2005 July

Yes, I would normally have tended to trust Moveon.org more. I have
traditionally been less likely to trust any news source funded by the
M-I complex, no matter who they use as a mouthpiece. Their vested
interests and motives have generally appeared to be just too contrary
to the survival of the species in any sane manner for me to lend them
much credibility. :-)

Now, however, I am more likely to use *all* “news,” regardless of the
source, as a story and a reflection of Self, and pay attention to the
responses in body-mind accordingly. It’s been a far more enjoyable and fruitful approach for me :-)

………………………………………

One could reply that Karl Rove is obviously pulling a sleight-of-
hand maneuver, creating a straw-dog “liberal pansy” to heap scorn on
and distract one from the facts: 1) Something stinks about the
government version of 9/11 itself, and 2) Iraq had nothing to do
with 9/11 and had no Al Qaeda blocs there — although it certainly
does now :-)

But this, too, is just another story of course :-)

…Oh, 9/11 was a crime and a calculated act of war all right. It would
simply appear that much of our country just happens to be in massive
denial about who the true criminals and aggressors were.

Similarly, I think it is a great idea for those inclined to fight
for freedom and democracy to go for it. One could argue that they
perhaps would be well advised to begin at home; maybe restoring
civil liberties and honest, democratic national elections would be a
good place to start. Before that, a national news-medium *not*
completely in the pockets of Big Business would probably help stem
the US’s apparent rush towards fascism.

On the other hand, the USA does have a massive addiction to foreign
oil; Iraq is a nice juicy source for our addiction; an addict will
say and do *anything* to keep his fix coming, and say and do
*anything* to avoid cleaning up his act. This is probably the best
model I have found yet to “explain” what is going on “out there”…
but again, it’s just a nice story :-)

………………………………………

I have no more time to waste on listening to the self-justifying
blather of Republifascists. Luckily, I am also tiring of listening to
the self-justifying blather of Democommunists. God Bless us all; I
hope and trust we all find true happiness and satisfaction in the
fullness of time :-)

………………………………………

All this makes for great propoganda, but who is to say it is the
truth? I have read eyewitness reports from Iraqi civilians and
others painting quite a different story — that the US Army has
purposely targeted hospitals and killed doctors and patients, as
well as non-embedded journalists, and has been methodically and
randomly terrorizing and killing civilians. Is it true?

And again, as for democracy, let’s begin at home, and open an
inquiry into why the 2004 exit polls showed Kerry winning by the
same percentage (or more) than that that was eventually given to
Bush (not to mention the non-election of 2000). Statistically this
has been shown to be virtually impossible. Exit-poll discrepancies
like these have always been taken as evidence of election fraud in
every other country, including most recently Ukraine. Why were
our “fair and balanced” media all over the Ukraine results, while
barely mentioning our own? Or is this whole thing just another story?

My point is, you seem to be wholeheartedly swallowing everything
that the traditional media are dishing out about “we-good; they-
bad.” I am guessing that if a foreign country invaded the USA under
the same pretexts we gave against Iraq, most of us would now
be “rebels” and “insurgents,” and not overly inclined to believe the
invader’s words when they don’t match the deeds. Had you heard that
only 5 people now own our major media? (IS this true?) To me it has
become pretty obvious that they are *all* feeding us pretty much the
same story, and that story has become excessively censored and
biassed (or maybe halfassed). Or maybe that has always been the
case. Or is this yet another story? I don’t know :-)

………………………………………

And I do believe you have made a good point about my oversimplifying
the monolithic nature of big media — I was a bit surprised to see
this statement by founder of USA Today:

Neuharth Calls For US Withdrawal from Iraq, Says Bush ‘Lied’
     Editor & Publisher

     Friday 01 July 2005

     New York – There he goes again. USA Today founder Al Neuharth, who
caused a stir last year when – a bit ahead of the curve – he told E&P
that he favored a US withdrawal from Iraq, re-iterated his position
Friday, with even more force.

     “I’m convinced the best way to support our troops in Iraq is to
bring them home. Sooner rather than later,” Neuharth, a Bronze Star
winner in World War II, declared. He also compared President Bush to
President Lyndon B. Johnson, saying that both presidents “lied to us
in wartime.”

     Neuharth added, in his weekly column Friday in the newspaper he
founded: “The crucial difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that
there is no Cronkite to call Bush’s bluff. Without a strong, trusted,
non-political voice, too many of us remain Bush-blinded. Bush tried
keeping the wool over our eyes again Tuesday on national TV by
repeatedly tying Iraq to 9/11. That charge is as phony as his
discredited prewar claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass
destruction.”

     Pointing to his own experience, Neuharth wrote: “Most of us who
have had personal war experiences strongly believe this great country
is worth fighting for at risk of lives. My World War II Bronze Star
and Combat Infantryman’s Badge on the wall behind my desk remind me of
that daily.

     “They also remind me that war is hell, that we must fully support
our servicemen and women and put their lives at risk only for honest
and just and noble causes.”

………………………………………

The rant, my anonymous friend, is in your own head. I asked IF MDixon
had heard about the 5 individuals, and I asked IS this true. I am not
ranting, I am asking. Thanks for your input. :-)

So this brings me to the real question — If Neuharth is correct,
WHY is there no “strong, trusted, non-political voice” in the media
today, if not because of a relatively complete sell-out to the M-I
complex? Again, this is not a rant, just a question.

………………………………………

Actually he is saying it was 6 [major media corp. in US] in 2000, and down to 5 in 2004. And while I confess I said “people” instead of “corporations” (mea culpa), I would like to draw your attention to the following from Wikipedia:

The word “corporation” derives from the Latin corpus (body),
representing a “body of people”; that is, a group of people authorized
to act as an individual (Oxford English Dictionary).

………………………………………

At the risk of being dubbed schizophrenic (as well as hopelessly
disconnected) by anonymousff, I think it’s interesting that not only
is a corporation (legally) an individual, but an individual is also
(really) a corporation — as may become more and more evident along
certain lines of consciousness exploration :-)

………………………………………

…As to the Self, maybe it comes down to whether one emphasizes the “wave” (ocean) or the “particles”
(waves), or then again, maybe not. Maybe we once again come up against the slippery and paradoxical nature of “Brahman” not only
inside-outside, self-other, absolute-relative, lively-still, empty-full, but also many-one :-)

………………………………………

What? Are you serious? Does being an adherent of TM or overall
proponent of TM preclude the possibility of all critical thought? If
you were on a bhakti path this *might* make sense, I suppose. However, I always found that God/the Divine responds far better to absolute *honesty* — communicating whatever is actually in my heart, even if it be full of anger and criticism and other so-called “negativity” — than S/He ever did to a hypocritical self-denial and “politeness” for politeness’ sake. There is a word for ignoring one’s deep truth; it’s called “ignorance.” :-)

Truth — one’s personal truth of the moment — is the carrier-wave of
Love. Hence my deep love for Llundrub — no matter how ugly it might
*appear* to be, he was generally vulnerable and honest to his Truth of the moment. This is supremely loveable.

………………………………………

…My main point would be that the mainstream media don’t even *report* let alone emphasize a good many of the events that are arguably most important to our wellbeing.

………………………………………

A classic example would be Stephen Greer’s video, posted here on FFL a while back (many thanks to that poster, BTW), in which Greer introduces to a crowd of reporters at Washington’s National Press Club (?) a plethora of extremely credible witnesses on the UFO/ET
phenomena, including strong allegations that portions of our government have had full access to “alien” free-energy technology for upwards of 50 years — rendering the current geopolitical and ecological situations completely unnecessary. I was pleasantly surprised to see this “outed,” until realizing the presentation took
place in 2001. What happened? Did any of the major media follow up on this, one way or the other? Not that I ever saw; did you? If so, what were their conclusions?

………………………………………

Does you *always* mention a grassy knoll when you have no reasonable reply to a reasonable question? :-)

………………………………………

_____ asked if you thought people who criticized MMY were anti-TM. You replied, “yes.”  I asked if you were serious, as I see a rather broad spectrum, wherein *many* people who may have “issues” with MMY and/or the TMO are still perfectly happy to practice TM.

………………………………………

You are asking me a hypothetical “what-if” which is basically
impossible to respond to. I am not judging those in that situation;
and of course if I were them I would *be* them (which I am, of
course, in the largest sense). I am just agreeing with Turq that
violence begets violence; it locks people into the same rather
hellish self-perpetuating frequency. (I will say this, though: If
somebody were shooting fire against *me and my family* in *this*
moment, I do *not* shoot back, as I do not own a weapon.)

…I was merely responding to your previous post which appeared to
justify virtually indiscriminate killing of innocents because the
killers were trying to kill someone who indiscriminately killed
innocents. Any idiot (even me) can see that this attitude merely
perpetuates the hatred, the “good guys” becoming indistinguishable
from the “bad guys.”

…First, we find our “inner terrorists” and we heal them. Sounds
naively simple, probably isn’t: this could conceivably take care of
the problem in its entirety, at least if we buy the whole quantum-
mechanical-step-right-up-create-yer-own-universe model.

Next, we don’t blindly “fight” terrorism per se, at least not in an
indiscriminate way, as it appears Bush is doing (and I say “appears”
advisedly); he is simply creating a hundred terrorists where before
there was *maybe* one. As was obvious to the intuition from day one,
Iraq was innocent of 9/11, and Iraq had no WMDs, and the UN
procedures were working fine. It’s finally become pretty obvious to
most who are not in severe denial that Bush preplanned the war on
Iraq, and cooked the evidence to justify his premeditated attack.
Best thing to do to stop making more terrorists? Admit we were wrong
to get into Iraq, and get out now.

I am not saying I have a full grasp of the situation, because I
don’t. Nonetheless, the average US citizen’s understanding of what
makes a terrorist a terrorist is (IMO) overly naive, paying no
attention to the root-causes. Please note, MDixon, I am NOT saying
we should sing Kumbaya and meditate at them. (Not that that might
not help.) Go ahead and kill those who are already murderers, if
that’s where you are at, but let’s take a good hard look at what’s
really creating terrorism, and begin to heal that. Our government
doesn’t want to touch this, as it goes right to our so-called “way
of life” alright, but not to “democracy and freedom.”

As already mentioned, we are a nation of addicts, and this
administration beautifully illustrates the damage that our power-
hungry denial and black-and-white “us-them” addicted thinking can
cause. We don’t heal a disease by treating the symptoms alone. We go
to the source, and heal it, and then we don’t respond to
indiscriminate hatred with indiscriminate hatred.

And this takes us back to the most important point, at square one:
Heal our own inner terrorists, or we will just be perpetuating the
problem :-)

………………………………………

[Comment on:…What is satchitananda?]

Transitory. Anything that can be named is transitory, wouldn’t you say? :-)

…Or on the other hand (with apologies to Jaimini) perhaps you could say
they are subtle characteristics of Wholeness: but if so, not
constrained to the Witness alone, but offerable to the Witnessing and
the Witnessed as well, wherein these three are not separate. If one
*had* to attempt to separate them, one might say that Being is the
Witness, Consciousness is the Witnessing, and Bliss is the Witnessed,
as aspects of Spirit (“Love” or Being), Soul (“Light” or
Consciousness), and Body (“Laughter” or Bliss-vibration).

But again, in the final analysis, these are all conceptual, and hence
transitory, and thus probably do not serve as useful prescriptions to
Liberation :-)
 
………………………………………

An excellent question! I would suggest it is precisely *because* you
feel you are still “working” on CC that you may be missing the reality
that you are already in Brahman; always have been; always will be :-)

But no worries, mate :-)

………………………………………

…It is still amazing to me how easily the fear of ridicule can keep nearly everyone in such a tiny box :-)

………………………………………

…This sounds a lot like Swiftboat Veterans for Truth propaganda, all
of which AFAIK was found to be lies. But assuming you *could* prove
that your Kerry allegations are true (which I sincerely doubt), what
makes you think I would care?  What earthly relevance does it have
to Bush’s colossal and ongoing failure in Iraq? Just because I have
pointed out the apparent eclipse of democracy in the USA as
evidenced in the last two fraudulent national elections, do you
think I somehow think the Democrats are lily-pure?

It seems to me that most of your arguments consist of repeating the
talking points of BushCo and when that fails, ridiculing your
questioner, and when that fails, attempting to deflect the argument
by going on the offensive elsewhere. All of which I am sure I am
guilty of as well, so many thanks for the mirror. :-)

………………………………………

Though all things being equal, I am most happy to be here in Fairfield. Truly, it now seems a terrestrial paradise :-)

………………………………………

…I am always happy to get at as much of the truth as possible (with as little effort as possible, as I am either lazy or efficient — take your pick). I have no great vested interest or POV to protect, one way or the other….

…You seem to think that just because I see through the pathetic lies
of BushCo, that I am automatically in the “other” camp. Not so; I
have no stomach for lies from *any* source. It’s true that
one “side” has apparently been lying lately a lot more than
the “other,” but that’s not my fault, is it? Or maybe it is! Hmm :-)

………………………………………

If you want to know where I stand at the moment, I generally am very
much in favor of personal freedoms and quality of life (and agree
with you that the recent SC judgement on eminent domain was a
travesty), and very much against according giant corporations the
status of individuals, when they have done nothing to merit such a
status (other than buying politicians, of course). I believe the
federal income-tax is illegal. I believe the country is currently in
a possibly-irreversible slide into undemocratic, corporate-run
fascism and a permanent fear-based war-time economy, and almost no-one is willing to publicly challenge the wisdom of this stance.

On the other hand, I may very well be wrong on all counts, and I
will be just as happy if that is so. On the *other* other hand :-),
this is *not* an invitation for you to deluge me with unproven
Coulter-Limbaugh-O’Reilly propaganda, as I can get that on
Fox “news” if I ever feel masochistic :-)

………………………………………

At the risk of again being dubbed conspiratorial or insane, I’d like
to explain this a bit more. Conventional reality is a great movie
(or perhaps billions of movies), but it *is* just a movie. It has
been pretty clear (to me anyhow, since about 1984) that *this*
everyday world is not the only such realm there is. The so-
called “transcendent” actually appears to consist of almost
innumerable strata of vibratory realms, with a virtually infinite
number of intelligent beings therein. Many of these beings interact
with us here constantly. (Indeed, from some PsOV they are “inside”
us, and we are “inside” them.)

Some beings on this planet are apparently in favor of everyone here
accessing their innate loving power of manifesting, while others are
apparently in favor of keeping everyone here in the vibrations of
hatred, us-them division, violence, and fear.  The best way to tell
who is who? “By their fruits ye shall know them.”  But the big joke
is, even this is a subtle us-them vibration! It is all Us. :-)

………………………………………

These last appear to be somewhat loaded terms. Are permanent American bases in Iraq part of “the will of the Iraqi people to set up a democracy?” Is one man’s “freedom-fighter” another’s “terrorist”? Is it a democracy if it is brought in from the outside on the point of a gun? It certainly doesn’t sound like freedom, at any rate. It *does* sound rather like an expansion of an American oil-empire, however :-)

………………………………………

…I can’t get over the fact we illegally invaded a sovereign
country under false pretenses, and now claim to be doing it “for
their own good.” What hogwash.

………………………………………

NOTICE: THE TRANSCRIBER OF THESE RE-POSTINGS HAS HAD “ENOUGH!” OF POLITICS, AND WILL NOT BE RE-RECORDING ANY MORE OF THIS STUFF. SAY WHAT YOU WILL — I WON’T TRANSCRIBED THEM ANYMORE. :)

………………………………………

You’re going to have to find another debate partner than this one,
good buddy — I have waded into all this muck just about as far as I
care to go. Maybe _____ will continue to oblige — I think she is far
more heroic than I :-)

At any rate, _____, many thanks for the exchange — I do appreciate it :-)

………………………………………

Thank God(dess) indeed, my friend, and thank you too (if there is a difference) :-D

………………………………………

…there’s a chance he could be an Empath, actually
feeling anger in his own field which the other may be suppressing.
Either way, unconditional love of the anger in one’s awareness-
field, feeling it in the body, simply letting it breathe, being easy
with it, not labelling it as “negative” or “bad”,  seems to
integrate and heal it properly in most cases :-)

………………………………………

…Reminds me of something Cyndi Dale wrote in *Advanced Chakra Healing* where IIRC she made a beautiful distinction between “nice” and “kind” — “niceness” being the warped, false or “polite” version of “kindness,” which is the genuine virtue. Politeness or niceness is by-the-book morality with no genuine heart, no real compassion or Truth. (I suspect this kind of heart-falsity may result in uncontrollable subtle “bleeds” of rage, as in passive-aggressiveness.) Not only may external politeness be anything but kind: kindness may also be anything but polite — her example of the latter being a passerby’s angry yelling at someone who is physically abusing their child.

………………………………………

Yes, my wife and I absolutely love it there [Fairfield]; it’s like no other place we’ve seen. The community is terrific — not so much the TB’s (whom we almost never see) — but all of those “awake” or “awakening” to the larger wholeness of the Heart. We just bought a house there this summer, and plan to live in it much of the year. :-)

………………………………………

…we’re back in Maine at the moment — working intensively on house renovations here, before heading back to FF in late July (we think). Probably we will not be seeing Amma; we have a great deal more to do here and do not feel especially pulled southwards at the moment anyhow :-)

………………………………………

Barry Fell has written a number of books presenting interesting
archaeological and epigraphal evidence of Phoenicians, Celts, Egyptians, and many others over the millennia .. worth a look, at any rate :-)

………………………………………

Seems likely there were only small settlements of Celts here
(apparently primarily in New England, judging from the Ogham
inscriptions and megaliths here), and (from the linguistic evidence)
they probably intermarried with the American Indians along the east
coast. I have also seen some pretty densely argued scholarly papers on the internet ascribing Tibetan antecedents to some of the western Indian tribes,  providing ample linguistic and cultural evidence to prove their case.

………………………………………

Mind or matter? Never mind; it doesn’t matter :-)

………………………………………

The King as uniter (and separator) of Heaven (upper chakras:
heart/Buddhi, throat/Mahat-Atman, and head/Avyukta) and Earth (lower chakras: navel/Manas, sex/Indriyas and base/Karmendriyas) is the symbol of the Ahamkara or Ego, residing in the Solar Plexus (“bottom of the heart,” midway between heart/Buddhi and navel/Manas). As BushCo is probably the prime modern example or symbol of the deranged or addictive Ego, bound helplessly to Power and Concrete Mind (navel center/Manas), Maharshi’s Kings are perhaps intended as a compensatory symbols, providing more positive examples or symbols of correct balance between Power/Concrete mind (navel/Manas) and Heart/Intuition :-)

………………………………………

Not sure how many DNA studies have  been done; below is an
interesting (if lengthy) overview on the subject as a whole (though
I see no mention of Tibet here). As to the Tibetan links with the
Navajo and Apache, I am unable ATM to find the densely-argued
internet papers mentioned earlier. It would appear at least some of
them were priestly types, given the numerous correspondences in
cosmology and sand painting, as well as sacred dances, costumes, and
so on. Again, don’t know about DNA, but physical similarities are
stunning. Some scholars agree there are definite links between Sino-
Tibetan and Athabascan (Navajo-Apache) languages; others remain
skeptical.

  http://www.palden.co.uk/hhn/essays/hhn-25.html
  Essays on geopolitics
history and the future
  Palden Jenkins
25. The Columbus myth
The myth that Columbus discovered the Americas is subscribed to
today and was recently reaffirmed in 1992 in North America on its
500 year anniversary. It is a resilient myth, and great interests
are vested in maintaining it. A sure sign of this is the general
academic refusal to research the matter seriously or to consider any
evidence which undermines the Columbian creed. Denial of the
validity of evidence is insufficient, even though some claims made
for pre-Columban trans-oceanic contact are inconclusive or dubious.
There is strong evidence for such contact. It is unjustified to
reject this quite plausible hypothesis on the basis that some
inconclusive evidence implies that all evidence is spurious – a
classic sceptic’s technique.

My own interest in this was aroused in 1986 when I met a farmer in
Cornwall (SW Britain) on whose land lies the ancient Merry Maidens
stone circle. He recounted that, when grubbing up an old earthen
field boundary some years before, he had found a deeply-buried
greenstone arrowhead which his son then took to school to show his
teacher. The teacher sent it to the British Museum for
identification, and the reply returned that it was at least 5,000
years old and derived from specific rock deposits in Minnesota. The
possibility of this being a hoax was minuscule: there is little
point planting evidence in a place where it is unlikely to be found
or to be accepted as valid evidence – hoaxers need a pay-off. The
farmer had little interest in prehistory – he was a classic farmer-
type! What was interesting to me was that this evidence suggested
west-to-east travel, from the `New’ to the `Old’ World, while one
would tend to expect east-to-west travel, if anything. West Cornwall
was frequented in ancient times by tin traders from the
Mediterranean, particularly Phoenicians. Cornwall was a major
trading place for tin, a valuable metal in alloy production in Roman
times, so this region was a seafaring node. The Phoenicians were
also intrepid travellers with a penchant for keeping their trade-
sources and destinations secret. They are known to have travelled
around Africa and as far as Scandinavia, and there is reasonable
evidence they reached the Azores too. As intrepid seafarers, America
is not out of the question as a destination.

Evidence for ancient contacts over both the Atlantic and the Pacific
with the Americas is certainly sufficient to deserve greater
attention and a preliminary acceptance that Columbus was not the
first to `discover’ America. We know that the Vikings and the Irish
(St Brendan) had been there, together with Nicholas of Lynn in 1360.
The Vikings actually spent a few centuries visiting eastern North
America, and penetrating well into the Great Lakes and possibly to
the Gulf of Mexico. Ian Wilson points out that Columbus had gained
his navigational information from English fishermen and traders in
Iceland. However, this is not the full story.

Much of the evidence for trans-oceanic contact is circumstantial and
debatable – for example, the use of parallel building styles and
techniques on both sides of the Atlantic, the existence of specific
species on both sides of the Atlantic and Pacific and the existence
of similar items of vocabulary or other cultural traits connecting
specific cultures in the Americas with those of Eurasia. However,
some evidence is much more definite, taking the form of specific
remains found in the Americas which seem Old World in origin. One of
the most contentious areas lies in the field of epigraphy, the study
of ancient rock-carved motifs found in America, spearheaded by the
enthusiastic Harvard scholar Barry Fell and his associates.

Amongst these remains are included Iberic-Roman amphorae of the
+100s-300s found in Maine, Honduras and Rio de Janeiro, late Roman
coins found in Texas, Massachusetts, off Venezuela, in Brazil, North
Carolina, Ohio, Georgia and Oklahoma, Roman lamps in Alabama,
Connecticut and Peru; inconclusive though possible Hebrew
inscriptions in Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky, Ohio, New Mexico and
Arizona, Phoenician inscriptions in W Virginia, Cape Cod and Rhode
Island and Brazil; Muslim coins at Cambridge, Massachusetts (which
might have been left by Vikings ) and Venezuela, and Arabic tokens
in Tennessee, Indiana and New York.

This is not all. There seems to have been extensive visitation to
the Americas by two major groups: Africans (specifically Ghanaians
or Malians) and Chinese, Annamese (Vietnamese) and Japanese. The
High Chief of Ghana is reputed to have sailed to the Caribbean with
a flotilla in the -800s, according to later Islamic scholars. It is
solidly arguable that the enormous heads carved by the Olmecs of
Mexico around that time, and Mayan murals of dark-skinned beings at
Bonampak and Chichen Itza were depictions of Africans. Burials of
negroid bones have been identified at Tlatilco, Cerro de las Mesas
and Monte Alban in Mexico. The black Carib and Arawaki peoples of
the south Caribbean and Panama, who lived there long before the
slave trade from Africa started, leave a big question as to their
origin, together with the `Mandinga’ language of minorities from
Venezuela to Nicaragua. In addition, the use of American maize and
cassava in west Africa before Europeans arrived needs some
explaining. Sultan Abubakari of Mali was recorded in the +1300s
Arabian History of Africa to have led 200 vessels westwards – it
should be remembered that favourable currents make such navigation
quite rapid. It was shown by Thor Heyerdahl in the raft Ra to take
55 days, and by Hannes Lindemann, who sailed across the Atlantic in
56 days by dugout canoe. There are also carvings at La Venta and
Monte Alban in Mexico and Guatemala which show bearded Caucasian-
type people.

Contact between Asia and America is marginally easier than from
Europe, following the line of the Aleutian islands from Siberia to
Alaska and down the American west coast – it is estimated that
thousands of wrecked junks were washed ashore on the north-west
coast of America between +200 and +1800, by dint of the Kuro Shio
ocean currents. If wrecked junks can get there, so can seaworthy
junks too – not to mention unsinkable bamboo rafts recently
demonstrated to have been able to sail from Vietnam to Canada.
Genetic and artefact links in America deriving from Japan and Shang
and Zhou China are established and suspected to be extensive,
amongst the north-western Haida people, the ancient Valdivia culture
of Equador, in Peru, at Vera Cruz in Mexico and at some of the
Yucatan Mayan remains, and repeated Chinese chronicles give details
of Fu-Sang, the `Isle of the Blest’, so named by them around +100.

Chinese visiting America in more recent times have reported the
ability to communicate with Sioux, Apache, Bolivian Quecha and some
Peruvian peoples. The Shan Hai Ching was a Chinese world survey
comprising 32 geographical journals, compiled around -2250 (during
the megalithic period in Europe) in the reigns of Shang emperors
Huang-ti and Yao. Inscriptions and linguistic connections between
Asia and American peoples exist also, as noted by mythographer
Joseph Campbell, who compared Chinese and Mexican motifs in detail.
The emergence around -500 of the Izapan culture of Mexico is
connected by some to maritime contact with Chinese, with Chinese
motifs appearing at Izapan, Mexico and Kaminaljuyu in Guatemala.

The Celts have American traditions too, ranging from the westward
sailing of the Irish hero Cuchulainn (whom some theorise on a long-
shot to be Quetzalcoatl) to the voyages of St Brendan and the
Welshman Madoc. Brendan was a well-loved abbot whose voyage to
America in a curragh was emulated by Tim Severin in 1977. While
sceptics use the more fanciful parts of the stories recounted in
Vita Brendani and Navigatio Sancti Brendani to demonstrate that the
tradition was spurious, many of the records correspond
topographically with the likely journey from Ireland, via the
Faeroes, Iceland and Greenland to Labrador – with some embellishment thrown in which should not be used to negate all of the information. It was this tradition of Brendan’s voyage which drew the Vikings westward, only to meet Celtic monks living in Iceland and Greenland. Even the Arabian geographer Al Idrisi mentioned `Great Ireland’ (Irlandah-al-Kabirah) west of Iceland in his atlas of 1154. Many medieval maps showed Brendan’s Isle and the mythical Celtic land of Hy-Breasail, up to the time of Columbus. But was Brendan the first Celt to cross `the pond’, or was he himself working from prior navigational information?

There are hints of earlier Celtic visits to America. Fell and others
make extensive claims identifying rock glyphs in Colorado, Oklahoma,
Mexico and other places – even Japan – as Ogam, the ancient Druidic
magical script. Stone chambered mounds of New England (such as
Calendar I) satisfactorily resemble British megalithic mounds,
obeying similar principles of alignment to the rising and setting
points of the sun and moon as are found in Britain. This can, of
course, be `coincidence’, but coincidence needs explaining too!

Welsh remains have been identified in Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee
and Missouri. Welsh-speaking natives were noted by early settlers in
New Jersey and the Carolinas, and an ongoing dispute has gone on
over the white-skinned Mandan Indians of North Dakota, who honoured an ancestor called Madoc Maho and who understood Welsh. Convincing Welsh traditions record that Madoc ab Owain Gwynedd sailed westwards in 1170 from north Wales, to return later to collect more people and return to Alabama. Structures investigated by Mallery in Ohio showed quite clear signs of Celtic technologies.

Then there are assorted contacts made during the Middle Ages, the
best known of which was the voyage of Leif Eriksson from Iceland
to `Vinland’ or `Markland’ (Newfoundland, Nova Scotia or Cape Cod),
landing in 1003. The second expedition under Thorvald Eriksson
landed up in conflict with Algonquin warriors, leading to
abandonment of the project. Incidentally, Muslim linguistic links
with the Algonquin have been suggested – these are not disconnected, since the Vikings traded with the Arabs of Baghdad, and it is
conceivable that they could have carried Muslim sailors or travellers with them. It is suggested that the Viking colony possibly numbered some thousands of people. Adam of Bremen, a historian, noted that Vinland was well known for its wines. This transatlantic traffic seems to have continued until the late 1340s, when bubonic plague hit Iceland, Norway and presumably the American colony, decimating the scant population. However, a rune-stone dating to 1362 (quite late for Vikings) was found in Minnesota, and Mallery discovered further sites along the St Lawrence and in Virginia – though these are greeted with a mixture of ridicule, disinterest and doubt. The best known site is at L’Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, although there is reason to believe Irish settlers of around +700 preceded Vikings at this site. Note that Columbus visited Reykjavik in Iceland in 1477, before his famed voyages!

Late Medieval European mapmakers seem to have possessed information about far-off lands to the west – especially Martellus and Behaim. The Zeno and Piri Reis maps hint at much greater knowledge of the geography of the world than we think. Apparently a forefather of Nicolo Zeno accompanied Henry Sinclair, Earl of Orkney, to spend nine years in America from 1395, following the old Viking north Atlantic route. This cartographical issue is a complex area, though it deserves further research. The Catholic church held a flat earth to be true doctrine, and geographers who questioned this were persecuted, not least Mercator. Behaim and others, however, marked significant lands west over the Atlantic on their maps.

In the period immediately preceding Columbus’ celebrated landfall,
there seems to have been some European activity in North America. In
1472, Diedrich Pining and Johannes Skolp appear to have landed in
Newfoundland and charted numerous islands. There are signs that the
Portuguese had discovered the Americas before Columbus, holding
their voyages secret until a near-war broke out between Portugal and
Spain when the Pope gave the Spaniards exclusive rights to colonise
the `Indies’. The known voyages of Diogo de Sevill in 1427 and
Cabral in 1431 to the Azores, and the several voyages of Joao
Fernandez between 1431 and 1486 can be construed as possible secret visits to the Americas. There is also incomplete evidence, including notes by Columbus himself, to show that merchant adventurers from Bristol were visiting the Americas in the 1470s, the Genoese John Cabot (Giovanni Caboto) amongst them.

As an aside to this, Ian Wilson suggests that the name America was
not, as is commonly held, named after Amerigo Vespucci, the
Portuguese explorer who mapped the coast of South America 1499-1502. Rather, it was named after Richard Ameryk (ap Meryke), a Bristolian merchant and customs collector of Welsh extraction, and later immortalised by the mapmaker Waldseemueller.

All these bits of evidence and signs of transoceanic connections
can, of course, be taken to be fantasy, or the work of some sort of
conspiracy of unpatriotic Americans or foreigners to construct a
case against the US policy of `isolationism’. Or they can be taken
as signs of something genuine. Since the prevailing ideology is that
Columbus `discovered’ America, and since this ideology is important
to the notion of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant supremacy in USA,
there is a disinclination to accept such evidence as valid for
further research or even for consideration. Spanish Latino South
Americans aren’t too enthusiastic to imbibe this stuff either.
However, the extent of evidence, from artefacts, remains,
anthropological and linguistic data, Old World records, maps and
traditions, from modern-day re-creations of historic seafaring craft
and voyages and – dare it be said – from sense, suggests that the
Americas have been quite well connected to the Old World for
millennia. In fact, as we shall see later, it might have been going
on for more millennia than historians would care to consider.

Why should Americans and historic traditions so aggressively hold to
the idea that, after the initial academically-accepted immigrations
over the glacial land-bridge from Siberia to Alaska tens of
millennia ago, there was no contact until 1492? Surely it would be
ennobling to the American heritage to acknowledge and investigate
this? Surely it would offer more of a sense of historical continuity
to the history of the Americas?

The answer is found in the early days of American history, when the
Conquistadors in Central and South America and the European settlers
in the North were establishing themselves on the continent. The
philosophies of each were somewhat different – the Conquistadors
were undoubtedly plunderers and imperialists while the early
Europeans in North America were predominantly settlers seeking a new life. From the beginning, the Conquistadors sought to overcome the native civilisations of the Aztecs, Incas and others, and to gain as much power and booty as possible, fabricating many myths to justify this outrage. Cortes created a story to portray the Aztecs as passive in action and fatalistic in attitude, which has been disputed only in recent times.

In North America, relations with the local Indians were initially
tolerant-to-friendly, with tales of Indians saving settlers from
famine or disaster, and a few intermarriages. However, an initiative
to push out and later overcome the Indians was eventually taken as
settlement and colonial government grew. This led to the Indian Wars
of the 1630s and 1670s, which led to increasing containment, forced
migration and elimination of Indian tribes across the continent up
to the 20th century.

These were historically very important choices. The story of the
Americas would have been very different if the white settlers and
conquistadors had instead elected to fraternise, trade and cooperate
with the indigenous Americans. In most cases the native Americans
were initially friendly with the settlers, and it was their initial
trust and gentility which made them vulnerable. However, a fatal
mixture of governmental and mercantile greed, plus the settler urge
to start a new life whatever the cost – often following from great
hardship, oppression and disruption in Europe – caused an enormous
ethnic decision to be made. A discontinuity was imposed on the
history of the Americas which not only disempowered and devastated
the native Americans, but also founded a bundle of new nations – the
nations of the Americas – which were rootless and disconnected from
their environment. In USA today, arguments over whether to permit
Spanish – the language of recent immigrants from Latin America – as
an official language now challenge the dominant Anglo-Saxon
Protestant culture, raising fears and a sense of outrage which smack
of a rebound from the days of the violent immigration of Europeans
in preceding centuries.

The European imposition has set the tone of life in the Americas
ever since: the expansion of the white-skins led to the contraction
of the indigenous Americans, and the new-found freedom of colonists
meant oppression and genocide for the natives. Settlers from the Old
World have seen the Americas as a land for taking and exploiting, to
the maximum. It has been a land for the fulfilment of dreams,
epitomised in late-20th century Californian culture.

Had the settlers chosen to act as guests, developments in America
would have been very different. The civilisation would now,
theoretically, be much more attuned to the land and to the native
peoples – and the native peoples would not have been exterminated to the degree they were. In addition, mass immigration of settlers in the 1800s would have been smaller in volume, since the land would not have presented itself so strongly as a `land of opportunity’ – settlers would have had to accommodate to cultural changes more than they did.

The white-supremacist notion arose from an amoral psychological
basis on which USA, in particular, was founded – despite the strong
religious element amongst its founding fathers. America was seen as
a land of refuge and freedom for Europeans, where there were no
limits to their expansion-possibilities – these limits have been
found only when the space filled up, when the paradise of California
began taking the form of a smoggy and endless housing development.
In USA, rights were given to white Americans and denied to natives,
who were seen simply as obstructions to progress. The respecting of
native rights and ways would have implied a massive change in the
nature of white civilisation in the Americas.

Even in the 1800s, the discovery of advanced civilisations in Mexico
could not be accepted for decades, until the evidence became so
overwhelming that it could not be ignored. Recognising the greatness
and sophistication of native urban civilisations would implicitly
call the nascent white culture into question. New England was so
named because of the pastoral landscape and economy of the north-
eastern native peoples, which produced a landscape reminiscent of
England (even though the area is ecologically more Scandinavian than
English). After initial cooperation, the growing numbers of white
settlers cleared native Americans from their lands by sheer
firepower and use of the forceful psychology of private property,
which the Indians did not possess – this was a repetition of the
manner by which the Saxons, Vikings and Normans overcame the
indigenous British and Irish some 800-1500 years earlier. Many white
settlers were incapable of behaving otherwise: God was on their
side, the government sectioned out the land and all available wealth
and resources were there for the taking. There were those who argued for respecting the Indians, but they were overwhelmed.

Even today, in New England, native peoples are presumed extinct. Yet
they discreetly live and work in modern society, leaving remains of
recent and present-day ceremonial activities within but a short
distance of Boston and New York. However, if native peoples were to
be fully recognised for their rights and prerogatives, and if an
adjustment were made on a fair and accommodating basis, a massive
redistribution of land and resources would have to take place,
undermining the very basis on which modern American life stands.
Indian `reservations’ would rightly expand to cover vast
territories – not only the poorest ones. Indian holy places standing
atop ore deposits would remain so, and not just a few military bases
would have to close. Such a settlement would be a legal and
constitutional nightmare – which is why no one wishes to broach the
subject at all! White-people’s priorities for interstate highways
and shopping malls would need to be subordinated to many of the
priorities of the Indian nations. The position of black Afro-
Americans would be awkward, since they weren’t even voluntary
settlers who claimed land rights as the white people had – even
though most of their foreparents were there before most whites. The
story in Latin America is the same: Latinos form an overclass with
control of the best land, resources and the political and economic
order, while Indians, be they Amazonian tribes or the remnants of
Mayans, Aztecs or Incas, form a seriously-dispossessed peasantry,
fit in Latinos’ eyes only for manual work and marginalisation.

Thus, the `isolationist’ theory of the history of the Americas is
ideologically important for the dominant classes of the modern
Americas. The Columbus myth justifies the approach Anglo-Saxons and
Latinos have taken to colonising the `New World’ – which is in truth
culturally as old as anywhere. Not only this, but the Americas would
be psychologically more connected to the rest of the world –
isolationism and the principle of the Monroe Doctrine rest heavily
on Columban mythology. Not only this, but Afro-Americans, mostly
brought over as slaves, would find a deeper emotional connection
with the land and cultures of the Americas, through their highly
probable ancient transatlantic links, predating the Europeans. Not
only this, but the Sino-Japanese, even Vietnamese, ancient
connections with West Coast America, now developing in a new way
through the Pacific Rim boom, would give modern Pacific coast
integration a greater historical scope.

Even though much of the evidence for ancient linkages with the
Americas is patchy, inconclusive to the sceptic, and subject to the
unscientific enthusiasms of alternative researchers, it is
sufficient, prodigious and varied enough to deserve massive
attention. Yet, the equally unscientific reluctance to do so betrays
ideological discomfort. America of today would prefer not to have
deep cultural roots: with such roots, the culture would have to
mature and reintegrate drastically. It is far better to maintain the
myth – to spend millions on it if necessary – than to acknowledge
the primacy of native peoples, and to be willing to ask them whether
the immigrants of the last 500 years actually are welcome.
 
………………………………………

Sometimes there has been an actual land bridge connecting Siberia and Alaska; at other ages island-hopping would have been necessary. I don’t recall exactly how or when the Tibetans were supposed to have crossed, but it apparently wouldn’t have been too difficult.

………………………………………

…apparently a large number of them [American founders] were Freemasons :-)

………………………………………

Yes, it is. However, apparently scholars of the Athabascan languages
also agree that the Navajo and Apache migrated down into the US
Southwest from Alaska (Eskimo is also an Athabascan language,
apparently). That is also a pretty fair distance. One presumes they
came to Alaska from somewhere, and given the cultural and physical
similarities, Tibet would be a fair bet, it appears. I read on the net
that DNA tests are underway, but have as yet seen no results.

Yes, I did not indicate that Tibet and China were closely connected,
except for mentioning Sino-Tibetan — i.e., Chines-Tibetan, their
common language family.

………………………………………

I don’t know; if memory serves, the internet articles outlined some
specific political stresses creating this particular Tibetan refugee
stream (circa 500-700 CE maybe?), but I do not recall much more than
that. Presumably this would be quite some time after the Bering land-
strait had disappeared.

…If you’re interested in this sort of thing, I strongly recommend “America BC,” “Bronze-Age America,” and “Saga
America” by Barry Fell, as well as “Sailing to Paradise” by Jim
Bailey (lots of mineralogical data on the prehistoric global sailing
culture), “Hamlet’s Mill” by de Santillana and Von Dechen (abundant
material on the precession of the equinoxes, myth, astronomy and
prehistoric global science).

………………………………………

Who was the owner of Fort Sumter?

…The article below appears to give pretty convincing evidence the US Government owned Fort Sumter:

  http://www.civilwarhome.com/sumterownership.htm

…Hey, when you sell something to someone you can’t just declare the bargain null and void and then try to evict them or kill them *lol*

…A sale is a sale. You can’t afterwards just declare the buyer to be non-existent :-)

…And other northern states as well. The point is, South Carolina sold
it, and received money for it. To then claim that the Civil War was
the “War of Northern Aggression” when the feds were simply retaining
their property, and the feds were the ones first fired upon, seems a
bit twisted to me. I have no real problem with Rebellion per se, and
I am not in a hurry to declare the South unjustified; I just have a
problem with what appears to be a Southern abdication of their own
portion of the responsibility

…The feds had been invited; South Carolina had received moneys paid
for by the feds for the property. Suddenly *uninviting* the feds is
a different story. However, all this is beside the point. My only
real quibble was your calling it the War of Northern Aggression. I
don’t see how the feds’ refusing to leave makes *them* the sole
aggressors here.

…Then I suspect the states should have offered to repay the feds the
money they took for the property, with interest of course.

…It would appear you are denying that the feds had the rights any
other individual would have — to retain what was legally sold to
them. By any legal standpoint I can see, the feds were perfectly
justified in retaining their lawfully purchased property. Suddenly
saying you don’t like your neighbor and you want the property back
you sold them, and shooting at them if they fail to comply, is not a
legal recourse, is it?

[Comment on:…Most federal properties were surrendered peacefully at the time of secession.]

If true, this makes it if anything even less apropos to call it a “War
of Northern Aggression,” doesn’t it?

…Perhaps we can agree then that the South was declaring *its* own
independence aggressively; the aggression was on the part of the
South’s at least as much as on the North’s. Would you call our War of
Independence “the War of British Aggression?” I certainly wouldn’t.
Takes two.

…OK, I guess we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one,
too :-)

………………………………………

Yes, it is interesting how we sometimes work out ways to “live with”
our demons — i.e., let them rule parts of our lives — rather than
heal them, until that precise moment when we no longer do. I wonder
about this inner sense of timing we have, of resistance to our own good — fascinating!

………………………………………

Even though the American Indians (AFAIK) don’t recognize the power
of the Federal Government *over themselves* they don’t try to
reclaim the properties they sold to it, even though the US Gov’t was
guilty of innumerable treaty-breakings in their case. What excuse
does South Carolina offer? This reeks of self-serving post-hoc
justification to me. Though rather sympathetic to States’ Rights in
principle (and no great fan of a bloated and arrogant Federal
Gov’t), I just lost a little more respect for the South.

………………………………………

Interesting. I don’t think I have ever seen any “false logic” from
Rick, myself. He seems pretty careful with his evidence. But I also
understand his “old friend’s” position — it is that of the True
Believer. Yes, they are becoming less numerous, at least in FF.
Running into one in FF now is actually a bit of a shock these days,
like suddenly hitting an iceberg after floating in a warm sea of
Love. :-)

………………………………………

Yes, this is interesting in that Rick’s “friend” apparently
*identifies* with his own idealized image of his Guru — that is,
his sanitized concept of MMY stands in for his own Ahamkara or small-
mind ego — which in itself I suppose is simply a subtle concept as
well…

………………………………………

In the immortal words of St. Augustine, “Lord, make me perfect — but not yet” :-)

………………………………………

Often translated as “Lord, make me *chaste*…but not yet” :-)

Since food is often viewed as a substitute for sex, I wonder if one
could pray for “ice-cream-chastity…but not yet”?

………………………………………

Actually, at this point, I welcome people’s pointing out any cult-
like “weeds” in my mental garden. How else will I root them out if I
am overlooking them and everyone else is too polite to give me appropriate feedback?
………………………………………

Not exactly, I meant what I said: the kind of Love that feels like a
warm sea, until one suddenly runs into another’s ice-cold
fear/judgment. I wouldn’t characterize the iceberg as anger, because
genuine anger served truthfully still feels like warmth and Love to
me. The iceberg generally feels more like extremely fearful denial —
  i.e., a deep Lie — than anger to me.

…I am just saying it is a genuine shock, that’s
all. And it may be bullcrap to you, but I am simply describing a
particular experience as best I can. At certain frequencies (other
than the undifferentiated Brahmanic all-this-is-THAT) some people
feel warmer to me than others, and warmer generally feels better,
freer, more highly energized, more rapidly-vibrating, more humorous,
more “liquid,” more loving at this moment. Those same “icebergs” may
be very warm indeed in other circumstances and/or with other people –
– how am I to know?

:-)

………………………………………

That looks good on the surface, but still sounds a bit as if Rick
would be taking undue responsibility or blame for how his friend is
feeling. How about, “I am sorry you feel angered and hurt by what I
did?” That sounds more accurate to me. But what if Rick *doesn’t*
happen to be feeling sorry? Do you want him to lie?

…This is the result when we start to get hypothetical — in the end,
all we have is a whole lot of energy spent on illusory ideas about
illusory ideas :-)

………………………………………

A true friend for me is one who loves unconditionally, without a lot
of rules and requirements either of us has to navigate through
to “earn” or “keep” that love.

………………………………………

…Anger honestly and cleanly expressed is Truth, another form of Love. To me, the friend was implying their friendship was over, and Rick was replying that for him it wasn’t.
This to me is Love. It is possible I misread the nuances of the exchange.

………………………………………

The mind likes to spin out its stories, ephemeral clouds and
coriolis forces around a small ever-turning planet. Meanwhile the
sun always shines unconditionally on all sides. Half of every planet
is always turned away from the sun; does the sun take this as a
rejection?

From the sun’s point of view, there are no “friendly” and
no “unfriendly” planets — all are a celestial choir of its own ever-
moving, ever-singing children :-)

………………………………………

I don’t generally respond well to hypotheticals, because they’re not-
here-now, but I’ll give it a shot. If I were Rick’s friend I would be
feeling what he feels — anger, hurt, betrayal and so on. So? All to
the good. When I’ve been in that space, there’s generally not much the other can say or do to woo me out of it. Nor should they feel obligated to try. I am feeling it because I want to — because I need to. That’s my emotional “weather” at that moment. Being given the space to feel what I need to feel, and to be reassured that Love remains regardless — that’s a good thing, and something I have rejoiced to know when my own deep-held concepts and attachments were being shaken to their very foundations.

In this case, anger, hurt and betrayal are precisely what I *should*
be feeling, as these are signposts that I have placed my eggs in a
conceptual basket that happened to shake simply by Rick’s standing for his own Truth. Good for Rick, and my eventual thanks to him. Any conceptual basket and all of its eggs are going to fall sooner or later. If I were not ready to have the basket shook, trust me; it wouldn’t have shaken.
:-)
 
………………………………………

…Another way to put it might be, I have no “friends,” and I have
no “enemies”…:-)

………………………………………

To continue the solar-system analogy, every planet finds its proper
distance from the Sun. Those nearby enjoy more radiant energy, and a
faster orbit (and, we could posit, a correspondingly higher orbital
note). And the Sun itself is in orbit around a central Sun, and
enjoys relations with all the other Suns in the galaxy, and so on.

………………………………………

…I don’t feel much of a “charge” around TM or TMO or MMY (or Amma or Karunamayi or Saniel Bonder for that matter), but greatly enjoy living in FF and interacting with everyone here on FFL — feels something like a “soul family,” I guess :-)

………………………………………

Yes, I think “family” and “familiar” are cognate (which word itself
has a “familiar” derivation) :-)

………………………………………

My original question remains — why all the (SHOUTED IN CAPS) interest in whether Bill Gates learned TM?

………………………………………

However, to be fair, if we use Sahgal and Yuval-Davis’ definition of
fundamentalism (see below), while the first feature (claiming one’s
version of religion to be the only true one, and feeling threatened
by pluralist systems of thought) *might* well apply to you, I don’t
see the second feature (using political means to impose one’s
version of truth on all members of one’s religion) in you at all,
unless “political means” include ridicule and insults.

Sahgal, Gita and Yuval-Davis, Nira (1992) “Introduction:
Fundamentalism, Multiculturalism and Women in Britain.” In Refusing
Holy Orders: Women and Fundamentalism in Britain, edited by Gita
Sahgal and Nira Yuval-Davis, pp.1-25. London: Virago.

Sahgal and Yuval-Davis on fundamentalism:

Beyond all these differences, there are two features which are
common to all fundamentalist religious movements: one, that they
claim their version of religion to be the only true one, and feel
threatened by pluralist systems of thought; two, that they use
political means to impose their version of the truth on all members
of their religion . . . Fundamentalist movements, all over the
world, are basically political movements which have a religious
imperative and seek in various ways, in widely differing
circumstances, to harness modern state and media powers to the
service of their gospel. (p.4)
 
………………………………………

So could we say you are delighting in the celebrities in your spiritual “family” ?

………………………………………

*lol* “Our name is legion”…?

BTW, Joseph Atwill has an interesting take on this New Testament
phrase. This is the author who says in “Caesar’s Messiah” that the
Flavians created Christianity shortly after Jesus’ “end of the world”
(Rome’s destruction of Jerusalem). He notes that Jesus’ exorcism of
the demons whose “name was legion” was reputed to have occurred in Gadara, where the Roman Legions later “exorcised” a number of Jewish rebels, according to Josephus. (This book is worth reading, I think.)

………………………………………

Yes, it’s interesting that no one really seems to know the word
for “Queen” (which I suppose to be “Rani”) — has the TMO not created even one?

………………………………………

Yes, it appears most of us here have aligned ourselves (at various times and to various degrees) with some classic, grade-A “fundamentalists” — :-)

………………………………………

…It is other statements you have made over time that have smelled of
TM-fundamentalism or even (sorry, Judy) cultism to me: some recent
examples would be your denouncing Rick as a lost yogi, maligning his
logic, dismissing his evidence and experience out-of-hand because “the accusers are anonymous,” dismissing the reporter’s opinion piece on TMO and Amma, and accusing MMY’s critics of short-term thinking (a classic cult maneuver is to justify short-term
abuse in the name of lofty long-term ideals; i.e., “ends-justify-means” enabling).

To me, all of this points to a completely idealistic image of MMY
that is seriously threatened by other viewpoints implying
any “fallibility” or humanity on MMY’s part, which (it seems to me)
you often attempt to deny through attack, ridicule, insult, and so
on. In like manner, you seem to need to cling to a self-image of
invulnerability, omnipotence, and grandiosity. (Although I suppose
these may all be “jokes” too, for all I can tell with my apparently-
limited sense of humor.)

If however you have been serious, I respectfully suggest that if you
can open up to the paradox of MMY’s being both divine *and* human,
perfect *and* flawed, that you can then allow yourself the same
luxury.

And of course, I may be way off base, in which case you can tell me
to go take a flying leap. :-)
 
………………………………………

Yes, actually Atwill claims Jesus himself was an invention of the
Flavians, who included a lot of in-jokes in the gospel about
the “Son of Man coming in the lifetime of this generation” being
Titus and his family, ca. 70 AD. Hence this whole “our name is
legion” episode was a joking reference to the roman legions’
evicting the jewish rebels in Gadara…

………………………………………

[for waking-down] *lol* “There is no god but God, and Saniel is His prophet!” :-)

………………………………………

…I know the TMO will excommunicate (teachers at least) for
seeing Amma or Karunamayi and so on. How do they feel about Saniel
Bonder?

………………………………………

In Fairfield while at a pundit’s Durga-puja I was even told that the
TMO would revoke your badge if they caught you there! (I have to say,
that puja was terrific, extremely enlivening.) This really astonished
me, as I have not had any dealings with the TMO for the last 23 years,
and had completely forgotten that miasm of conformist fear they regularly instilled in FF

………………………………………

[Comment on:…No it doesn’t because anyone practicing TM can practice any religion or non-religion they want…]

___, if you only knew how unthinkingly prejudiced this canned
response sounds to anyone who has experienced the TMO’s actual
attitude to “competition,” you would think twice before repeating
it…!

………………………………………

…you said something to the effect that it wasn’t very nice to call someone a cultist — that it was thought-stopper. So I was apologizing to you for going ahead and invoking the c-word anyway :-)

………………………………………

Yes, I do not know if the Atwill hypothesis is correct, but I do like
to ask — “Cui bono?” — “Who benefits?” and generally find this leads
to useful ideas or insights in things as diverse as 9/11, the London
bombings (nicely timed to distract from the G8 issues and put the
focus back on terrorism), and Christianity itself, which nicely channelled previously-rebellious, anti-Roman Messianic expectations into pro-Roman, “quisling” Messianic fervor.

………………………………………

Yes, I recall in ’82 or ’83 they tried to get employers to fire
people who had been seeing Robin Carlson too. AFAIK Carlson was not giving out techniques, though I could be mistaken here.

………………………………………

…I will try to check them out [Valis Trilogy by Phillip K Dick]. I have heard great things about PKD over the years, but for some reason the timing wasn’t right… :-)

………………………………………

Not sure this is entirely true — Atwill points out a number of
Flavians mentioned by name in the New Testament as “believers.”
Xianity may well have been the “pet religion” of the Flavians, just
as other emperors had created other religions to keep the masses in
line. Of course, if all this is true, the chances are a large number
of the Flavians were probably “in on the joke” perpetuated by their
adopted son Josephus (whom some have identified as the Apostle Paul himself!).

…Yes, we agree; (Fundamentalist) Christianity is serving Bush
precisely as it did the Roman empire — if Atwill is correct, serving precisely as it was designed to do all along. Interestingly, there is a strong chance that George W. Bush (as well as his distant cousin John Kerry, as well as millions of other Americans of royal descent) are descendants of those same Flavians — though this particular lineage is not proven thoroughly ATM to my satisfaction, anyhow. (It *has* been proven though that those who descend from England’s Edward III are direct descendants of Muhammed!) :-)

………………………………………

…on closer analysis it appears as if what sticks in your craw is the very
possibility that MMY could ever lie. Would this be an accurate assessment of your position?

I am *not* saying he did — but I am open to the possibility, and
wonder at what seems to be your vehement denial of that
possibility  — this looks like what I’ve called idealism or fundamentalism: the refusal to see or acknowledge the possibility of shades of gray. Everyone seems to have a bit of everything in themselves — saint and swindler, truth-teller and liar. Brahman is
paradox. The bottom line re MMY however is, I just don’t know. At this point anyhow, it wouldn’t affect my worldview either way, as far as I can see :-)

………………………………………

Lovely, LBS — and when I hear someone say “I don’t know,” my immediate impulse is often to say “I love you!” For where the mind surrenders, the heart embraces :-)

………………………………………

I firmly believed the former [weird behavior of the TMO is from followers, not MMY] until I saw MMY in person and saw both MMY’s brilliance and his “insanity,” and saw how MMY was responsible for micromanaging *everything* in the TMO, making it a virtually perfect mirror of his own personality.

Of course, it took a little longer before I realized both he and the
TMO were also perfect mirrors of *our own* personality :-)

………………………………………

[Comment on:…Unified Elitism Theory]
*lol* I have heard that many residents of Maharishi Vedic City even feel that way about Fairfield :-)

………………………………………

Aw hell, Bubba, of *course* Shiva is Satan! They both got pitchforks and a big ol’ serpent and oversee loads of demons don’t they!?

………………………………………

…And personally, I fail to see the big deal about the so-called “coherence” generated by everyone’s practicing the same technique. But then, I am dubious about the so-called “purity of the teaching” as well. Shakti is not particularly exclusive; neither is Enlightenment. This whole argument seems a lot like just another way
to keep the sheep in line, to me. I feel if someone wants to meditate in the dome, let ’em — the domes and the TMO could use all the help they can get :-)

………………………………………

Yes, I believe I know what you mean, … I have experienced
similar “disappointments” with large groups of non-TMers on
occasion — though I have experienced the same sort of quality in
the dome at times, and also at times experienced a terrific
coherence in small groups of non-TMers. So while not invalidating
your experience in the slightest, I am not in a hurry to embrace the other pole either :-)

………………………………………

Yes, and there is some evidence that the Christians borrowed their image of Satan from the horned god of the “witches” or pagans, who — as you say — may well have been remnant worshippers of Shiva-Dionysos.

………………………………………

…Nothing much I can say to that…I am certain I can find a miserable old fart in me somewhere :-)

………………………………………

[Comment on:…What does muh muh muh muh muh mean?]

It’s a meaningless sound whose effects are known :-)

………………………………………

…Ahh, so I guess every religion is *not* compatible with TM…? Or are
TMers more expert on Kai Druhl’s form of fundamentalist Christianity
than Kai Druhl is…?

:-)

………………………………………

Nice post, Vaj; thanks. Yes, I can definitely buy the idea of a
morphogenetic field, and a collective-consciousness “deva” and so
on. I am mostly reacting to my experience that FF is (to me) a more
excitingly harmonious and coherently sattvic community now than ever
before, with so many more people now happily exploring their own
paths. You probably wouldn’t believe this town these days! Perhaps
the many years they all spent exploring TM created enough of a
coherent field to sustain all the heterodox exploration; perhaps it
is simply the more widespread opening of Heart, which goes
fearlessly beyond conceptual limits to embrace the Other as the
Self; I don’t know… but I like it, and in my experience anyhow the
dome has next to nothing to do with it :-)

………………………………………

…I do wonder though why an accomplished yogi would expect that everyone around him would always tell the deepest truth, and rely on “real objective public evidence” (whatever that might be), and not simply avail himself of rtam-bara-pragya.

………………………………………

[Comment on:…Having met you in person, you strike me as paradoxically happy in your miserableness.]

*lol* That too.

………………………………………

…Ahh, OK, I see. So you are a non-Yogi, and only coincidentally
happen to share this universal credulousness (barring objective
public evidence to the contrary) that real yogis have, and you make
no claims for rtam-bara-pragya, and yet you also believe you have
the yogic ability to tell others’ states of consciousness…

[Comment on: Yes.]

*lol* Now that *IS* funny! :-D

………………………………………

…I am actually trying to do us a favor, pointing out his complete inability to tell the truth. First he says he is *not* a
yogi, but shares *only* the yogi’s propensity for total credulence (barring “objective physical evidence” to the contrary) (and this btw
is the first time I have ever heard of this particular yogic criterion), but then reverses himself and agrees he has the yogic
ability to tell another’s state of consciousness. So at which point is he lying?

Off, you earlier said you “suspect” I am not even a (lost) yogi yet.
Do you merely “suspect” it or do you “know” it? If you “suspect” it,
this is evidence of mere mentation and not of a yogic power, isn’t it?
At which point were you lying — when you said you suspect it (just to
be polite perhaps) or when you said you knew it?

I am pointing out a few of (y)our myriad inconsistencies to show that
you lie a lot. So do we all. Brahman is paradox. Consistency is a pipe
dream. It is utterly impossible to tell the whole truth (even now).
Why then would you expect those around you to always tell the deepest truth, barring objective physical evidence to the contrary?

Here’s something else to chew on: Offworld, I “awoke” or “died” into
Brahman nearly 23 years ago, after finding C.C., G.C. and U.C.
insufficient. Do you believe me, or do you have objective, physical
evidence to the contrary to show I am lying?

:-)
 
………………………………………

[Comment on:…I’m gonna stick with the mental image of you wearing makeup, rather than the one of you sitting there naked.]  :-)

How about naked *with* makeup? 200% of life and all That… :-)

………………………………………

…If you’re not going to answer the questions, but just deflect, we have no basis to engage each other — well and good. Carry on there….don’t let me stop you.

………………………………………

Jai Guru Dev! May the radiantly divine love of the ever-present Sat Yuga arise tonight in the heart of every One of Us.

………………………………………

You ever read Alain Danielou’s book, “Gods of Ecstasy”? Very nice correlates between Shiva and Dionysos, whom many others equate with Jesus…:-)

…Correction: “Gods of Love and Ecstasy: The Traditions of Shiva and Dionysus” …

………………………………………

…reminds me deeply of a number of personal “extradimensional” interactions, one of which involved four of us being instructed by luminous “Pleaidian” bliss-fields (subjectively, my “higher self”) to hold hands, dance in a circle, and lift off, which we did, as our bodies and the world dissolved into space. (I had had childhood dreams of doing this with other kids, and now suddenly realized they weren’t really dreams at all.)

After returning to earth amidst intense clarity and ectasy and a
highly-charged, newly-luminous body, I couldn’t figure out if this had
really happened to us on the physical plane or not. It certainly
didn’t feel like any astral projection I had ever done, and there were
*four* of us who had experienced this together, but still…?

But the thought strongly came, “don’t even ask the question; Matter and Spirit are ONE!”

However, I strongly suspect that the state of consciousness of any
theoretical observers would very much dictate what or how much of our levitation/dissolution they perceived. And as you say, while the phenomenon itself was mind-blowing, the real benefit was the healing and home-coming derived from the utterly delightful “Pleaidian” energy-field around it. Virtually all the other “extradimensional” interactions since then have shared this same quality of other-consciousness — not precisely dream-state, not waking-state, but somehow a fusion of the two — and always meeting seemingly-unusual beings as old friends, or relatives, or other-selves.

:-)

………………………………………

If what *he* experienced [levitation] was remotely like what *we* experienced, it could definitely be described as “real” — if by real you mean profoundly significant, life-changing, and so on. Much realer, more meaningful, than the “normal” reality had been, in some ways. If by real you mean a shared consensus with *everyone* else — I am not sure this is ever possible with this kind of mind-bending phenomena, given the tenacity with which some people adhere to their own reality-constructs. I mean, even with standard psychological tests, you can get 11 witnesses swearing to 11 (sometimes) radically different versions of the same event… though in those cases it is true the videotape will pick up the “truth” of the matter (or will it?). Interesting questions, for sure :-)

………………………………………

… I think you both are truly great — as is Jim himself!
Let’s raise a glass to all three of you — if not tonight in a cafe in Paris in 3-D, perhaps we are there in E-D (extradimensionality) — the space of the Heart :-)

………………………………………

…An easy solution would be to ascribe the
phenomena to one or another of the subtle bodies, but such a
categorizing doesn’t quite seem to do them justice. Generally
speaking, it is not really difficult to distinguish between subtle,
interior, subjective experiences (like out-of-body experiences, OOBs
and “overshadowing”) and gross, exterior, objective ones, and
somehow these phenomena fit neither category, or both.

Indeed there is a clear sense of the quickening or raising of the
vibration of the physical body before these fluid-state phenomena
occur, and the distinct feeling that one does not leave the physical
body behind as one might in an OOB experience. Rather, it is as if
the physical form itself becomes subtle. Unlike any subtle-body
experience I ever encountered, this phenomenon is so mind-blowing
precisely *because it appears to be physical.* Very deep-seated
understandings of physical-vs.non-physical, “real” vs. “less-real”
all have to go out the window.

Since that first time, it has become more evident that
interdimensional or extradimensional portals are (probably) always
available — one apparently need only have the understanding of the
Now and the True desire to recontact these other aspects of ourself
to effect a visible, heartfelt reunion with extremely specific and
physically(?)-detailed beings in the sea of Love.

Somehow now that I think of it this does not seem so different from
the specific enlivenment of the various devas and rishis etc. within
the body during a puja or yagya. These too seem to be both
rather “subtle” and “gross” simultaneously. There is much here that
remains a Mystery to me :-)
 
………………………………………

…I think we *all* may get a little pissy when our own Reality is impugned :-D

………………………………………

…Subtle (or not-so-subtle) denial of the perfection of “this Now” in favor of some imaginary or conceptual not-Now appears to be the foundation of (belief in) ignorance.

………………………………………

…after getting fed up with the carrot-on-a-stick and deciding to accept/insist on Perfection NOW, the mind lit up with a very rapid dialectic that bottomed into the transition.

………………………………………

[Comment on:…The enlightened remember what its like NOT to be enlightened,]

Gotta say it’s more like a memory of a memory of a memory — not a lot
of “juice” there. Rather, am continually surprised by people’s
steadfast refusal to see the “obvious,” though to be fair I was
equally shocked at my own erstwhile abilities to deny the ever-
present “obvious” when I finally gave up and admitted it :-)

………………………………………

…I only meant to point out how my “awakening” appeared to me, and how my previous “ignorance” seemed to work in denying the ever-present awakening. I realize that this may be of no great benefit to the conscious mind of anyone believing themselves to be in ignorance, but I am not particularly interested in that part of the conscious mind, anyhow. The best it can do is deny Perfection Now (like an addiction to the past or future) until it bottoms out and gives up
into what IS. I am speaking rather to and for the part of Us that knows the Truth — to awaken or stimulate the US that always IS.

Byron Katie is a far clearer “sage” than I am though — she actually
gives a deceptively simple technique for discovering Perfection Now
in her book “Loving what Is.” If you haven’t read and practiced her
Work, I highly recommend her!

:-)

………………………………………

…how very unusual that we are all on the same wavelength, simultaneously reading such an obscure children’s book [Harry Potter]! It would be different if it were an international best-seller or something of course…

………………………………………

…you insist that ignorance is real, not merely a belief — but the distinction is still somewhat moot to me. I am not speaking of a casual surface-mind belief here, but rather the core-belief in self-other
separation, something believed with the entire (conscious) bodymind.

…I found that ignorance to be an active (albeit previously-unconscious) denial or *ignoring* of Wholeness.

………………………………………

To do is to be — Socrates

To be is to do — Kant

Doo-be-doo-be-doo — Sinatra

………………………………………

Yes, after participating on FFL for the past few years I have
reluctantly come to believe that no really meaningful discussion can
be held on that particular subject [awakening] — hence the wise not speaking
and so on. *Except* with those who are *on the brink* as it were :-)

………………………………………

I think maybe our culture was not designed for it [realizing Unity], as it has actually been present “forever” (more obviously at some times than others) and for lack of vocabulary and consensus and so on, it came to be generally ignored (in this particular bodymind) until reading the Upanishads reawoke it, and later TM reawoke it, and finally ceasing TM and “acknowledging perfection now” stabilized it. I apologize in advance for the serious inaccuracies this paragraph embodies :-)

………………………………………

*lol* Yeah, I don’t think my genes are going anywhere :-) And it
seems survival/desires have become completely autonomic: that the
larger bodymind (inside and out) and everyone in it takes care of
everything pretty nicely — unless out of old habit I should choose
to get in there and override, micromanage, and generally screw
things up. Even so the homeostatic balance reasserts itself pretty
quickly :-)

………………………………………

…sometimes the waking-up process itself can hurt — sometimes even a *lot* — but it happens when it happens, and is something neither you nor I have a whit of real control over. As you have implied, we cannot argue ourselves into the one-pointedness or whole-heartedness that waking up might
require, until we suddenly can and do :-)

………………………………………

*lol* I never said I was wise…and it is very hard to get me to shut up :-)

………………………………………

No apology required; I am certainly in ignorance too :-)
Or perhaps more accurately, ignorance is certainly also in me :-)

………………………………………

Comment on:…That’s where empathy comes in: recognizing that while you don’t *intend* something you say that way, it’s likely to be *taken* that way by the person you’re talking to….”treading carefully.”]

I see. I guess I have no empathy left then, as you define it. I did
spend many years attempting to second-guess how others might feel
and “tread carefully” around other people’s wounds, and I just can’t
do it anymore. It didn’t do any good anyway. The anger/pain/betrayal/blame remained, regardless of what I did or did not do in attempting to avoid triggering it.  :-)

………………………………………

…*no* concept of realization could come close to being meaningful, in the sense of being particularly accurate or useful from the vantage point of ignorance. Which is not to say that Wholeness doesn’t love our trying to discuss IT :-)

………………………………………

[MMY’s teaching about the nature of realization]
at a certain point it [MMY’s teaching about the nature of realization] appears to allow one to more or less happily remain in ignorance, locked into a conceptual framework of other-than-now and a belief in fully automatic, painless, effortless, mythical enlightenment “by-and-by,” measuring oneself by our ideas of criteria set by others, not by those actual criteria honestly set by oneself. In other words, seen from one vantage point it appears to be truly magnificent at keeping many people asleep. While the description of the states of consciousness is stunningly beautiful, even this at best is a conceptual fairy-tale  :-)

………………………………………

It would seem to me that MMY’s formulations actually disrespect the
experience of the so-called unrealized *more*, for he seems to be
saying you are not enlightened until this, that or the other.

I actually am respecting your experience NOW in saying you are
already enlightened, this that you are experiencing is actually IT,
that which God is showing you and experiencing through you in this
moment, and there is at most only a bit of clean-up left to do on
the bodymind’s habits of thinking and feeling to help it reflect
that.

What I am *not* respecting overmuch is your habit of calling where
you are, “ignorance.” This much is true; it feels (if I may stretch
a point) a little like a rejection or a slap in the face of Wholeness. I am not asking you to change, though — just pointing out how it feels from this end :-)

………………………………………

…analysis of the letters of the mantra itself shows the mantra to be that of the Archetypal Seeker (Scorpio; Turquoise or Green-Blue Fowler in my system), divine anatomy’s “female” navel center and liver: Neptune’s “flight,” as opposed to the “fight” of Mars’s spleen, the other — “male” half of the navel center. This Seeker archetype is often the one explored immediately after one has “exhausted” the temporally-preceding one: Libra; the “male” heart center’s Green Caregiver, or Priest of Compassion, which is *the* classic “feminine” archetype in today’s patriarchal cultures. The Turquoise Fowler is the one who flees an unbearable situation (often after feeling as if one has given and given and received little or nothing in return) and begins to seek, gestate, brood, or look within, in prepration for giving birth to the new Self. This would clearly be quite a threat to those family-members still relying on Mom’s selfless giving in the Green-Priest archetype :-)
 
………………………………………

Another interesting interpretation of the AUM-glyph is given (I
believe) by Barbara Walker (maybe in “The Woman’s Dictionary of
Symbols and Sacred Objects), who points out it is a pregnant torso:
breast above belly, from which emerges an upswooping umbilical cord
ending in a baby’s upstretched arms (crescent) and head (bindu-
point). Though never noticed previously, this interpretation
really “clicked” and now it always appears that way to me. This
would clearly be another example of AUM being the female navel-
center of gestation and birthing of the cosmic egg-Self :-)

Yet while AUM is on the one hand merely one of the twelve seed-
mantras of the twelve primary Archetypes, it can also be more: the
actual soul-note of a portal to inner “Ascension” (i.e. subtle-body
Ascension, prior to the physical one of “Pleaidean” or Shiva-
Consciousness spoken of earlier on FFL) — bringing one into
identification with the “council of Masters,” wherein one actually
becomes aware of the existence of these 12 personal Archetypes:
Disciples surrounding one’s cosmic Christ-Self, or Adityas or rays
of one’s personal Aditi. :-)

………………………………………

…inquiry and appreciation (attention, Heart, Love, &c.) do evidently usher us deeper and deeper into the everpresent Wholeness of here-now, whether we approach the Mystery of Us as artist, scientist, poet, musician, lover, priest, warrior, seeker, gardener, forester, smith,
or mason. Friend, child, or parent … all different flavors of Love :-)

………………………………………

Yes, it would appear that a desire for the death of the Other might
equate with a desire to merge into Wholeness with the Other. I have
certainly found that a desire for one’s own death generally stems from
a wounded or acknowledged (or hated) part of, or individual within,
one’s self that desires to return to the Whole.

………………………………………

Whether there can be the concept of love without hate, or good without evil, or light without darkness, is something I am not prepared to argue for or against :-)

………………………………………

…this as a nice description of the Unity-field, where “it is not you; it is not me; it is the energy-pattern between us” :-)

………………………………………

 

Previous post:

Next post: