Home > Related Articles Spiritweb Michael

Spiritweb Michael List
1997 - Week 36


Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 06:46:04 -0400
Subject: Apologies to Brin et. al.

Brin wrote:

> Since Ken chose to share my personal letter to him with everyone...

I hereby extend my deepest apologies to Brin for posting, to the list, his "personal" email to me. I dishonored a confidentiality. It was a mistake. If I have done this to anyone else, my deepest apologies to them also. I'll be very careful to see that it doesn't happen again.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 11:23:04 -0400
Subject: Music and Higher Centers

Dear Listers,

Somehow I get the sense that the higher centers are activated more by "Just" or "Pythagorean" tuning than by normal "Tempered" tuning. Any of you musicologists out there have any comments asbout alternative tuning modes?

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: 8 Sep 1997 10:10:42 -0700
Subject: Sorry, one last overleaves

Hi everyone,

I've been doing some more reading and contemplating on my overleaves and my take on it is a mix of my two readings. I definitely feel I am in a 6th level because I am reaping alot of karmic problems this lifetime. I'm still not sure if I am a Mature Soul or an Old Soul... I'm leaning toward thinking I'm a Mature soul. I feel I am a Sage with a Scholar Bleedthrough. My Goal is Growth. My Attitude is Pragmatist although I feel like I have some Spiritualist in me too. Kate's Imprints feel right on to me... I'm sure my mother is a Baby soul and though my father died when I was 15, what I remember of him he feels like a young soul possibly mature. Stubbornness is definitely my chief feature!!!

So I feel Both readings really were quite accurate! I am very much enjoying the overleaves thread even with the hot debate.

Thank you again to Kenneth and Kate!!!! I'm going to start trying to tap into my higher self again and try to channel... (although the last time I did it, about two years ago, I had a problem with an unwanted entity)...

Are there ways to guard against these unwanted visitors? He haunted me (in waking nighmares) for about 6 months before I finally figured out how to get rid of him. Not a scenario I'd like to repeat! I did get some good information out of it as well...

Anyway, I don't want to go on too long... :)

Thanks again!

Peace and Love,
Jen

P.S. I've left Kenneth's and Kate's readings on this post below if anyone wants to compare to my thoughts on it...

Kenneth's reading:
-----------------------
Soul Age: 6th Level Mature
Soul Essence: Scholar
in the: Perseverance Mode
with a Goal of: Growth
the Attitude of a: Pragmatist
Centered in the: Moving Part of the Intellectual Cemter
and a Chief Feature of: Stubbornness

Kate's reading:
-----------------------
Soul Age & Level: Old, 6th
Role: Sage
Bleedthrough: Scholar
Goal: Dominance
Mode: Observation
Attitude: Spiritualist
CNF: Stubbornness
Center: Emotional, Intellectual part
Casting: Warrior
Imprint from Mother: Server, Baby 7
Imprint from Father: Sage, Young 3
Creative: 45%
Focused: 55%
Frequency: 55
Body: Martial 70%, Solar 30%


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:01:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Higher center experiences
/p>

Regarding Kenneth's mom looking almost in pain when being so taken with the beauty of a symphony or Kenneth's partner worrying about him after sex when he was in such love states that he looked pained, I have another to share.
And a comment.
A couple summers ago, I was sitting in a friend's ocean facing hot tub right in that period of time when there are lots of falling stars, forget its technical name. I saw one that was so bright, so white, so glorious with its dazzling brilliant green tail as it fell, that my friend who had her back turned to it thought I must be suffering a horrible pain or heart attack. I was too taken to even utter, Turn! Goddess, the beauty the universe holds!

comment on pained faces: Is it that the higher centered energy comes in so strong and cleansing that it pushes pain out? Though when you are there, it feels like such a good hurt, such a good stretch to have all that love in you.

Kenneth, I think it would be great for you to channel more info on these states. We all love them: I think possibly the realists like me might have less easy access than the spiritualists and idealists.

Joya Pope


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:02:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Being a Channel

Brin, I really like what you are saying here:

<<Many of those I've seen wanting to become michael channels or doing
spontaneous channeling that they attribute to michael, enjoy the way people
give their attention and focus to them. Would people do the same if they
said hey gather around, I want to share some of my own knowing. Maybe, if
it has a ring of truth. If it touches hearts and minds and souls. Maybe our
attention should always be earned in a sense, to see if what is shared,
whether by intuiting or channeling or fine intellect or sensitive heart,
resonates with us.

Too often when someone steps in and says ok I'm going to channel here, it
seems like somehow that is the last word. Can we just say, boy that sounds
really off, like a lot of nonsense to me, without it being rude? And yet as
channeling, it still does seem to carry more weight than just an opinion. I
really appreciate those times when there is a sincere offering of look this
is what came through me, how does this feel to people, some of it may be
on, some off. Does it resonate, does it serve? And not just hearing what we
may want to hear sometimes. Truth and indulgence have very different
feelings. What kind of checks and balances are there here beyond our own
hearts and our own knowing?>>

One of the things I like about being a channel, as opposed to a psychic or clairvoyant or a person with a lot of knowing opinions, is that it (Michael) so clearly comes thru me but is not me--meaning no place for ego to come in and say, Aren't I Grand? and somehow, for me to say, This is what I have learned from Michael, is one step away from ego entanglement with others over what's true or not. It seems a more neutral platform and I like that very much. That it is channeled material makes it carry more weight with some people and a lot less with others!

Joya Pope


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:15:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Ed: Old souls...Terror

My take on "old souls learn through terror" came the other day, and is pretty simple, maybe tpp simple, maybe just a joke...but it is an obvious point, maybe stupidly so.

Old souls already know everything, so to speak, in that they have mastered the infant, baby, young and mature issues. These things don't terrify old souls. What does terrify old souls, then? Whatever it is, it must be really awful! It doesn't fit into their grand scheme of things....therefore it's terrifying. It's SERIOUS, not light. Suppose, after you have learned to believe that the cosmos is benign and wonderful and all that good stuff, something happens that makes it suddenly appear that the Divine is malevolent and has it in for you, everything you ever believed is delusion, and you must now endure 1000 lifetimes of experimental torture, or some such. This might well stimulate feelings of terror!

How do you handle this problem? That's the "learning through terror". It seems to me that in Castaneda and in shamanic realms in general, the initiates experience this sort of learning through terror.

All the best, Ed


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:51:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Ed: Old souls...Terror

In a message dated 97-09-08 15:16:29 EDT, Ed writes:

<< Old souls already know everything, so to speak, in that they have mastered the infant, baby, young and mature issues. These things don't terrify old souls. What does terrify old souls, then???? >>

Being possessed by a demon, and having Richard Simmons perform the exorcism. (Shudders)....;-p

Dave


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 16:49:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Higher center experiences

In a message dated 97-09-08 15:02:56 EDT, Joya Pope writes:

<< in that period of time when there are lots of falling stars, forget its technical name. I saw one that was so bright, so white, so glorious with its dazzling brilliant green tail >>

Well, I channeled Carl Sagan last night, and he informed me that the speeding particles of dust that were heated to incandescence through friction with air molecules, was your garden variety "Meteor shower." The meteor with the green tail that apparently left a long streak across the sky is commonly called a "fireball." If it happens to explode in the air, it's called a "bolide."

Anyhow, those were words directly out of Mr.Sagan's astral realized mouth. Ok, ok.....maybe it wasn't really Carl Sagan, but I assure you it was a man who was at least named Carl, and he did say he owned a very nice telescope....

Ok, ok....maybe it was a pair of binoculars....;-p

Dave


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 17:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Music and Higher Centers

In a message dated 97-09-08 11:27:03 EDT, Kenneth Broom writes:

<< Somehow I get the sense that the higher centers are activated more by "Just" or "Pythagorean" tuning than by normal "Tempered" tuning. Any of you musicologists out there have any comments asbout alternative tuning modes? >>

Musicians jump back and forth between "just" and "tempered" tuning all the time. Especially when a orchestral concert has a piano concerto on the program. String players are quite skilled at making the adjustment, but typically they favor "just" tuning" as it allows better options for smooth intonation in intervals and chords.

I have noticed that keyboards tuned to the "Pythagorean" scale, (and this can only be accomplished if the work doesn't stray through many different keys) have a purer, rather ethereal sound. It's quite lovely. However, personally, I've experienced just as many "higher center" encounters while listening to a "tempered" keyboard, so I think the "spiritual message or truth" we receive in a piece of music is really not a result of the tuning. Also, in the last 2 centuries the universally accepted "standard" pitch in orchestras has changed quite noticeably, yet the great works of Mozart and Beethoven still carry the same appeal. But as I said before, this is all subjective and another may feel that "just" tuning is the "end-all" of true essence elation.

Dave - Hugs and Kisses...Why? Because I'm a pervert! ;-p


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 23:24:44 +0200
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling

Hi folks,

I've enjoyed the discussion of channeling that has gone on recently, and would like to add my two Schillings worth...

First off I'd like to remind us all that channeling the information and understanding the information are two quite different things. Many students who don't channel who are extraordinarily well versed in the Michael teachings and better able to explain and apply them than some channels. I hope we won't put channels on a pedestal, higher than other Michael students.

Secondly I think we need to work on validation in the group, so that there can be more consensus about the content of the teachings. There are many, many areas where different channels have come up with different information and I think we on this list would do everyone a big service if we would discuss them and start to sort out in a group way what is valid. (eg. the nature of the action polarity centres, the possibility of concurrent lives, parallel universes... just to name a few) We could also work on finding a method of validating overleaves of famous people none of us knows personally. There is absolutely no agreement here among channels and if this information is to be of any use to us we will have to find ways of testing and validating it. At the moment there are lots of plausible versions around, but until we can know what is what they aren't much help in learning about the overleaves. (Eg, to my knowledge Abraham Lincoln has been channeled as an Artisan, a Warrior, a Scholar, a Sage and a King; and as Mature and Old. This makes it hard to learn anything about the function of the overleaves from this example)

To do this all of us who channel will have to leave ego at the door and put what we have channeled on the table to be tried and tested and view the results without hard feelings, and without feeling that our whole channeling has been declared invalid. This is not necessarily easy, nor is it easy to criticise other people's channeled material. I tend to note the differences, decide what I think and hold my tongue. This keeps the peace, but it doesn't promote greater understanding or the growth of the teachings. We already see some branches of this teaching creating large bodies of material discussing ramifications of basic premises that some other branches don't accept.

I'm not sure we will be able to reach consensus on some of these issues, but it would be a fine thing if we could clean up the edges some at least. (I think so anyway) And if nothing else the giving and receiving of criticism without rancour is a wonderful spiritual exercise.

Peace,

Katherine Doversberger


Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 15:16:49 -0700
Subject: Music and Higher Centers, Overleaves reading

Kenneth, two subjects here actually,

First Re: Dave Wilson, (born Sept. 29 1954 @ 9am in Montreal Canada.)

Below please find your overleaves per Kenneth Broom, September 4, 1997
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Soul Age: 6th Level Old,

Soul Essence: Scholar (knowledge),

in the: Observation Mode (clarity),

with a Goal of: Growth (comprehension),

the Attitude of: a Pragmatist (practicality),

Centered in the: Emotional Part of the Moving Center
(productive),

and a Chief Feature of: Determination (stubbornness).

Comments:
---------
After your friend helps you interpret, please let us know how these resonate within you.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research

1)I met with my friend regarding Overleaves you did for me. He said, and, I agree, the reading was remarkably accurate. One minor point needs clarification. Soul Essence: scholar. We both agreed this is correct, but, I have a need to follow my soul's direction in this life regarding music.
When I move away from this dominating my daily actions, I experience extremely difficult situations that don't resonate with my soul's purpose.
As I follow my soul's directive, then, all of the other aspects of your overleaves reading falls into place. I guess the question falls into the area of slight artisian characteristics, or, is this the way I am following my growth path? Comments on this?

2)Being a musician and having spent the last 4 years doing synthesist and sampled sound programming one aspect that comes into play is micro tuning.
Some sounds are best experienced as Pythagorean harmonics, some as Bach's tempered scale, and every other known (and unknown) harmonic setup. The most interesting music I have created has been an overlaying of combinations of tunings. To the point of the emotional appeal, I believe, that modern music is creating soul resonance in regards to modulation and delay manipulation. To non-sound engineers, this means the processing of sound that engineers do studio recordings. If you hear musicians play 'live', and they sound like a record, the better they have incorporated sound modulation and delay into playing live. This coupled with the purely metaphysical and indescribable process of what a composer writes and how that reaches the heart, is the experience of music today. By the way even orchestras in live and recorded situations are subject to the modulation and delay factor. Did I even come close to answering your question? LOL. Well I tried.
One more by the way, this same conversation is going on in a classical guitar list right now, with completely different people, I think (cyberworld reality you know). Anyways, thanks for the reading it was extremely enlightening.

Dave Wilson/Nada
Listen to your inner desires,
follow them to the end of the path,
there your karma resolves and you get to move on,
therein lies the terror of the old soul: change


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 17:20:28 +0000
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling

Just a quickie response on the discussion of channeling vs. knowing. Maybe I'm getting caught up in semantics, but my personal definition of "knowing" is to access information directly from the tao/godhead/pick your label. This to me is very similar to channeling, but maybe the distinction lies in a "middle man" (such as Michael, Seth, Ramtha, etc) being involved in the channeling process.

John Rogers


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:20:40 -0500
Subject: Re terror

I recall a quote from a rabbi (from Bratislav?) long ago (17th century I think?)

"All the world is a narrow bridge,
and the most important thing
is not to be afraid of yourself
at all."

And of course, we fear what we most desire.
Don Juan said Death is your best advisor. Wo.
Let go and Let God is a scary deal, n'est-ce pas?
Maybe terror is not the right word - but I know my path has been full of anxiety about being who I really am.

Love, Aida.


Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:38:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Music and Higher Centers

Dave, I enjoy your sense of humor! Say - I have a musical background, but have never heard anything with "just" or "Pythagorean" tuning. Any recordings you could suggest?

By the way, Michael suggested as a tool for recollecting past lives to look at books with costumes and such that might evoke memories. I have a suggestion - for those near universities and big cities, there's a society called the "Society for Creative Anachronisms," and they often have dance classes for old dances from olden days... I went to a class once, and it was amazing. The STRONG FEELINGS that were evoked, and the amazing dynamics of dancing with others to music we normally sit and listen to... Very powerful.

Anyway, they have local chapters all over the place. They often stage costume events, and balls, etc. I recommend touching base with them at least sometime, even if just to watch.

Love you all - Aida.


Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 04:57:21 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Music and Higher Centers

In a message dated 97-09-08 22:21:11 EDT, Aida writes:

<< Dave, I enjoy your sense of humor! Say - I have a musical
background, but have never heard anything with "just" or "Pythagorean"
tuning. Any recordings you could suggest? >>

The keyboard recital I mentally made reference to was a concert of "period" instruments. I personally know of no recordings that employ such instruments, but I'm sure they're out there. However, most sensitive musicians (if not performing with a keyboard) will tend to favor the Pythagorean standard to a certain extent. Its relation to the tempered scale is as follows: the dominant and subdominant are equidistant from the tonic, respectively a pure fifth above and below; the leading tone is much closer to the tonic; the mediant is closer to the subdominant, and etc...Obviously, this is technical, but it should give you an indication as to the adjustments the musician makes when using this tuning system. Overall, this is just a better way to tune if you're performing in an ensemble. Thus, if you want an example of how this sounds, merely pop in a CD of any symphony orchestra.

Dave


Date: Tue, 9 Sep 97 01:09:59 UT
Subject: RE: Old Souls Learn thru terror!??@#%*

Joya Pope said:

But, it was from JP/Michael and something like when you are challenging yourself enough and on the edge of terror, then you are in a good place to grow. Seems like she meant the terror of your own personal challenges ( Like me calling chain bookstore headquarters to sell Emerald Wave's books)

Sigh....this has been one of my absolute BIGGEST nemesis this lifetime. I sit frozen in the situation when all I have to do is pick up the phone and ask for help, information, or whatever!!!!!! I keep hoping that the more I push myself to just "do it" the easier that it should get. Personally, I'd rather take the easier way out..... but one can be a "flake" just so many times.:) Some things are getting easier i.e. returning the call of a potential new client but some seem just as hard as always i.e. calling a client because they haven't paid my bill. That voice in my head starts chattering up a storm relentless in its attempt to keep me from lifting the receiver. I want to just give in to the terror. The heart speeding up, the sweaty palms, the dry mouth and the cluttered mind are all very real reactions to the feeling of terror. When I do finally make the call or whatever it is, the release is immediate and I laugh at myself in both relief but also when I think about how easy it really turned out to be. I have thought about this problem since I was eight years old and first realized what was happening to me. My mother wanted me to return an item I had purchased. That was the first time. Here it is over 40 years later and I'm still working on this challenge.

Diane L. Smith


Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 09:23:11 -0600
Subject: [Fwd: Postings]

Can someone answer James' questions on Mother Theresa, President Mobutu and Africa in general? Thanks.

From: James Afolalu
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 97 07:38:00 EST

Gloria,

I've been reading the fantanstic postings on Lori's Micheal list.
Thanks for letting me know about it.
I dont know how to post yet & am too busy to find out.
If you have time, could you include something about these to
pics in your next posting:
1) Has Micheal told anyone about Mother Teresa's death & what it means for our age ? I understand she was a 6th/7th Old Server who managed to erase her cheif feature within this lifetime! Wow, how did she do that ...
2)Former President Mobutu of Zaire who died recently - - - Baby or Young? What hope for his country, Africa in General?

Love, Will reply your mails soon,
James.


Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 09:37:02 -0600
Subject: I.D.

For those of you who want to know, James Afolalu is a Michael student, and a sixth-level old priest. He lives in Belgium, and makes his living as an engineer.


Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 11:41:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Old Souls Learn thru terror!??@#%*

Diane L. Smith wrote:

> Joya Pope said: But, it was from JP/Michael and something like when you are
> challenging yourself enough and on the edge of terror, then you are in a good
> place to grow. Seems like she meant the terror of your own personal
> challenges ( Like me calling chain bookstore headquarters to sell
> Emerald Wave's books)

Absolutely correct, IMHO. There really is nothing else to fear.

[clipped]

Dear Listers,

I agree with "The Michael Handbook" regarding old souls as learning thru terror. Some of my biggest lessons have come from the terror-magnified illusions of helplessness and ignorance. I also had to lose the deep fear of being "wrong" and thinking that if I were wrong that something unameable and painful and extremely embarrassing would happen to me. I learned that instead of wallowing in these old-soul-terrors all I needed to do was to change my reality. Sometimes that meant changing my internal impressions. Other times all I had to do was to make a "power statement" as to the way I wanted my life to be.

I think that for some old souls the opposite polarity of "Terror" is "Complacency" rather than "Confidence". I feel very strongly, as I look back on my life, that I could easily have been a very complacent, middle-aged, senior or advisory engineer making a lot of money at some Fortune 500 company, instead of happily pecking away at my computer keyboard and writing about cabbages and kings to my Michael Teachings family. Instead I kept losing good jobs (or should say that good jobs left me) after several years, or having my credit cut off, or wondering when "they" are coming to take my computer away from me because I'm a month or two late on my payments.

I always got another and better job. I never really needed credit (I like cash transactions anyway), plus I only owed them $400. I was freaking out over a lousy $400 f--king dollar balance owed. Big deal! Well back then it was a big deal to me. Plus the computer people didn't want my computer; they wanted the money. Looking back it's truly amazing the depth of actual terror that I experienced over these little mundane items. And most of the terror was about money... that non-almighty dollar. And I was earning "plenty" of money. I was even afraid to defend myself to the IRS, which terror also ended amicably enough for me.

All of this terror would not allow for any complacency what so ever. It was when I decided to be at cause in my life that I got into my own creativity and self-confidence, and my hay fever abuptly disappeared, my alcohol abuse quit abruptly, I stopped smoking cold turkey (have you ever smoked cold turkey? chuckle chuckle), I stopped clenching my jaws until they ached, and I learned that all I had to do was focus on what I wanted in life and "just do it" instead of trying to get rid of what I didn't want.

Terror vs Complacency? Hey, the terror was a big fat and good teacher for me. I now prefer wisdom, confidence, and proactive creativity to having to choose between terror and complacency. But then again hind site is usually 20/20.

Please and Light to you all,
Kenneth Broom


Date: 9/9/97 9:20 AM
Subject: Sorry, one last overleaves

Hello All! I'm new to the list and not sure if I'm doing this correctly, but here goes.

Jennifer wrote:

I'm going to start trying to tap into my higher self again and try to channel...

What method of channeling do you use? I've been trying to do some channel and have been somewhat successful. I mean, what does it feel like and sound like. When I tried it was so very subtle, but the info came just the same. It is so hard for me to discern between my intellect generated info and info coming from another source.

(although the last time I did it, about two years ago, I had a problem with an unwanted entity)...

Are there ways to guard against these unwanted visitors? He haunted me (in waking nighmares) for about 6 months before I finally figured out how to get rid of him. Not a scenario I'd like to repeat! I did get some good information out of it as well...

I too have had "mischievious" entities in my waking nightmares, who delighting in frightening me. It was suggested to me that I speak to the entity while I was awake and ask what it wanted, tell it that it was not welcomed here and it should search for the light. At the same time I did a purification and grounding in my home with some incense and candles (one black, one white). It seemed to do the trick beautifully.

Love and Light,

Lorraine


Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 12:06:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Dave Wilson's Post

Dave Wilson/Nada
Listen to your inner desires,
follow them to the end of the path,
there your karma resolves and you get to move on,
therein lies the terror of the old soul: change

What an excellent post Dave, thank you for sharing it.

I am a 5th level old soul and for me I believe the above post to be accurate. Change has been a source of fear for me for far too long now. I hope this aspect of myself will be something I master within this lifetime. Maybe I need to do as the Nike commercial suggest and JUST DO IT! :)

Thank you for the insight
Julia


Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 12:19:37 -0400
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling

John Rogers wrote:

> Just a quickie response on the discussion of channeling vs.
> knowing. Maybe I'm getting caught up in semantics, but my personal
> definition of "knowing" is to access information directly from the
> tao/godhead/pick your label. This to me is very similar to
> channeling, but maybe the distinction lies in a "middle man" (such as
> Michael, Seth, Ramtha, etc) being involved in the channeling process.

Can one "know" a thing without the experience of "being" that thing?

Can true "knowing" exist apart from "being"?

Can the "knower" be separate from the "knowee"?

I think John answered these questions above, God knows. Pun intended.

I feel a punny week coming up. I'll try to control it.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: Tue, 9 Sep 97 16:18:14 UT
Subject: RE: our relationship to channeling

And this makes me think about the confusion of words. Oh the frustration when one cannot remember the definition, let alone the possible application of the word. How can I use all these wonderful terms that I have been made aware of when trying to interpret how the overleaves create the different moves in the "Game". The visual in my mind is of that part of me running in circles of frustration because I WANT to understand but for me, in this life, the WORDS can so many times confuse the issue. Rather than a free flow of information I have a tendency to stop from lack of understanding at the moment of "here". ACK!!! There must be others like myself who might give me a clue if they have found a way to assimilate all the overleaves (with their positive and negative poles) and "intuitively" understand. If anyone thinks I might have just made some sense, would you please explain it to me...:)

Hugs to all because we never get to many,
Diane L. Smith


Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 20:52:32 +0000
Subject: Channeling Michael

Found the following at Tricia Sullivan's web site:

http://pw2.netcom.com/~dlstas/home.html

Though I am new to this, it was obvious who the initials in question were. I am curious to hear opinions from Michael veterans in regards to the following.

Q: Who do you channel through? I mean, can anyone contact and channel your information? Does A??? P???? really channel you?

M/L: We do not speak through A??? P???? though we know of her. She is a channeler of the non-psychic sort (using our definition of psychic), so only "converses" with her higher self. This is not wrong or right, it is only "wrong" inasmuch as she misleads those who would study our works. But she does not do so maliciously, for she herself has been mislead believing it not necessary to be psychic in our sense to be able to channel.

The "Dear Michael" channelers, Van H???? and Ch?????, are the only ones truly in touch with me, other than yourself. The others do not have the abilities or the agreements necessary to make the connections. We were paraphrased when we said that we would "talk" to all that ask, for we will, but only 29% of the world's population have the abilities to contact us, and only about 19% of them have developed and use those abilities regularly. So, few are our students that can contact us directly or us them. For it is a process developed between us for many of your years, and not something that occurs spontaneously, and on "demand". We are not like a radio frequency that you can easily readjust yourselves to. For there are concepts and perceptions that need to be tuned as well as techniques of communicating that need to be established. For we are not of your plane, and you are not of ours. This is a skill that has taken each of our channelers years (in their terms) to perfect. We do not come just to human students. We also have cetacean students, as well as others from different "planets" within the physical plane, and some located on the astral plane. So, this is not a spontaneous act that we do. That is not to say that the others do not channel something or "someone", but it is most likely their higher selves that they contact. This is good works in and of itself, though, for much useful information can come from contacting and listening to one's inner self. We have agreements with only 127 fragments, only 12 of which are located on Earth. That includes all "portions" of us, for we are also students as well as teachers, and there are lessons we also partake in just as you do, so this occupies our other "portions" that are not teaching.

'Nuff said.

John Rogers

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:13:46 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael

On 10 Sep 1997, John Rogers wrote:

> Though I am new to this, it was obvious who the initials in question > were. I am curious to hear opinions from Michael veterans in regards > to the following.

yeah, plain and simple, it's wrong. and I can show you how I know:

> self. We have agreements with only 127 fragments, only 12 of which are
> located on Earth. That includes all "portions" of us, for we are also
> students as well as teachers, and there are lessons we also partake in
> just as you do, so this occupies our other "portions" that are not
> teaching.

Nope, since "Michael' is fully cycled off, there are no 'portions' or fragments to teach... frankly, this channeling felt like crap to me.

Love,
Seth


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 04:42:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling

In a message dated 97-09-08 20:26:37 EDT, John writes:

<< Just a quickie response on the discussion of channeling vs.
knowing. Maybe I'm getting caught up in semantics, but my personal
definition of "knowing" is to access information directly from the
tao/godhead/pick your label. This to me is very similar to
channeling, but maybe the distinction lies in a "middle man" (such as
Michael, Seth, Ramtha, etc) being involved in the channeling process. >>

John

Perhaps I don't follow your line of thought here. Are you saying that the state of "knowingness" can only be accessed from a more evolved being, and that individuals on the physical plane are lacking the resources to discover their own truths?

Here's my belief on this thread. Every fragment is a portion of All That Is, there is no distinction present. Therefore, all knowledge, truth and connection with the original source, lies within all of us. The middle men, Seth, Michael, Ramtha, can guide us in this self imposed physical game of separateness we play, but that's all it is -- just a game. When we tap inside our "inner selves" and reconnect to our true reality, we have discovered our greatest link to the creator - ourselves.

Dave


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 05:10:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael

In a message dated 97-09-10 02:23:53 EDT, John Rogers writes:

<< Found the following at Tricia Sullivan's web site:
http://pw2.netcom.com/~dlstas/home.html

Though I am new to this, it was obvious who the initials in question
were. I am curious to hear opinions from Michael veterans in regards
to the following. >>

CLIPPED....

First, I am wondering what purpose this posting served, who AP is, and who really cares? This sounds like the work of someone who is attempting to monopolize the "Michael teachings" and certainly doesn't represent the thoughts of a highly evolved, multi-essence being. I really don't think such an entity who desires to spread its teachings would create a pedestal of exclusive members or found a psychic channelers club, so to speak. This obviously speaks of issues that would only find relevance on the physical plane. I think someone is merely disgruntled because their toys have been taken away. ;-p

<< it is only "wrong" inasmuch as she misleads those who would study our
works. But she does not do so maliciously, for she herself has been
mislead believing it not necessary to be psychic in our sense to be
able to channel.>>

This statement doesn't withstand scrutiny either. A truly evolved soul would realize that the concept of being mislead is essentially a fallacy. No person can be mislead without their permission. Our thoughts create the fabric of our existence, and our higher self will never take a path, even an mislead one, without a conscious decision. Being mislead is just a subscription to beliefs that we are at the mercy of victimization. Hopefully, this is a lesson that many on this list learned long ago and no longer desire to repeat.

Dave


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 08:15:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael

John Rogers wrote:

> Found the following at Tricia Sullivan's web site:
> http://pw2.netcom.com/~dlstas/home.html

[clipped]

An interesting post John. You did well to post it, for there is a large lesson here. And that lesson is the part that discrimination must play in acceptance.

I've been to this site before and was (and still am) unimpressed by the "feeling" of it. The author/channel calls them Michael/Lail or M/L. There was no "feeling" of agape or caring like that I get from the true Michaels. M/L has an edge that the Michaels do not have. They maybe sound-like, and maybe read-like, but are not The Michaels that I know and love. The M/L page feels too near my surface, not in my depths.

As I re-read the original web page that you referenced, the Michaels gently warned me not lose the self-confidence that I had built up over the past 14 years. This is another lesson for us in learning to use our own powers of discrimination in evaluating received data. This is especially important for those of us with a "Goal of Acceptance" (as I have) to be careful what we choose to accept.

As some of us have already discovered you can learn a great deal about the author and source of a post (or web page) by consciously tuning into the "vibration" of the post, not just to the words. How does the M/L page feel to you Michael Listers?

I prefer not to take apart the M/L post, but I will if I feel that doing so will be "good work". The Michaels certainly have no desire to do so.

Only 27 other causal teachers with physical plane students? The universe is much much grander than that.

plus I quote from M/L page about the movie "Michael": "We are pleased to see that the makers of this film do not take themselves or the concept of angels too seriously, and this is as it should be. For angels are nothing more than the misnaming of teachers and guides who come to those who ask."

Stop, Kenneth, stop right now! As you said John: "nuff said".

Sheesh! Where are my puns? My kingdom for a pun! Or is this to be my pun-ishment for today. Yaayyyyy I "found" one. I'm not a found-ling after all. Ah boy, lookout world. I getting Pun-chy. Du-uuh. <Stoopid Grin>

Man, I can't say it deep enough. I LOVE this list. (itty bitty tears in my I's)

Please all, please follow the love.

Peace and Light to You and Yours, (and me too)
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:04:02 -0400
Subject: Whimsey

An interesting thing happened to me... on my way into the day.

I met a judge and he was me... what more can I say?

Not too punny, but too accepting was he:
While invalidating something else, he invalidated me.

Now he thinks this doggerel... will dispel...
his feelings of light remorse.

But little does he know... all he did was...
just to fall off his horse.

So remount your horse, get back on... there's nothing more to do.

You've had your say, be on your way, and bid your faux pas "Adieu".

-----

Ah whimsey whimsy whimzi.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 08:27:58 +0000
From: John Rogers
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael

> Man, I can't say it deep enough. I LOVE this list.

You still can't have my Bud Light.


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 09:29:25 -0600
From: Gloria Constantin
Subject: Exclusivity

I encountered the channeled information on Tricia Sullivan's page some time ago, and it did not feel good or right to me. It felt disempowering, discounting, unloving and generally exclusive. And it also does not make sense in light of all the other information the Michaels have put out regarding their extraordinary accessibility.

The whole point is for this type of guidance to be available and visible (easily found) to those who are genuinely open and seeking such. Spiritual truths belong to everyone. I do not personally have any pre-established agreement to channel Michael, as the work I do (and will be doing more of) has been described by M. as an eclectic melange of different disciplines including channeling, but not necessarily them. Even so, I was told I was welcome to bring them through. They are in agape, not in withholding.


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 10:14:01 +0000
Subject: exclusivity in channeling Michael

> The "Dear Michael" channelers, Van H???? and Ch?????, are the only
> ones truly in touch with me, other than yourself. The others do not
> have the abilities or the agreements necessary to make the
> connections.

Well, let's move this in another direction for a moment, and see where it takes us.

Pretend for the time being that what she says is true. This woman, JP Van Hulle and Sarah Chambers are the only "true" Michael channels, and absolutely everything we've ever read or heard from anyone else on the subject is *not* from the causal entity Michael.

Ok, now what? All the information, the healing, the love, the challenges, everything we've ever experienced as an outgrowth of our encounters with these teachings therefore came from some other source. *Not* Michael, but who knows where? Is that disturbing? (I hear old souls learn through terror...) Well, could we have been duped? Have we been fooling ourselves? Everyone who ever shook their head & thought we were wasting our time with all this--were they right? Aagh, think of everything we've dedicated to these teachings, and all this time we haven't been getting the brand name goods?!?

But wait. We still have the information. We still experience the healings, we are *swimming* in that love, fresh challenges await... Everything meaningful remains, and we suddenly remember that the All That Is is known by All Its Names, even if we cannot name them all. Maybe, just maybe, anybody can have anything they want--including this woman and her semi-exclusive rights to Michael--and still they can't take anything away from us that's truly ours.

...Hey, John, I didn't know I knew that. Thanks for the posting.

Love always,

Dean

"Truth can't be destroyed."

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 14:07:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael

In a message dated 97-09-10 08:16:42 EDT, Kenneth Broom writes:

<< Sheesh! Where are my puns? My kingdom for a pun! Or is this to be my
pun-ishment for today. Yaayyyyy I "found" one. I'm not a found-ling
after all. Ah boy, lookout world. I getting Pun-chy. Du-uuh. <Stoopid Grin> >>

Ken, you punster! :-) Would you like some mustard with your ham? ;-p Heh heh
Actually that stupid grin of yours reminds me of a story: 

Did you hear about the Buddhist who refused his dentist's pain medication during root canal work?

He wanted to transcend dental medication! ;-p

Dave


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 22:53:30 +0200
Subject: RE: Digest No. 1997-09-10 of Michael Teachings List
Hi there,
Received this from the Mysticism List - thought seeing we have all been exposed to the dramas over the past week, it might be of interest:

>|Subj: _Death of Diana and Nostradamus_
>
>Well, as expected there seems to be a significant reference to the
>situation surrounding the death of Diana in one of the Nostradamus'
>quatrains. Here is my VERY preliminary analysis:
>
> Century II-28
>
> Le penultiesme du surnom du Prophete,
> Prendra Diane pour son iour & repos:
> Loing vaguera par frenetique teste,
> En deliurant vn grand peuple d'impos.
>
> The second last of the surname of the Prophet
> Will take Diana for his day and rest:
> He will swerve far because of a frantic head,
> And saving a great people from subjection.
>
> Line 1: The "surname of the Prophet" would correspond to "Mohammed",
> the Prophet of Islam, which happens to be the name of Diana's companion,
> Dodi Fayeds father (an Egyptian billionaire), Mohamed Al-Fayed. The
> "second last" part is not too clear at this time.
>
> Line 2: "Will take Diana for his day and rest" - Corresponds to "DIANA"
> and Dodi Fayed vacationing in France.
>
> Line 3: "He will swerve far because of a frantic head" - Corresponds to
> their car trying to slip the pursuers, ("frantic head" - the
> paparazzi), and the car slipping and crashing.
>
> Line 4: "And saving a great people from subjection" - The "great
> people" can refer to the Royal family. And the "subjection" aspect may
> have to do with the potential of the Egyptian (Dodi Fayed) becoming the
> stepfather to the future King of England, and/or the potential that a
> son between Diana and Fayed becoming a contender to become the King of
> England.
>
> This is just a preliminary analysis, and there are other interesting
> implications that are not mentioned here. Further analysis will be
> presented on my web site (URL below).
> --+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>Prophetic InsightsURL:http://prophetic.simplenet.com/

 

Hope someone finds it interesting too - if not, fear not, the delete key is at hand.

Lots of love to you all,
Gay


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:39:01 -0400
Subject: Jennifer's feedback on overleaves

Jennifer,

Thanks so much for your feedback on the readings. :)

Kate


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:44:39 -0400
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling

> understanding the information are two quite different things. Many
> students who don't channel who are extraordinarily well versed in the
> Michael teachings and better able to explain and apply them than some
> channels. I hope we won't put channels on a pedestal, higher than
> other Michael students.

Good point. :)

> Secondly I think we need to work on validation in the group, so that
> there can be more consensus about the content of the teachings. There are
> many,

Sounds good. Can you start us off? How would we come to agreement? Vote? Discuss and come to concensus somehow?

Kate


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:47:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Music and

Dave Wilson wrote:

> clarification. Soul Essence: scholar. We both agreed this is correct,
> but, I have a need to follow my soul's direction in this life regarding
> music.
> When I move away from this dominating my daily actions, I experience
> extremely difficult situations that don't resonate with my soul's
> purpose.
> As I follow my soul's directive, then, all of the other aspects of
> your overleaves reading falls into place. I guess the question falls into
> the area of slight artisian characteristics, or, is this the way I am
> following my growth path? Comments on this?

Scholars make very fine musicians. My dh, the scholar and musician can go on and on about that. <G>

Kate


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:31:42 -0400
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling
Brin,

Great points about trusting our own insights. :)

> Many of those I've seen wanting to become michael channels or doing
> spontaneous channeling that they attribute to michael, enjoy the way
> people give their attention and focus to them. Would people do the same if
> they said hey gather around, I want to share some of my own knowing.

Sometimes we are "channeling" ourselves, parts of ourselves that aren't regularly available to us, but which "come through" when we are more relaxed and receptive. I agree with you, all of us are full of wisdom and insight. Who is to say that a particular guide is any more wise than you or me? I agree with you, it is vital to always subject channeled transmissions to the same stringent standards we subject the words of people in physical bodies. Is it useful? Is it grounded? Is it compassionate? etc.

> Too often when someone steps in and says ok I'm going to channel here,
> it seems like somehow that is the last word. Can we just say, boy that
> sounds really off, like a lot of nonsense to me, without it being rude?

I think we can, and I think we've been doing that. The whole point of the overleaf channeling is to question, question, question. Never has Kenneth, and I don't think I have, suggested that this is the last word. Just an attempt to provide what Michael suggests, that you get more than one reading. :)

Same thing with the narrative channelings a few people have posted. I think they have been uniformly humble in their presentation. And very clear and useful in their content. :)

IMHO, we're doing great here. Thanks for bringing that up, Brin. You are one of the people who is esp. showing a lot of sensitivity, tact and kindness, IMHO, FWIW. :)

> may want to hear sometimes. Truth and indulgence have very different
> feelings.

Very true. Very good point. :)

> Beyond that, I would love to see the space and encouragement for
> people to share of their own knowing.

I think your post is a very good example of that. Thanks for getting the ball rolling. :)

Kate :)


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 01:16:34 -0400
Subject: Overleaves & Channeling

******SAGE ALERT!!!!<g>*********
******LONG POST WARNING!!******

John Rogers wrote:

> Well, I think we have just about beaten the overleaves issue to
> death, but I wanted to follow through on my bargain. Ken and Kate's
> channelled overleaves for me as well as my own comments follow.

Fantastic feedback, John! And, FWIW, I think your approach to ferreting out your overleaves is just about ideal, that is, IMO, it is exactly in keeping with what Michael has suggested is best to do. First you tried to figure out your own overleaves by studying the teachings. Then you asked for validation and got several, then you went back and thought and studied some more and cross-checked within yourself to come to a new conclusion about your overleaves.

As to this whole process of seeking out overleaves, here's my two-cents worth of personal experience on figuring out my own overleaves: I first thought and read and then channeled my own overleaves three or four years ago. Then I sent what I had gotten along with a picture of me to Kay Kamala for checking. I had thought at first that I was a Scholar because I had been living like a hermit and my life was reading and studying and I have gone back to grad school seven different times. <G> Nonetheless, I've spent a great deal of this lifetime teaching and talking, too, and Kay got that I was a Sage. With an incredibly strong Scholar bleedthrough, though (as I've discussed here on the board before). At that time, we never got around to doing my casting (Kay doesn't go into that as heavily as some Michael channels, like Shepherd, do).

Then just this summer, an Old Soul Warrior friend of mine (who got me into Michael originally) was asking me about my casting. I suddenly got very curious about casting, what exactly it meant and what mine was. I immediately began searching out info on it, but there wasn't an enormous amount to be found. I did find more on the subject in Shepherd's book THE JOURNEY OF YOUR SOUL than anywhere else (btw, anyone have any suggestions for further sources?). My first channeling on the subject was that my casting was Priest.

Having come to that realization, it got me to thinking heavily, for the first time, about my life in terms of a powerful Priest influence. I got to thinking about the fact that my dh has often commented on my "warrior-sage," the part of me that gets passionate about justice and social causes of all sorts. At the time I channeled Priest for casting, I thought, hmm, could this part of me be the Priest, the side of me that has caused me to spend so much time "saving the world," in this life and many others?

Just this past weekend while the two of us were at the beach, reading, contemplating and talking a lot, and in the process I started thinking about all the past lives that I or any other channl have ever gotten information on for me and realized that in every one I was either a wandering monk (a kind of healer or Buddha-on-the-road) or an oracle or a scribe of sacred texts. (No one has ever channeled any lives for me as a family person, interestingly. Not so far, anyway.) At any rate, I got a profound insight that in fact, I am most likely a Priest-Scholar-Sage rather than a Sage-Scholar-Priest.

While I'm pondering the ramifications of this insight, I'm currently seeking out confirmation with several other channels, including Joya Pope and Shepherd Hoodwin (thanks for the one who posted their e-mail addresses, btw. :) ).

So what this long-winded narration boils down to is that the process of discovering your overleaves is a long, careful, subtle process. And while it is going on, many very excellent, accurate channels can get seemingly "wrong" information on your overleaves. And I'm thinking that part of the reason "why" is that maybe we need to hear what we hear first for some reason, think of ourselves in that particular light for a while, before we get to the deeper, "truer" layer. It did something important for me thinking of myself for a while as a role of Scholar. It also did something important for me the past few years thinking of myself as a Sage, and I am gaining a further important, deep bit of truth about myself now thinking of myself as a Priest. The reality is that I am all three, what I am determining is the "strength" of the amount of each particular "variable." And this may be the most subtle and artful part of the channeling of overleaves. And of the whole fascinating process of growth in self-knowledge itself. :)

The Old Soul Warrior friend of mine I mentioned above, btw, was first told some years ago by a first-rate, highly-skilled and experienced Michael channel with a record for great accuracy that she was an Artisan. Another Michael channel to whom she went for checking told her that Artisan was not her Role but Bleedthrough. After much study on the subject, she realized the second channel was more correct. Does this make the first channel bad or wrong? I don't think so. It may be that, as for me, the "jury is still out" for my friend. She may still have some insights to gain about the permutations and interweaving of the Role-Bleedthrough-Casting triad.

Since so many have expressed interest (and some deep concern) about the process of channeling (and learning to channel), FWIW, here is another take on my experience of it (I've talked a bit previously about what it "looks like" when I channel, this is a bit of an amplification of "how to get there): IMO&E, each of us develops a technical expertise within our lifetime, sometimes many different ones (esp. all you Scholars out there <G>). The knowledge and experience we have becomes what I call (my own term), our "technical channel." The individual technical channel becomes the vessel or "tube" (hence, the word "channel") through which the entities we allow to speak through usl work. In the case of Michael channeling, the "flavor" of Michael is slightly different with each person he presents himself through because each one has a different technical channel. For you astrology buffs, this is much the same way that each house is "flavored" by the planets and signs present in the birth chart. Or, to offer a more simple analogy, sunlight is white-gold in color, but when it shines through a pink window, it takes on a pink tinge, and when piercing a blue window, it appears to the observer on the other side to be blue-tinged, and so on.

In this regard, then, I've found that as I myself have practiced channeling, there are several things that affect my accuracy--and that of any channel. First, in the beginning, it is the degree to which I have mastered the discipline about which I am trying to channel information, in this case, the Michael teachings re: overleaves. Many of you in your studies of the Michael Teachings may have noted that there are similarities between the characteristics of various overleaves, and a person who has not strongly mastered the meanings of the various overleaves will be a weak "technical channel" for this information. He or she may be dead-on accurate for the flavor of a characteristic, but may, due to having a poor assimilation of the overall overleaf information, when doing a chart place that flavor in the wrong spot, that is, assign it to the wrong overleaf. For example, the characteristics of the Warrior Role have some similarities to the overleaves of Aggression and Dominance and a weak channel may either place the Warrior in the wrong position (Role instead of Bleedthrough, for example), or misinterpret that flavor for Aggression or Dominance.

Another problem with channels getting a Michael overleaf channeling "right," is that Michael channeling is a very specific, precise form of channeling. In my experience of "hob-nobbing" with many fellow channels over the past several decades, I have found it to be far more common for channels to pull through generalities than specifics (some of them even "speak in tongues," offering the questioner a translation sheet explaining the "signs" and "symbols" aka gibberish their guides talk in). And, to be fair, or to provide another take on generality, in well-respected esoteric disciplines like numerology and astrology, the practitioner is urged to remain in in generalities vs. specifics in order to avoid saying things like, "This is precisely what is ordained for you." Part of the reason for this latter dictum, btw, is that it is irresponsible of any channel (or non-psychic reader within esoteric disciplines like Tarot, astrology or numerology) to couch his/her channeling/reading in terms of absolutes when making predictions. Predictions are probabilities, not pre-determined outcomes.

Of course, with the overleaves, we aren't making predictions of future events, but attempting, if we choose to arrive at the information through channeling, to draw out, as I mentioned above, precise, accurate information. Information that is descriptive in nature. What is it like for a channel to "pull through" information like that and why bother to do it?

Well, just to give you an idea, here's what it is like to do a similar kind of channeling: a few years ago I was practicing, alongside practicing doing overleaves, the skill of giving precise, accurate, concrete, physical readings of people. I thought it would be great practice to help me with the accuracy of channeling in general and Michael channeling in specific if I could channel, long-distance, sight-unseen, what people looked like. So on the New Age board on GEnie, where I "ran" the Michael topic, I created a channeling topic where I called for volunteers who would let me channel a physical description of them: eye color, hair color, skin tones, height, weight, etc. I was amazed at how quickly I got very accurate at this. BTW, the most accurate channeling of this nature I did at that time was for Christopher (my then, future dh). The only part I got wrong was the type of shoes he was wearing. Oh, I got brown eyes, and he thinks they are hazel, but IMO they are the kind of hazel that is more brown than green. <G>

Some of you have mentioned, why channel a chart at all? Why not just read the books and figure it out yourself? The standard answer to this is that often people aren't objective enough about themselves to do an accurate job. But is channeling a chart the solution? Wouldn't it be far more ideal to simply go to an experienced student of Michael who is a skilled, trained observer (a Scholar in observation, or someone with very strong Scholar tendency as a bleedthrough or casting would have a natural talent for this) who is also excellent at interviewing? If one could find such a person to help with obtaining the overleaves, in short order he or she could, by asking you the proper questions (much as a doctor or homeopath or psychotherapist takes a "case history"), determine, very precisely, all the overleaves.

Why isn't this service regularly offered? you might ask. How possible is it to obtain? Personally, I think just about every trained Michael channel (esp. the ones who are Scholars) has the potential to do this sort of thing, right now. And this, btw, is also a form of "reading." Even non-new-age people talk about "reading" another person when they mean closely examining verbal and body language, listening carefully to vignettes from the person's life that are symbolic and revealing, and so forth, in order to arrive at an understanding of what "type" of person that individual is.

So the next question would be: if followers of the Michael teachings who have great mastery of this information are able to "read" people and come up with their overleaves in such a concrete, logical, practical, "grounded" way, why on earth would anyone want to "waste time" channeling overleaves when there is, isn't there? so much more potential for error? Well, right off, I can think of quite a few reasonable explanations. (No, I won't go on for another 50 lines, this is the final sum up. <G>)

Perhaps the number one reason is that channeling is a way of knowing, very precisely, information about a person without the inconvenience of meeting in the body (and paying for travel expenses <G>) or of spending time getting to know the other person through "normal" means (saved time and money, on both counts, means far more clients can be served, and far more clients can get readings than would otherwise ever be able to, esp. with the advent of the internet, which links up the whole world). Secondly, even the most wonderfully trained, experienced, precise observer of human nature may miss some of the subtleties of the overleaves by using the "eyeball" method. :) By checking in with the akashic records, esp. with Michael's assistance, the odds are greatly increased that the accuracy of the reading will go up (usually, especially with an experienced channel, far more than the odds are increased that the accuracy of the reading will go down <G>). Thirdly, people really, really enjoy having information channeled about them. It's exciting, it's fun, it's downright amazing. <G> I think it makes us feel loved in a very special way--Someone Up There is keeping track of me...*me*--wow! <G>

Kate, at long last, signing off <G>

P.S. Now, I ask you, Michael students, was that a Priest speaking or a Sage? I leave it to you to judge along with me, the great mystery of my True Role. <G>


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:31:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Uses of Overleaves

Kenneth Broom wrote:

> per Michael of the Overleaves:
> ------------------------------
> "The choice of whether or not to publish such overleaves is the choice
> of each channeler. The "safe" publication of such overleaves can be
>
> "It would also be "good work" to ask the person's Higher Self for
> (1) permission to publish the fragment's overleaves, and
>
> "The issue of consistency among channelers will be resolved as the
> channelers themselves become more skilled in their own cleansing,

Thanks for posting this, Kenneth. Very helpful. :)

Kate


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:35:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed: uses of overleaves, etc.

> label, we wouldn't be here. Overleaves, astrology, numerology, etc
> are tools to help us get there. Maybe you are beyond that, but there
>
> I don't think anyone here has said that life is "about" overleaves,
> etc. Some may place more importance on them than you do, but it is
> probably because they need that at this time. And for those, such as
> myself, that are not advanced students of the teachings, exploring
> overleaves is a good introduction to the Michael "system".

Good points, John. I for one *adore* typologies of every stamp. I find them endlessly fascinating and extremely useful and informative. But I'm in observation. <G>

Kate


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:28:19 -0400
Subject: Re: My DH???

Christopher McMurry wrote:

> Dave,
>
> As the party in question (Kate's DH), I can say that it usually means
> Dear Husband, but sometimes you can substitute Dumb for Dear. :)
>
> Christopher

Something, of course, that the party of the second part, the...what?...DW? (dearest wife? darling wife? <G>), would never *dream* of doing. <wg>

Kate


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:21:08 -0400
Subject: Re: My DH???

> Kate...I've been meaning to ask you what your abbreviation, "DH"
> means?

LOL. It's "dear husband." :)

--
Kate McMurry


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:25:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Finally Burned Out

> I've finally reached the point where the freebie marathon must come to
> an end. I'd now like to pursue other threads in more detail. This
> I thank all of you for your appreciations and comments.

Great job, Kenneth! Thanks for sharing that with us. :)

Kate


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 17:17:24 +0000
Subject: Re: exclusivity in channeling Michael

Received the following from MEF in response to the same question I posed to the list.

> As far as I know, Michael is open to all students who are willing to
> receive their information. I know Alma, and she is a very good
> Michael Channeler. There are also many other very qualified Michael
> Channelers throughout the United States and some overseas. Please
> check out the website
> http://members.spiritweb.org/michael-teachings/ This list lists all
> the Michael Channelers, including Tricia Sullivan.

Interesting (or not) that JP Van Hulle's organization disputes a statement that gives her 1/3 exclusivity to Michael channeling.

My initial reaction to the information when I found it was that it was invalid, but I tend to dwell too much in my intellectual center and rationalize away what I feel is truth. Thank you all for bringing me back to my senses.

It might be interesting for a Michael channel to ask about Lail and why that entity is communicating that information, or if Lail is even... Well, maybe we don't need to go there.

Hey, Lori, did you notice MEF put in a plug for your website? Cool stuff.

Well, back to the article on how to channel....

John Rogers


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 04:19:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Michael Conference in November

Sep 10, 1997

Dear Friend,

Exciting things are happening in the Michael community. I'm writing to invite you to attend our first Michael conference ever, on November 8-9, 1997 here in Corte Madera, California. About a dozen Michael channels will be there, with panel discussions, chats with channels another Michael students, and lots of time for getting acquainted with people you've wanted to connect with.

This conference is the foretaste of good things to come. We're in the process of forming a new membership organization called the Association for Michael Teachings: a great idea that a number of Michael folk came up with on the same day, separately and synchronistically. Already we've formed a Steering Committee, and we're busy planning the November conference and future expansion of the teachings into new venues.

The Association for Michael Teachings is a community-wide Michael membership organization. People can join at different levels: General Membership, $25-30 per year, will give you a quarterly newsletter with articles about the Michael teachings, links to other Michael folk in your area, and news about Michael events all around the globe. Associate membership, $300/year (or $25/month), will give you a subscription to the quarterly newsletter, free ad space for your business or service in the newsletter, an advertising listing through our 800 number and through group ads in new age magazines; plus a mini-page for your business on our Michael-wide web site, 50% discount off the price of any future Michael conference, and a 10% discount on all services and products within the Association (i.e. channeling by any Steering Committee member, or the purchase of any Michael books or tapes we sell). Most Steering Committee members will be contributing books and tapes to the Association "store," so you'll have a great selection to choose from.

If you feel the call, you might think about membership on the Steering Committee, if you have the time and energy. Steering Committee members need to be nominated by at least three other committee members. If you feel you want to be a pathfinder in our new Association and want to contribute in an instrumental way to guide the future of the teachings, contact me or any of the channels participating in the conference (listed on page 2). Your name will come up for nomination at our next Steering Committee meeting. We can use you.

We also need Honored Volunteers from the general membership: people who are dedicated to furthering the teachings, but who may not have the wherewithal to join at the Associate level. Honored volunteers will be active in helping get our many projects up and moving, and in most cases you can work by phone or computer right out of your home. We might need you to help us get a mailing out, for instance; or do some email work. We might need you to help with community outreach, or contacting people in mass media, advertising, publishing, the law, or finance. If you're coming to the conference, we can use you in registration, setting up the conference room on Saturday morning, or in shuttling visitors to and from the airport. If you live in the Bay Area and have a spare room, you can help by allowing a visitor to stay at your house during the conference. Any and all help is welcome now at the beginning stages. The best benefit is that you'll be working with people in the Michael community: a great way to get to know everyone, and to be known yourself.

The conference fee is $150, which covers two days of intensive immersion in the teachings, new information not available anywhere else, free sample channelings and personal chats with all channels, and lots of connection with other Michael students, all in one spot. So far, channels who have signed on to participate are (in alphabetical order by first name) Aaron Christeaan, Alma Perez, Emily Baumbach, Jose Stevens, Joya Pope, JP Van Hulle, Kay Heatherly, Kay Kamala, Lena Stevens, Sarah Chambers, and Victoria Marina. Each of us has our specialties, and we'll be talking about our work at a special session on Saturday morning of the conference.

Here are the particulars:

Location: Best Western Corte Madera Inn
1815 Redwood Highway
Corte Madera, CA
(It's right next to the Hwy 101 freeway in Marin County, north of San Francisco)
(800) 777-9670 or (415) 924-1502

Rooms: Make your reservation before September 15 and mention that you're attending the "AMT Conference" to get the special group rates below. Reservations made after September 15 will be at the normal hotel rates.

1 bed / 1 person $80
1 bed / 2 persons $90
2 beds / 2 persons $90
Deluxe suite $89 plus (ask the Corte Madera Inn for details)
Guests make and guarantee their own reservations. 10% room tax added.

Parking: Park anywhere around the hotel except in Max's Restaurant parking lot, which is part of the hotel. Max's needs all their spaces for restaurant clientele. Thanks.

Conference fee: $150 for two days: Saturday, November 8; Sunday, November 9. Conference schedule will be announced in September or October. Includes free open channeling sessions with all channels, panels on new information in the Michael teachings and on other pertinent topics, get-acquainted times and other Michael events. For more information, call me at 501 575-0019, write me at the address on the letterhead. Or, feel free to contact Kay Kamala in Novato, California at (415) 883-7025. She's on the Steering Committee and has been coordinating the conference room reservations, so she's a great source of information. You can also contact any of the Steering Committee members listed at the top of this page, all of whom are actively involved in getting our conference and our new Association for Michael Teachings up and rolling. I hope you can come. It's going to be great fun, and a milestone event you'll remember always.

Thanks,

Joya Pope


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 11:34:28 -0700
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1997-09-11 of Michael Teachings List

Comments about the "true" channels....
Michael reminds to pay attention to what *feels right* to us and to ignore all else. They also constantly remind us to validate what we hear, read, see, etc. How many times have they reminded us that anyone can channel them (given appropriate training, practice and discipline, of course)?

In my training, we were reminded that our own perceptions and experiences ALWAYS filter what might come through. If we are confused and filled with our own issues, they will affect what we channel. Channels must be constantly aware of this and work on themselves to stay as clear and clean as possible. Some folks like drama/trauma and therefore, will create situations to support our own lessons and our evolution.

Wayne Dyer also reminds that experiences and people come into our lives for a reason. Our challenge is to try to understand the value they bring, rather than resisting them, blaming them or judging them to be wrong somehow.

As an old soul, I find the various takes on the teachings "interesting" and try not to get to agitated by the various flavors. I know that those who try to assume the "one and only" role are only fooling themselves, certainly not fooling many others. I do occassionally become a bit "annoyed" with the ethics of people trying to pass themselves off as something credible, when it is very clear they are not. But, as long as I don't have to deal with them, I can usually just pass on by without too much concern, knowing that the truth is the truth, and always reveals itself in its own good time.


**************************************
Barbara Taylor


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 20:58:04 +0200
Subject: RE: Digest No. 1997-09-11 of Michael Teachings List

Me too, I love this list, especially when old souls remind us gently
"this is another lesson for us in learning to use our own powers of discrimination in evaluating received data."

As well as:
"And it also does not make sense in light of all the other information the Michaels have put out regarding their extraordinary accessibility."

Not to mention:
Everything meaningful remains, and we suddenly remember that the All That Is is known by All Its Names, even if we cannot name them all."

This is what the list is all about - Old Souls letting others do their thing in their own part of the garden. Well done - I'm really proud to be part of such a group. May we all get together and chat on that cloud up there and continue with the Michael discussions!!

Lots of love,
Gay


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 97 19:20:34 UT
Subject: More of this and that....

Dave wrote:

<<,Being mislead is just a subscription to beliefs that we are at
the mercy of victimization. Hopefully, this is a lesson that many on this list
learned long ago and no longer desire to repeat.>>

Dave-yes sometimes we "hope" for a lot of things...<g> This did make me wonder though about the order of lessons. Is there really any order to learning things? One can think lots of things but maybe we just do not get them in the same order to help insure that there might be fun zigs and zags in the game. Seems that Michael hasn't given us all the information to this game yet. I'm still wondering if there is a list of lessons or do the Goals represent that word?

Gloria wrote:

<<They are in agape, not in withholding.>>

Gloria-<vbg> Your words rang loud a clear to me. Thanks. Would hate to think that Michael is some government agency that wanted to "withhold" the world from us...<silly grin>

Dean wrote:

<<...Hey, John, I didn't know I knew that. Thanks for the posting. ...>>

Dean-<giggle> Anything that makes me smile or anyone smile and feel good has worth along with all the rest of it. Sure appreciate you sharing from your point of view. Very refreshing to know that I to can continue learning something new. Sooooo... "Thanks for Yours"...<s>

Diane L. Smith


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 15:45:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Overleaves & Channeling

Dear Kate -- Great, great long post.

If I were to wager on what you finally decide your role is (that is, what it really is), I would bet on Sage. I get a pretty strong leaning that way from what I've observed so far, or rather, what my computer program has calculated and reasoned about you so far.

The main general thing I would look at if I were trying to sort out roles is: for which one are you intimately familiar with both the positive and negative poles from your own experience? If sage, you will know both teaching and "motormouth" well; if priest, it will be compassion and zeal. Zeal might have a resemblance to oration, but zeal is always preaching in a sense, as opposed to telling stories or just babbling away in general. I've never gotten the impression that your supposedly excess sageyness is about preaching.

Compassion and teaching are very different: compassion has a lot of loving non-action listening or being-with. Teaching and talking a lot are not at all the same as that and in general aren't really a very useful additive to good compassion.

Anyway, from what you have said so far I get the definite impression that Sage is more your natural role and Priest is an added flavor.

All the best, Ed


Date: 11 Sep 1997 14:32:03 -0700
Subject: Re: Michael Conference in No

Could someone ask Michael how I'm supposed to afford this conference??? Or maybe he doesn't want me to attend...

Yours in poverty *grin*... well OK... relative poverty....

Jen


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:49:15 +0200
Subject: Re: our relationship to channeling

Hi folks,

In my posting of 8 September I had said:

>> Secondly I think we need to work on validation in the group, so that
>> there can be more consensus about the content of the teachings.

And Kate McMurry replied:

> Sounds good. Can you start us off? How would we come to agreement? Vote?
> Discuss and come to concensus somehow?

I'd like to see a lot more discussion of some of the divergences to see whether more consensus could be reached. We can learn so much from each other if we aren't afraid to say "this is what I think, what do you think?"

Barbara Taylor said:

> As an old soul, I find the various takes on the teachings "interesting"
> and try not to get to agitated by the various flavors. I know that
> those who try to assume the "one and only" role are only fooling
> themselves, certainly not fooling many others. I do occassionally become
> a bit "annoyed" with the ethics of people trying to pass themselves off
> as something credible, when it is very clear they are not. But, as long
> as I don't have to deal with them, I can usually just pass on by without
> too much concern, knowing that the truth is the truth, and always
> reveals itself in its own good time.

In a way I can agree with that too, but I think the issue here is communication and learning from one another as much as a search for truth.

So, in the spirit of "starting us off", how about examining, for example, the concept of parallel universes. Some channels have affirmed that and some have denied it, so let's leave the channeling out of it and toss it around among ourselves. This concept doesn't resonate with me personally. It seems to erase the significance of our life choices, and Michael keeps talking about how all is choice, in fact they seem (to me) to say that the major purpose of our various lives is making choices. In one was or another I am in touch with most of the things Michael teaches about, my past lives, my Entity mates, my overleaves etc. After I read Shepherd's J.O.Y.S. book I tried to get in touch with parallel universes too, but couldn't find anything there at all. Would others please share why that concept does or does not resonate with them? The object here isn't to convince anyone, or to take a vote, just to find the deeper truths that lie behind the issue. On this point I wouldn't expect complete agreement to be reached, but there may be something for each of us to learn. And in the process the body of Michael students may grow together.

Katherine


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:49:21 +0200
Subject: Re: Overleaves & Channeling

Hi folks,

Kate McMurry said:

> each of us develops a technical expertise within
> our lifetime, sometimes many different ones (esp. all you Scholars out
> there <G> ). The knowledge and experience we have becomes what I call (my
> own term), our "technical channel." The individual technical channel
> becomes the vessel or "tube" (hence, the word "channel") through which
> the entities we allow to speak through us work. In the case of Michael
> channeling, the "flavor" of Michael is slightly different with each
> person he presents himself through because each one has a different
> technical channel. For you astrology buffs, this is much the same way
> that each house is "flavored" by the planets and signs present in the
> birth chart. Or, to offer a more simple analogy, sunlight is white-gold
> in color, but when it shines through a pink window, it takes on a pink
> tinge, and when piercing a blue window, it appears to the observer on
> the other side to be blue-tinged, and so on.

And also:

> Many of you in your studies of the Michael Teachings may have noted that there
> are similarities between the characteristics of various overleaves, and
> a person who has not strongly mastered the meanings of the various
> overleaves will be a weak "technical channel" for this information. He
> or she may be dead-on accurate for the flavor of a characteristic, but
> may, due to having a poor assimilation of the overall overleaf
> information, when doing a chart place that flavor in the wrong spot,
> that is, assign it to the wrong overleaf.

This is very good, the most convincing explanation I have seen yet for the differences between channels. Brava!

And I would say that the lives as wandering monk, oracle or scribe wouldn't necessarily add up to being a Priest. That sounds more Scholarly to me, if anything (IMHO).

All in all thank you for an interesting and thought-provoking post. (and it wasn't too long)

Katherine


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 14:50:38 -0700
Subject: Sources for Casting information

Someone asked about "casting" information.

From the Concordance:
Casting Order (definition and implication) ... More Messages from Michael, chapter 8
Casting (Numbers) ... Journey of Your Soul, Chapter 11
The Stevens use casting (as a 1-part casting number/role "influence") in their readings and their workshops
Victoria Marina uses the 3-part casting number, similar to Shepherd's version, if I interpret them correctly


*************************************
Barbara Taylor, Rainbows & Miracles etc.


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 14:57:51 -0700
Subject: Atttendance at November Conference

Jennifer asked --

> Could someone ask Michael how I'm supposed to afford this conference???
> Or maybe he doesn't want me to attend...

It's really simple ... if you are supposed to be there, you will. If not, you won't.
It's not up to Michael whether or not you make it there.


Barbara Taylor


Date: 11 Sep 1997 15:20:57 -0700
Subject: Re: Atttendance at November

Thanks! I was afraid that was the response I would get... *smile*...

I guess I'll have to just start to save my pennies...

_jen

--------------------------------------
Date: 09/11/97 3:01 PM
To: Jennifer Slatten
From: Barbara Taylor

Jennifer asked --
> Could someone ask Michael how I'm supposed to afford this conference???
> Or maybe he doesn't want me to attend...

It's really simple ... if you are supposed to be there, you will. If
not, you won't.
It's not up to Michael whether or not you make it there.


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 16:22:02 -0700
Subject: Higher Centers, etc.

After reading all the digests since 9/1, I see why Ed made his comments...there's so much!! Also, many posts are repeated multiple times, or quoted several times, which gets tiring very quickly. Getting one e-mail per day is a bit easier than the volumes of e-mail, though many of them are huge and taking a whole big chunk of my hard disk!

Perhaps we could all be conscious of trimming a bit to lessen the strain??

About "newbies": Those of us who have been studying the teachings for a while need to be patient with the newbies. They're flocking to the teachings and we'll have to get used to it.

About "games" -- see my web site (http://www.itstime.com/game.htm)


**************************************
Barbara Taylor, Rainbows & Miracles etc.


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 19:37:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: re: O'leafs

HI All!

Sorry to bring up overleaves again, but I am really curious about the overleaves of two particular people. Could we do just two more?

1) Lee Carroll - writer/channel for The Kryon group
2) Neale Donald Walsch - writer/channel of *Conversations With God*

Anyone ? Thanks. LOVING & LIGHTING you ALL! pmp* :-)


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 19:51:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Atttendance at November Conference

In a message dated 97-09-11 18:01:34 EDT, btaylor@itstime.com writes:

<< Jennifer asked --
> Could someone ask Michael how I'm supposed to afford this conference???
> Or maybe he doesn't want me to attend...

It's really simple ... if you are supposed to be there, you will. If
not, you won't.
It's not up to Michael whether or not you make it there.

--
*************************************************
Barbara Taylor, The Institute for Management Excellence

Ouch!!!!!! Was that a zinger? I guess us peasant folk will just stay home and read "Seth and Jane Roberts." .........."Let 'em eat cake!" ;-p

Dave


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 19:51:06 -0400
Subject: Re: O'leafs

Pmp wrote:

> HI All!
>
> Sorry to bring up overleaves again, but I am really curious about the
> overleaves of two particular people. Could we do just two more?
>
> 1) Lee Carroll - writer/channel for The Kryon group
> 2) Neale Donald Walsch - writer/channel of *Conversations With God*
>
> Anyone ? Thanks. LOVING & LIGHTING you ALL! pmp* :-)

I've been curious about these two folks myself. I'll get to these in the next 2 or 3 days.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: 11 Sep 1997 17:31:03 -0700
Subject: Re: Higher Centers, etc.

Barbara wrote:

"About "newbies": Those of us who have been studying the teachings for a
while need to be patient with the newbies. They're flocking to the
teachings and we'll have to get used to it. "

Yes, be patient with us "newbies" we are not so unenlightened as we may seem, in fact I think we are equally worthy of Michael teachings, we just don't know the "buzz words" and "jargon". So we may ask banal questions, or seem overly excited at the prospect of this "new" (to us) knowledge of the universe, but as I recall in the teachings we are all aware of everything, we are all tapped into the "god head" (probably wrong term), we just need to remember. Our paths have brought us here... now.... not when or if you feel like sharing with us. And if I have been totally misled by Michael teachings and they are just another Elitist-pseudo-religion-where-no-one-gets-to-heaven-but-me, then I apologize for wasting band width here. I realize that in our culture knowledge = power, but I am here to learn, and teach, and grow and I'm sorry I get my hackles up at those who hoarde their gifts and knowledge and scoff at my ingorance. No one here was born with instant Michael Channeling abilities...

I apologize for this rant and hope I didn't offend anyone. That was not my intention. Just standing up for the "Flocking Newbies"...

Peace,
Jen


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 20:55:07 -0400
Subject: Parallel Lives

Katherine wrote:

[clipped]

> So, in the spirit of "starting us off", how about examining, for example,
> the concept of parallel universes. Some channels have affirmed that and
> some have denied it, so let's leave the channeling out of it and toss it
> around among ourselves. This concept doesn't resonate with me personally.
> It seems to erase the significance of our life choices, and Michael keeps
> talking about how all is choice, in fact they seem (to me) to say that the
> major purpose of our various lives is making choices. In one was or
> another I am in touch with most of the things Michael teaches about, my
> past lives, my Entity mates, my overleaves etc. After I read Shepherd's
> J.O.Y.S. book I tried to get in touch with parallel universes too, but
> couldn't find anything there at all. Would others please share why that
> concept does or does not resonate with them? The object here isn't to
> convince anyone, or to take a vote, just to find the deeper truths that lie
> behind the issue. On this point I wouldn't expect complete agreement to be
> reached, but there may be something for each of us to learn. And in the
> process the body of Michael students may grow together.
>
> Katherine

Somewhere, out there in some parallel universe, there is a quiet little cocktail lounge with a cool jazz pianist playing chess and discussing practical metaphysics with a bunch of mature and old souls huddled around his piano bar. His name is Kenneth Broom.

Somewhere, out there in some parallel universe, there is a middle aged electrical engineer making a bunch of money with a fortune 500 company, who sometimes wishes he had taken that job as a cocktail pianist so he wouldn't feel he had to go home to a wife with whom he has no rapport at all. His name is Kenneth Broom.

Somewhere, out there in some parallel universe, there is a truck driver who owns his own rig plus 4 more, and is planning his retirement in three years when he'll be 62 years old. He'll sell his trucks and live off his Social Security, his retirement fund, and his Microsoft stock dividends. His name is Kenneth Broom.

Somewhere, out there in some parallel universe, there is a bearded middle aged man talking story with some young Hawaiian men and women and teaching and explaining to them how to paddle a Hawaiian canoe, and how to navigate in the open sea without a compass or a sextant. His name is Keneke Pulumi.

Somewhere, out there in some parallel universe, a man has 10 Olympic Gold Metals in his trophy case for setting 10 Olympic Records records for swimming the 50 Meter and 100 Meter Freestyle. His name is Kenneth Broom

And here in this parallel universe there is me doing my internet thing and fairly happy about it. My name is also Kenneth Broom.

And these are just six of me, and all are the results of different "choices" I made at different times.

Peace and Light and Love to All.
Kenneth Broom


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:04:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Higher Centers, etc.

Jennifer Slatten wrote:

[clipped]

> I apologize for this rant and hope I didn't offend anyone. That was not
> my intention. Just standing up for the "Flocking Newbies"...

Well ranted, Jen. Good for you and the "Flock" :>)#

I also see we've got another punster in our midst. I liked that too.

BTW: Hopefully some of the Higher Centers stuff will be posted tomorrow. Maybe all? Who knows?

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:31:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Sources for Casting information

Barbara Taylor wrote:

>: Someone asked about "casting" information.

It was me who asked--thanks a lot! :)

Kate


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:34:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Overleaves & Channeling

Thanks for the feedback, Katherine! :)

A Scholar, huh? Well, I have no doubt I'm a mix of Sage, Scholar and Priest, it's the calculation of which is the primary (role), secondary (bleedthrough) and tertiary (casting) that's a challenge to figure out. :}

> All in all thank you for an interesting and thought-provoking post.
> (and it wasn't too long)

Music to Sagey ears. <G>

Kate


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 18:23:09 -0700
Subject: Re: Atttendance at November Conference

> > Could someone ask Michael how I'm supposed to afford this conference???
> > Or maybe he doesn't want me to attend...
>
> It's really simple ... if you are supposed to be there, you will. If
> not, you won't.
> It's not up to Michael whether or not you make it there.
>
> Ouch!!!!!! Was that a zinger? I guess us peasant folk will just stay home
> and read "Seth and Jane Roberts." .........."Let 'em eat cake!" ;-p

Dave,
It wasn't meant as a "zinger" -- just simply stating what is. We make
our own choices and only WE are responsible for the results of those
choices. I'm an old pragmatic priest...the fewer words, the clearer the
message.
This whole conference thing is getting a bit overblown. There are
Michael meetings, groups, workshops, retreats, get-togethers of all
sorts every single week in various parts of the world. People
participate, or they don't. It's not a big deal.
Michael reminded us last week that our lives unfold in the appropriate
manner, at the appropriate pace. Trying to push them faster or heal our
issues faster will only cause us pain. They suggested we lighten up a
bit and stop trying to solve centuries worth of old issues in one
counseling session.

Barbara


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 18:35:46 -0700
Subject: Re: Higher Centers, etc.

> I am here to learn, and teach, and grow and I'm sorry I get my
> hackles up at those who hoarde their gifts and knowledge and scoff at my
> ingorance. No one here was born with instant Michael Channeling abilities...

Jen,
The best thing the newbies can do is read the Michael books (at least
The Michael Handbook -- thoroughly!), try to learn about their own
overleaves, subscribe to the many newsletters to pick up additional
information, take a workshop (where available), then ask reasonable
questions and take responsibility for their own learning.
If new students are serious about learning, they will find a great
deal of support. If they want knowledge handed to them without effort,
the support won't be there.
The Internet has opened up a great new avenues of support. It's
there to help answer the basic questions. Use it. It's free even!
Those of us who have put up web sites have spend significant sums of
money and time to make basic information available to anyone.
That's not hoarding and scoffing from my viewpoint.

Barbara


Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 21:51:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Overleaves & Channeling

MetaSyn@aol.com wrote:

> Dear Kate -- Great, great long post.

Thanks, Ed! :)

> If I were to wager on what you finally decide your role is (that is,
> what it really is), I would bet on Sage. I get a pretty strong leaning that
> way from poles from your own experience? If sage, you will know both
> teaching and "motormouth" well; if priest, it will be compassion and zeal.
> Zeal might

Ed, zeal and "preachiness" has been a major source of karma (esp. the rejection kind <G>) this lifetime. I've learned, for the most part, to tone it down. Only my dh, for the most part, hears me on my soapbox about social injustice these days. <G> I find that my Scholar side (and Observation, too) is the most restful part of me (being in Growth, I don't get much of that <G>), so I tend, as much as possible, to default to that, esp. since I became a mother of a Warrior in Dominance and Aggression nine years ago. :}

I identify very much with the compassion component of the Priest. I am empathic to the point of hypervigilence, and I have to consciously attempt to tune that out. But it is a very useful skill for writing fiction and getting deeply immersed in characters.

> Anyway, from what you have said so far I get the definite impression
> that Sage is more your natural role and Priest is an added flavor.

Interesting. :) You see me as Sage and Katherine as Scholar, and I am both those things, and this brings up a point I meant to, briefly, address yesterday: someone said, why don't channels who are *wrong* just admit it? The trouble is, when several channels differ on the overleaves of a particular person, it can take some time for the recipient of these readings to puzzle out what is "right" and what is "wrong." As I say, IMO&E, the shadings between the Role, Bleedthrough and Casting (R, B & C) are quite complex. Figuring them out it similar to determining body type. For the latter, I've found that most people are not just one type. They are usually mixed. And when this is so, you have to decide on percentages of each type. In the same way, sometimes we are dealing with shifting "percentages" of the amount of time we spend in undiluted R, B or C. Now, some may say that they are *never* undiluted, that they are always shading or coloring each other's function. Possibly, but I think we all tend to shift with great frequency between overleaves. That is, the amount of emphasis on a particular overleaf will vary according to the relationship or situation we find ourselves in at the moment. IMO, no one is a "Johnny one note" who is the same in all places and situations (and if they are, they probably are either mentally ill or totally socially maladapted <G>).

This concept of (for lack of a term) shifting emphasis between overleaves is something else that makes giving a reading of overleaves both from simple face-to-face observation and channeling difficult. Though channeling probably has a better chance of cutting through the confusion it brings. In this regard, I think maybe a major purpose of the Michael teachings on overleaves is to stimulate in each of us exposed to it a deep desire to consciously know ourselves. We may never get that knowing totally "right" or even largely figured out, but the pondering can be quite revealing. (Thus spake the Scholar in me. <G>) Who was it who said, "It isn't the answers that matter but the questions?" :)

Kate


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 01:56:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Atttendance at November Conference

In a message dated 97-09-12 01:42:12 EDT, btaylor@itstime.com (Barbara Taylor) writes:

<< Dave,
It wasn't meant as a "zinger" -- just simply stating what is. We make
our own choices and only WE are responsible for the results of those
choices. I'm an old pragmatic priest...the fewer words, the clearer the
message. >>

Well, I'm an "idealist" (I think?), so I'll always try to improve the content of your salient verbiage. ;-p Besides, I was just messin' with ya.....

Dave


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 07:58:04 -0400
Subject: The Higher Centers - 1

Ok gang, here's the first one on the Higher Centers. It is sent as an attachment. I'll reserve my personal comments until they all are done.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research

The Higher Centers: A dialogue between The Michaels and Kenneth Broom for the benefit of The Michael Teachings List

September 12, 1997, 07:00 am

Kenneth Broom (KB):
Michael, please tell us about the "Higher Centers".

The Michaels (TM):
"Anyone can access these centers at any time by simply switching the focus of their personal consciousness. The higher centers are not just for the fortunate few who say they can easily access them. We sense that you didn't expect us to start with this topic. Your question was a fairly general one so we started with what we felt needed to be said. There are those of you who feel that they are lacking some knowledge or talent and so are not entering into the discussions as fully as they could. We suggest that you come from out of your shadows and feel free to ask your questions openly and with love. As some of you have noted, it is the quality of the questions that prompt people to go within themselves and ferret out knowings that they did not know they possessed. You are all much more knowing and loving than you feel yourselves to be.

"This knowingness also holds true for your Higher Centers. You all have access to all of the overleaves. Open yourselves and your minds to our words and allow these words to jog your memories, so to speak. We are not telling you something new or something that you do not know already know. The overleaf system is our way of "organizing" information that already exists and is already available. We asked specific questions of the akashic and received answers specific to the questions we asked. You all can do the same.

"Before your recent birth into flesh and blood, you decided which of the overleaves would "best" serve your higher purpose of experiencing as much of the physical earth plane as you could. You each chose to "focus" your perceptions through a "specific" set of overleaves, and not at all, did you leave behind you the remaining overleaf possibilities.

"Now, the higher centers are gateways to the paths leading to your highest conceptions and perceptions of your total being. What does this mean...? This means that, regardless of your perceived physicality, you still have existences from here to the TAO. You exist from "Earth to TAO", or if you wish, you can say that you exist from "TAO to Earth". You have never ever stopped being any part of your higher self. You have just extended a part of your higher self into a lower vibration physical earth plane.

"Through the higher centers you can experience any or all of your higher realities, or any of your higher selves, limited only by your personal abilities to conceive of the existence of these realities. You cannot consciously perceive what you cannot, or do not, consciously conceive of. However, if you are open to the "concept" of different realities and are without fear or trepidation, then you can perceive almost any reality. This also includes the parallel physical realities that have been mentioned.

"Now, your conceptions may be limited by prior conditioning, by self or by others, or they may be limited by your overleaves. If you look at each leaf carefully, you can perceive that some overleaves are more forgiving of conceptual flexibility than others.

"We will discuss more of the higher centers in the very near future. Ask your questions. We will try to answer them to the satisfaction of all."


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:24:16 -0400
Subject: The Higher Centers - 2

The Higher Centers - Second Entry:
A dialogue between The Michaels and Kenneth Broom for the The Michael Teachings List

September 12, 1997,
09:00 am

Kenneth Broom (KB):
Michael, have you any preferences as to how we should continue this discussion about the "Higher Centers".

The Michaels (TM):
"We prefer clarity and accuracy. We'd also like to start with the Higher Moving Center and its Poles, continue with the Higher Emotional Center and its Poles, and end with the Higher Intellectual Center and its Poles."

KB:
I've read somewhere that the "Poles" of the higher centers are not postive and negative like the other overleaves. Could you talk about this please.

TM:
"Yes, we could... Would you like us to? ...Just teasing a little bit here. If you take a close look at the poles of the higher centers you'll find that there is no flavor of separation or apartness or selfness to what you would have called the negative poles of the higher centers.

"The situation is more like "Exalted" and "Ordinal" rather than "Positive" and "Negative".

"Let's look at these in closer detail:

---

The Exalted Poles of the Higher Centers have a "wider" and a "not-so-deep" view of the realities that they lead to. For you astrologers this like a "Jupiter" effect. Its energies are focused widely and relatively shallowly.

The Ordinal Poles of the Higher Centers have a "deeper" and a "not-so-wide" view of the realitites that they lead to. For you astrologers this is like a "Saturn" effect. Its energies are focused narrowly, and very deep.

---

"The Exalted Pole of the Higher Moving Center (Action Axis) is Harmony. Harmony is all inclusive, by definition, in its focus.

"The Ordinal Pole of the Higher Moving Center (Action Axis) is Desire or Lust. Lust or Desire is usually focused on one object or fragment at a time.

---

"The Exalted Pole of the Higher Emotional Center (Inspiration Axis) is Agape (Love). Agape is all inclusive, by definition, in its focus.

"The Ordinal Pole of the Higher Emotional Center (Inspiration Axis) is Empathy. Empathy is usually focused on one object or fragment at a time.

---

"The Exalted Pole of the Higher Intellectual Center (Expression Axis) is Truth. Truth is all inclusive in its focus.

"The Ordinal Pole of the Higher Intellectual Center (Expression Axis) is Telepathy. Telepathy is usually focused on, or from, one object or fragment at a time

---

"So we have another parallel in life, i.e. between the poles of the higher centers and the poles of the axes.

"Enough for this session. we'll discuss more in another few hours."

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, Columbia, MD, USA
aka I.A.M. Research


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:59:22 -0800
Subject: hmmmmm....
From: "otterly"

OKAY.... without adding any negativity and attitude, I will just say that I guess this list is not for the average Michael Student/Channel... I understand the method of debate/bickering, but I find it tedious and unfulfilling... I want to add that I have recieved a multitude of e-mails from "newbies" and Students alike that find this list being too dominated by the context set by one person. I wish this list was more of an informative sharing than a who has the most pronounced authority and ancientness. Although intentions can be read as loving, the affect can be more manipulating than one anticipated. I know that last comment can be analysed and used against me as if I have something to work out (maybe that's true), but please do not overlook the "truth" in it either. Many who have written have expressed a sort of anxiety in reading the posts and feel at a loss of words to respond. I think it's just because it's hard to be a "troublemaker", but that's been my job all ! this life, so I'll speak in general that I just wish it was friendlier. It seems it's more about a popularity contest. And while there is a pronounced amount of "old" souls here, it certainly doesn't make us an authority on anything, and it's actually maybe a little better for now to claim being a "mature" soul, because "old" is getting synonymous with "annoying". Michael has "warned" that "old" souls feel so lonely, yet when they come across each other there tends to be an arrogance and stuffiness expressed. As in: "that's what YOU learned!??? well, that's just stupid, because I've been here just as long, if not longer, and I learned THIS, and you just look like a dork!" I know I think this way, heh, heh. Rather than trying to "fit" in to the mentality dominant on this list, I have opted as a channel to slip away where Michael's Teaching and the people involved feel more like a family/home (?) A few of you have really impressed me and I'm glad to have met you. You ! are genuinely real people, but I can continue my relationship with you through my mail. As for those who have turned from the list and Michael because of the mentality here, I feel it is just a matter of preference for more peace and sharing. a preference, that's all, and I hope those who "live" here continue the bliss it seems is shared amongst you. OF COURSE THOUGH I'LL POP IN A FEW TIMES... so I'm not gone for good! ha ha ha ha ha ha.... be loved otterly


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:25:01 +0000
Subject: Re: Overleaves & Channeling

Whew! Thanks for that great post, Kate! Do you have any words left for your book? ; )

A comment in general... I think that learning to channel, or at least learning to converse with your higher self, is good tool for growth. A primary teaching of shamanism is to learn to live in and experience the physical and spiritual worlds simultaneously. Learning to channel could ultimately aid in the facilitation of this process.

John Rogers


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:25:01 +0000
Subject: Re: Atttendance at November Conference

For those desiring to attend the November conference, but perceiving themselves as unable to do so, maybe they could find some local Michael students and create their own get-together. Two ideas jumped at me as how to find the other students in your area. 1. Ask at bookstores that specialize in "new age" type stuff. 2. Post an ad in your local freebie throw-away ad paper.

Also, what does Michael say about manifesting?

John Rogers


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 11:29:15 -0700
From: Dick Hein
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael

I am posting this for Janet Botto, who is unable to because of computer problems. At this time she has only limited access through an alternate account. I apologize to her for the delay - I was offline from 9/9 @ ~ 0300 to 9/12 @ ~ 0300.

Here, then, is Janet's post -

<------------------------------[Begin quote]------------------------------>

 

On Wed. 10 Sep 97, John Rogers wrote:

> Found the following on Tricia Sullivan's web site:
>
> http://pw2.netcom.com/~dlstas/home.html
>
> Though I am new to this, it was obvious who the initials in question
> were. I am curious to hear opinions from Michael veterans in regards
> to the following.

 

I would like to share my opinion on this. But first, I'll let my Warrior come forward while my sweet, shy Server retreats - and watch out because she is PISSED.

My opinion, not so humbly as usual, is that the posting in question is not only highly questionable, it is trashy, tasteless garbage. When I first received it from the author via email a while back, I was incensed, because I know and care deeply for "A.P.", but I was able to dismiss it easily as the garbage that it is. But now that she has posted it to the Web, and only thinly disguised the identity of the person in question, I am outraged. I am outraged not only because the person in question is my friend, but because, AFAIK, said person is universally regarded in the Michael community as a clear and gifted Michael channel.

I can't even delve into the other objectionable notions contained in the message (the exclusivity factor for one) - I'm too upset about the treatment of my wonderful friend. I'll leave that to others who may have an opinion. The opinions expressed already by John, Seth, Kenneth and Gloria were very well said and I agree with them heartily.

Sorry for the anger folks, but agape has escaped me at the moment.

Take care all,
Janet


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 11:50:21 +0000
From: Dean
Subject: Re: Parallel Lives

Katherine offered [clipped]:

> So, in the spirit of "starting us off", how about examining, for example,
> the concept of parallel universes. Some channels have affirmed that and
> some have denied it, so let's leave the channeling out of it and toss it
> around among ourselves. This concept doesn't resonate with me personally.
> It seems to erase the significance of our life choices...

Speaking as a voracious scholar, I would *hope* there are other versions of me out there in parallel universes gathering up all that information I'm not getting to!

I don't know that, for me, it erases any significance, but it sure changes your perspective. (Anyone else enjoy the opening of the movie "Contact," where they keep pulling back from the earth into the cosmos, and _keep_ pulling back until you think they can't *possibly* pull back any more, and then they pull back some MORE...) This reminds me of what has been pointed to as a source for older soul's difficulties with self-esteem. A little knowledge of All That Is sure can take personality down a few pegs, in terms of its own self-importance and centrism. Hopefully, after a period of fluctuating between feelings of grandeur and dust, you arrive at a middle ground...

Kudos to Kenneth for knowing where 'else' he's at. I get flashes from my guys from time to time, but nothing so specific. I wish them well, but I figure I don't really need to know what they're up to. I got my hands full over here. Now, all you publishing-minded fragments out there, here's a book idea for you: "Letters to Parallel Lives." One person's thoughts on the choices their other selves got to make...


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 13:54:42 -0400
Subject: Re[2]: Channeling Michael

Janet,

Wow! This subject certainly created a lot of anger and hostility, which, by the way serves no good purpose. Everyone who is involved in these kinds of "channeling feuds and uproars" knows their own intentions and integrity. Stay in your circle. Why let someone else's reality, perceptions, deceptions, or whatever deplete your energy? If it is what they need at the moment to learn a lesson, let them be with it. Do not judge, keep it simple and let it go. Maybe even send them a little light if you feel they need. I know I'm gonna' send you some!

Love

Lorraine

_________ Reply Separator_________
Subject: Re: Channeling Michael
Author: Dick Hein
Date: 9/12/97 6:29 PM

I am posting this for Janet Botto .......

My opinion, not so humbly as usual, is that the posting in question is
not only highly questionable, it is trashy, tasteless garbage. When I
first received it from the author via email a while back, I was
incensed, because I know and care deeply for "A.P.", but I was able to
dismiss it easily as the garbage that it is ........


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 13:04:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: telling it like it is

I remember asking in a channeling session one time, regarding a friend of mine.... I was angry. I saw some things my friend was doing that I thought were pretty hypocritical (hypocracy is one thing that really pisses me off--I know it is my thing, to deal with in myself--but we really get to see it when we are in relationship with another person.) but I didn't know if I should tell him. I asked Michael about it and they said that if I was truly this person's friend, then I owe it to him to tell him the truth because my withholding what I saw might be of more of a disservice to him, and by telling him my truth, he might get a lesson he might not have otherwise. I've thought a lot about this. (I've also gotten to talk to my friend. He had a few "insights" about me to share as well. Wouldn't you know it. ;^p) I've given people feedback before, that they had not asked for, and I've been burned for it. Sometimes I wonder. People don't always want to hear the truth. Even when you are clear in your intent, authentic in your communication, people misunderstand you. They can only see where you're coming from in the context of where they have been as well. Soft words of compassion can easily be misconstrued as manipulative self-righteousness. Sometimes you just have to accept that they are at where they are at for a reason, that wasn't meant to be clear to you. Soul age is just a tool for seeing where you're at and where you've been. When you think that older is better, you give in to the superiority which is exactly where your ego can take over the game. Your ego was meant to be a tool for you to use to live on the physical plane, not to rule you. Just as your soul-age and overleaves, and body, are tools. They all deserve the honor and respect of the power that they have--including the ego. The ego is a very very powerful tool--like a chain saw. The chief features are like what kind of blade you have on the end of your chain saw. You have to be careful which way you point it--or you might hurt someone or yourself. Keeping it in the right position, keeping it clean, and honoring the power that it does have, will allow you to use this tool in the way it was intended (for cutting down trees of course, hehhe, or in our case, cutting through life's lessons) smoothly. Boy this analogy could go far, but I'll leave it up to Dave to take it from here. ;^)

IOW, don't belittle the power your ego has--it'll bite you back in the end, or in the back-end, whichever you don't expect. I'm not immune from having used my perception of being an older soul to make myself feel better than someone else. But I usually catch myself when I do it now, and that's important, I feel, because in that moment of *consciousness*, I can own my *accountability* for my ego there, and in that, I am *free* to make a new *choice*. It really is all about choices. I don't admit all this just to give into any self-deprecation I have, I say it because it's really all one can do--share your own experiences with others. All my scholarly theorizing about how things should or could be would just be a farce, hypocracy, and lies. (And as you know those things make me mad, heh.)

I don't like it when people tell me not to be angry, or not to hate something, because I have found that I really have to move through the emotion. Emotions pass, but when we deny them they stay stuck. So if I just say, I'm not mad, but I didn't get to go through the feeling, it gets stuck, then I just have to deal with it later. I've done that too much in too many lives. I'm glad some of you here have the courage to speak up about what you see, what you feel, what you believe, and just do it from a place of authenticity. I know your intent is not to hurt others with your truth, but to point out something that hopefully someone will get a lesson on. I get it. Go ahead and express yourselves. No one is superior or inferior here, you might get disagreement, but this is a place to discuss those things. If you think I'm just in *my* ego then go ahead and tell me. I'm open to looking at that and learning something new. I hope everyone is open to that, but maybe that's just my not wanting to be singled out--ego fear of being judged! That's a big one for me!

BTW: No one has any exclusive rights to Michael IMO, go with your intuition on that, as you would with any channeled material....

Later....

Lori Tostado


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 17:21:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: You know you're an OLD soul when....

In a message dated 97-09-12 14:04:24 EDT, Otterly writes:

<< And while there is a pronounced amount of "old" souls here, it certainly
doesn't make us an authority on anything, and it's actually maybe a little
better for now to claim being a "mature" soul, because "old" is getting
synonymous with "annoying". Michael has "warned" that "old" souls feel so
lonely, yet when they come across each other there tends to be an arrogance
and stuffiness expressed. As in: "that's what YOU learned!??? well, that's
just stupid, because I've been here just as long, if not longer, and I
learned THIS, and you just look like a dork!" >>

(Laughing and laughing; long, sinewy strands of white glistening drool dangling down to the keyboard; gasping for breath; tears flowing down the cheeks; swallowing tongue......;-p)

THAT WAS FUNNY!!!!! ;-P

Well said, Otterly. :-) It does seem at times that geriatric souls have tendencies towards turning their noses up so high that if they sneezed, they'd blow their hats off. I think part of this is due to meeting so many like-minded individuals on this list. It gives them an awful inferiority complex -- they've just met someone as good as they are. Heh heh...;-p However, I don't necessarily believe Old souls are "annoying", just galactically strange. Here's a quick list to determine if you fall into this pattern:

YOU KNOW YOU'RE AN OLD SOUL WHEN.....

1. You collect spore samples, and then EAT them.

2. You attempt to categorize the ingredients of ice cubes.

3. You get lost on an elevator.

4. You try to wake up a sleeping bag.

5. You pick your nose for a delectable harvest, but are so socially unacceptable that you forget to say "grace."

6. You free base using the dried, crystallized remnants of Michael's old bathwater.

7. You pump 30, 000 gallons of grapefruit juice into a cow, but don't have the sense to seek cover in a nuclear fall-out shelter.

8. You braid your armpit hair and bead your teeth.

9. You summons a demon to possess your body, and then have Richard Simmons perform the exorcism.

10. You accost professional atheletes by saying repeatedly to them, "Uh, oh..spaghetti -O's" until they punch you in the face.

11. You take a baton into a restroom and attempt to conduct a "bowel" movement.

12. You lick out the inside of a can of Spam until you puke.

13. You pour water on your pillow in order to have a wet dream.

14. You have the cornea in your eyeballs pierced so you can hang decorative ornaments from the bleeding sockets.

15. At a dinner party, you leap onto the table and expose yourself to your friends, loudly exclaiming, "Look! My boil is draining!"

Dave - Off to drink a SNOT slurpee ;-p Ah, yes. The life of a geriatric soul is good.


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 16:33:18 -0400
From: Lorraine
Subject: Re: telling it like it is

Very insightful stuff, Lori!

Lori said:

I don't like it when people tell me not to be angry, or not to hate
something, because I have found that I really have to move through
the emotion. Emotions pass, but when we deny them they stay stuck.
So if I just say, I'm not mad, but I didn't get to go through the
feeling, it gets stuck, then I just have to deal with it later.

Regarding emotions such as anger or hate, I have read in
"Bartholomew" and several other channeled materials that our
emotions are our children. We can say that others "make us angry or
sad", however, this is passing responsibility outside of ourselves.
We create our feelings, therefore we should embrace them, whether
they are negative or positive. Let them flow, love them and then
release them, for they have served their purpose (a lesson?). It is
true, if they are denied they will remain in the tissues waiting to
erupt at any moment, in any unexpected form, and you will be forced
to deal with them. Does this make sense? It has helped me out
tremendously when dealing with stress, etc., etc. Just thought I
would share this little "method of dealing".

BTW: No one has any exclusive rights to Michael IMO, go with your
intuition on that, as you would with any channeled material....

THANKS!!!!!!


Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 14:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: You know you're an OLD soul when....

16. You start trying to recycle your Depends undergarments, but find
that using them as hats irritates your scaly bald scalp.

17. Your soul-cataracts start to get so bad, that your third-eye goes
blind.

18. Your peril-sensitive sunglasses start falling off your nose.
(But what does it matter anyway? You're blind and terrorized.)

19. You find out that there IS something out there that's better than
sex! But you're too lazy and tired to find out what it is.

20. Your chakras start giving into gravity: "They've fallen, and they
can't get up!"

21. You get all excited when you're watching the Borg on Star Trek as
they say, "Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated." And you're
going, "Oh yes, yes, please...assimilate me!"

22. You now are old enough that you even take full accountability when
you release your flatulence: but you tell the victims of your expression
around you that you were "making a melody."

--------

OK, I want my slurpee now. Uhhh...well, maybe I'll make my own, heh. ;^) 

Lori (sicko freak in disguise)

 


Next Page | 1997/37   
.....................................................................................................................................

Michael Teachings | Site Map | Welcome | Introduction | Michael FAQ | Soul Age | Roles | Overleaves | Advanced Topics | Nine Needs | Michael Channeling | Related Articles | Channels & Resources | Michael Tools | Michael Books | Michael Chat | Michael Student Database  | Role Photos | Spiritweb List Archives | Personality Profile | Translations | Glossary | Links |