:45:10 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Much appreciated Marianne Message:

I too am sorry I didn't get to meet you when you were here, can't even remember why I couldn't make it to the Latvian club that night, but I also know that meeting exes is almost too close to the bone for me as Anth & JHB & especially Jethro will testify, I was a little out of order that evening! When JHB got that durga ji memento out I had great difficulty not puking up, although I seem to remember I got over that hurdle later! Also the night of Anth's birthday party, I could smell premies there, and for some reason it completely did my head in, for the life of me can't imagine why! Do you, or does anyone, have an e-mail add for JHB now he's out in Latvia? I still have a Grateful Dead cd of his to return.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:48:23 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences Message:

It's true that physical things such as magnets, g-forces, drugs, etc. effect the brain and that it turn effects consciousness, but it is far from certain what is going on, 'generated by' is simply a guess, it is not something you know. There are alternate viewpoints. Suppose you light a fuse and that leads to a bomb exploding. You can't conclude that lighting the fuse entirely accounts for the explosion. Flipping on a light switch can lead to a light bulb glowing, but it does not generate the light. My opinion is that mind/brain interaction is more of a two-way street. I think that the placebo effect is good evidence that the mind in fact effects the brain.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:17:23 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: G Subject: 2nd order cybernetics Message:

Methinks you are being just a tad pedantic here G, by the way I've been a systems thinker for twenty years, done a fair amount of stats etc, understand the basics. Generated by, as in triggered. When the magnet is taken away the experiences stop. When it returns they start again. You don't think there's any relationship between the magnet and the experiences? Same thing when I meditate, and I (in a VERY loose way) noticed that when I was on a meditation roll, energy buzzing etc, that if I then stopped meditating there was an after effect that lasted for days, but incrementally reducing. Do you think that the possible conclusion I came to that there were chemicals involved is outrageous, note I didn't say definitely? That there is a connection between all the so called 'spiritual' node points and neural circuits linked to chemical release such as serotonin, melatonin, dmt etc (all psycho drugs) would be naive to deny, and if one doesn't deny then the suspicion that there is a connection seems highly probable, any other possible explanations you have I would be very interested in. I don't have a grand belief system, if anything I'm a pragmatic agnostic, ie I use probabilities, and that doesn't mean I'm certain, but since maps are better than daydreaming I'd rather run with maps. Personally I don't see or experience a mind/brain split, if anything a brain/body split, but since I'm into second order systems, I really see the whole system as a whole. Couldn't agree more about the placebo effect, that's why I asked the question, but what I'm interested in is how deep the placebo effect can go. Re your question about second order systems thinking & consciousness, any constructivist approach to consciousness would see it in terms of the organism's experience of reality itself, not from some 'objective viewpoint', cognition as a result of lived experience. When you see 'living systems in terms of the processes that realized them, and not in terms of the relationship with the environment', consciousness becomes a very different creature. To simplify enormously, any living system, ie one that produces and renews the components that constitute it, will have consciousness, because it is in it's own world/universe that it experiences, when that self begins to use language, self consciousness arises. The degree to which that language use develops will determine the degree of self reflectiveness. If you want names to follow up/check out, I'll be quite happy to oblige. If you're interested in breaking out of the materialist/spiritual dichotomy I'm certain you'll be interested. It undercuts both positions beautifully, even the AI people are returning to their roots in the constructivist/second-order cybernetics which they tried to avoid for simplification and funding reasons, their models were seriously flawed on the logical level, and again I would be quite happy to provide pointers. With your interest in the brain/consciousness I think you'd find the debates fascinating.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:15:13 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: hamzen Subject: 2nd order cybernetics Message:

I didn't say that there was no relationship between the magnet and the experiences, obviously there was. What I was saying is that there is a difference between 'triggering' and being the 'sole cause of' of the experiences, that this does not imply that consciousness is simply a physical process. As I clearly stated, I agree that chemicals in the brain effect the mind, that there is a connection. That does not mean that there is nothing else going on. There is a difference between the brain causing the mind and conditioning the mind. '...any living system, ie one that produces and renews the components that constitute it, will have consciousness, because it is in it's own world/universe that it experiences, when that self begins to use language, self consciousness arises. The degree to which that language use develops will determine the degree of self reflectiveness.' I don't see why a system simply producing and renewing its components would necessarily give rise to or require consciousness. First, why would it need its own world? Couldn't it just be a robotic process? Second, even if it needed it, that doesn't explain what consciousness is. Also, I think there could be a mechanical 'own world' without awareness. I think there is a difference between what I'm calling awareness and consciousness and the 'self consciousness' and 'self reflectiveness' you write about. You could say that some computer systems are in some sense 'self reflective' or 'self referencing', but there is no reason to think they are aware.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:23:46 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: G Subject: 2nd order cybernetics Message:

I didn't say that there was no relationship between the magnet and the experiences, obviously there was. What I was saying is that there is a difference between 'triggering' and being the 'sole cause of' of the experiences, that this does not imply that consciousness is simply a physical process. Tricky stuff language eh! Let's say that the magnet is just a trigger & no more, what other factors do you think could be involved in such experiences? Not sure how/why you've mentioned consciousness in relation to these experiences, could you expand? I'm also not sure what you mean by 'simply a physical process', not sure how you could seperate physical from psychological in this context? As I clearly stated, I agree that chemicals in the brain effect the mind, that there is a connection. That does not mean that there is nothing else going on. There is a difference between the brain causing the mind and conditioning the mind. Sorry g, not sure what you mean re brain & mind, since the whole process is so circular, feedback mechanisms etc, how can you differentiate as though they are seperate? '...any living system, ie one that produces and renews the components that constitute it, will have consciousness, because it is in it's own world/universe that it experiences, when that self begins to use language, self consciousness arises. The degree to which that language use develops will determine the degree of self reflectiveness.' I don't see why a system simply producing and renewing its components would necessarily give rise to or require consciousness. First, why would it need its own world? It wouldn't need its own world, IT IS its own world, easily proven to human level, not just cellular organisms. The components it produces are not just add ons, they ARE THE ORGANISM ITSELF, ie there is a level of circularity and self reflexiveness involved here. On a crude level, imagine yourself looking in a mirror looking at yourself where the mirror is not just an add-on/extension, but is as important and as much part of your system, ie the mirror is looking at you too. Couldn't it just be a robotic process? Second, even if it needed it, that doesn't explain what consciousness is. Also, I think there could be a mechanical 'own world' without awareness. I think there is a difference between what I'm calling awareness and consciousness and the 'self consciousness' and 'self reflectiveness' you write about. In theory the initial state could be robotic, but from then on not remotely close to it. Before going into details, could you define whast you mean by consciousness, and awareness for me, it could save us a lot of time and energy if we're going to run with this. You could say that some computer systems are in some sense 'self reflective' or 'self referencing', but there is no reason to think they are aware. Sorry, on this couldn't disagree more, there are no computer systems that are even remotely close to self referencing, especially not self reflective, if they were they would be producing themselves, this territory is exactly why AI has been such a dismal failure in terms of producing intelligent machines, and exactly why they have gone back to neural nets and truly parallel concepts, and why the AI community is starting to connect back to thewir constructivist roots.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 19:24:20 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: hamzen Subject: 2nd order cybernetics Message:

Let's say that the magnet is just a trigger & no more, what other factors do you think could be involved in such experiences? The magnet effected their state of mind, their mind itself was the main other factor, along with whatever factors were involved. I can't describe what these are, I don't know. I don't think anyone understands why the magnet triggers these experiences. I'm not saying that some spirit from another realm just happened to come along at the same time and effected their consciousness. Also, I'm not seperating (totally) physical from psychological in this context. ... brain & mind, since the whole process is so circular, feedback mechanisms etc, how can you differentiate as though they are seperate? You can think of the brain and mind as both being parts of the brain/mind system, but that does not make them identical. Closely tied, yes, but not the same thing. That's my opinion. IT IS its own world, easily proven to human level, not just cellular organisms... I agree that the 'human system' is in some sense its own world (to some degree) and that circularity and self-reflexiveness is involved. But how does that explain consciousness? We experience a model of the 'outside' world, that is part of the human experience. But how does this happen? What is the color red? We know its function, what it represents, but what IS it? All I do is point to something represented by it and say 'Red is what I see when I look there.' ...could you define what you mean by consciousness, and awareness for me... 'Awareness' would be, for example, what is aware of the color red etc. and also aware of itself. 'Consciousness' would be awareness and all that it is aware of (not what is represented by qualia but the qualia themselves). Something like that, definitions here are very difficult. there are no computer systems that are even remotely close to self referencing, especially not self reflective What I meant is that a computer system can check on the value of a property and behave according to the value of that property. For example, you could program and create an instance of a 'dog' object that checks its 'name' property and if it's 'Spot', then it will 'run' (ok it won't run but maybe print 'run' on the screen). Have it do this say every minute. You could have its name set by another object via a setName method. The dog object would be self referencing but there would be no awareness or volition. I wouldn't say it was self-reflective because 'reflect' suggests conscious thought, so I'll drop that. How do you define 'self-referencing' and 'self-reflective'? ...they would be producing themselves I don't see why simply 'eating', 'disgesting', building and destroying 'cells' (or whatever), and 'excreting' would require awareness, much less explain it. I can see where 'strategy' might be required, but I think that is different.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 17:08:52 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: G Subject: 2nd order cybernetics Message:

Let's say that the magnet is just a trigger & no more, what other factors do you think could be involved in such experiences? The magnet effected their state of mind, their mind itself was the main other factor, along with whatever factors were involved. I can't describe what these are, I don't know. I don't think anyone understands why the magnet triggers these experiences. I'm not saying that some spirit from another realm just happened to come along at the same time and effected their consciousness. Also, I'm not seperating (totally) physical from psychological in this context. ... brain & mind, since the whole process is so circular, feedback mechanisms etc, how can you differentiate as though they are seperate? You can think of the brain and mind as both being parts of the brain/mind system, but that does not make them identical. Closely tied, yes, but not the same thing. That's my opinion. I'm still not sure how you differentiate them, if you do see them as seperate systems that interact, where do you see the mind as being, how do you see it existing at all, ie where are its roots, pre birth, post birth..? Sorry, maybe I'm being very dense here G? I'm not trying to put obstacles in the way, but it's very difficult to respond without understanding what kind of model you are using. IT IS its own world, easily proven to human level, not just cellular organisms... I agree that the 'human system' is in some sense its own world (to some degree) and that circularity and self-reflexiveness is involved. But how does that explain consciousness? We experience a model of the 'outside' world, that is part of the human experience. But how does this happen? What is the color red? We know its function, what it represents, but what IS it? All I do is point to something represented by it and say 'Red is what I see when I look there.' Again g I need some clarification, because I thought our models were very similar in this regard. Why only to 'some degree' in it's own world, I'm certain I could prove to you it's completely in it's own world. What surtprizes me is that you see our experience of the world at a sensory level as a representation, surely our experience of the world beyond our boundaries on a sensory level, is completely experiential. Higherr level filter mechanisms obviously then model/map, otherwise consciously we would be continuously overwhelmed by sense impressions, but don't you suspect that the modelling/mapping is not in terms of an outside world, but in terms of ordering and simplifying experiences? and that is why 'mystical' experiences, where boundaries go, have that element of truth & a higher reality, instead of being filtered the actual experiential state is exposed. When I was focusing on those 'mystic experiences' it became increasingly difficult to function, precisely because the practicalities of living were losing relevance, in some way closer to that amorphous experience of babyhood. And surely that is where the whole concept of needingf to be open like a child comes into the equation, the conceptual baggage is really just a fossilization of filter mechanisms? ...could you define what you mean by consciousness, and awareness for me... 'Awareness' would be, for example, what is aware of the color red etc. and also aware of itself. 'Consciousness' would be awareness and all that it is aware of (not what is represented by qualia but the qualia themselves). Something like that, definitions here are very difficult. They certainly are difficult, definitions that is, but without being as accurate as possible, and without eacvh of us understanding the words we use it would be impossible to bridge those gaps, and since the only way to bridge those gaps that I know of, is through language they become crucial. I think this is especially true when dealing with theoretical constructs about 'reality'. I'm sure that, like myself, you must constantly come up against this barrier in communication, because we all use shorthand assumptions (even raina!) to bypass the effort required if we were to be certain what other people mean. A constant questioning of assumptions, models etc would be impossible, and yet how often are we thrown in crucial areas with people because we realize that our assumptions are not the same as others, and we are thrown, another example to me that we are all in our own world. Redness, to use your example, would be a classic example of this. Again I would guarantee that if we were to magnify our definitions of redness and compare notes, that although we might have a simple agreement of what redness is, in comparison to greenness say, our experiential route to redness can nevewr be identical, because even though as humans we have similarities biologically, no two individual human systems are identical, even on a basic experiential level, leaving out the modelled reality level completely. So you see consciousness as more experiential, and awareness as having higher level abstract functions? Less complex organisms would have less awareness, but not necessarily less consciousness? As soon as we clear this I can get back to the 'consciousness', in my terms, issue. there are no computer systems that are even remotely close to self referencing, especially not self reflective What I meant is that a computer system can check on the value of a property and behave according to the value of that property. For example, you could program and create an instance of a 'dog' object that checks its 'name' property and if it's 'Spot', then it will 'run' (ok it won't run but maybe print 'run' on the screen). Have it do this say every minute. You could have its name set by another object via a setName method. The dog object would be self referencing but there would be no awareness or volition. I wouldn't say it was self-reflective because 'reflect' suggests conscious thought, so I'll drop that. How do you define 'self-referencing' and 'self-reflective'? No you're right, that is a version of self referencing, but a very primitive version, which really is no more than simple feedback mechanisms. Self reflective, no problems there with your definition. What I meant by self-referencing in this context would mean that the computer would have to be truly autonomous, ie ...they would be producing themselves I don't see why simply 'eating', 'disgesting', building and destroying 'cells' (or whatever), and 'excreting' would require awareness, much less explain it. I can see where 'strategy' might be required, but I think that is different. Any autonomous system is completely circular, the components that it produces are the system itself tyhat produces the components, ie it's a bootstrap system. You could specify a boundary and internal mechanisms, without a boundary no separation for the organism as a seperate identity. Without the components, just a skin, but the two are products of each other they are not sequential, but simultaneous. The circularity of living systems and their autonomy has to come before anything else in a definition of what constitutes a living being. No offspring, no future, without the first autonomous organism. Organisms cannot be seen as objective, they are truly subjective, to any organism. Any organism that is unable to produce offspring is still recognizably a living being, because of it's autonomy. Once you accept this, that the organism is operating within a state of operational closure, and that its experience of itself is itself, you are automatically describing a form of simple consciousness. From single cell operational closures which interact with other simple closed systems in a recurrent nature over time & when you then throw in a nervous system which is increasingly complex and allows higher level self reflexiveness, the degree of consciousness of its own experience takes on higher levels. You thus have a definition whereby as the complexity increases so does the degree of consciousness of it’s own experience of being. Along with this increasing complexity you have a more adaptable, flexible system such as would be needed for reproduction purposes. In the way that young infants crudely put, are limited in their ability to produce complex behaviour, in the way that an adolescent can, where awareness of wider possibilities in terms of coupling the self with other adolescents,etc ie variability of behaviours. In other words what was once an infant, a consciousness that is much more self absorbed, and seeing its experience almost purely in terms of perturbations of its internal states, adolescents are becoming aware that other people are not just perturbations to be absorbed, but perturbations that need more awareness for stability sake, if nothing else. So even those perturbations are becoming increasingly complex, requiring greater subtlety of approach. And since the roots of consciousness are built into our system as human beings, the closer we get to full development, the greater the consciousness, and through the complexity of those interactions, more self aware. But since each individual is going through the same experience, and interactions are a biological imperative for humans there has to be some way of bridging that gap of our own worldness, in the same way that someone who is self absorbed beyond the norm has more difficulties communicating, the variety of possibilities is reduced. So from being islands, as jefferson airplane stated, no man is an island, he’s a peninsula. Different forms of communication bridge that gap, and as the complexity of that bridging mechanism happens, so the number of possibilities increases, where variety and adaptability increase stability, even though intrinsically we are still in our own worlds under a state of operational closure. When language develops to a point that you have another level of self reflexiveness, so does our level of self awareness. Only from gorillas up do you get self awareness to a level whereby seeing themselves in a mirror very quickly they realize it is a reflection of themselves, but their ability to generate language complexity is limited compared to ours. Well hopefully this has been worthwhile!! Thanx for the discussion g and to add a light note to finish, below is what I got when doing a search on qualia! Amusing or what! S ociety and Culture > Magazines Qualia-Net - a grain of sand in the foreskin of the nation. Business and Economy > Shopping and Services > Sex > Speciality > BDSM Qualia-Net Sexual Explorer - leather products, restraint gear, videos and more. Eurasia Video Service of America - offers hard-to-find horror, gore, sex, bondage, and S&M videos imported from Asia and Europe. http://qualia-net.com/film/eurasia/ Leather Dungeon http://members.qualia-net.com/WWW.MIDIAN-NET.COM/ Arts > Humanities > Philosophy > Philosophy of Mind Chalmers' Philosophy of Mind Bib - consciousness and qualia, mental content, psychophysical relations and psychological explanation, philosophy of artificial intelligence, and miscellaneous topics. Brent E. Silby Essays - offers essays on higher order thought, phenomenal consciousness, qualia, and Brentano's intentionality. Society and Culture > Sexuality > Activities and Practises > BDSM > Gor > Personal Experience Sir Midian's Leather Dungeon - fan fiction. http://members.qualia-net.com/WWW.MIDIAN-NET.COM/gorean.htm The Tree of Knowledge by Maturana/Varela is the most detailed and accessible version of this I know, the closest to a bible/sacred text that I have now, but all of this fits with the basic 2nd order cybernetics/constructivist position ! have a good 1 ham

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:53:11 (GMT) From: Stonor Email: None To: hamzen and FA Subject: Is it me, ham or FV? - no message above (nt) Message:

Is it me, ham or FV - no message (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:40:14 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Stonor Subject: Sod it, nothing showing on mine either,g (FA help) Message:

don't think I can rewrite tonight, must hit the deck, back tomorrow, how can this happen?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:41:59 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Twuly bizarre, it's back up again now (nt) Message:

a

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:06:19 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: G Subject: 2nd order cybernetics Message:

Yes G , you are able to explain what I essentially believe in ways that I cannot. I enjoy that. Also I would never say that there is no connection between consciousness and brain. Is there a relationship between a horse and a jockey? Yes, but only when the jockey is actually riding the horse. Or?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:23:46 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences Message:

Dear ham, Hi, I write to an ex that came here last summer and she has done quite a bit of reasearch on how emotional traumas do change brain chemistry. I know that isn't exactly what you are asking but I can write and ask her more about it if you think it may relate. I thought it was facinating when she told me about it originally. Let me know. You know what I have been thinking about the god issue and it seems so logical to me that humans made it up to explain universal human feelings but still I can understand how people can feel that this is surely god. It is how we are raised, conditioned and they are such powerful experiences and often we as human beings are filled with doubts and insecurities about our own power and effectiveness in our lives and in our impact on the world so these strong feelings must not come from us. Maybe? :) Love, Robyn the scientist's assistant :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:32:27 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Bio-feedback/placebo effects/'spirit' experiences Message:

Hello oh gorgeous one, Would be VERY interested in the results from your friend, but not just brain effects, effects on the whole system physiologically. I do understand the possible reasons why people project the way they do, but considering our backgrounds of self-delusion around gm/spirituality find it incredible that anyone could be so sure, that's why I threw in the comment about the magnet experiences. Possible belief yes, but certainty? And to take that stance here I find an emotionally provocative & insensitive stance, especially to do it with so much certainty. It's basically saying 'I'm so emotionally needing this that I'm prepared to provoke people, but so what', that is why I find Keith's position so aggressive. When he first returned I thought he was a bit morew humble this time, but no, same old same old, just under nicer clothes. Also, even when I had strong beliefs I loved being challenged because if you're committed to truth it means something, not just another form of personal choice and consumption, especially not when you flaunt it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 00:12:49 (GMT) From: Keith the aggressive. Email: None To: ham and all you dear ones Subject: I just ham it up sometimes. Message:

Could it be that I respond to aggressiveness and rudeness with sarcasm. I have little devils in my eyes. YES. But I'm a gentle , kind old bugger too. Crazy, just crazy for you. Don't we all need the humour in what is such a serious forum?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:33:43 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith the aggressive. Subject: If only you did around this topic! Message:

Could it be that I respond to aggressiveness and rudeness with sarcasm. I have little devils in my eyes. YES. But I'm a gentle , kind old bugger too. Crazy, just crazy for you. Don't we all need the humour in what is such a serious forum? Why, if you are so certain about this 'spiritual' truth, which I presume carries a least a little bit of special love with it, wouldn't you respond with 'loving detachment'? Not being picky, but where have you displayed any hum our in our communications? Can't you also concede that your spiritual 'certainty' in the context of this site, which after all is not a new-age boot camp, might be perceived as VERY provocative?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 03:51:20 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: hamzen Subject: choose your box please. Message:

Error number one; you assume you know what I believe. Error number two; you do not ask me the type of questions that would enable you to understand my position more accurately. At least allow me to choose my own box, please. See, I could follow your example and assume all sorts of nasty things about you, hamzen, based on the posts I've read from you. But I'll avoid the temptation. Really do you know what I really think about spiritual matters? Don't listen to people like Jim. He is not a good model of balanced thinking. Are you? I'll tell you something. We would not agree anyway. But we might learn how to respect each others views. Or do you only respect those who agree with you ? As with some others here? Where do you stand? Hamzen?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:31:15 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Keith Subject: choose your box please. Message:

Dear Keith, I really should read more of what you write as I never have because you use to be in this long and viscious threads and now I just don't have the time. I should be out in the sun right now! :) I would like to know how you feel spiritually without having to read all the threads you started or participate in and keep wanting to email you but haven't again after that one was returned which was because it had the wrong extention, com/net whatever. Anyway I will either email you and hope you let me know or maybe you could write something here. I do realise that is probably over the top self centered of me though so don't feel you have to oblige me. I just know that I have always sensed a kind gentleness about you and that is why I have a kind, gentle feeling toward you. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:23:31 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Keith's spirituality. Message:

Hi Robyn, As I'm sure you realse yourself talking about 'spirituality' is fraught with difficulties. In fact talking about anything that is intangible is problematic. It's akin to you 'sensing' that there's a kind gentleness about me. A sceptic might ask, 'how do you that?' Well, you don't know. Likewise, I don't think I've said I know 'God' exists. In fact I rarely use the word God except 'lightly, as in my story for sci-fi fans. Some people assume so much based on so little about each other. I rarely even use the word 'Spiritual'. What I do do, is to express myself in various ways. For me, life is fluid. I like a very broad selection of music. I am the same with literature. I think 'eclectic' is the term. Philosophically I am the same. And my taste in the esoteric realms likewise. Even my interest in the sciences spans many disciplines. Hamzen thinks 'I'm so certain' because I obviously believe in 'something' beyond the materialistic and athiestic view he has. Do I believe that 'love' is more than a neurological, chemical experience? Yes I do. Am I certain? Yes. Have I researched this? Yes I have. How? Inwardly. Do I experience a magnet? Yes. Also. I am a biological and chemical network. But I'm something more too. There is another type of magnet too, IMHO. The words to descibe this 'other magnet' can vary. We are not dealing here with a need to be precise , as in the exact sciences. Poetry is often not precise. Art and music neither. One 'senses' the underlying message or 'truth'. I feel that to understand my position one would have to get to know me. No one has to do that. One way of doing that would be to read a lot of my posts. And sense where I'm coming from. As indeed , like you, I sense things about you and others too. I sense Robyn that you are simular to me in some ways. You are open minded. But unlike me you don't have the stomach to enter into the kind of 'dialogues' that I do. This time round though, I am more inclined to debate only with those who I 'sense' have some respect for those who's views differ from their own. And who are not downright abusive. My final word here is , I do not have a 'particular spiritual' position. I am non-aligned. For me, that 'power' whatever or however one chooses to refer to it as, is a reality. Full stop.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:49:16 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith Subject: I am neither a materialist nor an atheist Message:

I also believe you're certain because of direct quotes you've made over the last few days, not because of my belief systems. I do notice though that you're prepared to talk about me to others in a public arena, but not with me, I was brought up to see that as bloody rude, and a touch insensitive for someone who is a self-proclaimed 'spiritual' person! I would also add that I never said the experiences were purely chemical, experiences are experienced by someone, not in some materialist vacuum. How can you be so certain that your conceptual definitions of your experiences are accurate?? I genuinely would love to know.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:34:19 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Keith's spirituality. Message:

Robyn, one other thing. I have never said , 'I believe in God'. God is a religiously loaded term. Words are so connatative. I like the way some American Indian cultures expressed their experience. They called this 'power' 'the great mystery'. The only question I would ask someone is 'do you sense this great mystery?' Do you 'experience' it? Ex-spiritual people simply are prone to go to the other extreme. All their 'experiences' become scientifically explainable. A position I feel is very limited and very incomplete.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:08:04 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Keith Subject: Keith's spirituality, my comments on the same Message:

Dear Keith, Thank you for indulging me. I agree with the things you've said in these posts. I also think you misunderstand hamzen but that is between the two of you. You do sound like you would be a perfect one for membership in 'Robynism' :). Funny but I was discussing the same on AG and have just come to use that term but it was 'coined' by Sir Dave. I agree the term spiritual is also loaded and in some ways it seems to not fit my meaning but for now it is the best term I can think of because although I question even the existance of a god and that those 'spiritual' feelings, visions, and other sensory phenomina are just common experiences for all humans, they are extraordinary in that when you give them value they can be very expanding, also for the lack of a better term. Hard to use words to describe these feelings, eh? So if you need my address to send your donation for membership to 'Robynism' just let me know. :) Teasing, but then I know you know that. Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 12:04:33 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith Subject: choose your box please. Message:

Except for the real. But the real needs to align with all the other 'finite' realms. It wasn't me that said this, you want me to go through all your posts recently, pointing out quotes of yours that are based on this certainty? I haven't got a fucking clue what you believe, I just read what you write yourself, and you seem certain there's a spiritual realm, and that god is for real. In this territotry how can anyone be 'certain'? Say you were experiencing something magical, how could you rely on any interpretation of it with certainty? As for error no.2, right, you're allowed this but what about me? The questions I ask are the ones I would like answered, am I allowed my box? I don't give a toss whether you make assumptions about me or not, what interests me is whether your assumptions are coherent and based upon what I've said, basic stuff in communication really! In my experience Jim is a lot more coherent in his arguments than you are because he has at least got research that hints at his position, even if there are greyer areas where I would leave question marks where Jim might not. In my experience he is way more balanced than you. Also I don't have this obsession about Jim that you have, for me he's just another person here with satrong and cogently argued ideas, and there's little that I've seen in his posts that have altered my stance ever, except for when I wasd first here when he was right about premie responses and I was wrong. I respect peple who eitrher have the weight of evidence behind them, or if they haven't, at least suspend their certainty. So again, how can you be so certain about your 'etheric' interpretations when there is research that magnets around the brain can produce 'god'/'cosmic consciousness' experiences? Are you sure you know where I'm coming from?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 14:26:33 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: hamzen Subject: choose your box please. Message:

I WANT A MAGNET!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 15:53:20 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Robyn Subject: me too! Message:

Give me that magnet!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:53:29 (GMT) From: Keith the incoherent. Email: None To: Hamzen Subject: God magnets. Message:

I could get into a 'debate' but I doubt it. I'm happy to just leave it. You can write and assume anything you like. I don't really have the 'heart' to continue. But I do think that God magnets could be mighty profitable. Don't worry, be happy!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 22:38:26 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith the incoherent. Subject: Is your committment to truth really that Message:

superficial? If so why bother posting provacative posts? What's thew point if you're only interested in spaeaking to people who agree with you? I would still like to know how you can be so certain your interpretations are true, especially in the lihght of the magnet/g force research. By the way I'm an agnostic not an atheist, so who's making the assumptions!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:42:04 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Is your committment to truth really that Message:

Ok. Hamzen, my offhanded response to you is largely to do with the rudeness that I've experienced from you. So if you are willing to say sorry for your rudeness and assumptiveness then so am I? Can I direct you to a new post that should be above(new thread) in a short while. I'll call it 'Ten questions'. I'd be interested in your responses.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:38:08 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith Subject: Except that Message:

even IF I cut out the slightly aggressive tone, you will still be posting about your 'spiritual certainty', which I find, especvially in the context of this site, at least as aggressive as you find me, if not more so.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:52:55 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: hamzen Subject: Except that Message:

9) Why do some 'non believers' balk at the air of certaintity surrounding 'believers' when they themselves have the 'air' of certaintity themselves(regarding their own views)? The above ,culled from my 10 questions goes some way to responding to your post. Is it not ineviatable that we and contributors to this forum in general are going to rub each other painfully. But aggressively? I don't believe it would need to be that way. You feel aggressive when reading posts that posit spiritual certainties? Why? Look in the final analysis I am certain about nothing. Not through thought. Thought, ideas are limited. This is tricky. Because how can certaintity if there one be acknowledged without thought. I agree. Thought and 'something else' co-exist is my response. The limited acknowledges the unlimited. Not through thought. How then? Empty oneself of thought and face the music. Do it. Don't think about it. It's like a big bang! Or a gentle 'aha'! IMHO.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 03:57:10 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Keith Subject: If you're not certain, then don't make statements Message:

that say you are, I don't give a monkeys what you or anyone else believes, spiritual systems bore me to tears, but I've seen too many quotes from you that contradict your statement DIRECTLY, an 'air' of certainty, ie belief I have no problem with, but when you say you know for definite don't moan if I ask for proof, or challenge you, and I would expect the same back, otherwise this is all just hot air and wanking in public for the sake of self exposure, ie posing. And lastly, if this 'unlimited' can't be described, then you use an awful lot of words trying to describe the indescribable, which as I said yesterday, looks like so much spiritual wank/hot air.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:56:22 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Hamzen Subject: correction Message:

Sorry.'Because how can certaintity if there one be acknowledged without thought.' Should read 'Because how can certaintity ,if there is one, be acknowledged without thought?'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:34:24 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Hey, what's with the spam? Message:

Someone's apparently submitting my name to this page and that so I can get spammed to death. And it's seems to somehow derive from here. Here, let me show you a sample: Title: Ex-premie.org URL: http://www.ex-premie.org Section: Entertainment Submitted by: heller@bc1.com Hello: Thank you for requesting this information. Let me get right to the point. You requested this information because you want to make extra money. The info you are about to read will show you: - How to create a lifetime residual income stream!!... - How to get paid just for referring people to great VALUES!!... - How to profit from the technology revolution!!... - How to receive FREE step-by-step Internet training!!... - How to get YOUR piece of the E-Commerce goldmine!!... AND..... do it ALL FOR FREE !!.... NO COST to you EVER !! [Then there's a whole lot more of this sales pitch which I've deleted.] Please contact me if you have any questions at all. Thank you very much for your interest. $hop & $hare, Dave Brandon ID# DB20289 For More Info. on the business plan, http://vcoop.cjb.net My Shopping Portal is at, http://shoppingmall.cjb.net (Take A L@@K) Anyone have any ideas what and how to deal with this?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 19:14:43 (GMT) From: Ben Lurking Email: benlurken@aol.com To: Jim Subject: Hey, what's with the spam? Message:

A) do not respond to it as it only vailates your email address B) get a filter (try eudora or eudora lite as a free mail client www.eudora.com) C) Have your ISP block certain IP's D) Have your isp report it. From practical experience I was part of a group targeted by a significantly more devious hacker and when we turned it over to the FBI with all the logs they basically didn't have time to follow up. To many pedophiles and crooks to deal with 'annoyance crime'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:03:47 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Ben Lurking and Jim Subject: I get those spams a lot Message:

Never got one originating from here, but Ben Lurking has exactly the right advice. it worked for me every time. In fact, usually just not responding works. and BTW, I know you know Jim that I have been experimenting with proxy software but I want to assure you I didn't post the one post that is upsetting you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:42:48 (GMT) From: hamzen Email: None To: Jim Subject: Use alias and seperate e-mail add when here!(nt) Message:

a

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 20:06:20 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: hamzen Subject: good good point I sometimes wish I had Message:

Originally when I came here I was so mad at the premies in my community I WANTED them to know I was posting and read what I had to say, and read the responses and support I received. Now though, after many computing hassles as a result, I'm thinking you are wise.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 23:02:43 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: Selene Subject: Sensibly paranoid maybe, but wise, I doubt it! Message:

My worry for Jim, especially in view of his direct challenges, was that something like this was bound to happen, what astonishes me is that it took so long. As we know, premies are not the most stable people when it comes to rationality, especially when joined to a hacker mentality, especially since it is painfully obvious to anyone with half a brain that the ship is sinking, and not even slowly any more. I think it's so funny the way he's now trying to get them to propagate again. How are they going to do it, when they've been self censoring for so long that they have no language left except a few keywords, and with absolutely no spontaneity about it all at all. Who is ever going to be interested in what a self-censoring zombie has to say about life???? But thewn desperation plus an enormous ego has always meant that prawat was never the brightest person around, highly amusing little soap opera or what!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 04:51:22 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: ham Subject: exactly ham, this is what questions me Message:

what astonishes me is that it took so long. oh well. I am happily off work finally. long long friday the usual make up for my get in late every morning. have a good mix-it-up. love you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:14:56 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: MY MOST IMPORTANT POST EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Message:

This was on ELK. Check out the bold. I honestly think the Lord might pull it off this time. Oh mercy me, my heart is breaking! Lordy, Lordy, Lordy! And to think that we all might have had something to do with getting his fat ass into gear and really saving this world instead of just fucking his mistress, etc. I am so proud. Was it the MRC letter? Hell, was it any of a number of funny little things we said about his alcoholism, venality and general corruption? Or maybe it wasn't us at all and this is jut a wonderful lila. Well, whatever it was, whether we can claim credit or not, the fact is that the Lord is on the move again! Yipeee!! **************************************************************** Maharaji in Boston More reports can be found in 'Around the Planet' - click on the side bar. Heartfelt thoughts from attending the Boston event The 12 June Event: a report by Janice Wilson Thank you Maharaji, as you said at this event you have always given us your best, no matter what has been going on ... I feel I am the most fortunate of human beings, I am learning to put my heart first and accept the gift of Knowledge in my life everyday. Where there is a will and a heart, there is a way, to make this experience real every day in my life. Listening, practicing, participating, enjoying grabbing as much as I can. You encourage me, for my time here is short and sweet. ('This life is only a two day festival.' Shri Maharaj Ji.) Seeing your example, I also can reach inside my heart and learn to give my best in service to the greatest opportunity available to a human being. Gratitude is a great way to be living, centered in the heart of this feeling. The possibilities are truly endless as you say. You have shown me once again there is no limit. Please let me not make one. I am extremely grateful to be a part of this magic. Every day I get to 'wake up' in the world of the heart and enjoy the surprises it brings. More and more I learn the rhythm of this inner dance, and I can only rejoice and invite other interested people to also come and listen to your message: the greatest music ever written, the music of the heart! It is a lot of fun to experience it and a lot of fun to invite other people to join the dance of the heart ! I want to keep taking every opportunity I can every day to let my heart bloom! The level of clarity and precision at which you work is awesome. Auto-Knowledge will go around the world, a gift to those hearts that are open and ready to receive this most priceless gift of Knowledge and you in their lives. ================ Good news Also from Janice Good news everyone! Maharaji said in Boston that this time everyone with Knowledge 'will be included' in this wave of love, of propagation that is about to wash over this planet. What a great time to be alive! ================ Refreshed My name is Jeyam from Boston, USA I was recently helping out with the arrangements for Maharaji's coming to Boston. I would like to share some of my experience I felt during this program. It was so nice to practice in the hall and I felt like: ' Yes, I am refreshed. ' Maharaji was asking everyone to tell people about Knowledge. Since I feel the benefit of Knowledge and Maharaji in my life through the experience , I decided to introduce Knowledge and Maharaji to other people more actively. During the event, Maharaji said several times: 'Let go, you are home.' I thought about this. Who else but Maharaji could assure me of this. Can I let go? Of course. Yes. Have I ever let go? Yes I have. Have I experienced what Maharaji is saying. Yes, of course I have. Is it painful to let go? For me, no. If I am in the right place practising Knowledge, then a sweet feeling overwhelms me when I let go. The only thing I want to ask Maharaji is to keep on teaching me how to stay in this bliss. I learnt a lot participating in this program and I felt I am so fortunate to be a part of it. What I remember is that heaven is right here, not there. I would like to thank Maharaji for giving me this wonderful gift and I am looking forward to helping out more in any which way I can.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:34:31 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: Auto_Knowledge? Message:

Auto-Knowledge will go around the world, a gift to those hearts that are open and ready to receive this most priceless gift of Knowledge and you in their lives. What's auto-knowledge? You receive knowledge automatically when you're born? What better way for the lord to reveal himself, eh? Or maybe it's knowledge that only the prettier premies receive in the back seat of M's auto. Anybody know? What the fuh is auto-knowledge??? Good news everyone! Maharaji said in Boston that this time everyone with Knowledge 'will be included' in this wave of love, of propagation that is about to wash over this planet. What a great time to be alive! Oh, man! Joy of joys! I'm going back. All thos 'fuck the fat man' curses and stuff I said. I take them back. I didn't mean a word of it. This is fantastic, absolutely mind boggling incredulous! His love is going to 'wash over the planet'? Oh, joy! This is what we've been waiting for! Repent all ex-premies! Be saved! The time of reckoning is at hand!! It was so nice to practice in the hall and I felt like: ' Yes, I am refreshed. This guy's funny. Yes, good to the last drop. How refreshing. Hasn't this guy heard? He's practicing the knowledge of knowledges which reveals the greatest love ever possible to be known by man, and this guy says 'Yes, I am refreshed'. Kinda laid back there, ain't ya, Jeyam from Boston? What I remember is that heaven is right here, not there. And the jokes just keep coming. This guy's great with one liners, ain't he? I would like to thank Maharaji for giving me this wonderful gift and I am looking forward to helping out more in any which way I can. Just send in a check, Jeyam. I'm sure M will agree it's the greatest service anyone's ever done.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 01:28:16 (GMT) From: (Sir) David Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Auto_Knowledge? Message:

'priceless gift of Knowledge and you' So Maharaji is a gift, now. No, Maharaji is the only gift and a strange one at that. How many gifts do you never see and have to send them money? Knowledge isn't a gift. 'Maharaji said in Boston that this time everyone with Knowledge 'will be included' in this wave of love, of propagation that is about to wash over this planet. What a great time to be alive!' Call it deja vu if you like but I somehow feel like I've heard this before. And before and before and before...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 04:04:44 (GMT) From: A premie told me today Email: None To: Jim Subject: Not even a leaf moves without Maharaji's will.... Message:

...and yes, for him, Maharaji is still the Lord of The Universe...bigger than God, because he shows you God...and how important it's to be clear... and alone... because the world is 'too complicated'...bla bla bla....And why I am confused....bal bla...bla.... I think I lost my job today...I couldn't stop myself any longer from laughing!! That is what I did when he stopped describing his feelings toward maharaji: I began to laugh so hard that didn't need to say a word...Oh well, time to move on... Jim, thanks for the laughs I always get when reading this garbage! SB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:23:35 (GMT) From: ham Email: None To: Jim Subject: Don't get too excited until Message:

you find out that your photo has been taken off the restricted list for events, but of course if that doesn't happen we know it won't be his fault, but the premies!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:04:03 (GMT) From: sam Email: - To: Everyone Subject: old days, old ways Message:

I've spent some time this week reading ild divine times and golden age from '74-79period. (it takes as much energy to ezit this cult as to join) I was surprised that premies wrote about such a strong experience in old days. I also had a lot more exp. in '70s than'90s. regardless of effort- I wonder why? Was it group hype? The effect of M's claims in earlier days(god, disciples, etc), or was it too early days to be disillusioned? I dont see that intensity today even in the most devoted. Strange to read mags from that era- check it out if you have any- its almost embarrassing- all surrender your life to gmj and ignore your mind and your thoughts. It was so cultlike I couldnt believe it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:47:07 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: sam Subject: old days, old ways Message:

I didn't believe, in the seventies, that M was God in human form. But I did believe he was my SuperGuru. Pretty much like a god. Watching over me, controlling the events of my life. If you believe that, believe me, you will have visions, dream, synchronicities etc. It's all in what you believe. Nothing at all to do with the nature of the Person who you believe in.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 22:48:08 (GMT) From: Roger eDrek Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Attention Joey and others - I am not Roger Drek Message:

It would appear that someone is using a name similar to mine, but we are not related. I am Roger eDrek, not Roger Drek. The distinction is eDrek. Joey, please re-address your comments to me, Roger eDrek, if your comments were to me and not the other Roger as in Roger Drek. Ok, glad we've got that cleared up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 11:43:28 (GMT) From: Forum Administrator Email: None To: Roger eDrek Subject: I am not Roger Drek Message:

Hi Roger (and Kate), the person who used 'Roger Drek' has been causing a nusiance, posting under a variety of names, including Lazune, Gene Ackman, Underdog, Webbi Ji, Fetch, Pierre Masimajean, Annie, and Dettmers Inner Cash. I've kicked off the threads started by this idiot, and weeded out most of the posts. He or she is no longer welcome here. Forum Admin.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 13:37:53 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: Forum Administrator Subject: Thanks, FA Message:

Even if Roger doesn't mind, I do! And I really cannot stand it when someone posts long threads using different names - in other words, answering themselves. Appreciate it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 00:26:43 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: Roger eDrek Subject: You should complain to the FA, Roger Message:

In the past week someone has used Jim's, Selene's, and now your name as a so-called 'alias'. IMHO this is confusing, irritating, and extremely dishonest.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 01:01:27 (GMT) From: Roger eDrek Email: None To: Katie Subject: Actually, I think it's nice Message:

to show everyone that I have some humility and that I can freely allow the other Roger Drek to receive the warm appreciation of some of my fans. I love you all! I am doing it right now for you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:17:51 (GMT) From: The Real Roger eDrek Email: None To: Roger eDrek Subject: Funny thing about that Peanut Gallery Message:

Me thinks the compliments I'm being paid are from my Scotish fiend, Rob McFakem. Seems if I pay him any mention he always comes back in spades. Is it just me or does it seem that Rob is trying to make a comeback here at the big Forum? I see his name and I also read stuff that sounds a lot like him. Nah, I'm just paranoid.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 06:15:18 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: The Real Roger eDrek Subject: no I don't think you are! nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 19:07:33 (GMT) From: jondon Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Premies are all back from the Boston Event... Message:

and practicing their meditation daily. Telling me how much they missed it, but needed M to come by and remind them that it really isn't the same without him how M is so funny and does the entire event right off the top of his head, no rehearsal. They are going to videos 2-3 times a week. This should hold for about a month, I expect. I told them I found the LOTU tape and learned the techniques and would be practicing myself but I have to work and the Red Sox games are on when I get a chance to relax and I think watching a Red Sox game gives me that spiritual relaxation better than sitting in the corner for an hour. Now they want to watch LOTU and tell me that you can't do the techniques correctly without M and that thirst for K. I told them that when I am watching a Sox game, I have that thirst for K....a Kold one from the fridge. We're gonna watch LOTU this weekend. I'm making the popcorn. I told em it was very intense. It has gotten my curiosity back up about Maharaji and has in fact made me remorseful for my lack of respect for him as of late. I told them that I did not know he was such a powerful being. Have not, however, told them that this tape is available in the COMEDY section at Amazon.com. Well, M is on his way to Montreal or Toronto I guess. To all of you Canadian Friends: the ball is in your court...TRANSLATION: THE PUCK IS IN YOUR ICE

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 21:31:52 (GMT) From: cy Email: None To: jondon Subject: Premies are all back from the Boston Event... Message:

jondon likes to talk a lot... a lot...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:08:56 (GMT) From: Observer 500 Email: None To: cy Subject: Premies are all back from the Boston Event... Message:

and you are a moron, right? Not even a leaf moves without Maharaji: He opened your mouth?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:58:27 (GMT) From: jondon Email: None To: Observer 500, cy Subject: O 500 cy fy nt Message:

fy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 18:42:54 (GMT) From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: 10 reasons why I do not hate Maharaji. Message:

1) There is no reason to hate him. 2) Hate is an emotion that is like a cancer. 3) I take responsibility for all choices I've made in my life. 4) No one is perfect. Quote ; 'let he (or she) throw the first stone who has not sinned?' Replace sinned with erred if you like. 5) Maharaji has influenced people variously. It is so subjectively blinkered to assume that anyone person's or group's experience can act as a definitive 'benchmark' to explain away the value of Maharaji's influence. 6) Even if I felt that someone was largely responsible for influencing my life in very negative ways, as I realise some feel here, I would choose to not hold onto the hate. I would somehow work through it. I have not had to work through that. Not with anyone. But that doesn't mean I'm oblivious to the sufferings of those who have reasons to feel hate. If I or my loved ones had suffered greately at the hands of someone to a degree that I felt hate ,I would hope to get free of that emotion. I would get therapy. 7) I don't believe that Maharaji's shortcomings equal to such emotions as hate. I am not assuming that anyone does hate Maharaji. I am suspecting that some do. It 'feels' like some do. 8) I personally do not hate Maharaji because my own subjective experiences were that his influence on me was more positive than negative. I simply outgrew the need to be associated with him. 9) I do not hold Maharaji solely responsible for the experiences or actions of anyone else. His grace does not run through premies like a current. Nor does any other energy. He did not physically control people. Did he? He didn't send people to the gas chambers. He didn't put a gun to anyones head. To say he played God and one felt unable to say no to his dictates is a weak argument from many points of view. How did or does anyone ever free themselves from someone playing God if they never had a choice in the first place? I never perceived Maharaji as God. And in my time as a premie i never heard him say or even hint that he was God. Only that the divinity was within everyone or words to that effect. 10) I could , and would if asked, criticise Maharaji. I disagree with many of his past decisions. I feel he has played the game unwisely in many respects. I perceive him as someone who has been too weak to be as honest as he could have chosen to be. Too weak might translate as too greedy, too dishonest, too power hungry, too inflated, too tyrannical, too righteous. But no criticism I could make equals a reason to hate him. At least this listing has enabled me to express a bit more where I stand in relation to Maharaji.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 11:15:33 (GMT) From: SHHHHHH Email: None To: Keith Subject: SHHHHH nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 19:41:53 (GMT) From: Elaine Email: None To: Keith Subject: BTW,ditto...needless to say. (nt) Message:

OM

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 17:43:28 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Watch out Elan Vital - especially in France! Message:

Watch out Elan Vital - especially in France! (... and just remember who and what you're representing when you post here, Han.) from yesterday's Guardian (at http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4029083,00.html) FRANCE TO CRACK DOWN ON SECTS Paul Webster in Paris Wednesday June 14, 2000 France is to defy President Bill Clinton's appeal to be more tolerant of religious sects and introduce draconian laws, including an offence of 'mental manipulation' - brainwashing - which will carry a two-year prison sentence. President Jacques Chirac has told Mr Clinton that religious freedom will no longer be a subject for bilateral presidential talks, in the light of what has been officially described as 'shocking' White House support for Scientologists and Moonies. The French government has also complained that Congress's introduction of laws protecting religious freedom internationally is 'an unacceptable intrusion into internal affairs'. The chairman of a French ministerial mission to combat the influence of cults, Alain Vivien, said many observers believed that Mr Clinton was making his peace with big religious movements 'because they offer an indispensable source of political financing'. The French senate has approved legislation reinforcing the right of victims to take action against marginal religious groups.The national assembly plans to toughen the measure even further when it debates it on June 22. MPs on both the left and the right are expected to vote in favour of authorising the courts to forcibly dissolve sects after two complaints, and to forbid them operating in the neighbourhood of schools, hospitals and rest homes. They intend to make such movements responsible for acts considered to be a provocation to suicide or incitement to abandon families. France's war against mainly American-sponsored movements, including the Jehovah's Witnesses, has been running for at least 20 years. It has prompted the accusation, particularly by Scientologists, that it is indulging in 'collective hysteria' and preparing to ban religious freedoms. Mr Vivien denied that France was acting alone, claiming that Germany was leading the battle, with strong support from Belgium, the first country to produce a legal definition of a sect. 'The United States position is less and less understood in Europe,' he said. 'No one can forbid us to take action against sects in the interests of human rights. This point of view is particularly absurd when these movements flout the most elementary rights.' He claimed that, headed by Scientologists, sects were infiltrating UN and European human rights associations, financing some of their work, and collaborating on reports that condemned France 'with virulence'. (copyright Guardian Unlimited)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 20:31:19 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: cq Subject: Very interesting... Message:

But according to this article, it seems that it is cults that have originated in the states that are being targeted, not cults in general. It sounds like 'Yankee go home!' This isn't necessarilly a bad thing. I wish there was a nice dose of anti eastern cult sentiment in my own country, whereby all these fucking gurus and their bullshit, outdated, backwards, ideologies would get the fuck out of America and go back where they came from. Am I being prejudiced? Too fucking bad if I am. Enough is enough. The only reason these fuckers came to the states, in the first place, was to get rich. They did so by infesting our minds with their horseshit about being our saviors from the east, come to free the west from our materialistic ways, and inject us with a much needed dose of spiritualism. But seriously, folks. What's really happenning, eh? These peckerheads are indulging in the very same materialistic pursuits they preach against, while calling upon their devotees to lead lives of abstinence and sacrifice that they, themselves, never exemplify. Fuck all of them. I'm glad France is taking it's stance. I hope the US wakes up and follows suit someday, as well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:16:17 (GMT) From: sam Email: - To: Jerry Subject: Very interesting... Message:

just been reading some old divine times and golden age and they supported your opinion. M did very nicely by coming to west and there were comments from early prems saying it was strange to sit there having satsang and hear the lord watching television upstairs. His lack of practice what you preach hasn't changed. A big double standard and he changes the rules to suit himself.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 18:37:41 (GMT) From: Joey Email: None To: cq Subject: Vive la France!!!! Message:

Thank you CQ for this excellent submission! It's even given me an idea or two. All the best, Joey

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 17:29:24 (GMT) From: thin mann Email: None To: Everyone Subject: short stories altmannm ? Message:

i remember many years ago we was told that maharaji had a ulster, we all wondered in silence ,why did he get an ulster? he is the perfeckt master,nothing in this world can tuch him ,butno it was rigth he was now a litle sick but sure he is allright in a day or two......and the story why he got the ulster was something like this : HE HAD BEEN EATING AN ATOMIC BOMB TO SAVE THE WORLD. THAT was the story that was going around here. When i think of this i think it is both funny and so sad that we were so into it, does any of you remember this story ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 23:02:02 (GMT) From: Loaf Email: None To: thin mann Subject: Ulster has always been a problem Message:

Sorry to read about M's ulster. They have had one for years in Northern Ireland..., and its not been easy. Loaf

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 23:08:36 (GMT) From: Ian Paisley Email: None To: Gerry Adams Subject: Ulster has always been a problem Message:

Wot's all this about an 'M' in Ulster. You mean there's more than one. Blood and Thunder.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 17:22:53 (GMT) From: Gerry Adams Email: None To: Ian Paisley Subject: You mean the 'amster's ulster??? (nt) Message:

You mean the 'amster's ulster??? (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index