Related Articles Spiritweb Michael

Spiritweb Michael List
1998 - Week 14


SUMMARY:  Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Praesent vestibulum molestie lacus. Aenean nonummy hendrerit mauris. Phasellus porta. Fusce suscipit varius mi. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Nulla dui.


THE POSTS:

Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 01:26:57 EDT
Subject: Re: Dave!

In a message dated 98-04-05 22:37:54 EDT, Kathy writes:

 

I am so sorry. I've upset you, I can tell, there's not one mention of
toe cheese or ice cream in your post about publishing problems. I would
be devasted if books were to disapeer off the face of the planet. My
intention, admittedly not clearly stated, is too find a way that the
self-published authors could keep overhead costs down, realize some
profit and get the information they have to thier readership.

 

Heh heh...I wasn't upset. I perfectly understood the issue, and I think that transfering the out-of-print books you mentioned to a CD-Rom format is a good idea. I was just playing the Devil's advocate concerning the implementation of such an idea to cherished works of literature. Thus, I was expressing my worry that someday a young soul techno-nerd might take an idea such as electronic print and use it to herald the demise of all books as we know them. Admittedly, such a prospect is probably unlikely, but what a scary thought.
I think the day the libraries shut their doors, is the day I will finally cycle off this planet.

Dave


Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 01:13:06 -0500
Subject: Essence' Name

J J Tan wrote:

 

> Ha! I haven't yet heard my Essence, much less see it...
>
> Regards.

 

To: All

    While we're on the subject, I have not "seen" my essence, but have felt it's presence quite often. However, once in meditation, I asked if my essence had a name, and that if so, that essence let me know what it's name was. About three days later, I had forgotten my request, but unexpectedly, I woke up with the sounds, "Os-wa-gol-li-gar." I didn't know what it was but wrote it down in my dream journal. Later I realized that was my essence's name.

    Later, I asked in a channelling session (Aaron Christeaan) if that was indeed my essence's name, and Michael confirmed it, but that the name is how it would be perceived auditorally in the physical plane. They said that when essences approach each other in the astral plane, there are no names but a signature vibration that is distinct to each essence, and that the signature shifts and changes when essence changes. In short, the "name" evolves reflecting it's (pardon the pun) essence.

    I thought I'd share that.

John Macchietto
or
Os-wa-gol-li-gar for short


Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 05:32:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Finding Michael Books

Barbara wrote:

 

> I don't have the same issues of not having enough material,
> therefore maybe don't understand why there is a problem that
> needs solving. My only problem is finding the time to deal with
> all that IS available already. I can't keep up with it.
>
> Barbara

 

BIG SNIP

Barbara,

I think that is what so many of the California Core Groups feel. What those of you who are in the California Community are not aware of is how difficult getting new information is for those of us who are scattered across the country. When the first book "MFM" came out I found it in a big bookstore in Springfield, MO. Then as the others came out I managed to find them by going to the New Age section of the same bookstore on my rare visits to that town (it was 60 miles away from me). I just found "Michael For The Millenium" last Spring when a Barnes & Noble bookstore opened in Cape Girardeau, MO where I work. In the interim (maybe 10 years) nothing.

I know that all of the channels are coming forth with new information all of the time and since I got on the internet (which is the exception not the rule in this area), I have had access to what all of you in the mainstream consider old hat. Since I live in an area that is not only under-educated, but also pays very low salaries, I have to pick and choose what I will purchase. I have subscribed to a newsletter and I am gradually purchasing books and tapes that I think will be of use to me but I'm usually buying a pig in a poke. I do not know until I've received the material, whether it will be useful to me at my stage of growth. I was quite disappointed in a tape I just recently received that I paid $20 for and there was maybe 30 minutes of information on it. And the information was information I already had.

What I am trying to say is that many, many Michael students are not even aware that there is new material out here. And a way needs to be found, paper, electronic, whatever, to get the material out, that is beneficial to the author and to the purchaser. I do not know the answer, but I think that the electronic means is well worth looking at. It won't solve the entire problem, but it certainly would help.

Jeanne Holley


Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 22:19:37 +0800
Subject: Re: Life and Death and other misc stuff

Ed wrote on 4/4/98 7:21 pm:

 

>I think suicides are going to be dramatically prevalent in the Bible Belt area
>in years to come. We should probably come to terms with it in advance.

 

Just curious. Where is this Bible _Belt_? The Middle East? And why the increase in suicide in that area? Because of the Moslem Extremists on Jihat?

J J Tan


Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 12:00:05 EDT
Subject: Book publishing profitability

 

| The issue of publication is interesting and an area which is evolving.
| For the Michael authors/channels there is such an extremely small core
| audience to reach that even self-publication must not yield much
| revenue. Then there is an audience saturation point to be considered as
| well. How many authors can we support on a book by book approach?

<< Shepherd seems to be doing alright. >>

 

So far, my books haven't been very profitable for me. Maybe about 5000 each have sold so far, and even though I self-publish, I have a distributor that takes a large percentage of what it collects from wholesalers or bookstores, so there's not much margin. Plus my first distributor went bankrupt, owing me a bunch of money--ouch!

Any publisher will tell you that the book business is very tough, especially right now. The superstore chains buy large quantities; then, if they don't move right away, the chains return most of them, leaving the publishers high and dry--returns are a terrible problem right now: they come in lieu of cash, more and more. I publish my books because I must, but I also need to make it work for me financially. I have four more books that are basically finished and awaiting publication, three channeled from Michael.

I created my web site hoping to sell large quantities of books directly to readers, which would begin to make publishing profitable. I am strongly considering using bulk e-mail to promote the site and sales, because I don't see any other way to make it work, but I have mixed feelings because I know most people don't like "spam." However, most spam is selling MLMs, sex sites, or bulk e-mailing software. Maybe people wouldn't mind so much an unsensationalistic offer for books, especially since nowadays, people pay for their ISP with a flat fee, so it doesn't cost them anything to get more bulk e-mail.

I am surprised at how few books and other reputable products are sold through bulk e-mail. Either it's a bad idea, or it's a great idea that hasn't caught on yet--or it's the bad reputation of spam. I personally don't mind the spam anymore; I quickly delete most of it, but occasionally something looks interesting and I read it. I once bought a useful book that way.

If I do bulk e-mailing, I can hire a service to do it for me, which is very expensive, or I can buy a PC (there's no software for Macs) and do it myself, also very expensive. I can buy CD-Roms with lists of millions of addresses (many bad, no doubt) and mail to everyone. Or I can buy software that pulls addresses off of appropriate targeted sites (new age, alternative medicine, etc.), which is much more time-consuming, but less likely to put mail in the hands of fundamentalist Christians who think that channeling is the work of Satan.

I have asked for inner guidance on all this, and have been told only that I should put one foot in front of the other and I would be shown what to do. I finally got most of the bugs out of my web site (http://summerjoy.com), after working hard on it for six months, and am now "ready for prime time."

I'd really appreciate your feedback on this.

All the best,
Shepherd


Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 12:00:07 EDT
Subject: Essence and Rest and Godness

Dear Kenneth,

This is just wonderful! So empowering. Thanks for writing it.

I totally agree about not childishly worshiping essence. If essence were fully evolved, it wouldn't be here. All parts of self are in this together, making mistakes, learning and evolving. It's true that essence has the larger picture, but personality has the smaller picture, and both are needed.

I see essence and personality as an equal partnership, a collaboration with give and take. I went for years letting my essence totally decide everything, and found that my essence wasn't always right--sometimes my personality, being on the "front lines," knew better. I now see my conscious self as the bridge between essence and personality, the one responsible for wisely weighing all the input and setting my course. It's rather like Freud's idea of ego bridging the id and the superconscious. When the impulses of my essence and personality are at odds, it's my job to negotiate a solution that works for both, rather than letting one dominate the other.

Love,
Shepherd


Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 18:23:46 -0500
Subject: R&R

Regarding the necessity of rest and all that, here are a couple of things to ponder....

A number of channels have gotten the same information about old souls' needing to balance their work time with their rest time... Michael places this ratio at about 3:3.... as an example they say that for every three hours of work, three hours of rest are necessary. If you work for three days, you 'should' (for optimum balance) rest for three days. Or three months on, three months off. There seems to be a reciprocity failure factor built in here, for they don't recommend long stretches of work without a rest, saying three months is about the limit before you start to melt down and then the rest period will need to be even longer. I know this is of no solace to those who feel compelled to work, or who have to work past this balance because of those very real necessities like groceries and rent - BUT, even though your work situation might not be ideal, just knowing the real and honest need for rest can be comforting in its way as you'll feel perhaps not so guilty or undeserving of time spent whiling away the hours just looking out the window.

The next point I'd like to bring attention to in terms of balance is how your Four Pillars are part of this whole R&R concept... Since only ONE of the FP's is "True Work", doesn't it fall to reason that there *is* a reason for "True Study", "True Play", and "True Rest" as well? The four pillars are in place to support your life task. If you do not do ALL the four pillars, you will find it more difficult, or confusing, or unsatisfying to be doing life task work.

So Rest! Play!! Come have a martini at my house!

Caris


Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 19:06:03 -0500
Subject: Publishing - Food For Thought

I have been mulling an idea over in my mind all day and I'm going to offer it up as just that, an idea. Religious Science puts out a monthly publication, available at book stores and magazine centers, for a modest price. It generally contains articles, up-to-date info on what is going on in the Religious Science Community, book reviews, etcetra. I was thinking that the Michael Channels might confer among themselves and come up with a monthly online newsletter on that order. I am aware that there are divergences of opinion among various channels, but I would think that the greater good of the entire Michael Community, nationwide (worldwide) might bring them to a concensus on what sorts of material could be distributed in an online newsletter. And every channel would have his/her day; i.e., be the featured channel of the month (2 months, quarter, whatever).

If it appeared that this concept would be feasible, it could be offered at a fee to be paid in advance by those who wanted to receive it. I'm sure that again, a concensus could be reached as to what the charges should be, so that all of those who were contributing to the newsletter would receive adequate remuneration for their efforts.

I currently receive two online newsletters, one of "Chief Joseph" and the other is the "Salem New Age" newletter. I look forward to the information that is sent to me and print them out as soon as they come in. For those, like myself, who are so far removed from the Michael Communities, it would give us more a feeling of inclusiveness. At this point in time, I'm sampling Authors and to a lesser extent channels.
(It is too expensive to just randomly jump into having a half-dozen or so channels doing sessions for me; I am not saying they are not worth it. I'm saying while they are worth every penny, I have to stay within a budget.) However, I digress.

I would hope that some of the fine minds out there could examine the worthiness of such an effort and if an online newsletter is not feasible, perhaps figure out something that is.

Love and Hunger for Information :-))

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 05:07:53 -0700
Subject: Re: Publishing

Hi Everyone,

I wrote this last night and then wasn't going to send it because I thought it has a bit too much attitude. :) But after reading Shepherd's post today, I think I will go ahead and put it on the list, because it might give a better understanding of what some of the challenges are facing authors right now who want to share information and also have it be a profitable venture.

Best to all, Brin

 

      Why would an author want to spend two, three, five years of work to write and publish a book that doesn't provide a viable livelihood? For people that want to spend two or three dollars for material that has years of work behind creating it, do you think that is a reasonable exchange? How altruistic do we expect authors to be? Many of these books have no advance. They are written because the author feels moved to do so without any guarantees. They are often written while the author is spending time making a living some other way. Maybe as books become unavailable or don't get written, we'll find ways to reward the kind of time and effort that goes into creating a well written book, rather than, as we so often do in this culture currently, reward things quickly made, (and sometimes quickly forgotten as well.)

      When a channel can get $10,15 or 20 dollars for a half hour or hour tape casette, why spend years writing a book that sells for the same?

      Certainly something moves us inside to choose to write and to choose to create a well-designed book that can be held and carried, read and reread outside under a tree or on a lazy Sunday morning. Perhaps we write for those who will appreciate the material. But appreciation needs to translate into something real. Right now there is much more of a disincentive than any kind of real incentive to enter the crap shoot world of publishing.

      The middle has fallen out of the publishing industry. I don't think it's because all of these books lack quality. I think often they don't get the time and attention they deserve. I think we are in a time of attention being given to the top ten, to brand names, to marketable superstars. (Many editors will say the reason they went into the publishing business was for love of midlist books which are often of fine quality.) In the last twenty years we've lost the majority of our independent bookstores that were willing to take time to read and nurture books that weren't yet superstars or that had smaller markets. Tax laws have changed that allowed publishers to keep larger supplies of backlist and write them off, so now the margins are smaller, and books are required to sell faster. Publishers are less willing to simply have books on hand and keep them in print. It used to be that a publisher could do a larger print run and let the books sell gradually over years. Not any more. Sometimes the chain bookstores will buy books and if they don't sell in a month or two, they'll be returned or even destroyed in the case of pocket sized books. With so much going on in the world, a month or two can pass in an instant and we might not even know a book has come out, much less have the time to read it, consider it, share it with friends, give it time to gradually find its audience and build a word of mouth support. Within six months, if a bookstore doesn't return a new book that hasn't sold, they are often stuck with it. So the incentive currently exists to only keep books briefly or have a few on hand unless it's the equivalent of a Titanic. How many books can be advertised on TV or radio or support nationwide author tours? In the past an author might be able to write a first book or two or three and gradually develop a style, a voice, a following. Now large publishers can rarely nurture the development of an author that way and small publishers can't afford to get books out in a way that gives them the attention they deserve. All of this is changing rapidly at this time. I think publishers are currently rethinking and trying to change the traditional policies regarding returns. This may cause stores to order less and for publishers to take even less chances with what they publish. It may also cause stores to order more wisely. But most likely, it will have an affect on books for smaller markets. For those of us that write or love to read the printed page, or hold a book, there is reason to wonder how the information that interests us will be published in the future, or even how fiction will find its way to our hands.

      Perhaps we simply hope that it will continue somehow. That things of quality will get to us in some way. It's only now and then that something comes to our attention, like the Michael material, something that we would like to read, that makes us become aware of what authors are up against and how unprofitable the majority of books are right now, and what a labor of love.

      Please excuse my frustration. It's the voice of the artisan/scholar. Having worked in the past both in independent bookstores and for publishing companies and having a love of books and of writing, I feel that in general the public may not know how censored our books have become through the current economic trends of publishing. Like most trends, they swing to one extreme and then back. Perhaps the smaller publishers that have sprung up all over our country in recent years will find ways to keep and nurture books and authors. But so far, it just seems like there are less authors that can find a way to make a dependable living through their books. And I think our Michael authors may be experiencing this as well. So if these books don't get published or if they go out of print faster, we are only seeing a slice of the current state of the publishing industry as a whole.

      Yours passionately, Brin

      For Michael books that _are_ out of print, in the United States they are always available to anyone to read and keep for three or four weeks at a time through interlibrary loan. Libraries anywhere in the country have this.

      (It _is_ true that at the same time that the world of publishing is contracting/changing, the world of the internet is exploding. Perhaps that will make us appreciate writing of quality all the more, for so much that is written on the internet is dashed off with the spontaneity of conversation rather than the care that creates gems we can read and reread.)

 


Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 19:12:53 -0500
Subject: Re: R&R

Dear Caris,

Again you relieve me of my sense of guilt! First storms, now daydreaming. My ability to sit and live inside my head, while staring at absolutely nothing has often troubled me. Perhaps it is being married to a Warrior whom I have dubbed "The Energizer Bunny." I greatly appreciate this posting, and mix the martinis (and please don't bruise them).

Love and Here's To You :-))

Jeanne


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 01:18:59 +0100
Subject: Re: Book publishing profitability / bulk mailing

I know this is a bit off-topic, but I just had to post...

 

>I created my web site hoping to sell large quantities of books directly to
>readers, which would begin to make publishing profitable. I am strongly
>considering using bulk e-mail to promote the site and sales, because I don't
>see any other way to make it work, but I have mixed feelings because I know
>most people don't like "spam." However, most spam is selling MLMs, sex sites,
>or bulk e-mailing software. Maybe people wouldn't mind so much an
>unsensationalistic offer for books, especially since nowadays, people pay for
>their ISP with a flat fee, so it doesn't cost them anything to get more bulk e-mail.
>
>I am surprised at how few books and other reputable products are sold through
>bulk e-mail. Either it's a bad idea, or it's a great idea that hasn't caught
>on yet--or it's the bad reputation of spam. I personally don't mind the spam
>anymore; I quickly delete most of it, but occasionally something looks
>interesting and I read it. I once bought a useful book that way.
>
>If I do bulk e-mailing, I can hire a service to do it for me, which is very
>expensive, or I can buy a PC (there's no software for Macs) and do it myself,
>also very expensive. I can buy CD-Roms with lists of millions of addresses
>(many bad, no doubt) and mail to everyone. Or I can buy software that pulls
>addresses off of appropriate targeted sites (new age, alternative medicine,
>etc.), which is much more time-consuming, but less likely to put mail in the
>hands of fundamentalist Christians who think that channeling is the work of Satan.

 

I have to say, please, PLEASE don't even consider doing this. The reason that so few books or reputable products are sold through bulk e-mail is that, unless it is strictly opt-in (to people who've asked you to send them information), it's going to do you far, far more harm than good.

Most ISPs have clauses against bulk mailing, because it causes so many problems. The millions of mails being pumped out can jam up mail servers for hours, even crashing them at times. It transfers to cost of advertising on to the ISPs and consumers. Imagine if just one in every thousand small companies decided to advertise their products by bulk e-mail - take a quick look at the Yellow Pages and guess at how many e-mails that would lead to us getting each day! It would be impossible to find our real mail in all the spam.

Most ISPs will immediately close down the dial-up and web hosting accounts of anyone who uses bul e-mail to advertise their sites or products, it's widely regarded as an intrustive and unethical medium for advertising.

I think you would find that bulk e-mailing would quickly cause you far more problems that it would solve, and possibly even cost you customers. It would be much better to get your site (and therefore books) more widely known by other means. On that topic, I quite enjoy playing around with graphics, so if anyone on this list wants a Link Exchange banner or banner for other link exchange schemes designed, I'd be happy to help. I probably can't do much for about 2 weeks though, as I'm about to move home.

For a basic explanation of the main problems with bulk e-mailing, this is a good page: http://www.cauce.org/problem.html

Sorry to go on at length about this, but it really concerns me to see anyone considering using unsolicted e-mailing as an advertising means, and I hope this had given some idea why.

Christine

PS: To give some idea of how widely spam is regarded as a problem, this is a quotation from Vint Cerf, Senior Vice President of MCI: "Spamming is the scourge of electronic-mail and newsgroups on the Internet. It can seriously interfere with the operation of public services, to say nothing of the effect it may have on any individual's e-mail mail system. ... Spammers are, in effect, taking resources away from users and service suppliers without compensation and without authorization."


Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 21:25:49 -0700
Subject: Re: Book publishing profitability / bulk

Christine (and Shepherd),

I agree 100%. My ISP is real big on shutting down spammers. I NEVER read them, and if by accident I do, anything they might be selling is instantly tainted by being bulk mail.

I imagine the negative energy generated by the thoughts of those zillions of unwilling, uninterested recipients would do far more harm than good on levels that students such as ourselves can easily understand.

My 2 bits' worth....
Anne


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 02:23:46 -0500
Subject: Rest

Caris wrote:

 

---snip---
> A number of channels have gotten the same information about old souls
> needing to balance their work time with their rest time... Michael
> places this ratio at about 3:3.... as an example they say that for
> every three hours of work, three hours of rest are necessary.
---snip---

 

Caris,

   Thanks. The way I figure it, I have about 20 years of rest coming to me.

John Macchietto


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 02:30:50 -0700
Subject: Re: Essence and Rest and Godness (1998-13/1341)

 

| From: Kenneth Broom | Subject: Essence and Rest and Godness | Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 08:59:58 -0400 | | I and several of my friends have discovered that during an incarnation | if you want rest then "TELL" Essence or Entity or even TAO that you | desire a few days' rest, or for however long. You will get it. Please | notice that I use the word "TELL", not the word "ask".

 

A very thoughtful post, IMO. I'll usually slough ideas like this off, but I think this was very well presented. The concept goes counter to my perceptions as demonstrated in a response I made some time ago to a post by Barbara. But hey, it's about growth, right? I can change, but it needs to be for good reason.

Also note that Kenneth's ideas are in agreement with Michael.
Thanks for the post.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]

[--------------------<*>--------------------]

      Each person is the leader of a team assembled to achieve tasks. You
      organize your team prior to each lifetime. [GJS]

      But you are the captain of your ship, and your leadership is needed. [GJS]

 

---

GJS = Growing Through Joy "Working With Spirit Guides"
http://www.Summerjoy.com/GrowingChapter8.html

In marking quoted material, the marks text represent italics.
They will usually surround those portions containing the lesser
amount of material. Occasionally they will demark italicized
material within the quote.

The following table shows nominal markings for each source -

GJS = Edited Michael Other

===


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 02:31:13 -0700
Subject: Re: Casting structure (1998-13/1343)

 

| From: Shepherd Hoodwin
| Subject: Casting structure
| Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 11:54:24 EDT
|
| Ed wrote:
|
| <<Michael made clear when someone asked that these rows and blocks are
| NOT made up of solid groups of the same role. (This differs from the
| Yarbro books.) Also, we choose roles before we are positioned in this
| structure.>>
|
| I recall at the LaVeta Michael Channel's conference in 5/96 that someone
| asked me to explain the three casting numbers on my chart. JP then
| commented about the 1234567, 1234567s she gets that determine a person's
| number within the entity, something to the effect that she thought that
| there could be the same role being cast for a while, then a new one
| might start midstream, even in the middle of a 7 group--at least, this
| is what I recall. She implied that there COULD be many cadences of the
| same role for a while. It didn't seem then that she believed then that
| every cadence was filled with random roles.

 

As has been mentioned before, this directly contradicts what was emphatically put forth in Yarbro. And as I contend - if new information contradicts old, held-to-be-valid material, for the new information to be considered valid the old must be refuted. That appears to be what is being said WRT casting.

So was the information in Yarbro *wrong*? Or is it as was the case with ETs being 6-out-of-7 the same Role in Yarbro but now not so, attributed to the information in Yarbro being for those with few major cycles with those with higher major cycle counts opting for more flexible casting? There has to be a reason for everything, and unless that reason is known and understood, where does one "hang his hat"? How do we, who don't have direct access to (can channel effectively) Michael, know what material is accurate/valid?

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 02:31:34 -0700
Subject: Re: The Number Model (1998-13/1344)

 

| From: Barbara Taylor
| Subject: Re: The Number Model
| Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 09:01:55 -0700
|
| To everyone who is trying to "convince" Dick that he should not
| be skeptical of the new information:
|
| It seems we might all be better served by allowing him the
| space and time to work it out in his own way (rather than
| debating with him).

 

1. I am one voice, representing not necessarily one opinion/position.

2. Debate, in the form of useful information, is one way to "convince" someone of their position (see my reply to a recent post by Kenneth).

 

| Skeptics need to find out for themselves. When stubbornness is
| involved, people will resist even more when they are pressured. They
| need time and space to work it out in their own way.

 

Hey, let's not forget Caution (I have that too!).

 

| Some of us are actively searching for new information, others
| are still working through the basics.

 

"Working through"? More like "Holding on to until something more valid is presented."

 

| All is as it should be for every one of us.

 

Of course.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 02:31:55 -0700
Subject: Re: Book publishing profitability / bulk (1998-14/1370+6+7)

 

| From: Shepherd Hoodwin
| Subject: Book publishing profitability
| Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 12:00:05 EDT
|
| I created my web site hoping to sell large quantities of books directly
| to readers, which would begin to make publishing profitable. I am
| strongly considering using bulk e-mail to promote the site and sales,
| because I don't see any other way to make it work, but I have mixed
| feelings because I know most people don't like "spam."

 

"Don't like" is a gross understatement.

 

| However, most spam is selling MLMs, sex sites, or bulk e-mailing software.

 

Makes no difference what it sells - spam is spam.

 

| Maybe people wouldn't mind so much an unsensationalistic offer for
| books, especially since nowadays, people pay for their ISP with a flat
| fee, so it doesn't cost them anything to get more bulk e-mail.

 

To many, myself included, it's an invasion-of-privacy thing.

 

| I am surprised at how few books and other reputable products are sold
| through bulk e-mail. Either it's a bad idea, or it's a great idea that
| hasn't caught on yet--or it's the bad reputation of spam.

 

At the risk of offending you, let me be blunt - I think the reason you feel this way may be your lack of experience on the Net. For many of us who have been around awhile (on the Net) spam is not just a curiosity or an inconvenience, it is an anathema.

 

| I personally don't mind the spam anymore; I quickly delete most of it,
| but occasionally something looks interesting and I read it. I once
| bought a useful book that way.

 

When I get spam, I forward it to the sender's ISP (when ascertainable) as well as a few uplines as determined by a traceroute.

 

| I'd really appreciate your feedback on this.

 

As the above and following indicate, it looks like you'll get it!

---

 

/ From: Christine Daae
/ Subject: Re: Book publishing profitability / bulk
/ Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 01:18:59 +0100
/
/ I know this is a bit off-topic, but I just had to post...
/
/ I have to say, please, PLEASE don't even consider doing this. The
/ reason that so few books or reputable products are sold through bulk
/ e-mail is that, unless it is strictly opt-in (to people who've asked you
/ to send them information), it's going to do you far, far more harm than good.
/
/ Most ISPs have clauses against bulk mailing, because it causes so many
/ problems. The millions of mails being pumped out can jam up mail
/ servers for hours, even crashing them at times. It transfers to cost of
/ advertising on to the ISPs and consumers. Imagine if just one in every
/ thousand small companies decided to advertise their products by bulk
/ e-mail - take a quick look at the Yellow Pages and guess at how many
/ e-mails that would lead to us getting each day! It would be impossible
/ to find our real mail in all the spam.
/
/ Most ISPs will immediately close down the dial-up and web hosting
/ accounts of anyone who uses bulk e-mail to advertise their sites or
/ products, it's widely regarded as an intrustive and unethical medium for
/ advertising.
/
/ I think you would find that bulk e-mailing would quickly cause you far
/ more problems that it would solve, and possibly even cost you customers.
/ It would be much better to get your site (and therefore books) more
/ widely known by other means.
/
/ For a basic explanation of the main problems with bulk e-mailing, this
/ is a good page: http://www.cauce.org/problem.html
/
/ Sorry to go on at length about this, but it really concerns me to see
/ anyone considering using unsolicted e-mailing as an advertising means,
/ and I hope this had given some idea why.
/
/ Christine
/
/ PS: To give some idea of how widely spam is regarded as a problem, this
/ is a quotation from Vint Cerf, Senior Vice President of MCI: "Spamming
/ is the scourge of electronic-mail and newsgroups on the Internet. It
/ can seriously interfere with the operation of public services, to say
/ nothing of the effect it may have on any individual's e-mail mail
/ system. ... Spammers are, in effect, taking resources away from users
/ and service suppliers without compensation and without authorization."

 

---

 

\ From: Anne Hawley
\ Subject: Re: Book publishing profitability / bulk
\ Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 21:25:49 -0700
\
\ Christine (and Shepherd),
\
\ I agree 100%. My ISP is real big on shutting down spammers. I NEVER
\ read them, and if by accident I do, anything they might be selling is
\ instantly tainted by being bulk mail.
\
\ I imagine the negative energy generated by the thoughts of those
\ zillions of unwilling, uninterested recipients would do far more harm
\ than good on levels that students such as ourselves can easily understand.

 

---

I think I probably don't need to add anything more.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 02:32:15 -0700
Subject: Re: Publishing (1998-14/1374)

 

| From: Brin
| Subject: Re: Publishing
| Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 05:07:53 -0700
|
| Hi Everyone,
|
| I wrote this last night and then wasn't going to send it because I
| thought it has a bit too much attitude. :) But after reading Shepherd's
| post today, I think I will go ahead and put it on the list, because it
| might give a better understanding of what some of the challenges are
| facing authors right now who want to share information and also have it
| be a profitable venture.

 

Brin,

Thanks for following your later urge to send this. Sometimes a little attitude is what is needed.

Many, perhaps most, of us don't have much of a clue as to what goes on behind the scenes in the publishing business. So your bringing it to our attention does us a service IMO.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 08:36:45 -0400
Subject: Re: On Line Magazine

Jeanne,

Read your post of yesterday suggesting a collaberative on-line publication from the Michael channels. Gosh, wouldn't that be wonderful. The reason I found this list was because I was searching for the publishers of the now defunct "Spirit Speaks" which was a print magazine which featured several channelled entities, and was IMHO a very worthwhile effort. I never did find the publishers, but after posting some messages on some of "new age" sites, I was directed here.

I, too, feel I've missed out on much of the Michael information over the years ... it just doesn't get distributed around the rest of the country. And I would be happy to subscribe to any effort by the channels to publish a magazine on-line or in any form. Perhaps if enough people respond ...

And a note on relaxation ... if the ratio is 3:3, then I must be making up for 3 lifetimes, because all I wanna do is sleep this life!
(Oh, and read, read, read.)

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 12:07:28 EDT
Subject: Re: Publishing

A couple of years ago I saw a cool book called I believe"1001 Ways to Sell Your Book" by, I think, Kramer or a similar name. It was then a couple of years old and had been updated every three or four years since the '70s, so there is probably a new version out or coming out soon, though I haven't seen it. The last version predated the WWW explosion.

Kramer's (?) main idea was that if you as an author want to publish your work, whether through a publisher or by self-publishing, and have any chance of success, you need to seriously think through the reality of 1) what is the purpose of the book (both your purpose in writing it and the use it serves for the reader); 2) who are the readers, who would be interested enough to possibly buy it; and 3) how do you effectively reach them as a target group?

Then he went on to hundreds of pages of interesting and wide-ranging detail on many different approaches. I'd certainly buy a copy if I run across it.

I remember the idea that the traditional route of publishers with sales reps selling to bookstores is just a subset of all the possibility and authors would be wise not to rely on it alone.

All the best, Ed


Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 12:20:46 EDT
Subject: Publishing/Spam

I think "spam" is an intrusion like having random strangers ring your doorbell to sell you something. If you're way out in the boondocks, you might enjoy the contact, but if there were 20 or 50 or more salesmen a day it would be a nuisance.

"Deleting" them by going to the door and saying "go away, I'm busy" 20 or 50 times a day would disrupt one's life, wouldn't it?

There are few reputable businesses selling door-to-door or by internet spamming because they quickly get overwhelmed by the negative feedback they get. Telemarketing works better because the callers in their "boiler room" aren't facing the full negative energy they'd get if they were going door-to- door in person and they can instantly quit a call and dial another one. But few reputable companies rely on telemarketing "cold calls" as a way of life.

All the best, Ed


Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 12:15:37 -0700
Subject: Re: Supporting authors whose work you enjoy....

 

>Brin,
>
>Thanks for following your later urge to send this. Sometimes a little
>attitude is what is needed.
>
>Many, perhaps most, of us don't have much of a clue as to what goes on
>behind the scenes in the publishing business. So your bringing it to
>our attention does us a service IMO.
>
>Cheers,
>Dick

 

Thanks Dick....

I would just add that the best way to insure that books can happen is to support the authors by buying their books. If books are bought directly from Shepherd and Joya, Jose and the others, then they may be able to take the time to create new books.

Newsletters and such can be great ideas as well, although they don't address the issue of the time it takes to really lay out material well in a book and also make a reasonable living from doing so.

Best to all, Brin


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 21:40:01 +0000
Subject: Re: book publishing

Shepherd,

I also agree with Christine, and not just because she's family! Spamming is the last thing you ought to be doing. It just alienates your potential customers -- who are, after all, Michael students-in-waiting.

What your books need is exposure -- YOUR exposure. Do magazine interviews. Talk on the radio. Get magazines to review your books. It always works!!

The one thing that really "sells", in the most positive sense, is you and your personal story. People want to know who YOU are -- why you're doing what you're doing -- how it's changed your life -- and of course what you have to to offer. People who read things like Common Boundary or (here in the UK) Kindred Spirit or even (why not) Newsweek would be fascinated. That's how people like Wayne Dyer make megabucks. Look at Ken Wilber [someone who SHOULD be a Michael student!].

I suspect the first Michael book might have had a decent amount of public interest in the 70s, but the Michael story "died a death" thereafter due to lack of follow up. I expect that a lot of people out there who read MFM 20+ years ago have no idea that Michael is still coming through more loud and clear than ever through dozens of channels.

I can understand Sarah/Jessica et al wanting to keep things relatively quiet for themselves, and regularly "broadcasting" the latest incoming info to the world at large probably wasn't for them. But times have changed, there are new channels, and the teachings are surely having their intended impact. Many of us are now Michael Students with a capital S, not just people who've read some funny little book with a ouija board on the cover.

So I say, books (and their authors) need exposure to sell themselves.

As for an online subscription-based newsletter, I'm all for that too.

          B a r r y
_________________________________________________________
Mature Scholar with a dread of missing out on information


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 21:43:40 +0000
Subject: Re: Rest

Caris said:

 

......................................................................
A number of channels have gotten the same information about old souls'
needing to balance their work time with their rest time... Michael
places this ratio at about 3:3.
......................................................................

 

 

I know my arithmetic ain't what it used to be, but isn't 3:3 exactly the same as 1:1?

Good info nevertheless!

      B a r r y
_____________________________
Mature Scholar being pedantic


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 18:15:35 -0500
Subject: re: Rest

 

I know my arithmetic ain't what it used to be, but isn't 3:3 exactly the same as 1:1?

 

All I can say is when the M's spoke of this matter they did not say 1:1. They very specifically said 3:3 - maybe because they realize the ..... silliness? ..... of working one hour and then resting one hour. I don't know. When I wrote the post I originally wrote 1:1 (even though math is my WORST subject), and changed it to 3:3 at their request. Maybe there's more on this to explain...... if I get anything I'll post it.

Caris
___________________________
Old King eating a chocolate


Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:15:10 EDT
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-07 of Michael Teachings List

 

Seriously, can you imagine reading Melville's "Moby Dick"
from the eye-straining glow of a monitor, while
propped uncomfortably in your computer chair?

 

I've read that the current limitations of computer monitors is what is most holding back electronic publication. In a few years, perhaps we'll have laptop monitors that aren't a strain to read at length. Maybe they'll come up with book readers, where you just pop in the disk to something very portable and light.

Thank you for the feedback on bulk e-mailing. I had not thought about it jamming the system.

Best,
Shepherd


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 20:18:46 -0700
Subject: Re: Bulk E-mail

Shepherd,
   Please don't go that route. I got e-mail bombed with more than 500 unauthorized messages in the last 2 days. Just because there is a way to put such obnoxious tools into the market and people who can't resist using them doesn't make it a good idea.
   With the new version of Netscape I can direct all e-mail that is not what I want directly into my SPAM folder, where it is immediately deleted.

To the list:
   If people are interested in getting more material published, they will need to put their $$$ where their mouth is, as they say. Most publishers stop printing books when sales drop. Simple Economics 101. The rest of us have a need for expression or agreements to put information out there for whatever reasons. If making money were the goal, I suspect there would be NO Michael books published ever again. If the folks that want more material can come up with a system for supporting alternative methods, I'm sure the authors would be willing to consider using them.
   There's a great opportunity there for someone with the entrepreneurial drive to make it happen.
   Personally, I've never bought any Michael book, tape, seminar or channeling session that was disappointing to me. And, I'm in the 5% that puts a lot of money into supporting the teachings with $$$, time and effort to spread them out into the world.

 

Barbara


Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 20:43:21 -0700
Subject: Publications-Radio?

    Shepherd,
    I don't know if this is a good idea or not but why doesn't someone volunteer you to be on the Art Bell show? Would you feel comfortable being on the Radio?
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1998 16:23:32 +0800
Subject: Re: Musician?

Dave Gregg wrote on 6/4/98 1:37 am:

 

> Anyway, as a Sage, my career choice (right now) is a musician. >>
>
>What's your ax? If you hadn't guessed, I play woodwinds: sax, clarinet, and flute.
>
>Dave

 

Should musicians have ax (or axe)? Does the ax come with a grinder? Anyway, I am a violinist by trade and, well, I used to have an ax <g> but I think collective Essence(s) took care of it better than I thought (imagined) and the ax is now in deep storage. :-)

J J Tan


Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1998 16:24:03 +0800
Subject: Re: Sofa spuds in suspension...

Dave Gregg wrote on 6/4/98 2:43 am:

 

>Could it be possible that a mistake was made concerning your goal of
>growth? Most channelers will admit that they are not infallable.
>If growth doesn't resonate strongly with you, it could be that it's not your
>goal, or that you, perhaps, occassionally slide to growth from relaxation.
>It's worth considering.
>
>Dave

 

Good idea. Maybe I should check it again. According to Shepherd Hoodwin in "Journey of a Soul", it is possible to switch Goal, especially with older soul age with more experience.

J J Tan


Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1998 16:25:05 +0800
Subject: Re: Book publishing profitability

Shepherd wrote on 6/4/98 5:00 pm:

<snipped>

 

>I created my web site hoping to sell large quantities of books directly to
>readers, which would begin to make publishing profitable. I am strongly
>considering using bulk e-mail to promote the site and sales, because I don't
>see any other way to make it work, but I have mixed feelings because I know
>most people don't like "spam."

 

<snipped>

 

>If I do bulk e-mailing, I can hire a service to do it for me, which is very
>expensive, or I can buy a PC (there's no software for Macs) and do it myself,
>also very expensive. I can buy CD-Roms with lists of millions of addresses
>(many bad, no doubt) and mail to everyone. Or I can buy software that pulls
>addresses off of appropriate targeted sites (new age, alternative medicine,
>etc.), which is much more time-consuming, but less likely to put mail in the
>hands of fundamentalist Christians who think that channeling is the work of Satan.

 

One alternative just occur to me: How about asking to advertise your books on those New Age sites instead of pulling email addresses from there? All it takes is a graphic banner or just a link to your own site. This may cost money, or not, depending on the owners of those sites.

J J Tan


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 10:43:34 +0200
Subject: Re: re: Rest

Hi oldies!

I do not know the reference but my understanding is that if an oldie works for 2 weeks he/she should rest for one. I found this in something I wrote for myself after reading some Michael material. I remember this also because I used this ratio in discussion on how much work I should dedicate to the household. :-)

So the ratio is 1:2, that is 3 parts: one rest, two work(activity).

Olafur Jakobsson


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 13:43:11 EDT
Subject: Re: Musician?

Dave,
I always thought you were way ahead of me, but now it looks like your sofa is a freakin' time machine.

John Clarko
P.S. what is Microsoft selling at on 6/4 ?


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 13:46:07 EDT
Subject: Re: Rest

In a message dated 4/8/98 12:06:04 PM, Olafur wrote:

 

So the ratio is 1:2, that is 3 parts: one rest, two work(activity).

 

Olafur, I like the way you put the "rest" part first.     --john clarko


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 14:05:29 EDT
Subject: Jesus H. Clone

Here's a thought that I am not too proud to share with y'all.

What if some scientists could scrape some DNA off the Shroud of Turin ( or some other artifact) and use that material to clone Jesus?

What would he be like?
Would we call it Immaculate Conception, once removed?

And, on a related Holy Week subject... Did the little Jesus get spankings? Does this create karma for the spanker? And if you get bad karma with infinite spirit, does the shit REALLY hit the fan?

John Clarko


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 15:56:55 EDT
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-08 of Michael Teachings List

Barry wrote:

 

>What your books need is exposure -- YOUR exposure. Do magazine
>interviews. Talk on the radio. Get magazines to review your books. It
>always works!!

 

Mike wrote:

 

I don't know if this is a good idea or not but why doesn't someone
volunteer you to be on the Art Bell show? Would you feel comfortable being
on the Radio?

 

Thanks for your thoughts. I sent out 200 of each book for reviews to a mailing list of publications that review new age books. I got some wonderful reviews in mostly small publications, but it had little impact (except maybe the rave in the NAPRA Review, which goes to owners and buyers for new age bookstores). But, for example, New Age Journal receives about 200 books for every issue, and reviews about three, usually by people who are already well-known. (They missed the "Celestine Prophecy," for instance.)

I've done a few small radio interviews, but haven't been able to get on anything bigger, such as Art Bell, which would be very helpful. An acquaintance of mine was on, and sales of his book went through the roof. I've sent them my books and press releases, and have e-mailed follow-ups, and never got a response. I love being interviewed (although feel a little nervous about it, too, in situations in which I'm not practiced and that might not be supportive).

I could hire a publicist to get me on more things, and television (Oprah!), but that is very expensive. I should devote more time to publicist tasks, but I'm a one-man band, and it's overwhelming how much there is to do. Writing the books is much less than half the work involved. The business end could easily become a full-time job.

The word-of-mouth has been great on the books, but it hasn't caught fire like, say, a Celestine Prophesy or Conversations with God, which are far more mainstream and commercial. I keep doing everything I can and know how to do, and pray for a miracle. Psychics have seen great energy and prospects around the books, but as to whether they'll actually become financially successful, that remains to be seen.

I appreciate your support. Thanks.

Best,
Shepherd


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 23:44:00 +0200
Subject: Publishing

 

Seriously, can you imagine reading Melville's "Moby Dick" from the
eye-straining glow of a monitor, while propped uncomfortably in your
computer chair?

 

Just because a manuscript comes in on my computer doesn't mean I can't print it out... I'd think that authors with such a limited market as Michael students would be best advised to sell their books as electronic documents via the web and let the readers print the material out and put it into a binder if they like. That would not only make more material available and put more money into the hands of deserving authors, it would also save the purchasers money that would ordinarily have gone for printing and distribution. Everybody wins.

And a modest annoucement telling this list (for example) or other similar lists that you have a new book for sale probably wouldn't count as Spam.

Peace,

Katherine E. Doversberger
violist, fiddler and cat person

The real problem is;
people think life
is a ladder,
and it's really a wheel.


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 19:44:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-08 of Michael Teachings List

Shepherd,

I have been ordering books and tapes directly from whichever "Author/Channel" wrote the book or recorded the tape. Perhaps, not asking for the books in bookstores is part of the problem. If there is no demand in the bookstores, the bookstores will not stock them. Incidentally, I went to a webpage "Full Circle Books" and I noticed that they were advertising a number of books including Course In Miracles and Seth/Jane Roberts books. I did send them an e-mail, complimenting their website (very elegant and understated) and asked why, since they are in California, they did not advertise any of the Michael Teachings books. They are not an online store, but they are another source of advertising for our channels efforts.

Jeanne Holley


Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1998 18:22:17 -0700
Subject: Jesus H. Clone

 

> What if some scientists could scrape some DNA off the Shroud of Turin (or
> some other artifact) and use that material to clone Jesus?

 

      This is going to get a little weird but someone connected with the Montauk project claims they went back in time to get a sample of blood from Jesus. I can think of only one reason to do that and that would be to clone him.
      Mike Huttinger


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 21:54:40 EDT
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

In a message dated 98-04-08 17:45:09 EDT, you write:

 

What would he be like?
Would we call it Immaculate Conception, once removed?

 

Note from a scholar who learned something she did not know until a few months ago (what a naughty supposed to be Catholic!) I guess the term "Immaculate Conception" really refers to Mary's conception, because she was born without original sin. Not really trying to be a jerk and correct you, just want to "disseminate" the info, 'cause I thought it was Jesus' birth my whole life until I saw an A&E biography on Mary around Christmas time. Oopsies! So, I guess his birth was already IC once removed. But with that whole original sin (which, I must admit, the idea of it makes me very angry!), does that mean Jesus was born with original sin? Or did he just get everyone else's?

Yes, I would like to hear more about great figures from history, and what Michael has to say about them! I am also interested to hear whether Michael has said anything regarding the Bubonic plague or the Holocaust...anyone? Who's gonna have to deal with all that kharma? And when will it start? Are people who died in the Holocaust already incarnating here?

byebye! I must apologize if this comes out weird...something has happened to my aol mail colors, and I can't seem to make it go away! So, sorry if this comes out red!
bye! --------- Kris


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 01:38:53 EDT
Subject: Re: Publishing

In a message dated 98-04-08 22:16:03 EDT, you wrote:

 

<< Seriously, can you imagine reading Melville's "Moby Dick" from the
eye-straining glow of a monitor, while propped uncomfortably in your computer chair? >>

Just because a manuscript comes in on my computer doesn't mean I can't
print it out... I'd think that authors with such a limited market

 

I wasn't refering to Michael books in that quote, but to literature that's up to 600 pages long. But nevermind...

Dave


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 01:53:36 EDT
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

In a message dated 4/8/98 10:30:08 PM, Mike Huttinger wrote:

 

This is going to get a little weird but someone connected with the
Montauk project claims they went back in time to get a sample of blood from
Jesus. I can think of only one reason to do that and that would be to clone
him.
    Mike Huttinger

 

I would not doubt this is possible...but my question is...why would Jesus allow a blood sample to be taken? Don't you think he would know the intent of the sample takers? And if this did happen, and if Jesus did know their intent was to creat a clone in the "future", then I would suppose this was/is something Jesus agreed was acceptable. (Just some thoughts!)

Robin D.


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 02:44:14 EDT
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

In a message dated 98-04-09 01:42:44 EDT, Kris writes:

 

Yes, I would like to hear more about great figures from history, and what
Michael has to say about them! I am also interested to hear whether Michael
has said anything regarding the Bubonic plague or the Holocaust...anyone?

 

I agree, info about historic figures such as Jesus is always a fascinating subject, but I hope it's more accurate than some of the information that's been compiled about noted celebrities. I think some of the channeling concerning the overleaves of celebrities represents everything that's wrong with the Michael teachings. For instance, I've seen Mozart channeled as a warrior, a sage, and an artisan. At this rate, even I could take a whack at his overleaves. What the hell, I'll just compile an entire book that charts the overleaves of every star in Hollywood, but not by using the miraculous gift of channeling, but through the implementation of a more time tested methodology - eeny-meeny-miney-moe. ;-p

Obviously, I'm guilty of hyperbole, but the point I'm trying to make is that I'm really not seeing enough collaboration between the Michael channels. It's rather ironic that Michael teaches how the physical plane is a world where we all feel separated from each other, while most of the channelers I've seen appear to have a lone bull attitude of "My reading's right and yours is wrong." I don't mean this with any disrepect, just offering a perception about the obvious need for more corroboration.

With the recent discussion about using the electronic media, perhaps this would help in bridging the gap between the growing throng of Michael channelers and allow them to work together to create a more cohesive whole in the teachings; however, so far, the published discrepencies only weaken the thrust of their efforts.

I thought that the recent conference last November would have helped to diminish this concern, but the obvious exclusion of a couple notable channelers only escalated the problem, in my humble opinion.

Dave


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 03:33:52 EDT
Subject: Re: Musician?

In a message dated 98-04-08 17:10:00 EDT, John Clarko writes:

 

Dave,
I always thought you were way ahead of me, but now it looks like your sofa is
a freakin' time machine.

 

I think the only thing my sofa would know about time is that when I'm sitting on it, it's usually "time for another beer." Of course, if I'm really bored, I could always try to get high from sniffing a dead horse. ;--p <--(20 demerits if you don't get it.)

Dave


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 15:38:16 +0800
Subject: Re: R&R

Caris wrote on 7/4/98 12:13 am:

 

> Regarding the necessity of rest and all that, here are a couple of
> things to ponder....
>
> A number of channels have gotten the same information about old souls'
> needing to balance their work time with their rest time... Michael
> places this ratio at about 3:3....

 

Erm, I think I read somewhere (Journey of a Soul?) that the ratio is 4:1, 4 hrs work to 1 hr rest, 8hrs work (usual work=EFg day) to 2hrs rest (usually we have at least 2hrs to ourselves after work).

Anyone can confirm either way?

PS: Having read another post, which stated the ratio of 2:1 (work : rest), I begin to doubt my memory... but I am quite sure it was not 3:3 that I= read.

J J Tan

There is no Truth, just the perceiver and the mystery that is called The Universe.


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 01:02:14 -0700
Subject: The Accuracy of Yarbro

Fellow students,

I have found, as many of you undoubtedly have, that when one has a need for something necessary for one's evolution, the fulfillment of that need is often facilitated by one's guides. IMO my guides are very skillful in helping me along my spiritual path, having guided me to several basic- understanding books before »Messages«, then on to several other Michael books, »Cosmic Journey«, and just recently Newton's »Journey of Souls«. I see each of these as a meaningful step in my spiritual growth.

I have also discovered that part of the need/ask/answer sequence can be at the time unrecognized. Specifically, sometimes I have a need but am not consciously aware of it. Sometimes I pose a question but don't realize that I do. It is only when the answer comes that I can see what led up it. Such a case has occurred once again.

This time the need was to be able to reconcile the apparent discrepancies and/or contradictions between material primarily in Yarbro, which due to its being my first exposure to Michael and to its method of expression (I *like* the direct quotes) I have considered to be "baseline valid", and the newer material currently being brought in. As readers of the list are aware, I have been struggling with this problem for some time.

Apparently, as has been the case previously, I also had a request in to my guides for some help with the matter. And in Tuesday's mail the answer, or at least part of it, arrived.

A couple of weeks ago I took Ed's advice and contacted Sara Alexander from info in her bio on the AMT site. She is one of the people who was in the original "Jessica Lansing" group, and is kind enough to make available copies of transcripts from the early sessions. That is what arrived in the mail Tuesday.

So far I have spent probably less than 2 hours with the material. It is as I expected - raw unedited transcripts. They are typed, some single- and some double-spaced, and are single-sided. When compressed, the sheets are about 1" thick, containing maybe 200-300 pages. They are loose, not bound or punched, and in order by date and numbered within each session. I have glanced through the entire set and read maybe 4 or 5 sessions.

I'll offer a few comments based on my limited exposure so far. First, I would recommend this only to Scholars or those who have a strong Scholar influence. There is a lot of personal material present, some of the questions (and answers, for that matter) are rather arcane, and much of it is pretty dry reading. But there is also a fair amount of generic Michael present in some parts. Within the first 5 pages I discovered a direct contradiction of something in »Messages«.(§1) Whether this discrepancy is between actual sessions or was introduced as part of the process of producing the book, I can't say at this time.

One other thing I noticed, again based on limited reading so far, is a lack of phrases such as, "We have told you before...", "We must remind you yet again...", etc. (there is sparing use of "Of course"). One other thing that makes me wonder just how much liberty Yarbro took when writing her 3 books is - while organizing many quotes from those books into a dataset for my own research I discovered one particular quote used in 2 places.(§2)

Now, all of this taken together exposes the inaccuracy of information in Yarbro compared to that in the actual transcripts. It is disturbing to me that such extensive liberties were taken with the actual quotes; in my view they are the strongest draw of the entire series of Yarbro books. This leads me to hold the information in Yarbro in serious question, and potentially lays the groundwork for undermining the validity of what is there. It's too soon to tell, but the potential is there. I expect my further reading of the early sessions transcripts will help clarify the issue.

During the last few days I have mentioned a couple of times that once something is validated (as best as can be from our perspective), I take the position that when something else comes along that contradicts it, one or the other needs to be refuted. And usually, as in politics, the incumbent has the advantage - it needs to be disproved by the challenger. In this case, the information in Yarbro was being challenged, and as now seems evident it may not withstand that challenge. Needless to say I am grateful for some very helpful guides.

I intend to post more generalities as I learn them, and specific contradictions as they appear.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]

[--------------------<*>--------------------]

§1 -

    »If you kill [a cetacean], is it murder and does it incur a karmic debt?«

    Of course. [M1.270]

    »Are there karmic ribbons between whales and humans?«

    No. [EST 40522.5]

§2 -

    Survival is the goal for the organism. Ecstasy is the goal of the essence. [M1.108, 194]

---

M1 = »Messages From Michael« / Chelsea Quinn Yarbro
EST = Early Session Transcripts

In marking quoted material, the marks »text« represent italics.
They will usually surround those portions containing the lesser
amount of material. Occasionally they will demark italicized
material within the quote.

The following table shows nominal markings for each source -

M1 = Heavily edited Michael »Other«
EST = Edited Michael »Other«

===


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 05:12:37 EDT
Subject: Re: Montauk??

In a message dated 98-04-09 01:30:36 EDT, Mike Huttinger writes:

 

    This is going to get a little weird but someone connected with the Montauk project claims they went back in time to get a sample of blood from Jesus. I can think of only one reason to do that and that would be to clone him.
    Mike Huttinger

 

Montauk?? Is that the secret base on Long Island famous for the Philadephia experiment, time travel, aliens and worm holes? That's just rubbish, Mike. If I remember correctly, the bogus report alleged that we were already making trips to the moon in 1962, and that we were colonizing Mars in the 70's. They also verified the existence of that "face" on Mars. Now I've always been intrigued by the idea of pyramids and a face-like structure on the red planet, but it's all been disproven with recent photographic evidence.

I hadn't heard that there was mention of using time travel to clone Jesus Christ. Hmmm...despite it's hilarious implications, it at least sounds like great material for a good science fiction novel.

Anyhow, thanks for the laughs....:-)

Dave


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 05:42:16 EDT
Subject: re: Accuracy of Yarbro

 

Now, all of this taken together exposes the inaccuracy of information in
Yarbro compared to that in the actual transcripts. It is disturbing to
me that such extensive liberties were taken with the actual quotes; in
my view they are the strongest draw of the entire series of Yarbro books.
This leads me to hold the information in Yarbro in serious question, and
potentially lays the groundwork for undermining the validity of what is
there. It's too soon to tell, but the potential is there. I expect my
further reading of the early sessions transcripts will help clarify the issue

 

Dick,
Yarbro writes fiction for a living. It's occured to me once or twice that possibly after she read a couple of Jane Robert's Seth books, she got the idea to use her own authorial skills to fictionalize the material known as the Michael teachings. Sure, there were other people involved, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a scam. You wouldn't believe how much metaphysical mumble- jumbo I've read, for example, the "Mars" face, that has later turned out to be absolute, unadulterated, pure grade bullshit.

However, I've received some very good readings from a couple Michael channels, and after personally validating their findings to a certain degree, I can't deny that I wasn't impressed and enlightened by what they told me. So I'm still a believer, but I agree that the discrepencies are bothersome. Once again, if there was more cooperation between ALL the channels, perhaps the errors would diminish in the publication of information that sometimes contradicts what other channels have previously said.

Dave


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 07:53:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

What is the Montauk project? Time travel to clone Jesus, oh my.

Mystic Girl


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 09:08:48 EDT
Subject: Seeing essence

In a message dated 4/4/98 7:19:29 PM, you wrote:

 

I experienced it as a bluish-silver globe with silvery energy radiating out from it.

 

I have had what feels like a similar experience. But, it is something I saw in the people around me. It happened one day when I was in a particularly quiet mood. And I noticed that the physical forms of people began to take on a two dimensional quality. As if they were cardboard cutouts. This was due to the incredible silvery light that was radiating from their bodies. It was an incredibly beautiful sight, one that I can still call forth in any given situation. This experience showed me that beyond this physical realm, we are so much alike. Does anyone have an idea of what it might be that I see?
PJ


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:35:20 -0400
Subject: Getting the word out on your books

Shepherd,

I don't have access to internet right now and I'm not sure where the site = is, but when you mentioned the Art Bell show, it got me thinking. There = is another radio talk show called The Edge of Reality, and the host's name = is something like Ken Dashow. I've listened to some of the shows and the = host seems genuinely interested in his guests. I know there is a web site = and he has mentioned that some of his guests were originally people that = had written comments to his site. Hey, give it a shot.

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 11:59:24 EDT
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

In a message dated 4/9/98 5:41:56 AM, you wrote:

 

"Immaculate Conception" really refers to Mary's conception, because she was born without original sin.

 

This is interesting. I wonder if it is a Biblical way of saying she had cycled-off and had no karma remaining.

John Clarko


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 10:14:48 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy

I think if anyone is looking for word for word accuracy of any of the channeling, they are not going to find it because it is not the nature of channeling to be that accurate. On a _good_ day they say 80% accuracy but that can fall much lower.

What does that mean?

It means there will be factual inaccuracies when the channel is tired, when there are belief systems in place that color the information ie. if the channel really believes something to be true, sometimes that will come through and sometimes what Michael is seeking to share may come through with greater or lesser clarity. The vocabulary a channel is comfortable with will color the information as we've seen; the early group was well-versed in the Gurdjieff teachings, so a lot of that terminology influenced the expressions.

I've heard (so this is probably about five steps removed from the source :) and may be of dubious accuracy itself) that the original Michael channel when asked about printing the original transcripts as a greater whole, wasn't charmed with the idea partially because of the errors in the early channeling and the degree of accuracy.

I think this is a great discussion to have. It brings us all back to our own ability to know and discern what is true and not true. If discernment is only based on accuracy of material, that creates a fairly vulnerable state because it is a sort of externally based discernment. For years people thought the world to be flat and just because they all agreed, didn't make that belief true. I've felt for a long time that I doubt Michael or any healthy spiritual information or system, is meant to make us dependent on others to tell us what the truth is. Whether they are channelers or a priest class or whatever. We are all of the Tao, the breath of the Tao enlivens all our bodies, our awareness is the Tao itself colored by our thoughts, habits, perceptions. There are times we turn to "external" teachers, yet what we know, how we learn and grow, our beingness is an inside job so to speak based on our own choices and understanding.

I took a look at Barry's website which was very nice and speaks of enlightenment intensives. The tradition of personal experiences of openings to greater light go back and back weaving in one form or another through all the spiritual and religious traditions. One of the reasons for this is that one's personal awareness of who and what you are, the nature of the Tao, and the ability to know/sense/intuit/discern directly-- to simply be/do, becomes more clear. A lot of thought patterns, habits, limitations caused by belief systems and so on can fall away. When this happens even briefly, there can be enormous transformative effects. You can come to know for yourself directly.This cuts through a lot of the conjectures we often see on the list or sharings that may simply be personal opinion or even inaccurate information.

Meanwhile in terms of accuracy of the early transcripts, or of any of the information, it's probably more useful to see what the overall thrust is or at least not to let this become lost in details. The system Michael shared was a system to help us understand ourselves and the world better. Why we are like we are, why others may be different. In general, it's clear that there is a beautiful structure that creates our inter-relationships. That we are never truly alone, but part of larger groups on every level until we realize ourselves as simply a Oneness expressing in all these different ways. That we have choice in how we are. The information was never meant to limit us to its expressions, rather it was meant to expand our vision and understanding, to enable us to find greater balance.

Where understanding leaves off and fantasy begins _is_ the journey and how we answer that creates the cycles....

Best to all, Brin


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 14:03:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: The Accuracy of Yarbro

Hi Dick,

 

> Now, all of this taken together exposes the inaccuracy of information in
> Yarbro compared to that in the actual transcripts. It is disturbing to
> me that such extensive liberties were taken with the actual quotes;

 

You know, it would be intersting to see how the people from the original "Jessica Lansing" group feel about the yarbro books. Do they feel that, despite the editing, the books depict the "essence" of the michael teachings? Did the editing for them, take away from the teachings overall?

Perhaps another way of looking at it is that the discrepancies between the yabro books and the original transcripts just point to the need for personal validation. If you can validate the system for yourself, do little discrepancies really matter? Besides, there's _always_ been the problem of validation with the Michael material. If i recall the material in the yabro books correctly, it does say that most channeled material has a success rate of 85 percent, with Jessica Lansing having a success rate of 95 percent. That's still a pretty high failure rate (try using a voice recognition software with a 5 percent failure rate and you'll see what I mean.) Any direct contradictions you find could result from that failure rate rather than sloppy editing.

I guess the overall message is that in the search for spiritual enlightenment, you can never take anything for granted!

 

      --Kathy K. (not a scholar, but born into a family _full_ of them, both in essence role and profession.)


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 15:00:34 EDT
Subject: Re: Essence and Rest and Godness

In a message dated 4/5/98 1:03:54 PM, you wrote:

 

So why is it we don't manifest what we desire to be in our lives?

 

Wouldn't you say it is because most are making these choices unconsciously. I feel you are right, we get to ask and create what we want in life. But, it can be difficult at times to be consciously aware of each choice we are making. Easier to fall back on habitual thinking, or comforting beliefs about reality.

Thanks for your post Ken,
PJ


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:04:34 EDT
Subject: Re: Seeing essence

In a message dated 98-04-09 15:58:18 EDT, PJ writes:

 

Does anyone have an idea of what it might be that I see?
PJ

 

Ok, first a question: Do you wear glasses?
If your answer is yes...

  then clean them.

Just kidding...

Dave


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 16:23:04 -0400
Subject: The Karmic Petard

PJ wrote:

 

> In a message dated 4/5/98 1:03:54 PM, you wrote:
>
> <<So why is it we don't manifest what we desire to be in our lives?>>
>
> Wouldn't you say it is because most are making these choices unconsciously. I
> feel you are right, we get to ask and create what we want in life. But, it can
> be difficult at times to be consciously aware of each choice we are making.
> Easier to fall back on habitual thinking, or comforting beliefs about reality.

 

Correcto mundo. The beliefs are comforting due primarily to their familiarity, but the results of those beliefs are usually discomforting, and most cannot see the connections between the comfort and the discomfort. This is part of what Don Juan Matus calls being a warrior. To stay constantly and consciously aware of where your head is at at all times, and to be able to make changes "immediately" as necessary. Some call it "practicing the presence", some call it "mindfulness". But whatever you call it it is usually difficult to keep from getting hoist on your karmic "petard". Especially if you're an engineer. <grin> :>)#

 

> Thanks for your post Ken,

 

You're muchly welcome.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 16:43:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Seeing essence

PJ wrote:

 

> In a message dated 4/4/98 7:19:29 PM, you wrote:
>
> <<I experienced it as a bluish-silver globe with silvery energy radiating out from it.>>
>
> I have had what feels like a similar experience. But, it is something I saw in
> the people around me. It happened one day when I was in a particularly quiet
> mood. And I noticed that the physical forms of people began to take on a two
> dimensional quality. As if they were cardboard cutouts. This was due to the
> incredible silvery light that was radiating from their bodies. It was an
> incredibly beautiful sight, one that I can still call forth in any given
> situation. This experience showed me that beyond this physical realm, we are
> so much alike. Does anyone have an idea of what it might be that I see?

 

I think what you saw was the person's etheric body. A beautiful sight indeed. It is actually a physical phenomenon, but at a much higher vibration rate than our flesh and blood physical body. This etheric body holds the pattern for the perfection of our physical bodies. It is behind the "phantom limb" experience of amputees, and the ghosts of cut leaf parts seen in kirlian photography. For some folks this light is closely shaped around the physical body, and for others it may be shaped like an egg around the physical body.

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 17:43:27 EDT
Subject: Ordering Books from Author?

In a message dated 4/8/98 5:48:51 PM, Jeanne wrote:

 

> I have been ordering books and tapes directly from whichever "Author/Channel"
> wrote the book or recorded the tape. Perhaps, not asking for the books in
> bookstores is part of the problem.

 

It's always helpful to ask for Michael books you don't see on the shelf whenever you're in a bookstore. You can order them, of course, but just suggesting that they be carried is helpful, too. Of course, authors make far more per book on those they sell directly. I can also offer discounts on Summerjoy Press books that you can't get from bookstores.

All the best,
Shepherd


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 17:43:47 EDT
Subject: Various Topics

 

According to Shepherd Hoodwin in "Journey of a Soul", it is possible to
switch Goal, especially with older soul age with more experience.

 

Outside of sliding, and walk-ins choosing new overleaves, it is very rare in my experience for people to change overleaves during a lifetime, although it can be done with strong focused intention. Our chosen overleaves can usually serve us well in a variety of situations if we are in the positive poles. Also, we can temporarily pull in other overleaf energies as needs arise.

JJ wrote:

 

One alternative just occur to me: How about asking to advertise
your books on those New Age sites instead of pulling email addresses from
there? All it takes is a graphic banner or just a link to your own site. This may
cost money, or not, depending on the owners of those sites.

 

That's a great idea. I've already contacted a couple about exchanging links (no answer). Banners would definitely cost money, but it might be reasonable. This is a good afternoon research project for me. Thanks.

Dave wrote:

 

most of the channelers I've seen appear to have a lone bull attitude of "My reading's right and yours is wrong."

 

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I've been working for a long time to fully let go of this tendency in myself. It recently occurred to me that it's really understandable that channels might take this attitude as a defense--every channel and psychic constantly puts him/herself out on a limb. And with several channels working with the same teachings, we are especially vulnerable. It is also true that we each have at least slightly different takes on the teachings, and have some strong opinions about what is true. It takes some conscious effort to remain open-minded and respectful of everyone's work, even if we don't fully agree.

I try to take the approach of "This is what I got" rather than "This is what is right." If someone can't validate something I got, I discuss it, seeking to learn what his picture of that trait is. By helping him expand his definition of what a trait could look like, it might help him validate. If he still feels it's wrong after a period of self-validation, I go back to Michael and ask for a double-check. Sometimes, they stand behind the earlier channeling and explain why it might look like something else, and sometimes they make a correction. It is still up to the person to decide what he feels is right.

Regarding Dick's comments on reading transcripts from the first Michael group: The true history of the "Yarbro group" is far different from what is presented in her books. I hint at this in "Journey" when I say that the story is more fictionalized than one might think (although the channeling is not). I am still piecing together the complete picture, but I've learned a lot from conversations with Sarah Chambers (heavily fictionalized as "Jessica Lansing" in Yarbro) and some others who know Yarbro and have attended her meetings.

In a nutshell: Yarbro met Sarah after the "big group" had disbanded (maybe 1977) and Sarah was channeling only occasionally for sporadic individuals and small groups. Apparently, after attending a few of Sarah's sessions (and buying the rights to her transcripts), Yarbro started channeling herself and later formed her own group, which is not the "original group" as she implies it is. Yarbro does not want it widely known that she channels, so I respected this and kept it out of "Journey." I think that Messages has a mix of Sarah and Yarbro's channeling, and More Messages has less of Sarah's. There isn't any of her material in the 3rd and 4th books, AFAIK. Also, there were two others who sometimes channeled when Sarah did, and the transcripts don't say who channeled what. There were other channels and satellite groups that branched off from Yarbro's, as well.

Best,
Shepherd


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 14:58:00 -0700
Subject: Re: Seeing Essence, and Manifesting

Somebody mentioned that they knew that I'd seen my essence and I wondered if I'd ever told you all this story before, but I don't think I have.

Back around March of 1995 I asked Essence to show me how it is that me and my essence-mate (my EM for short) were working together on higher planes because we were so telepathically, spiritually, and empathically connected and it really blew me away.

In a series of dreams over the course of 4 or 5 nights I was shown some strange things that my mind couldn't comprehend very well. I would find myself detached, watching myself as a light-form, a glowing, golden-white light inside of a "light-ship," for lack of a better term, with many others who looked like myself, just these beautiful, golden-white light forms, but I recognized my EM closest to me there. We were working together on a project of focusing some kind of energy into form and sending it down to the Earth.

Later I interpreted the light-ship to be our entity (2nd entity) and it was the place where I could see myself in relationship to other essences around me, like cadences, but since I was not focused on that aspect at the time, I didn't recognize it like that until later.

A couple months later I think, I had a channeling session and asked Michael about those dreams and they said I was seeing myself on the 6th dimension. That made sense--the 6th dimension is the upper astral plane, the place where we reunite with our entities! Also, I've read from other sources that the 6th dimension is about form. It's where form is created. So, my EM and I were working on some project with the Earth itself--bringing in forms from the 6th dimension. Perhaps this is the way we all manifest--by our essences creating form on the 6th dimension, and when we are in alignment with essence, we allow the form to come into our physical reality.

I know some people are going, "But you aren't reunited with your entity yet, or you wouldn't be here right?" But that is linear thinking. Remember that on higher dimensions, time doesn't exist the way it does here, so we are and we aren't reunited with our entities already. It's a matter of grasping multidimensionality. But if you don't buy it, that's OK too, I'm not trying to force anything down anyone's throat. Just take it as being true for me.

Interestingly, the realization that I was creating form and bringing it down to Earth even assisted my understanding of why I work in the environmental field, but I only realized it recently. I thought I'd have to change my job because it wasn't spiritual enough. There was a belief I didn't know I had and when I realized it, I changed it!

I thought I had to do something unique and esoteric to really be spiritually my true self, but that wasn't really it--my presence here, the energy I bring into the framework of my job, that is where I'm really working in assisting the Earth in this transitional time. I had grappled with that a long time, thinking I had to make my job be something more "spiritual," but then I realized it's not so much what you do, but the presence you bring to your work, that makes it spiritual. My work supports this allowing of energy, as it's conducive to the overall concept and mission of the agency I work for (which, incidentally, if you're wondering, is the California Air Resources Board.)

Well I hope I didn't get too off the topic! :^)

--
Lori Tostado


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:32:54 EDT
Subject: Re: Getting the word out on your books

I believe the huge success of books like "Conversations with God" and "Celestine P." clearly shows that there is a thriving market for new age books. In other words, writing a New Age best-seller is not an impossibility. Perhaps what Shepherd needs to do is analyze why these two works in particular seemed to excite the pulse of the masses. Once that research is completed, he could then muster his creative powers into either writing a Michael inspired book that's specifically designed to appeal to the masses, or pen something similar to "Conversations" or "Celestine," but with his own personal stamp. Obviously, the objective here would be to write something original, yet marketable on all levels that would somehow thrust him into recognition. This would then allow his previous works to ride on the coat tails of his new found success.

I know I'm possibly oversimplifying this, but does every endeavor have to be arduous and complicated? Perhaps it's all a simple matter of belief.

Dave


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:18:37 -0600
Subject: A Little Slack

Someone said, "if there was more cooperation between ALL the channels..."

From time to time, I have allowed this to really disappoint me. But you know, these folks are human beings with their own karmas and agreements to work out, on the same journey as the rest of us. It wouldn't hurt to cut them a bit of slack, and support them in the ways we know how, as they work to resolve interpersonal and personal issues.

Gloria


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:21:31 -0500
Subject: Student Online Newsletter

I would like some input from other students (not channels) on the idea of some of us putting together an online newsletter. I've thought a lot about this and I think it's a good idea whose time has come. I don't think that any of our channels should be involved. This should be a (non-channeling) student enterprise. Our channels have enough to do as it is.

I feel that it could be set up with the basics of the Michael Teachings explained first (i.e., Role, Overleaves, the purpose being for the individual to use this information to better understand and deal with his/her own life). Since most of our Channels do put some channeling on their Websites, I thought we might ask one per month to offer something for the Newsletter. The choice of whether to do it and what to offer would of course be theirs, but it would give newcomers to the Michael Teachings a little of the flavor of the individual channels.

There could also be short articles by Students that would be attractive and pertinent to all of the other students. (We might even bribe Dave to do some little piece, if we offered him cookies and ice cream and didn't ask him to get off from the sofa. LOL.) We could also have a review of one of the Michael Books and advise of the level of the book (i.e., Newbie, Advanced Student, Old Scholar, etc.). We could do the same with the tapes. And finally we could list any activities, conferences, meetings, that are happening during that month and give particulars (location, name of person or group holding the meeting, time, date and fee if there is one). And we could end with the E-Mail addresses of pertinent links, websites, etcetera. And most importantly Lori's Website.

I know Jody offered to help and I'm sure some of the other students would find an interest and outlet here. If need be I have the address of a Website Creator who offers free (very attractive) website pages (up to 6 pages), if it would be necessary to have one. And that is something I know nothing about.

But the important thing is that I think it should be done by Students. I think the Michaels would feel that this is fair. Our contribution to the Teachings would be getting the word out, and frankly I am concerned for all of those who are seeking and not finding this information. Some people (like me) did not feel a strong pull to "Seth" and for myself many of the other Channelled Entities invoke to much religion into their messages.

Would like feedback please. You need not contact me on the list. I really think it is time (and we'll sure need some good Scholars to do Reviews if we get this up and running).

Love, Laughter and Stop the Presses!!!

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:39:02 -0500
Subject: The Accuracy of Yarbro

Dick,

While Yarbro may have taken liberties with the channelings I feel from all of the multitudes of channelings that have been done since then, that the basic premises are probably intact. I can't speak for you and of course I have much more limited experience of the Channels, but when someone is really channeling "The Michaels" I get a flavor that is always the same, even though some of the dialogue differs from Channel to Channel due to speech and thought patterns.

It is a rare author who does not take liberties (even non-fiction writers) with their material. Since I'm going to have a channeling done in two weeks, if you have anything basic that you want verified, send it to me and I'll ask the Michaels. Of course it will come through a Channel, so you will have to validate any discrepancies. (If you knew how long I've waited to say that to one of my favorite scholars! LOL).

Love & Laughter :-))

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 98 00:18:47 UT
Subject: RE: THE WORD (Digest No. 1998-04-09 of Michael Teachings List)

<assorted snips> :but the point I'm trying to make is that I'm really not seeing enough collaboration between the Michael channels. (Dave)

This leads me to hold the information in Yarbro in serious question, and potentially lays the groundwork for undermining the validity of what is there. It's too soon to tell, but the potential is there . . . During the last few days I have mentioned a couple of times that once something is validated (as best as can be from our perspective), I take the position that when something else comes along that contradicts it, one or the other needs to be refuted. (Dick)

In my studies of the Michael material , I have kept two concepts firmly in mind: First, that even the most accurate channel is going to be "wrong" 15-20 percent of the time, for many reasons. Second, they are translating information that was not originally in English or, indeed, in human language. Some of the concepts are not easily reduced to words or three dimensions, so what we get is a rough approximation, most likely a metaphor. Zen koans might be the same sort of thing; the master is trying to get the student to stop thinking linearly so the student can grasp what is a non-linear concept.

In my last session, Michael told me that they are "spiritual librarians," that they are just looking up information for us and passing it along. It seems to me very likely that the information they find for a particular individual might be tailored somehow by how that individual requests the information and perhaps even who the individual asking the question is. (Shepherd says in "Journey" that scholars seem to "draw" more information out of him.) Taking the library analogy even farther, perhaps Michael goes to different sources for each asker or each channeler. We're told over and over that the Tao is forever creating itself, ever in a state of flux - perhaps the information itself changes?

Michael is not all that much beyond us, as the various planes go; I doubt that an entity above the causal plane could even communicate with us directly. We're like undergrads being taught by a PhD candidate TA, perhaps; they know a lot more than we do, but they don't necessarily have all the answers.

What I'm getting at here is that I don't believe that there is ONE TRUTH out there - or if there is, Michael may not be able to convey it to us. And I'm absolutely sure that even if there was and they could, we humans could not grasp it.

IMHO the best we can do is take the teachings, apply them to our own lives and see what makes sense, what helps us grow and learn and get closer to being capable of agape, and not "fress" too much about inconsistencies (could quote Voltaire here but won't) or details. If there is an inconsistency between two channelings, don't spend your life arguing about whether the sandal or the gourd is the path (20 points for recognizing my witty movie reference here); take the one that resonates for you, that helps you grow, and go with it.

PS I don't see the point of cloning Jesus. They'd just get the physical body, not the soul, dontcha think?

--------<--{@ Jody

______________________________________________________________
Mature scholar who spends too much time at work sweating the small stuff.

 

 


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:38:54 -0700
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

 

> I would not doubt this is possible...but my question is...why would Jesus
> allow a blood sample to be taken? Don't you think he would know the intent of
> the sample takers? And if this did happen, and if Jesus did know their intent
> was to creat a clone in the "future", then I would suppose this was/is
> something Jesus agreed was acceptable. (Just some thoughts!)
> Robin D.

 

    Robin,
    Interesting about it being acceptable. I forgot to mention a couple of things. Supposedly, when the person from the future showed up Jesus handed him a vial of blood, so Jesus knew in advance what they wanted. You may want to ignore this, but according to the book, the person from the future tried to assassinate him. Jesus looked at him and said "I am not ready to die yet". The person tried to assassinate him but it had no effect.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 19:37:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Accuracy

Brin,

Thank you. That is such a clear explanation of what we all know and tend to forget. For many of us, it is difficult to express these thoughts with the kind of clarity you have used. I'm going to print this out and put it with Gloria's "Essence" piece and Ken Broom's "Power" piece.

I've "thunk" it, just couldn't say it!

Love

Jeanne Holley


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 19:44:47 -0700
Subject: Re: Books/authors exposure

    Hi all,
    As far as getting books published one thing I have heard (actually this is Ted;s idea) of doing is to ask that others visualize the desired outcome. In this case to make that work people on the list would visualize Shepherd's desired outcome with his books. We could list what visualization we wanted in return and take turns visualizing a desired outcome for each other. There may be too many on the list to make this work.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 98 03:20:40 UT
Subject: RE: Seeing essence

When we're not in bodies, we are pure energy, according to Michael Newton's "Journey of Souls". Some people can see this on the physical plane; sounds like you're one of them (cool!). The healer Barbara Brennan writes about developing your ability to see and work with what she calls the "human energy field" in "Hands of Light."

I envy you. I only saw this once and it was an "internal" seeing.

--------<--{@ Jody

In a message dated 4/4/98 7:19:29 PM, PJ wrote:

 

<<I experienced it as a bluish-silver globe with silvery energy radiating out from it.>>

I have had what feels like a similar experience. But, it is something I saw in
the people around me. It happened one day when I was in a particularly quiet
mood. And I noticed that the physical forms of people began to take on a two
dimensional quality. As if they were cardboard cutouts. This was due to the
incredible silvery light that was radiating from their bodies. It was an
incredibly beautiful sight, one that I can still call forth in any given
situation. This experience showed me that beyond this physical realm, we are
so much alike. Does anyone have an idea of what it might be that I see?
PJ

 


Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 21:14:03 -0700
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-09 of Michael Teachings List

Chris wrote:

 

> Yes, I would like to hear more about great figures from history, and what
> Michael has to say about them! I am also interested to hear whether Michael
> has said anything regarding the Bubonic plague or the Holocaust...anyone?
> Who's gonna have to deal with all that kharma? And when will it start? Are
> people who died in the Holocaust already incarnating here?

 

   There was discussion here about Hitler and that era on this list I believe. Search the archives. Yes, they are back again.
   There has been information coming for several years about plague and other catastrophic diseases which will quickly reduce the population over the next 30-50 years about 1/5.
   The ratio that Caris quoted for rest/work for old souls is consistent with other information we have gotten for several years from many channels about the pillars and old souls. Almost ideal is working 4 days (32 hours) and resting 3 days. In many professions, that can be done and still afford a good economic lifestyle. It just takes some maneuvering and courage to break the young soul mind-set.
   I, too, have seen some of the original transcripts and was under-whelmingly impressed. Altho, seeing them and some of the pictures and attempts to show some information that has never been published was a wonderful experience.
   I'd love to have a set of my own......Dick, is that possible? Cost? If you have more information, write me directly. Thanks!
   A few years ago when a group of friends was taking channeling lessons, we all took notes long-hand about what was said, then typed up the notes. It was amazing the different words people used, even when everyone was trying to be very accurate and precise. The "quotes" came in 5 or 6 different versions most of the time (our group was 5-6 people). Only rarely did we all agree on *exactly* what was said. As with Michael's energy, the most important part was the energetic sensation we got, which was much more important than the words. We eventually went to tape recorders (until we blew them out), and gave up trying to transcribe. Of course, our goals were different and we were not trying to record our channelings for future generations to learn from.

Barbara


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 02:30:04 EDT
Subject: Re: Jesus H. Clone

[snip]

 

> ....I would suppose this was/is something Jesus agreed was acceptable. (Just some thoughts!)
> Robin D.

    Robin,
    Interesting about it being acceptable. I forgot to mention a couple of things. Supposedly, when the person from the future showed up Jesus handed
him a vial of blood, so Jesus knew in advance what they wanted. You may
want to ignore this, but according to the book, the person from the future
tried to assassinate him. Jesus looked at him and said "I am not ready to
die yet". The person tried to assassinate him but it had no effect.
    Mike Huttinger

 

I should have said....acceptable to him that they clone him. Also...why was the future person trying to assassinate him? In an attempt to re-write history? And, do you know what the purpose would be of cloning him then? As someone else said, it would only produce a look-alike body....would not have the soul of Jesus in it.
Robin D.


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 02:46:32 EDT
Subject: Re: A Little Slack - Jack

In a message dated 98-04-10 01:08:14 EDT, Gloria writes:

 

From time to time, I have allowed this to really disappoint me. But you
know, these folks are human beings with their own karmas and agreements
to work out, on the same journey as the rest of us. It wouldn't hurt to
cut them a bit of slack, and support them in the ways we know how, as
they work to resolve interpersonal and personal issues.

 

I think most people on this list DO support them. Personally, I have collected most of the Michael books currently in print, and have hired the services of 3 different channels. But the point I was trying to make is that the Michael collective, the teachings as a whole, would be better served if the many channels would work together in an effort to pool their resources and aspire towards attaining a singular truth. Call it a democratic-like commitee, where the channels could strive to work together, sharing information (new and old), then putting their heads together, giving group validation to some of the more difficult concepts.

In terms of cutting them some slack, I haven't tied any of them to a pole and stuffed their innards full of tofu until they burst, so what's the problem? ;-p

Dave - A Lint Rights Activist.
(Stop the senseless waste of good navel fuzz! Support your local Buddha)


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 14:54:45 +0800
Subject: Divine Press Release

With the recent interest in the man Jesus, the cloning of whom, etc. I thought this particular humor might be suitable here...

=======================================
The latest from Washington.... Trix

 

Divine Press Release

Turmoil rocked Heaven this morning as allegations arose that
God had had an affair with a former worshipper. The scandal
was begun when a 21 year old woman, known only as Mary, claimed that she
had given birth to God's "only son" last week in a barn in the hamlet of Bethlehem.

Sources close to Mary claim that she "had loved God for a long time",that
she was constantly talking about her relationship with God, and that she was
"thrilled to have had his child." In a press conference this morning, God
issued a vehement denial, saying that "No sexual relationship
existed", and that "the facts of this story will come out in time, verily".

Independent counsel Kenneth Beelzebub immediately filed a brief with the
Justice department to expand his investigation to cover questions of
whether any commandments may have been broken, and whether God had illegally
funneled laundered money to his illegitimate child through three foreign
operatives know only as the "Wise Men". Beelzebub has issued subpoenas to
several angels who are rumored to have acted as go-betweens in the affair.

Critics have pointed out that these allegations have little to do with the
charges that Beelzebub was originally appointed to ivestigate, that God
had created large-scale flooding in order to cover up evidence of a failed land deal.

In recent months, Beelzebub's investigation has already been expanded to
cover questions surrounding the large number of locusts that plagued
God's political opponents in the last election, as well as to claims that
the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah was to divert attention
away from a scandal involving whether the giveaway of a parcel of public
land in Promised County to a Jewish special interest group was quid pro quo
for political contributions.

If these allegations prove to be true, then this could be a huge blow to
God's career, much of which has been spent crusading for stricter moral
standards and harsher punishments for wrongdoers. Indeed, God recently
outlined a "tough-on-crime" plan consisting of a series of 10 "Commandments",
which has been introduced in Congress in a bill by Rep.

Moses. Critics of the bill have pointed out that it lacks any provisions
for the rehabilitation of criminals, and lawyers for the ACLU are planning
to fight the "Name in Vain" Commandment as being an unconstitutional
restriction on free speech.

 


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 03:44:53 EDT
Subject: Re: RE: THE WORD

In a message dated 98-04-10 02:17:18 EDT, Jody writes:

 

IMHO the best we can do is take the teachings, apply them to our own lives
and see what makes sense, what helps us grow and learn and get closer to being
capable of agape, and not "fress" too much about inconsistencies (could quote
Voltaire here but won't) or details. If there is an inconsistency between two
channelings, don't spend your life arguing about whether the sandal or the
gourd is the path (20 points for recognizing my witty movie reference here);
take the one that resonates for you, that helps you grow, and go with it.

 

When I made the comment about collaboration, I had a feeling this very same response would appear, probably because I largely agree with it; however, my bone of contention is not a personal gripe really, but more-or-less a concern that these tiny discrepencies might hurt the teachings as a whole. Recently, there's been a discussion of channelers dealing with the economic difficulties of publishing books, and eeking out a living. I would think that since most successful enterprises rely on the credibility of its product, it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to realize that even infinitestimal discrepencies could undermine this credibility, and play a factor in a loss of sales, and a lack of confidence in the product itself. Obviously, I'm not talking about the personal validation of overleaves here. Instead, I'm attempting to point out why collaboration among the channelers could assist in building credibility in the teachings, possibly making them more ATTRACTIVE to potential publishers and the PAYING public.

Dave - Respond to this post with the comment "channeling is only 80% accurate," and I will be forced to send you mass GIF mailings of a hairy, bloated boil that droops from the left cheek of my buttocks. It ain't pretty, folks. ;-p


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 05:41:35 -0700
Subject: Re: Getting the word out on your books

Dave wrote:

 

> I believe the huge success of books like "Conversations with God" and
> "Celestine P." clearly shows that there is a thriving market for new age
> books. In other words, writing a New Age best-seller is not an impossibility.
> Perhaps what Shepherd needs to do is analyze why these two works in particular
> seemed to excite the pulse of the masses. Once that research is completed,
> he could then muster his creative powers into either writing a Michael
> inspired book that's specifically designed to appeal to the masses, or pen
> something similar to "Conversations" or "Celestine," but with his own personal stamp.

 

I disagree. You're putting the cart before the horse. I feel the true objective is to provide information, not have a bestseller. Abundance can be manifested in many other ways than by selling books. If the motive is to make money rather than to provide accurate and valuable information, then the work itself will become compromised. If Shepherd does an excellent job of sharing his truth, and also concentrates manifesting abundance, but as a separate issue, then the abundance will come. And this doesn't apply to Shepherd alone, of course, but is universal. Marianne Williamson has put out some excellent information on this topic.

I would like to hear from Ted Fontaine on this topic. Ted, how's the experiment going?

John Rogers


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 07:07:44 -0700
Subject: More on Accuracy

I just wanted to add that in general I agree with Dick and Dave that at some point the information must mesh in a way that rings true as one body of information. Or perhaps I should say that at every point that it divurges, the material becomes questionable and I imagine we each deal with that in our own ways.

Since many of us are entity and cadre mates, the information has served to bring us together. Loyalties to parts of the information may spring up for various reasons that may or may not actually have to do with how accurate the information is or how much it's really a part of what feels like the central body of what we're calling (more or less loosely) Michael teachings.

In terms of a body of information, what is it that makes up "Michael"?

I want to say that I found it deeply useful to see the original transcripts and to be able to sort out on my own what was what. Seeing those transcripts made the fictionalized part of the early books clear, which may have been a way of presenting the material initially, but at some point clear information is more useful. It also gave a sense of major themes at the time. Some came out in the early books, some didn't and haven't really been in any books.

Overall the level of inconsistancies in those transcripts as well as in the styles and kinds of information of different channels even when channeling on the same person or subject is inevitably in our face pretty quickly. I've found it disturbing when we've discussed someone famous and there was such a range of information channeled by different people that didn't agree and didn't really go together in any way. Different overleaves, different basic info as well as different interpretations of what that person was about.

Initially there's an impression perhaps that we're getting some kind of final truth from some kind of authority beyond and we can sort of rest in accepting that they have a greater clarity and understanding from their perspective. Well, maybe that's true and some of that comes through, but which is which? And we can say, "channels get it together" and sort of put a responsibility on the channels, but that doesn't seem to be the way it has been, or seems to be going -- not to say that wouldn't be nice or that there couldn't at any time be more of the channels collaborating. I think one of the many issues influencing potential collaborations is the element of the degree of time that would take. I think each channel has sought to find some way to make it a financially viable choice to be channeling at all and perhaps that hasn't supported doing more work together. How do the channels even if they did come together decide on what information is accurate? Do they create standards of channeling and if so, how... One person may have a very different style of channeling and yet bring through very strong information. One may change numbering to reflect an aspect of the truth that another is not focusing on. And yes, some of it may be just off. Do they create standards of what is Michael? It doesn't seem to me to be that much different than the information we encounter every day in the rest of our lives. Which is to say that on this plane we get facets of truth, we get a lot of illusion and fantasy, we get points of view (always with the potential to open to something deeper... which I personally think is the point anyway.)

So instead of a complete body of harmonious information, we have people sort of doing their own thing.

For me, some of the information really has been helpful to my understanding of myself, the world, and my place in it -- has added more dimension and richness to understanding how this all works. A lot of that was in the initial information or in clear descriptions of what feels like that core body of what I think of as Michael. The loyalty I feel to that information probably comes from the strength of the positive impact it had on me and still has. When newer information comes through, some of it is useful, some less so. I don't feel much loyalty to information that seems to fall more into the realm of personal preferences. Some of it may simply be interesting, some not. As new information comes out on the basics of structure, some of it feels accurate to me, some feels somewhat off or completely out there in the realm of ahhh....

When a channel or a teacher, a therapist, an astrologer, or a friend or mate for that matter, shares info with us, some of it can give us great new insights, leaps of understanding. Just hearing a different point of view can do that. Sometimes the quality and accuracy of the information is strikingly powerful and sometimes we just want it to be....

Which doesn't help Dick much. I appreciate him wanting to keep the material honest. I appreciate some of the fleshing out of structure with newer channeling and intuitively sense what it is that people are trying to describe. I intuit dimensions of the structure and of information not yet described. I guess where I'll end is simply to say that at best, each of us bring our part, our specialty of understanding, of insight, of strengths to the whole, to the better understanding of that whole through expressing what it is we are. So we're creating it as we express it as we intuit it and continue to create in the nature of what we are. It's an ongoing living organism. Within that, wanting to sort out the excesses, distortions and fantasies of this plane helps us define truth and fantasy for ourselves.

Best to all, Brin


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 11:24:22 EDT
Subject: Re: THE WORD

It bothers me to hear all this talk of discrepancies and disagreements and channels not being best friends and the teachings not being heralded by the masses.

What are we trying to start here? A religion? If you can't get more help than you could ever possibly put into effect from the teachings as they are now available, not only are you not even on the planet, you never even sparked off from the Tao.

If we do get everybody together on this we can change the name from Michael Teachings to Dogma Central. --John Clarko


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 17:04:09 +0100
Subject: Re: Getting the word out on your books

I've been meaning to contribute much more to this list, but am just really busy at the moment. Anyway, a couple of comments here.

 

I believe the huge success of books like "Conversations with God" and
"Celestine P." clearly shows that there is a thriving market for new age
books. In other words, writing a New Age best-seller is not an impossibility.
Perhaps what Shepherd needs to do is analyze why these two works in
particular seemed to excite the pulse of the masses.

 

Part of it is the publicity. It's much easier to get publicity if you bill your channelling as coming from "God" than from any of the ways in which Michael describe themselves (the grammar of talking about Michael always bothers me... that's being a Scholar, I suppose!). I haven't read the Conversations with God book yet so I can't comment on how accurate it is, but my assumption has always been that the author was channelling something like Michael, but due to his own background interpreted it as being from "God", and no doubt a fair bit of it is influenced by his filters. But it's much easier to get the mainstream press to cover something like that than to cover anyone channelling Michael, Seth, or whoever else. They may interview the author and decide he's a kook, but they still do the interviews. There are also thousands of people who believe in some notion of God and would buy the book out of curiosity, but would pass over Michael material.

With the Celestine Prophecy, I think much of its success comes from the way it's presented - fictionalized, and not really too hard to follow. It illustrates its points quite well and makes it very easy to connect with the truths in it - it's very easy to grasp, and I'm sure its spread was helped by some people not being sure whether it was fictional or not!

On the subject of making more material available to Michael students, I think CD Roms or simply web pages are good ideas. One person with a CD writer can run off CD Roms for a few dollars each. There are some very good deals on web space. What it needs is people willing to type up the material and turn it into HTML, and ideally someone to code a search engine of it all! With enough volunteers, it should be possible.

I'm sure we can come up with some ways to get the books more widely publicized too, but I'll have to save thinking harder about that until I've moved, and read all of Shepherd's books!

Christine

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
We who dream by day are aware of many things that escape those
who dream only by night. - E. A. Poe


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 14:07:15 EDT
Subject: Re: Getting the word out on your books

In a message dated 98-04-10 12:47:25 EDT, John writes:

 

I disagree. You're putting the cart before the horse. I feel the true objective is to provide
information, not have a bestseller. Abundance can be manifested in many other ways than
by selling books. If the motive is to make money rather than to provide accurate and valuable
information, then the work itself will become compromised. If Shepherd does an excellent job of
sharing his truth, and also concentrates manifesting abundance, but as a separate issue, then the
abundance will come.

 

Well, evidently the abundance hasn't arrived yet, so I would say a change in action is needed. And WHERE did I say that Shepherd would have to supply a product where the content was comprimised for the sake of money? Making your work accessible to a larger audience doesn't mean you are sacrificing its inherent quality, it's just an indication that you want your message to take on a greater scope.
  Concerning making money, I've come to the conclusion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. It's really nothing more than energy, and we shape and mold its bidding like the clumps of playdoh we used to play with as children. Yes, I am aware of the MANY spiritual laws that tell how to manifest money through joy, aliveness, the transformation of your beliefs, and finding what you love, but what's wrong with adding "writing a bestseller" to that category? In my opinion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. If your "bestseller" touches the lives of the masses in a positive fashion, and in return, saturates you with a never-ending shower of crisp, one-hundred dollar bills, then I think you have created a wonderful environment where you can take care of yourself, do what you love, and make a huge difference for others. With that in mind, I believe prosperity CAN be a sign of a healthy spirit, not to mention it's just plain fun. Personally I've had enough drama in this cycle, so I think I'll opt for some fun.

Money is not a dirty word, and abundance is the right of all.

Dave - An old soul who doesn't like "Hamburger Helper" without the hamburger. ;-p


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 15:11:18 EDT
Subject: Re: THE WORD

In a message dated 98-04-10 11:24:22 EDT, John Clarko writes:

 

It bothers me to hear all this talk of discrepancies and disagreements and channels
not being best friends and the teachings not being heralded by themasses.

What are we trying to start here? A religion? If you can't get more help than you
could ever possibly put into effect from the teachings as they are now available,
not only are you not even on the planet, you never even sparked off from the Tao.

If we do get everybody together on this we can change the name from Michael
Teachings to Dogma Central. --John

 

Well, now you've taken some simple suggestions and blown them into something as distasteful as organized religion.
With that kind of overblown exaggeration, I could say something like "Hey, my dog is so smart that while being paper trained...he learned to read. (Drum shot) ;-p

Dave


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 15:38:38 EDT
Subject: Re: THE WORD

In a message dated 4/10/98 7:11:18 PM, Dave wrote:

 

With that kind of overblown exaggeration, I could say something like "Hey, my dog
is so smart that while being paper trained...he learned to read. (Drum shot) ;-p

 

Glad to hear you prefer dogs over Dogma. Say, can he read handwriting on the wall? ;-) --John


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 17:58:12 EDT
Subject: Consistency of Information, and Booksignings

Re: Booksignings

I've done a number of them, and I enjoy them. I've gotten anywhere from zero people to 35--some store have stronger signing programs than others. There are time-consuming to set up. Every little bit helps, but media exposure is probably much more meaningful in terms of promotion. It's not worth it to do a book-signing tour unless it is coordinated with significant tv and radio appearances.

 

he could then muster his creative powers into either writing a Michael inspired
book that's specifically designed to appeal to the masses, or pen something similar
to "Conversations" or "Celestine," but with his own personal stamp.

 

I've been thinking about writing a book with wisdom from my spirit guide, called "Conversations with Fred." It has "bestseller" written all over it, don't you think? I had also been thinking about doing "The Philistine Prophesy," but it's already been doon.

Seriously, "Journey" certainly isn't a mass market book. I believe that "Loving from Your Soul" is close to being one, though--people are deeply moved by it, and I think it's pretty accessible, if not to the masses, at least to those who can entertain the idea that we are eternal souls who reincarnate. "Meditations for Self-Discovery" is full of simple, imaginative guided meditations that anyone with an interest in meditation could enjoy and find useful.

James Van Praague's "Talking to Heaven" is a wonderful, simple book full of truth and insight that talks clearly to the average person, and it is (or was) #1 on the NY Times nonfiction list. But I don't think I could write a book like that. It's not my style.

Re: Consistency of information.

Michael through me has strongly encouraged channels to share information and discuss discrepancies. But there's a danger that a group of channels might come from fear and arbitrarily determining what the "party line" will be, suppressing what doesn't agree, rather than truly resolving differences. Truth is not determined by committee. Sometimes what is most true is also most unpopular.

I know that reading in one source that Shakespeare was a scholar, and in another that he was a sage, is troubling and confusing. But in general there are discrepancies and disagreements in all disciplines, and I think we need to make peace with that within the Michael teachings--it ain't going away. My experience is that people who are already Michael students in essence and who are ready for the teachings will devour everything out there, as most of us did, and nothing will stop them. Rather than trying to make the teachings mass-market acceptable, I think we'd do better to just keep evolving and clarifying them, and let the mass market find us when they're ready.

All the best,
Shepherd


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 16:11:17 -0700
Subject: Re: Student Online Newsletter

Jeanne -- I think you have a good idea for a student online newsletter. If you get what you're looking for as far as material goes, I'm sure we can present it through my website or maybe even through the newsletter section on Spiritweb itself--I could ask Rene about it anyway. Let me know what I can do.

Blessings,
Lori


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 18:31:26 -0500
Subject: Out of the Henhouse and back to business

Hi everyone,

This "discussion" is starting to deteriorate into a petty henhouse squabble. I offer some wisdom from an editor I once worked for many years ago. He edited a College Freshman Course called Civilization Past & Present. And when everything started to get messy he would say "Who'll know in a hundred years." You may be here then, but you won't remember who said what about the Michael Teachings or the Channels or Yarbro or any of the rest of it. You'll probably be learning it all over again. So relax, remember that we're all in this together and it's a "GAME". So come on, let's play the game and find a new thread to get our egos in an uproar over.

Love, Laughter and 5 minutes of deep breathing exercises. :-)))))))

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 08:57:56 +0800
Subject: Re: Seeing Essence, and Manifesting

Before I add my little comment, I would like to thank Lori for a wonderful post... no wonder I thought I missed out on something... because it was not posted here before.
:-)

At 10:45 PM 4/9/98 -0000, Lori Tostado wrote:

 

> Somebody mentioned that they knew that I'd seen my essence and I
> wondered if I'd ever told you all this story before, but I don't think I have.

 

:-)

<big snip>

 

> I know some people are going, "But you aren't reunited with your entity
> yet, or you wouldn't be here right?" But that is linear thinking.
> Remember that on higher dimensions, time doesn't exist the way it does
> here, so we are and we aren't reunited with our entities already. It's
> a matter of grasping multidimensionality. But if you don't buy it,
> that's OK too, I'm not trying to force anything down anyone's throat.
> Just take it as being true for me.

 

Somehow, this "Truth" issue sticks with me recently. Perhaps it was influenced by Dick Hein a and a few others, who seek specifically for details, or more generally, corresponding details, concensus, objective truths. I am not trying to point fingers here, but just making my comment. Sorry if I offend Dick by mentioning name. Currently, I am also interested in teachings from Castaneda, and trying to learn something via the Monroe Institute products (Hemi-Sync technology). It was really the latter, from Robert Monroe and those following the path he took a lead in exploration, that got me on this Truth issue. Erm... I don't really know how to express this (not such a Sage, am I?) but it has been mentioned numerous times that we create our reality. In our reality, is our own truths. And this "reality" is not limited to the physical reality we experience, but non-physical ones as well (should I say "especially non-physical reality"?). In other words, there are truths, and then there are more truths, but they are all geared towards the "reality" we create (and allow). In early Michael books, there is a reference to Universal Truth, but I curiously I don't recall the details of which. It was a nice idea to me -- I was "fresh off" from Christianity in seeking a _wider_ truth, and having a Universal Truth really appealed to me (I believe it does to many others, too), even though I may not comprehend it now. But now, I realise that even if I do see The Universal Truth, I will only see the aspect as viewed from me, and that reduces it to Personal Truth. Having seen someone using a tag-line from X-File ("The Truth is Out There"), I was first tempted to use "The Truth is Inside", but it didn't feel right. What I now feel right is ... what I am using on my tag-line now, "There is no Truth". There is only a perceiver, and the mystery that is called The Universe. Whatever truth we see (in our corporeal body or out of) is only a facet of The Truth. I would be so bold to say that even the entity Michael does not see the whole of The Truth, but their perspective of which. And granted that them being on the Causal Plane, their perspective is far wider than whatever we can imagine. (any channeler like to bring this to Michael to dispute or confirm me?)

end rant

:-)

 

> Interestingly, the realization that I was creating form and bringing it
> down to Earth even assisted my understanding of why I work in the
> environmental field, but I only realized it recently. I thought I'd
> have to change my job because it wasn't spiritual enough. There was a
> belief I didn't know I had and when I realized it, I changed it!
>
> I thought I had to do something unique and esoteric to really be
> spiritually my true self, but that wasn't really it--my presence here,
> the energy I bring into the framework of my job, that is where I'm
> really working in assisting the Earth in this transitional time. I had
> grappled with that a long time, thinking I had to make my job be
> something more "spiritual," but then I realized it's not so much what
> you do, but the presence you bring to your work, that makes it
> spiritual. My work supports this allowing of energy, as it's conducive
> to the overall concept and mission of the agency I work for (which,
> incidentally, if you're wondering, is the California Air Resources Board.)
>
> Well I hope I didn't get too off the topic! :^)

 

The above passage reminds me very much of what Don Juan says about being close to a master sorcerer... that your "assemblage point" shifts whether you like it or not. (I don't remember the whole passage, just a paraphrase) And guess what? He also said that everyone is a magician, in the sense that everyone defines a reality (position of assemblage point), even though it is a concensus reality depending heavily upon definitions using words.

If the above paragraph is really too esoteric, :-) then I would like to finish this long rambling with a Chinese saying, translated literally is "if you are close to red clay (ochre?), you got red on you; if you are close to ink, you got black on you". The meaning is that we are influenced by mere proximity, especially when we are not conscious about it.

As for being "spiritual", I once comment (elsewhere) that plants are very spiritual... that they are not functioning intellectually does not mean that they are not spiritual. Our works may not sound spiritual in any sense of the word, but that does not mean they are not spiritual... (now that's really confusing, no?) :-)

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 18:01:25 -0700
Subject: Re: THE WORD

    Hi all,
    The Michael teaching has helped me immensely to understand the flow of soul evolution. What has also helped a lot is the channelers giving me personal assistance in understanding myself. They have been very helpful in validating my feelings about various things, many times without my asking about it.
    I have been wrestling with the difference between dogma and truth for a long time. I personally see truth as being a matter of perspective to a large degree, but what are good ways of avoiding turning a truth into a dogma? I invite any comments on this.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 19:19:37 -0700
Subject: Re: Dogma central

I agree, John. It WOULD be a bit dogmatic to try and get every Michael channel to agree on all points.

The Michael material, to me, is a bit like astrology. Anyone on this list who's had much to do with astrology and astrologers knows that there is NO agreement about many of the most fundamental points. And still, as a system, it works admirably. In my belief, it works because it's a lens to be trained on reality, and is not in itself a truth.

I don't personally care whether my astrologer believes that Pluto rules Scorpio or that Mars does, as long as she is able to train her particular version of the lens on the reality of my life and give me a glimpse of the Truth there. Though I'm not nearly as experienced with the Michael teachings as I am with astrology, I'm pretty sure I feel the same way about the distinctions among various channels.

Anne Hawley


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 20:11:09 -0700
Subject: Re: Getting the word out on your books

 

> Well, evidently the abundance hasn't arrived yet, so I would say a
> change in action is needed.

 

Agreed, if abundance is a goal.

 

> And WHERE did I say that Shepherd would have to supply a
> product where the content was comprimised for the sake of money?

 

You didn't say the content had to be compromised for the sake of money. I said that when money is the motive, the content becomes compromised. I don't believe that goals such as "writing a bestseller" resonate with essence. These types of pursuits belong to the ego, or false personality. If you write your truth, and your truth resonates with enough people to make your book a bestseller, then great. But to attempt to write a bestseller, with the primary motive being to write a bestseller, the mindset from the beginning has to be to sell books. When this is the mindset, the work is automatically compromised. In light of some recent information here, it sounds as if Yarbro's work may fall into this category.

 

> Making your work accessible to a larger audience doesn't mean you are sacrificing its
> inherent quality, it's just an indication that you want your message to take on a greater scope.

 

No argument here. I was talking initial intent in regards to the work itself.

 

> Concerning making money, I've come to the conclusion that there is absolutely
> nothing wrong with it. It's really nothing more than energy, and we shape and
> mold its bidding like the clumps of playdoh we used to play with as children.

 

No argument here, either. I absolutely agree.

 

> Yes, I am aware of the MANY spiritual laws that tell how to manifest money
> through joy, aliveness, the transformation of your beliefs, and finding what
> you love, but what's wrong with adding "writing a bestseller" to that
> category? In my opinion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. If your
> "bestseller" touches the lives of the masses in a positive fashion, and in
> return, saturates you with a never-ending shower of crisp, one-hundred dollar
> bills, then I think you have created a wonderful environment where you can
> take care of yourself, do what you love, and make a huge difference for
> others. With that in mind, I believe prosperity CAN be a sign of a healthy
> spirit, not to mention it's just plain fun. Personally I've had enough drama
> in this cycle, so I think I'll opt for some fun.

 

I have to go back to intent here. If your intent is to write a bestseller, and also accomplish all of the above, then great. But if your intent is to inform or enlighten, the other "intents" will cloud your true purpose.

 

> Money is not a dirty word, and abundance is the right of all.

 

Money does have five letters, doesn't it? Okay, I'll buy that.

 

> Dave - An old soul who doesn't like "Hamburger Helper" without the hamburger. ;-p

 

John Rogers - An old soul who uses one pound of hamburger to two boxes of "Hamburger Helper."
;-p back at you!


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 20:28:31 -0700
Subject: Re: More on Accuracy

I think the important thing here is that the channels not become islands unto themselves. I suspect (and I may be wrong -- it wouldn't be the first time) that for the most part, many of them are very near that state now. If a small group of them were to come together, were able to maintain clarity, and were able to interact in an amiable fashion, some real progress towards consistency and clarity could be made. If while they were together, issues of accuracy, clarity, and consistency could be addressed to Michael on the spot, through all of the participants while they were together. Could provide some interesting information...

In the very early days of Ramtha, before JZ Knight created a monopoly of those teachings, a number of Ramtha channels were scattered about the country. Then JZ was mentioned in a Shirley Maclaine book and her ranch became a Mecca. The other channels disappeared.

I don't want to see this happen to the Michael teachings. And I don't think at this point it could at such a drastic level. But in order for a similar event not to occur, there need to be a number of individual channels, who naturally are going to present some different "stuff." That is not to say though, that some of them couldn't get together in the interest of consistency in core material.

John


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:34:22 -0600
Subject: There is no TRUTH

JJ Tan wrote:

 

"There is no Truth. There is only a perceiver, and the mystery that is called The Universe."

 

Thoughts to ponder, along the same line:

There is no Karma. There is only the agreement to engage in karma, and the perception that a balance is obtainable from such and must be striven for. And,

There is no Game outside of the fact that we have agreed to play one.

Life has no meaning, other than what we choose to give it.

We really can go home anytime. If this is all true, the only thing left is...is....is....

Somebody help me out here. Thanks.

Gloria


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 20:39:20 -0700
Subject: Re: THE WORD

Funny you should mention THE WORD.

Doesn't the song say, "Grease is the word?"

What great timing! Everybody go see Grease!

Is it a movement (bowel?), or is it a conspiracy?

Is it dogma, or is it catma?

Worship John Travolta if you want, but I'm putting the Olivia Newton-John idol on my dashboard.

Hell, I'm off to Australia to start a shrine!

John Rogers


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:48:09 -0600
Subject: Truth and Dogma

M. Huttinger asks:

 

"...what are good ways of avoiding turning a truth into a dogma?"

 

Well, if there is no truth, then it can't become dogma. But, on the other hand, if there is dogma, then maybe it makes things interesting to consider the concept, "truth."

What are those things we consider true? Things we have experienced as real, as intellectually, emotionally, and palpably substantive, and validating, even. Things that we have seen with our very eyes, heard with our ears, and felt in our hearts. Truth is meaningful in the sense that it has the power of an icon. It is objectified (and made into objects) into something separate from us, and has the power to make us weep, make us laugh, and inspire us to save and kill one another.

Apart from the power we give it, it is nothing. If we FEAR truth, it will become dogma. If we FEAR that our truth will be distorted by another's interpretation of it, it will become dogma. If we see our truth being practiced in a way that does not appear to honor or understand it, that truth has become dogma. Allow truth to be infinitely flexible, exposing and exploring all possibility, and dogma has no opportunity to materialize. Otherwise, there is no difference, as I see it. Dogma = FEAR.

Gloria


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:00:10 -0700
Subject: Re: Out of the Henhouse and back to business

 

> This "discussion" is starting to deteriorate into a petty henhouse
> squabble. <snip>
> remember that we're all in this together and it's a "GAME".
> So come on, let's play the game and find a new thread to get
> our egos in an uproar over.

 

Ultimate Fighting Championships is a game too. To Hell with squabbling. That's for weanies. LET'S SEE SOME BLOOD!

John Rogers


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:13:12 -0700 Subject: Re: Re: THE WORD

 

>     The Michael teaching has helped me immensely to understand the flow of
> soul evolution. What has also helped a lot is the channelers giving me
> personal assistance in understanding myself. They have been very helpful in
> validating my feelings about various things, many times without my asking about it.
>     I have been wrestling with the difference between dogma and truth for a
> long time. I personally see truth as being a matter of perspective to a
> large degree, but what are good ways of avoiding turning a truth into a
> dogma? I invite any comments on this.

 

Oh, Grease isn't the word? It's truth?

I would say that when you manifest Essence, you are expressing the purest form of your truth possible in that moment.

Even when we cycle off, we are still pretty far removed from the Tao. Any Ultimate Truth is not going to be comprehensible to us. The best you can do is manifest essence. Desiring to do any more than that is moot.

John Rogers


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:58:40 -0700
Subject: RE: THE WORD (Digest No. 1998-04-09 of Mich

 

> We're told over and over that the Tao is forever creating itself, ever in a
> state of flux - perhaps the information itself changes?

 

    I saw an example of this. In the book Upcoming Changes Michael stated that the earth's population was going to be down to 80% by the year 2000 compared to what it was when the book was published (around 1992?). Around 1996 I asked Michael through a different channel if they were still seeing that. They said no that they were then seeing an increase in the earth's population by the year 2000. They then said "mankind is moving so fast". At the risk of leaping off into wild speculation I figured what they meant was that mankind is evolving so fast that new parallels have been split off with kinder futures for all of us. At least that is my hope.
    Regards,
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 01:06:03 EDT
Subject: Re: Shepherd's success

In a message dated 98-04-10 21:23:28 EDT, Shepherd writes:

 

I've been thinking about writing a book with wisdom from my spirit guide,
called "Conversations with Fred." It has "bestseller" written all over it,
don't you think? I had also been thinking about doing "The Philistine
Prophesy," but it's already been done.

 

Yes!!!!! "Conversations with Fred" is a must do! There's a remarkably stimulating appeal to the name, Fred. I can't quite describe it, but it's an unseen ethereally energetic force that just cries out -- "ENLIGHTENMENT!"

However, after careful examination of Shepherd's situation, I've decided that the change shouldn't come in his books, but in Shepherd himself. I once read an article about how to become a great romantic poet, and I think the criteria, if applied to Shepherd, would result in him attaining a sort of metaphysical mega-stardom. I mean friggin' off the charts, baby! ;-p

First off, Shepherd is just too nice a guy. To be successful, he needs to acquire a certain air of mystery about him, and perhaps even an eccentric tinge. This doesn't mean he has to sleep in a coffin with fresh earth from his homeland, or ponder aimlessly about the philosophical significance of chipped beef on toast, but a couple lucrative Jockey underwear endorsements might be just the ticket. In addition, if he could perhaps develop an opium addiction, boast of a wasting disease, pose for pictures with lots of really good hair, and at all times cradle the skull of a medieval monk under his arm, I think his personal success would know limitless bounds. Think about it: how many famous people do you recall that died from the common cold? Scandal is the key. This means entertaining such delightful pursuits as having sex with farm animals, pouring Drano into your mother's Cream of Gristle soup, and poking the Pillsbury doughboy just a little too low. Yes, notoriety is where it's at folks!

Of course, if these salient precepts offer little rewards, I thinking slapping the shit out of Richard Simmons on national TV would give Shepherd that macho appeal that just could not be ignored. Can you imagine the reaction he would receive? To quote that Otterly Blue guy who posts here occassionally, "Wow!!!"

So what do you guys think? I'm firmly convinced that I'm on to something here. Gosh, if it hadn't been for that sordid incident with that midget and the cricket bat, I think I could have had a career as a great agent.

Dave - I'll make you into a star! ;-p


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 22:13:09 -0700
Subject: RE: THE WORD (Digest No. 1998-04-09 of Mich

 

> PS I don't see the point of cloning Jesus. They'd just get the physical body,
> not the soul, dontcha think?

 

    I assume they would just get the body. I wonder if they would get something different if they were to clone him after the infinite soul came into the body? I assume any meddling with Jesus has to have a nefarious intent. I figure the only reason to attempt the cloning of Jesus would be to create a race of super warriors for an army (okay so it gets a little weird again). Maybe a clone of Jesus would have healing and/or other powers even with a different soul? Just a thought.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 01:21:56 EDT
Subject: Blood

John ranted:

 

Ultimate Fighting Championships is a game too. To Hell with squabbling.
That's for weanies. LET'S SEE SOME BLOOD!

 

Spoken like a true Warrior?
Okay, I'll give you some blood. To quote the great philosopher, Clive Barker, "Everybody is a book of blood; wherever we're opened, we're red." ;-p

Dave


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 01:50:47 EDT
Subject: Bestsellers & Truth

John:

 

I don't believe that goals such as "writing a bestseller" resonate with essence.
These types of pursuits belong to the ego, or false personality. If you write your truth,
and your truth resonates with enough people to make your book a bestseller, then great.

 

I'm quite aware of that, but I was making my suggestion based on the idea that the author wanted to make a LIVING from his writing. If you're engaging yourself in book signings, and interviews, not to mention the arduous task of promoting your book to the major book distributors, you're not following the whims of essence, but prudently observing the reality of physical plane existence. And that's just fine. Truth or no truth. In fact, FUCK the truth. Who needs it? When the icewater is canceled in Hell, the only truth those poor slobs know down there is that they can expect that they'll be quenching their thirst by either slurping the sweat off their desiccated bodies, or drinking their own urine. The truth is relative.

Dogma Dave - Dig that alliteration ;-p


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:01:00 EDT
Subject: I agree!!!!

John:

 

I think the important thing here is that the channels not become islands unto themselves.
I suspect (and I may be wrong -- it wouldn't be the first time) that for the most part, many
of them are very near that state now. If a small group of them were to come together, were
able to maintain clarity, and were able to interact in an amiable fashion, some real progress
towards consistency and clarity could be made. If while they were together, issues of accuracy,
clarity, and consistency could be addressed to Michael on the spot, through all of the participants
while they were together. Could provide some interesting information...

 

That's what I've been trying to say all along! I agree. Finally, I agree. Heh heh..;-p

This is a momentous occassion. I feel I need to say something profound, but during the excitement of the moment, I accidentally chewed off my thumbs.

Dave


Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 23:47:44 -0700
Subject: re: truth...

JJ Tan wrote:

 

> "There is no Truth. There is only a perceiver, and the mystery that is called The Universe."

 

Gloria wrote:

 

> Thoughts to ponder, along the same line:
>
> There is no Karma. There is only the agreement to engage in karma, and
> the perception that a balance is obtainable from such and must be striven for. And,
>
> There is no Game outside of the fact that we have agreed to play one.
>
> Life has no meaning, other than what we choose to give it.
>
> We really can go home anytime. If this is all true, the only thing left is...is....is....
>
> Somebody help me out here. Thanks.

 

We've never left home and such a thing is not possible. Our breath is the Tao. We are cells of the one body of life and we are life itself. There is indeed truth and we can know a truth beyond the personal. First we may have flashes of insight and if we choose, that sight and knowing can become more clear and stable.

Karma is part of the game on the duality plane here. When we step out of time into being present, when through awareness we cease being at the mercy of habits and tendencies, when we recognize the paradox of duality as being a seamless whole that always was and is, karma ends in the world of our perception and we are free.

Brin


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:22:33 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy (1998-14/1420)

 

| From: Brin
| Subject: Re: Accuracy
| Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 10:14:48 -0700
|
| I think if anyone is looking for word for word accuracy of any of the
| channeling, they are not going to find it because it is not the nature
| of channeling to be that accurate. On a _good_ day they say 80%
| accuracy but that can fall much lower.

 

When that word is the difference between "yes" and "no" for a given question, then it can be very important. When that occurs, we can hope a consensus from multiple channelings will be available.

 

| What does that mean?
|
| It means there will be factual inaccuracies when the channel is tired,
| when there are belief systems in place that color the information ie. if
| the channel really believes something to be true, sometimes that will
| come through and sometimes what Michael is seeking to share may come
| through with greater or lesser clarity. The vocabulary a channel is
| comfortable with will color the information as we've seen; the early
| group was well-versed in the Gurdjieff teachings, so a lot of that
| terminology influenced the expressions.

 

Agreed.

 

| I've heard (so this is probably about five steps removed from the source
| :) and may be of dubious accuracy itself) that the original Michael
| channel when asked about printing the original transcripts as a greater
| whole, wasn't charmed with the idea partially because of the errors in
| the early channeling and the degree of accuracy.

 

I have heard something similar from another source.

 

| I think this is a great discussion to have. It brings us all back to
| our own ability to know and discern what is true and not true. If
| discernment is only based on accuracy of material, that creates a fairly
| vulnerable state because it is a sort of externally based discernment.

 

Right. But sometimes externally based information is what one needs to start with, so accuracy is not unimportant. If we didn't need external information, it would be because we already knew the concepts internally. In that case, we would have no need to pursue the teachings per se.

 

| I've felt for a long time that I doubt Michael or any healthy spiritual
| information or system, is meant to make us dependent on others to tell
| us what the truth is. Whether they are channelers or a priest class or whatever.

 

I agree based on your saying "healthy" - Michael, and possibly other present-day teachers do teach self reliance. But AFAIK religions, from day one, have taught dependence on them as a way of controlling the masses.

 

| We are all of the Tao, the breath of the Tao enlivens all our bodies,
| our awareness is the Tao itself colored by our thoughts, habits, perceptions.

 

Absolutely.

 

| There are times we turn to "external" teachers, yet what we know, how we
| learn and grow, our beingness is an inside job so to speak based on our
| own choices and understanding.

 

Bottom line - yes.

 

| Meanwhile in terms of accuracy of the early transcripts, or of any of
| the information, it's probably more useful to see what the overall
| thrust is or at least not to let this become lost in details.

 

Some of the details cannot be ignored IMO. The overall thrust is important, but as one aspiring Presidential candidate was heard to remark, "The devil is in the details."

 

| The system Michael shared was a system to help us understand ourselves and the
| world better. Why we are like we are, why others may be different. In general,
| it's clear that there is a beautiful structure that creates our inter-relationships.
| That we are never truly alone, but part of larger groups on every level until we
| realize ourselves as simply a Oneness expressing in all these different ways.
| That we have choice in how we are.

 

No argument.

 

| The information was never meant to limit us to its expressions, rather it was
| meant to expand our vision and understanding, to enable us to find greater balance.

 

Right, but using the expressions does not necessarily constitute limitation; it can, instead, be a stepping stone to further understanding.

 

| Where understanding leaves off and fantasy begins _is_ the journey and
| how we answer that creates the cycles....

 

Beautifully said; thank you.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:23:23 -0700
Subject: Re: The Accuracy of Yarbro (1998-14/1421)

 

| From: Kathy K.
| Subject: Re: The Accuracy of Yarbro
| Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 14:03:13 -0400 (EDT)
|
| Hi Dick,
|
| > Now, all of this taken together exposes the inaccuracy of information
| > in Yarbro compared to that in the actual transcripts. It is | > disturbing to me that such extensive liberties were taken with the actual quotes;
|
| You know, it would be intersting to see how the people from the original
| "Jessica Lansing" group feel about the yarbro books. Do they feel that,
| despite the editing, the books depict the "essence" of the michael
| teachings? Did the editing for them, take away from the teachings overall?

 

Indeed it would. I would guess that, overall, the material came through pretty well. But at what point do the details become unimportant?

 

| Perhaps another way of looking at it is that the discrepancies between
| the yabro books and the original transcripts just point to the need for
| personal validation. If you can validate the system for yourself, do
| little discrepancies really matter?

 

It depends. Maybe this is another illustration of the differences in perceptions between the Old and Mature cycles. Also, it is not in the nature of Scholars to ignore details!

Something else has occurred to me WRT the fact that my perceptions are somewhat different than others' on the list - I am pursuing information about how "the system" functions. I am more interested in details from a systems perspective than from a personal one. OTOH I think many here care more about how they relate to the system and the teachings in a personal way than they do about the overall system aspect. And I think this difference in perspective is due at least in part to our difference in soul age.

 

| Besides, there's _always_ been the problem of validation with the
| Michael material. If i recall the material in the yabro books
| correctly, it does say that most channeled material has a success rate
| of 85 percent, with Jessica Lansing having a success rate of 95 percent.
| That's still a pretty high failure rate (try using a voice recognition
| software with a 5 percent failure rate and you'll see what I mean.) Any direct
| contradictions you find could result from that failure rate rather than sloppy editing.

 

OK.

 

| I guess the overall message is that in the search for spiritual
| enlightenment, you can never take anything for granted!

 

No argument there!

 

| --Kathy K. (not a scholar, but born into a family _full_ of them,
| both in essence role and profession.)

 

Now *that* is heavy imprinting! Any Scholar influence via casting or ET?

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:23:42 -0700
Subject: Re: Ordering Books from Author? (1998-14/1426)

 

| From: Shepherd
| Subject: Ordering Books from Author?
| Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 17:43:27 EDT
|
| In a message dated 4/8/98 5:48:51 PM, Jeanne wrote:
|
| > I have been ordering books and tapes directly from whichever
| > "Author/Channel" wrote the book or recorded the tape. Perhaps, not
| > asking for the books in bookstores is part of the problem.
|
| It's always helpful to ask for Michael books you don't see on the shelf
| whenever you're in a bookstore. You can order them, of course, but just
| suggesting that they be carried is helpful, too. Of course, authors
| make far more per book on those they sell directly.

 

So which would you rather have a purchaser do - buy directly from you which gives you a larger immediate return, or buy from a book store which may cause that store (and possibly others in the chain if it is a chain store) to make further purchases at the wholesale level? That is the question I think Jeanne was asking.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:24:36 -0700
Subject: Re: The Accuracy of Yarbro (1998-14/1432)

 

| From: Jeanne Holley
| Subject: The Accuracy of Yarbro
| Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:39:02 -0500
|
| Dick,
|
| While Yarbro may have taken liberties with the channelings
| I feel from all of the multitudes of channelings that have been
| done since then, that the basic premises are probably intact.

 

I agree.

 

| I can't speak for you and of course I have much more limited
| experience of the Channels, but when someone is really
| channeling "The Michaels" I get a flavor that is always the
| same, even though some of the dialogue differs from Channel
| to Channel due to speech and thought patterns.

 

In large part I do also, but I think my ability to sense things of a spiritual nature is not as strong as that of older souls.

 

| It is a rare author who does not take liberties (even non-fiction
| writers) with their material.

 

I suppose. Maybe what I am looking for is a documentary and what I am seeing is a story "based on" (read, "*loosely* based on").

 

| Since I'm going to have a channeling done in two weeks, if you have
| anything basic that you want verified, send it to me and I'll ask the Michaels.

 

Thanks; I'll think on it.

 

| Of course it will come through a Channel, so you will have
| to validate any discrepancies. (If you knew how long I've waited
| to say that to one of my favorite scholars! LOL).

 

Heh!

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]

 


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:26:38 -0700
Subject: Re: THE WORD (1998-14/1433)

 

| From: Jody Bower
| Subject: RE: THE WORD
| Date: Fri, 10 Apr 98 00:18:47 UT

 

Jody,

You make some very good points IMO.

 

| In my studies of the Michael material, I have kept two concepts firmly
| in mind: First, that even the most accurate channel is going to be
| "wrong" 15-20 percent of the time, for many reasons. Second, they are
| translating information that was not originally in English or, indeed,
| in human language. Some of the concepts are not easily reduced to words
| or three dimensions, so what we get is a rough approximation, most likely a metaphor.

 

Your 1st point is well known and mentioned, but your 2nd point is probably less frequently thought of.

 

| In my last session, Michael told me that they are "spiritual librarians," that
| they are just looking up information for us and passing it along.

 

Hmmm.

 

| It seems to me very likely that the information they find for a
| particular individual might be tailored somehow by how that individual
| requests the information and perhaps even who the individual asking the question is.

 

I think that is almost certainly the case.

 

| (Shepherd says in "Journey" that scholars seem to "draw" more
| information out of him.)

 

Now that you mention it, I recall the passage.

 

| Taking the library analogy even farther, perhaps Michael goes to
| different sources for each asker or each channeler.

 

Interesting point; not unlikely IMO.

 

| We're told over and over that the Tao is forever creating itself, ever
| in a state of flux - perhaps the information itself changes?

 

Another interesting point, one which Scholars might not appreciate.

 

| Michael is not all that much beyond us, as the various planes go; I
| doubt that an entity above the causal plane could even communicate with us directly.

 

I believe that is correct, especially considering the akashic plane is between the causal and the next higher one. And above the causal, entities have recombined into cadres.

 

| We're like undergrads being taught by a PhD candidate TA, perhaps; they
| know a lot more than we do, but they don't necessarily have all the answers.

 

They have made that point.

 

| What I'm getting at here is that I don't believe that there is ONE TRUTH
| out there - or if there is, Michael may not be able to convey it to us.
| And I'm absolutely sure that even if there was and they could, we humans
| could not grasp it.

 

No argument. But as I see it, there is a vast reality sometimes referred to as the tapestry, sometimes as a puzzle or a mosaic. What I am trying to do is find and assemble as many pieces of the puzzle/mosaic as I can so I can better understand the whole picture.

 

| IMHO the best we can do is take the teachings, apply them to our own
| lives and see what makes sense, what helps us grow and learn and get
| closer to being capable of agape, and not "fress" too much about
| inconsistencies (could quote Voltaire here but won't) or details.

 

At what point do you go from "Oh, that's only a small detail, don't worry about it." to "That's a pretty big detail, I wonder how much of the rest of it is not valid."? Besides, as I mentioned before, it is not in the nature of Scholars to ignore details!

 

| If there is an inconsistency between two channelings, don't spend your
| life arguing about whether the sandal or the gourd is the path (20
| points for recognizing my witty movie reference here);

 

Duh...

 

| take the one that resonates for you, that helps you grow, and go with it.

 

Scene: the list. Action: question posed by newbie. Response by 15 helpful readers give 15 different answers to newbie's question, based on what resonates with those responders. Newbie is quite confused, unable to understand why there is no consensus to the teachings.

 

| PS I don't see the point of cloning Jesus. They'd just get the physical
| body, not the soul, dontcha think?

 

Of course, as would be the case with any and all cloning. Once you understand the principles of the teachings, it's a no-brainer.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 02:27:00 -0700
Subject: Re: THE WORD (1998-14/1442)

 

| From: Dave
| Subject: Re: RE: THE WORD
| Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 03:44:53 EDT
|
| [M]y bone of contention [about inconsistencies in the teachings] is not
| a personal gripe really, but more-or-less a concern that these tiny
| discrepencies might hurt the teachings as a whole. Recently, there's
| been a discussion of channelers dealing with the economic difficulties
| of publishing books, and eeking out a living. I would think that since
| most successful enterprises rely on the credibility of its product, it
| wouldn't take a rocket scientist to realize that even infinitestimal
| discrepencies could undermine this credibility, and play a factor in a
| loss of sales, and a lack of confidence in the product itself.
| Obviously, I'm not talking about the personal validation of overleaves
| here. Instead, I'm attempting to point out why collaboration among the
| channelers could assist in building credibility in the teachings,
| possibly making them more ATTRACTIVE to potential publishers and the
| PAYING public.

 

Well said, Dave; excellent. I love it when someone points out something I have been overlooking, especially when it's fairly obvious.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 08:25:51 EDT
Subject: Re: Re: Books/authors exposure

In a message dated 4/10/98 8:10:16 AM, Mike Huttinger wrote:

 

As far as getting books published one thing I have heard (actually this
is Ted's idea) of doing is to ask that others visualize the desired outcome.
.... We could list what visualization we wanted in return and take turns visualizing
a desired outcome for each other.
There may be too many on the list to make this work.

 

This sounds like a great idea. I would only like to add that the visualization be a basic structure. And that each one be open to any "ideas" that may come to them, then provide the feedback to Shepherd. So we all can be open to a new path not thought of before. The answer may lie in not focusing too much on the goal, but allowing a path to reveal itself, no matter how unusual.
PJ


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 08:33:44 -0400
Subject: Re: There is no TRUTH

JJ Tan wrote:

 

> "There is no Truth. There is only a perceiver, and the mystery that is called The Universe."

 

Gloria Constantin wrote:

 

> Thoughts to ponder, along the same line:
>
> There is no Karma. There is only the agreement to engage in karma, and
> the perception that a balance is obtainable from such and must be
> striven for. And,

 

Karma is your energy children (your thoughts, words, deeds, and feelings) returning to you, bringing with them the results of whatever it was you created them to do... consciously or unconsciously. You can ignore your energy children and their results (de-energize them), or you can choose to engage them on whatever level you choose, and under whatever rules you choose.

 

> There is no Game outside of the fact that we have agreed to play one.

 

There is no game that we did not, at some level, create for ourselves. We, each of us, is the creator of our own personal game. Quite often there are overlaps among parts of our chosen games, and we then have partial agreement on how parts of the games should be played... which can be called a consensus or reality or ...

 

> Life has no meaning, other than what we choose to give it.

 

Life is for creating and living and experiencing. Life is whatever you desire it to be for. If you desire meaning then put meaning in it. If you desire love then understand what love is for you and put some of that into your life. If you desire struggle then think on what struggles you desire and put some of them into your life soup. If you want financial abundance then put some money into your soup. Create what you desire. Don't wait for someone to come and offer it to you. It's your soup, your pot, your stove, your kitchen, your house, your world, your galaxy, your universe, your TAO. Invite some friends over. Go visit some friends. Hang out for the sake of hanging out, or be alone for the sake of being alone.

 

> We really can go home anytime.

 

Absolutely. But most of us do not discover this until after we've been through the game more than a few times. But the greater truth of the matter is that we never really left home at all. We are, all of us, extensions/fragments of the TAO. How can we possibly have left it?

 

You can stay in your body and still be home. N'est pas?

 

 

> If this is all true, the only thing left is...is....is....

 

What we have left is everything. What we have left is clarity and accuracy of perception. What we have left is clarity and accuracy of comprehension. What we have left is ourselves and our wonderfulness and our deep perceptions and our wise choices and our beautiful creations. And these can be anything we desire for them to be. We can choose happiness and abundance and love and body health and whatever. We have imaging abilities and we have control over the amount of energy we apply to our images.

We have our will power that the universe will always accede to and comply with. How do you want your life to be? Then create it to be that way. The more late level old souls free themselves from what they call the illusions of the world, the more they must rely on themselves to create whatever they desire. The illusion being that the world will always give you something to struggle with, and that something will automatically happen to keep your attention from being bored and free. You want freedom... you got it. We are truly free spirits... and the higher our world view, the more self-responsibility we have.

 

> Somebody help me out here. Thanks.

 

Just did... I hope. :>)#

The Happy Scholar sez: "TRUTH is WHAT IS. And that changes constantly. Outside of that there is only TRUTH."

Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 07:04:34 -0700
Subject: Re: Blood

Dave wrote:

 

> John ranted:
> <<Ultimate Fighting Championships is a game too. To Hell with squabbling. > That's for weanies. LET'S SEE SOME BLOOD! >>
>
> Spoken like a true Warrior?

 

Bleedthrough from my ET. Maybe... I guess it depends on who is channelling my overleaves, what day of the week it is, what phase the moon is in, and whether an even or odd number of items in my refrigerator are cultivating a lif of their own.

John Rogers


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 07:28:20 -0700
Subject: Re: I agree!!!!

 

> That's what I've been trying to say all along! I agree. Finally, I agree. Heh heh..;-p

 

Take notes fellow listers. Dave has just experienced a change in overleaves. Please stand by while I consult a channel...

Yes, it is comfirmed. Dave's overleaves have changed.

Oh, wait a minute. Another member of our esteemed panel of channels has also confirmed a change, but is not in agreement on the specifics of the change.

And a third channel, again, has comfirmed the change, but is also in disagreement on the specifics.

They are conferring now. I can't quite make out what they are saying... What was that? Sonofabitch? Incompetent? Retarded reject of an infant soul?

It seems we have a bit of a squabble here folks.

Oh, channel number one just poked number three in the eye.

And number two just gave number one a Texas Titty Twister.

Now number four and number five just jumped in and are pulling number two's legs in opposite directions.

Quick, somebody get a video camera.

This is our big chance to get Michael into the mainstream. We can sell this as a two tape set with the Uncensored Worst of Jerry Springer and make a mint.

John Rogers


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 98 14:32:48 UT
Subject: RE: Digest No. 1998-04-11 of Michael Teachings List

 

In my belief, it works because it's a lens to be trained on reality, and is not in itself a truth. (Anne)

 

Amen, sister! I'll shut up on this topic - you just said it all for me.

 

I feel I need to say something profound, but during the excitement of the
moment, I accidentally chewed off my thumbs.

Dave

 

You talk with your thumbs? Do you have a roomie named Koko?

------------<--{@ Jody


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 98 14:15:13 UT
Subject: RE: Digest No. 1998-04-10

 

This is going to get a little weird but someone connected with the Montauk
project claims they went back in time to get a sample of blood from Jesus.

 

That would be the cigarette-smoking man, probably.

 

Regarding Dick's comments on reading transcripts from the first Michael
group: The true history of the "Yarbro group" is far different from what is
presented in her books. I hint at this in "Journey" when I say that the story
is more fictionalized than one might think (although the channeling is not). I
am still piecing together the complete picture, but I've learned a lot from
conversations with Sarah Chambers (heavily fictionalized as "Jessica Lansing"
in Yarbro) and some others who know Yarbro and have attended her meetings...
I think that Messages has a mix of Sarah and Yarbro's channeling, and More
Messages has less of Sarah's. There isn't any of her material in the 3rd and
4th books, AFAIK. Also, there were two others who sometimes channeled when
Sarah did, and the transcripts don't say who channeled what. There were other
channels and satellite groups that branched off from Yarbro's, as well.

 

Sarah has told me that she was one of three people that Yarbro composited in her description of "Jessica Lansing."

 

I would find myself detached, watching myself as a light-form, a glowing,
golden-white light inside of a "light-ship," for lack of a better term, with
many others who looked like myself, just these beautiful, golden-white light
forms, but I recognized my EM closest to me there. We were working together on
a project of focusing some kind of energy into form and sending it down to the
Earth... Later I interpreted the light-ship to be our entity (2nd entity)
and it was the place where I could see myself in relationship to other
essences around me, like cadences, but since I was not focused on that aspect
at the time, I didn't recognize it like that until later.

 

This is in line with what Michael Newton says in "Journey of Souls" - people he regresses remember being with "their group" in between lives.

----------<--{@ Jody


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 10:15:23 -0700
Subject: Re: Dogma and Relibion

 

> If we do get everybody together on this we can change the name from Michael
> Teachings to Dogma Central. --John

 

John,
   Well said!

Dave and others who want the channels to cooperate,
   The AMT is exactly what you say you are asking for -- a combined effort to make information available and bring a collective approach to the teachings as they evolve and expand. Like everything on the physical plane, it takes a while and will never fit everyone's needs or desires.
   There exists (for some people) an illusion of separation. Other know it is only an illusion made possible on the physical plane. Rather than criticize what doesn't fit *your* picture of perfection, how about trying to accept things as they are or doing something to make it better?
   The primary purpose of this teaching is to learn acceptance of ourselves and others, not create religion, dogma or anything remotely related to similar organizations.

Barbara
"If you are not part of the solution, then you must be part of the problem" -- a good friend reminded me of this.


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 15:35:43 EDT
Subject: Re: There is no TRUTH

In a message dated 4/11/98 12:37:25 PM, Ken Broom wrote:

 

> Life has no meaning, other than what we choose to give it.

Life is for creating and living and experiencing.

 

Thanks Kenneth and Gloria, this strikes the nail on the head.

The Conversations with God book says this, too (over and over and over), but adds another dimension to the discussion of what life is for, by saying that we are also here to experience duality with God.

I'm not so sure this is totally for our sake. In fact, it may be primarily for the benefit of God. According to the book, and I hope I am getting this right, when you are absolutely everything, like God is, or more precisely like God was before he created sentient critters, you just can't know yourself. That's because you can only know yourself in relation to others, sort of like needing to be able to look in a mirror.

God as everything did not know himself. Now, through us, the "others" created in his image (in that we are creators) he is discovering himself.

So I think this is another part of the answer to the question "What is life for?" To help God know him/her/itself.

I think our situation is a paradox. We are all God and we are all connected to God, but we are also separate or distinct from God. To just say we are God and infinitely creative is not, to me, an accurate statement. (I would venture that most human psychological pain comes from the feeling of separtion of God. It is helpful to focus on the feeling of connection.)

It seems we are on a path, kind of an eliptical journey with the starting and ending points at oneness with God. The apex (or nadir) of the elipse is the point where we put our greatest emphasis on our distinctness from God. (Do the words young soul society ring a bell?) I think we move back toward God in stages, by forming larger and larger soul groups, by building more and more connection. You are all familiar with this, of course.

Anyway, I don't see how the separation aspect of our journey can be short- circuited. How could there be a shortcut on this path. If we had the unlimited creativity to jump to end of the journey, wouldn't we be depriving God of the experience of relativity he needs to know himself? Don't we really have to experience the feeling of separatness, for God?

So what is the extent of our creative capabilities right now? Are we creative only within certain parameters, or are we unlimited in our creative capacity?

Why am I writing this? All of my life I have have struggled with the question, "Why am I here." Which has led to questions like "What should I be doing," and "What is the true nature of the universe?" I have certainly felt the pain of separation, and, you betcha, focused on it at times. I tend to bounce back and forth between feelings of separation and connectedness, which is also kind of a painful activity.

During a Michael reading I was told this is partly a function of my soul age level, old fourth. I am bouncing back and forth between the two feelings because I have not yet developed to the point of truly being able to hold the paradox in my mind. This was even described to me as being a physical characteristic. They said there are two rows of parallel cells in the "moral" center of the brain. Only when one is able to hold the paradox, will both rows of cells light up.

As much as all this makes sense to me, I still have some problems with the big picture of why God set it all up this way. First, I'm just not eager to believe that God has needs (to know himself) or even desires. And if God is infinitely creative,

why did set up a scenario with so much pain in it? I know, you say the pain isn't real, but it is. Hey, it counts as an experience for God. Or, if god is not infinitely creative, who made the rules that limit his creativity? (Obviously, my cell lights are not on, and I'm not home.)

I feel like I am kind of rambling here, but I suspect this is of some interest to the Michael community. And, frankly, this is the only place I know of where there are so many spiritually sophisticated people capable of contributing to a topic like this. (Certainly, what I have written could be helpful to someone else who is at this same place in the journey; and I hope it is.)

So what does it take to get both rows of those cells lit up at the same time? Experience? Time? My creative efforts? Study? I really long for the kind of mystical experience where you see God in every blade of grass. I want to live in acccordance with the true nature of the universe and hit the target with the meaning I create in my life. The more I know about the world, the better I'll be able to do that, I think.

Love,
John Clarko


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 16:26:14 EDT
Subject: Re: re: truth...

 

Karma is part of the game on the duality plane here. When we step out of
time into being present, when through awareness we cease being at the mercy
of habits and tendencies, when we recognize the paradox of duality as being
a seamless whole that always was and is, karma ends in the world of our
perception and we are free.

 

This is a fascinating paragraph that in capsule form, neatly summarizes the elements of karma. In my opinion, karma is about experience. How we choose to deal with such an experience is always a matter of free will, not a pre- ordained, or rigid set of occurences that leaves us powerless, and in a position of little control.

Dave


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 17:19:34 EDT
Subject: Re: Shepherd's success

Dave wrote:

 

(To become a bestselling author/celebrity, you could)...develop an opium
addiction, boast of a wasting disease, pose for pictures with lots of really
good hair, and at all times cradle the skull of a medieval monk under his
arm....having sex with farm animals, pouring Drano into your mother's
Cream of Gristle soup, and poking the Pillsbury doughboy just a little too low.

 

Been there. Done that.

Shepherd


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 23:29:30 +0200
Subject: Truth and Channeling

Brin wrote:

 

> We've never left home and such a thing is not possible. Our breath is the
> Tao. We are cells of the one body of life and we are life itself.

 

There's been a lot of chat on the list recently about the inconsistencies and confusion within the body of the Michael teachings as received by the various channels over the last 20+ years. With regret I have to opine that there will be no solution for this problem. Expecting the channels to get together and decide "What is Truth" and then channel accordingly ignores the nature of channeling. You can't decide what the answer is to be before asking, you just have to take whatever comes, whether you agree with it or not. I channel for the Vienna study group and get things from time to time that I don't agree with, sometimes strongly disagree with, but if I were to bend the channeled material to my will the whole enterprise would be utterly compromised. Nor do I see that any consensus is likely to be reached among the large body of students, the diversity of opinion seems too great to "bring under one hat" as they say here. (Unter einem Hut bringen)

But as far as I can see it really doesn't matter. The one vital, overwhelming thing the Michael teachings have brought me personally is expressed (better than I could say it) in the quote above. Everything else... overleaves, planes of existence, infinite souls, the colour of essence, whatever, served only to drive that point home for me. And in achieving that purpose perfect accuracy and consistency, unattainable though obviously desirable, weren't important. Which is a good thing.

Katherine


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 17:44:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Truth and Channeling

Brin wrote:

 

> We've never left home and such a thing is not possible. Our breath is the
> Tao. We are cells of the one body of life and we are life itself.

 

Kathryn wrote:

 

> There's been a lot of chat on the list recently about the inconsistencies
> and confusion within the body of the Michael teachings as received by the
> various channels over the last 20+ years. With regret I have to opine that
> there will be no solution for this problem. Expecting the channels to get
> together and decide "What is Truth" and then channel accordingly ignores
> the nature of channeling.

 

I don't think that was what anyone had in mind. I believe that we were discussing the possibility that some groups have splintered off and do not choose to acknowledge that others are channeling the Michaels. This can be very destructive to the Teachings, and I would think it could create some not so pleasant Karma for some. IMHO no one is "right" or "wrong". As the Michaels said in one channeling (was that in Journey, Shepherd?) that there are many ports, and there are many entities attempting to reach us for the purpose of teaching. I don't consider any of the channeled entities in a "religious" light, I consider them in a philosophical light. The purpose is to help us remember who/what we are and enable us to better deal with the physical world we have chosen to inhabit. However, I watched a "Science of Mind" church become, over a period of years, full of cliques, backbiting and infighting. I do not want the message lost because of personal egos. And I would ask anyone who feels that he/she has the "right" answer to look very carefully at what they are doing, because their right may not be my right, and so on.

We must all agree to disagree on some things, but the basic Teachings must not be cast aside for some one person's or group's personal gain. And I personally see that principle as part of the teachings. And we really need you Kenneth. You are 7th Entity...the peacemakers. And though I have my "truth" and each of you has his/her "truth" there is a higher Truth, which we are all trying to REMEMBER.

Love

Jeanne Holley


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 17:37:42 -0700
Subject: Re: Truth and Channeling

As I stated in an earler post, I think it would be highly beneficial for a group of channels to get together in the interest of clearing up some discrepencies. No, they are not going to all agree, and no, they are not going to attain perfection. But they quite possibly could un-muddy the waters in a big way.

Associations bother me. Organized groups with charters chiseled in stone bother me. When I heard the AMT had in essence blacklisted some channels, this REALLY bothered me. If I am incorrect on this point, someone please correct me, because at this point, I will NEVER attend an AMT event. (And they would probably be glad not to have me anyway, which makes my feelings a moot point.)

John Rogers


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 21:35:27 EDT
Subject: Re: Truth and AMT

In a message dated 98-04-11 20:39:58 EDT, John Rogers writes:

 

Associations bother me. Organized groups with charters chiseled in stone
bother me. When I heard the AMT had in essence blacklisted some channels, this REALLY
bothered me. If I am incorrect on this point, someone please correct me, because at
this point, I will NEVER attend an AMT event. (And they would probably be glad not to
have me anyway, which makes my feelings a moot point.)

 

I agree, John. My previous posts were fueled by knowledge of the incidents from last year, but I didn't want to come right out and say it. I was extremely disappointed that several very fine channelers were excluded from AMT's conference last year, and in all honesty, I have felt somewhat cynical towards the organization ever since. If last year's exclusion wasn't a sign of divisiveness between the Michael camps, not to mention an obvious example of political back-stabbing, then the Pope uses Red Rider Extra-Ribbed condoms. However, I'm sure AMT has realized the extent of their mistake, and won't make it again. We can only hope....

Dave


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 21:36:23 EDT
Subject: Re: I agree!!!!

In a message dated 98-04-11 10:29:21 EDT, John Rogers writes:

 

They are conferring now. I can't quite make out what they are saying...
What was that? Sonofabitch? Incompetent? Retarded reject of an infant soul?

 

Sticks and stones...;-p

Dave


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 20:11:28 -0700
Subject: Re: Truth and AMT

 

> then the Pope uses Red Rider Extra-Ribbed condoms.

 

    Hey Dave, does the pope...er...recommend them?
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 21:15:34 -0700
Subject: OOPS!

It's a damn good thing I'm not trying to earn a living as a playwright, or I would be eating Hamburger Helper without the hamburger.

When I wrote the following, it was as the channels referring to each other, not Dave.

Dave, I hope you are as thick-skinned as the Pope's condoms. They must work well. The next thread on the Michael list: Immaculate Contraception!

John Rogers

 

They are conferring now. I can't quite make out what they are saying...
What was that? Sonofabitch? Incompetent? Retarded reject of an infant soul?

 


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 02:00:54 -0700
Subject: Re: More on Accuracy (1998-14/1444)

 

| From: Brin
| Subject: More on Accuracy
| Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 07:07:44 -0700
|
| I just wanted to add that in general I agree with Dick and Dave that at
| some point the information must mesh in a way that rings true as one
| body of information. Or perhaps I should say that at every point that
| it divurges, the material becomes questionable and I imagine we each
| deal with that in our own ways.
|
| Which doesn't help Dick much. I appreciate him wanting to keep the
| material honest. I appreciate some of the fleshing out of structure
| with newer channeling and intuitively sense what it is that people are
| trying to describe. I intuit dimensions of the structure and of
| information not yet described. I guess where I'll end is simply to say
| that at best, each of us bring our part, our specialty of understanding,
| of insight, of strengths to the whole, to the better understanding of
| that whole through expressing what it is we are. So we're creating it
| as we express it as we intuit it and continue to create in the nature of
| what we are. It's an ongoing living organism. Within that, wanting to
| sort out the excesses, distortions and fantasies of this plane helps us
| define truth and fantasy for ourselves.

 

Many interesting thoughts. Thanks for posting.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 02:01:02 -0700
Subject: Re: Consistency of Information, and Booksignings

 

| From: Shepherd
| Subject: Consistency of Information, and Booksignings
| Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 17:58:12 EDT
|
| Michael through me has strongly encouraged channels to share information
| and discuss discrepancies. But there's a danger that a group of
| channels might come from fear and arbitrarily determining what the
| "party line" will be, suppressing what doesn't agree, rather than truly
| resolving differences. Truth is not determined by committee. Sometimes
| what is most true is also most unpopular.
|
| I know that reading in one source that Shakespeare was a scholar, and in
| another that he was a sage, is troubling and confusing. But in general
| there are discrepancies and disagreements in all disciplines, and I
| think we need to make peace with that within the Michael teachings--it
| ain't going away. My experience is that people who are already Michael
| students in essence and who are ready for the teachings will devour
| everything out there, as most of us did, and nothing will stop them.
| Rather than trying to make the teachings mass-market acceptable, I think
| we'd do better to just keep evolving and clarifying them, and let the
| mass market find us when they're ready.

 

Good points all. Thanks for posting.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 02:01:13 -0700
Subject: Re: There is no TRUTH (1998-14/1458)

 

| From: Gloria Constantin
| Subject: There is no TRUTH
| Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:34:22 -0600
|
| JJ Tan wrote:
|
| "There is no Truth. There is only a perceiver, and the mystery that
| is called The Universe."
|
| Thoughts to ponder, along the same line:
|
| There is no Karma. There is only the agreement to engage in karma, and
| the perception that a balance is obtainable from such and must be
| striven for. And,
|
| There is no Game outside of the fact that we have agreed to play one.
|
| Life has no meaning, other than what we choose to give it.
|
| We really can go home anytime. If this is all true, the only thing left
| is...is....is....
|
| Somebody help me out here. Thanks.

 

Yuk! (Taken in the spirit it was meant, I hope!)

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 02:01:20 -0700
Subject: Re: THE WORD (1998-14/1462)

 

| From: John Rogers
| Subject: Re: Re: THE WORD
| Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:13:12 -0700
|
| I would say that when you manifest Essence, you are expressing the
| purest form of your truth possible in that moment.
|
| Even when we cycle off, we are still pretty far removed from the Tao.
| Any Ultimate Truth is not going to be comprehensible to us. The best
| you can do is manifest essence. Desiring to do any more than that is moot.

 

Interesting points.

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 02:01:25 -0700
Subject: Re: Shepherd's success (1998-14/1464)

Yo Dave,

You outdid yourself on this one -

 

| From: Dave
| Subject: Re: Shepherd's success
| Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 01:06:03 EDT

 

[In describing ways in which Shepherd could change his image in order to be more successful selling his books, Dave said among other things...]

 

| First off, Shepherd is just too nice a guy. To be successful, he needs
| to acquire a certain air of mystery about him, and perhaps even an
| eccentric tinge. This doesn't mean he has to sleep in a coffin with
| fresh earth from his homeland, or ponder aimlessly about the
| philosophical significance of chipped beef on toast, but a couple
| lucrative Jockey underwear endorsements might be just the ticket. In
| addition, if he could perhaps develop an opium addiction, boast of a
| wasting disease, pose for pictures with lots of really good hair, and at
| all times cradle the skull of a medieval monk under his arm, I think his
| personal success would know limitless bounds. Think about it: how many
| famous people do you recall that died from the common cold? Scandal is
| the key. This means entertaining such delightful pursuits as having sex
| with farm animals, pouring Drano into your mother's Cream of Gristle soup...

 

I about split when I read that. It's unusual when someone finds my "funny bone", but "cradle the skull of a medieval monk under his arm" followed by "pouring Drano into your mother's Cream of Gristle soup" did it. (I'm still chuckling.)

Cheers,
Dick
----------------------------------------------
[2.1(3)/5/4.2-144=4.7.3<5.150/M5=26/IME/4.11>]


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 08:56:55 EDT
Subject: Shakespeare

In a message dated 4/11/98 1:26:11 AM, you wrote:

 

I know that reading in one source that Shakespeare was a scholar, and in
another that he was a sage, is troubling and confusing.

 

I don't know if this may be a contributing factor. But, according to the instructor of my college Shakespeare class, Shakespeare plays were in fact worked out by the entire troop, each one had input... So since the general public credits only Shakespeare for this body of work... could there also be a bleedthrough from the others who helped write the plays?
PJ


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 09:28:05 EDT
Subject: Jesus Clone... cause he's the dreamiest...

In a message dated 4/11/98 7:14:54 AM, Mike wrote:

 

Maybe a clone of Jesus would have healing and/or other powers even with a different soul?

 

Or maybe they would just have really blue eyes and silky flowing hair and the ability to hold their hands up in an embracing gesture for a very long time.
PJ


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 09:33:27 EDT
Subject: Re: Truth and Channeling

 

And we really need you Kenneth. You are 7th Entity...the peacemakers.

 

My daughter (also a scholar) and I are both 7th as well! Hugs to you, Happy Scholar!

Martha


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 10:09:38 EDT
Subject: Re:Converstions with god

In a message dated 4/11/98 7:37:00 PM, John wrote:

 

So I think this is another part of the answer to the question "What is life
for?" To help God know him/her/itself.

 

First of all, thanks John, for bringing up this topic. I have just come off a period of not only reading the book but, listening to the tape series several times. I still have a strong negative physical reaction to the first part of the information. Don't particularly like the chiding personality of the "god". ... I did get the message that life was for us to experience the process of creation. In a very general sense.

 

First, I'm just not eager to believe that God has needs (to know himself) or even desires.
And if God is infinitely creative, why did set up a scenario with so much pain in it?

 

I liked how you said that it was like god looking in a mirror. So, would you say that we are fragments of "god"? And that it is more interesting for this "god" to go through the learning process in this reflection. Instead of knowing already. And like in a mirror, the reflection can only be observed. We, ourselves are the creators of the pain. The creation is in our own hands... at least this is what I got from the book.

One aspect that I found interesting was that this "god" pointed out that it was a part of yet a greater entity. Yes, it was still "god". For me this has a hint of "essence" in it.

Any others out there who have read this book?
PJ


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 10:39:30 -0400
Subject: a little correction

MysticGirl wrote:

 

>> And we really need you Kenneth. You are 7th Entity...the peacemakers.
>
> My daughter (also a scholar) and I are both 7th as well! Hugs to you, Happy Scholar!

 

Dear Martha,

I am sorry, but I am not of the 7th entity, I am of the 5th entity. Lady Jeanne made a mistake. However we all can still share love and high regards. More hugs back to you both.

Peace and Light to You Both,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
    7th Level Old Scholar/Server, Acceptance, Observation, Idealist
    Intellectual Center, Emotional Part, Impatience/Stubborness
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 98 14:45:08 UT
Subject: RE: Truth

 

There's been a lot of chat on the list recently about the
inconsistencies and confusion within the body of the Michael teachings as
received by the various channels over the last 20+ years. With regret I have
to opine that there will be no solution for this problem. (Brin)

 

I pray there never will be! Sheri Tepper wrote a sci-fi book, "After Long Silence," that featured a group of aliens who would sing about every event or issue in their lives. Each being's part was their experience of the event or opinion about the issue, so the song reflected the entire tribe's experience. To them, "harmony" was equal to "getting everyone's input." These beings could not understand the humans' preoccupation with getting everyone to agree on one point of view. To them that was as far from "the truth" as a Gregorian chant is from Beethoven's 9th. Both are beautiful, yes, but it takes more training and an open ear to really hear the latter . . .

So when I read all these posts I read them as a musician might, looking both at each individual part and also at the entire symphony. I hope we never agree, because then my worst fear will probably be realized: pairs of young men dressed in black pants, white shirts, and ties, bicycling about the city and knocking on your door to ask if you've read The Book of Michael . . .

Dick, I'm a Mature Scholar too, and my work (book editing) consists of making sure that every smallest detail is right, or the entire work is for nothing! But I can't apply that attitude to my spiritual life. (I suspect my artisan casting & imprinting - mother, brother, task companion - is at work here.)

[Brin I always love your posts]

--------<--{@ Jody


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 07:54:19 -0700
Subject: Re: Shakespeare

I kinda figured when I read the original post this issue would be raised.

Sure, that may explain away the Shakespeare discrepency, but how about the hoardes of others? The point is that channels are channeling the overleaves of famous people, and the overleaves are different. Here's a scenario for you. A newbie stumbles across the Michael teachings, and begins wrestling with overleaves. As the newbie tries to sort it out, he or she consults a number of different sources, and comes up with three or four conflicting sets of overleaves for Abraham Lincoln. The newbie asks, "How can this be so?" The reply is, "Well, channeling is not 100 percent accurate." The newbie says, "Well, the entirity of the Michael teachings is based on channeled material, there is no way to sort out what is accurate and what is not, this is bunk, and I'm outta here."

A recent example from the list. Someone said they had previously thought they were an artisan, and had recently been channeled as a scholar. They wanted to know if it was possible to be a scholar, and also be an artistic person (or something to that affect). I replied that I thought I had read that Da Vinci was a scholar. Barbara replied that no, he was an artisan with some type of scholar influence (I don't remember the specifics, and they aren't important to this discussion). I went back to _Messages from Michael_, and found that yes, Da Vinci was channeled as a fifth level old scholar in observation with a goal of growth.

The point is that these types of discrepencies are widespread and can be quite confusing, let alone disheartening to someone new to the teachings trying in earnest to sort all of this out.

 

> <<I know that reading in one source that Shakespeare was a scholar, and in
> another that he was a sage, is troubling and confusing.>>
>
> I don't know if this may be a contributing factor. But, according to the
> instructor of my college Shakespeare class, Shakespeare plays were in fact
> worked out by the entire troop, each one had input... So since the general
> public credits only Shakespeare for this body of work... could there also be a
> bleedthrough from the others who helped write the plays?

 

John Rogers


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 08:53:00 -0700
Subject: correction on Jody's post....

 

>There's been a lot of chat on the list recently about the
>inconsistencies and confusion within the body of the Michael teachings as
>received by the various channels over the last 20+ years. With regret I have
>to opine that there will be no solution for this problem. (Brin)

 

Hi there Jody,

This was from a letter by Katherine. :) She began that letter with a quote from one of mine so my name was at the top, which may have caused the confusion....

Best to you, Brin


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 11:01:25 -0500
Subject: Ken Broom's Entity

I sent a message (I thought to the list) apologizing to Ken for putting him in the wrong Entity. As Gloria said, 7th Level Old, 5th Entity. So again Ken, sorry I screwed up and I, who am also 5th Entity, am making you an "Honorary 7th" because you are so good at soothing ruffled feelings (except with Dick of course, and following the two of you through one of your spats is fascinating). I love you both and I feel you are truly a peacemaker.

Love and Laughter :-))

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 09:04:54 -0700
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-12 of Michael Teachings List

John Rogers wrote:

 

> When I heard the AMT had in essence blacklisted some channels, this REALLY bothered
> me. If I am incorrect on this point, someone please correct me, because at this point,
> I will NEVER attend an AMT event. (And they would probably be glad not to have me
> anyway, which makes my feelings a moot point.)

 

John,
   Groups of any kind have to start somewhere. The AMT started from a group of channels that happened to be together for another reason. I know most of them, and the idea of "blacklist" is not part of any discussion that I've ever heard from any of them. That came from others who decided they wanted to control what was happening. If you have never been involved in starting something like this, you may not realize how difficult it is to organize, coordinate and manage, especially when people are geographically separated.
   You have complete choice about what you listen to and what you believe. Two of my "laws": Reality is a state of mind. People don't see the world as it is .. they see the world as they are.
   Separation is an illusion, and some folks -- because of soul age or their own self-karma -- choose to try to create dissension where there is none. So be it. I suggest that you check the facts ("validate"), rather than create more gossip.

Barbara


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 12:17:13 EDT
Subject: Re: Shakespeare

There is a pretty substantial case that Shakespeare was a beard for an English nobleman who actually wrote the plays. I think the guy's name was Edward de Vere ( it's been awhile since I looked at this). It was illegal for nobles to write plays at that time. --John


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 11:19:41 -0500
Subject: Channeling Celebrities Overleaves

I must concur with John regarding channeling the overleaves of celebrities. It may be fun (I have Emily's Celebrity Book) but it is a risky business without that person's involvement and it can be very troubling to newbies. I was mystified as to how anyone could channel Shirley MacLaine as an artisan, when she is so obviously a sage (even to one as inexperienced as I). Sages tell the story and that woman has done more for the spiritual movement toward a reborn Western belief in reincarnation than any famous person there is. And she did it at great risk to her career, when she first started. Artisans are (according to the channels I have read, very unstructured). No dancer who achieves greatness can be anything but very disciplined and structured. But I am much more familiar with the Teachings than many who come to the links on this list. I was confused, then indignant. As John says many newbies would say "If you can't even agree on this, how can I believe these Teachings?"

Since there was only one Jane Roberts, the "Seth" people don't have these problems. And I for one, do not know the answer. But the answer is out there somewhere. And just saying "validate" doesn't cut the mustard with those who are suffering and searching for answers. First they must have some kind of reassurance that they are not wasting their time and money delving further into the Teachings. And no, we don't need them, but they do need us and the love of self one learns from "The Michaels".

Love and Perplexity

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 00:37:21 +0800
Subject: Re: THE WORD

At 08:10 PM 4/10/98 -0000, Dave wrote:

 

>In a message dated 98-04-10 11:24:22 EDT, JClarko writes:
>
><<It bothers me to hear all this talk of discrepancies and disagreements and
>channels not being best friends and the teachings not being heralded by the masses.
>
>What are we trying to start here? A religion? If you can't get more help than
>you could ever possibly put into effect from the teachings as they are now
>available, not only are you not even on the planet, you never even sparked off
>from the Tao.
>
> If we do get everybody together on this we can change the name from Michael
>Teachings to Dogma Central. --John >>
>
>Well, now you've taken some simple suggestions and blown them into something
>as distasteful as organized religion.
>With that kind of overblown exaggeration, I could say something like "Hey, my
>dog is so smart that while being paper trained...he learned to read. (Drum shot) ;-p
>
>Dave

 

That was funny, Dave. :-) Actually I am enjoying all your humorous posts.
Well, I have nothing wittier (is that how it's spelt?) to add. On the other hand, I am going to ruin the fun and post something more serious... (how unbecoming for a Sage?) I used to be like the 2 paragraphs I quoted above -- I used to find organized religions distasteful, particularly so after I picked up those early Michael books. (no they didn't change my opinions, just augmented it a little) That attitude stayed with me for 5 years too long. It was until about last year that I got my share of "scolding"... of reminding me of something I only subscribe to verbally. Michael says on more than a few occasions that "all are choices". Organised religions are just one of these choices. I used to pity those who chose to follow these religions, but I have no right to do so. Those who make such choice are either real Baby Souls who really need this part of the growth process, or ... well, any soul age can find solace in organized religions. I can very well imagine myself being exhausted with the intensity of Growth and find a restful existence in a monastary, be it a Buddhist or a Catholic, or Orthodox. Or very well be persuing Growth within just such an organised religion, because it is just one unique experience that can't be found in the "secular world".

Just choices. I used to think I am "more advanced" because I choose not to be bound by doctrines of religions (I was a Christian). But now, when I have found more peace with myself, I realize that "more advance" is just a play of ego. It brought home that "motto of Old Soul" -- "You do your stuff, and let me do mine"... It is not selfishness or self-centeredness, which was being said about me by several people. It is about accepting my current choices, and accepting others for their current choices.

Gosh I think I am repeating what everyone knows, right?

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 12:38:10 EDT
Subject: Re:Converstions with god

In a message dated 4/12/98 2:13:07 PM, PJ wrote:

 

One aspect that I found interesting was that this "god" pointed out that it
was a part of yet a greater entity. Yes, it was still "god". For me this has a
hint of "essence" in it.

 

I heard Jose Stevens say at a Michael talk one time that the author was channeling his essence when he wrote the book. Semantically, I guess it is ok for essence to call itself god. Technically, I could do that, too. Big deal. I found it kind of offensive that he used that name. (They were already reading the book in my study group when I joined.) I have to say that I did get a lot out of it, though, and I am glad I read it. But, yes, I had some real problems at times with the attitude and sometimes the content. I also thought the entity would sometimes fudge, or play semantic games, to focus the answer on the point it wanted to make. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the name god was used to sell books. You know, if god is so big he is everything, and he was speaking to you directly, don't you think his voice would VERY LOUD.
--John


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 10:04:27 -0700
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-12 of Michael Teachings List

 

>    You have complete choice about what you listen to and what you
> believe. Two of my "laws": Reality is a state of mind. People
> don't see the world as it is .. they see the world as they are.
>    Separation is an illusion, and some folks -- because of soul
> age or their own self-karma -- choose to try to create
> dissension where there is none. So be it. I suggest that you
> check the facts ("validate"), rather than create more gossip.
>
> Barbara

 

Okay, you are obviously personally involved. What are the facts based on your version of reality?

John Rogers


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 12:14:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Re: THE WORD

Mike wrote:

 

>     Hi all,
>     The Michael teaching has helped me immensely to understand the flow of
> soul evolution. What has also helped a lot is the channelers giving me
> personal assistance in understanding myself. They have been very helpful in
> validating my feelings about various things, many times without my asking
> about it.
>     I have been wrestling with the difference between dogma and truth for a
> long time. I personally see truth as being a matter of perspective to a
> large degree, but what are good ways of avoiding turning a truth into a
> dogma? I invite any comments on this.
> Mike Huttinger

 

   IMHO don't you think it is by not allowing yourself to close your mind to other concepts? My way is by telling myself that this is my truth for today, I don't know what my truth for tomorrow will be. While I am a strong advocate of the Michael Teachings, I have not ruled out the possibility that when I reach a certain stage in my evolution, I will find another teaching that fits me better.
Perhaps that is part of my Goal of Discrimination, but that is my instinctive feeling now. There are many things in the Teachings that I do not accept at this point in my Soul Growth. I'm not into Parallel Lives, Simultaneous Lives or Devas. But that is my truth for today. It could change tomorrow. And that is how I keep from becoming dogmatic in these beliefs.

Love and Laughter :-))

Jeanne Holley


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 14:57:22 EDT
Subject: Re:Conversations with god

In a message dated 98-04-12 10:13:33 EDT, PJ writes:

 

One aspect that I found interesting was that this "god" pointed out that it
was a part of yet a greater entity. Yes, it was still "god". For me this has
a hint of "essence" in it.

Any others out there who have read this book?
PJ

 

I have seen somewhere on the web that the author of "CWG" was actually channeling his higher self, but because of his religious beliefs, would not allow himself to believe it was anything else but the almighty. Regardless, his mistake certainly made for a remarkable --->bestseller<--- ;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 11:57:59 -0700
Subject: AMT

 

>John Rogers wrote:
>> When I heard the AMT had in essence blacklisted some channels, this
>>REALLY bothered me. If I am incorrect on this point, someone please
>>correct me, because at this point, I will NEVER attend an AMT event.
>>(And they would probably be glad not to have me anyway, which makes my
>>feelings a moot point.)
>
>John,
>
>    Groups of any kind have to start somewhere. The AMT started
>from a group of channels that happened to be together for another
>reason. I know most of them, and the idea of "blacklist" is not
>part of any discussion that I've ever heard from any of them.
>That came from others who decided they wanted to control what was
>happening. If you have never been involved in starting something
>like this, you may not realize how difficult it is to organize,
>coordinate and manage, especially when people are geographically
>separated.
>    You have complete choice about what you listen to and what you
>believe. Two of my "laws": Reality is a state of mind. People
>don't see the world as it is .. they see the world as they are.
>    Separation is an illusion, and some folks -- because of soul
>age or their own self-karma -- choose to try to create
>dissension where there is none. So be it. I suggest that you
>check the facts ("validate"), rather than create more gossip.
>
>Barbara

 

I guess I would like to encourage all to see various input as attempts to share ideas that others may not have considered rather than only as attempts to control or be divisive. Perhaps none of the channels that created the AMT felt they were excluding other channels by not inviting them to be a part of their organization or attend the conference. Perhaps it was more like a group of friends getting together. Others may have felt the oversight uncomfortable or not acceptable. Perhaps that would have been a good time to openly address the issue in some way. Perhaps some thought/felt the AMT might be an organization that could truly be an umbrella to suit more of the needs of all of us, which yes, would take adaptation, communication, willingness to hear and respond to a wide range of needs. It sounded clear after the first conference that the AMT was a self-chosen group that hoped to address a particular group of people and needs. Perhaps there was a natural desire on the part of many to be more included or a hope that there could be an evolution to include and really represent the whole body of people interested in Michael. Yes, this would most likely demand an evolution in all of our ability to be open and communicate with one another, maybe even require efforts to create ways of finding consensus among us. There would be great rewards as well. The group which became the AMT simply sought to carry out their personal vision. Others in the Michael family perhaps wanted to find a way for the AMT to represent/include more of the whole family, not simply as an audience, thinking that was their original intent. Yes, issues of power, control and money arose. This is not really surprising. It would be challenging for all to find the openness and willingness to listen to one another, to develop better communication that can lead to truer understanding among one another. Well worth the effort. At this point there are still misunderstandings and hurts. What we can do is realize that there was more behind any of the positions involved than simply a desire to control. There are some good ideas represented by all and opportunities to learn and grow for all involved.

The seed that began as the AMT opened up the energy of many needs seeking to find ways/forms to express.... Some of these the AMT specifically sought to address, some may never have been their intent or never have occured to them. As a whole, the family of people interested in Michael
- would like to have opportunities to gather
- discuss the teachings
- hear new information
- consider differences that arise
- find ways to include the abilities, insights, understandings of more of the whole family of those interested in Michael, as teachers, channelers, wise old souls in their own rights, as students, scholars, creators, as those interested in structure, in socializing, in whatever it may be that a particular person brings as a strength to the whole group as well as whatever they may be looking for in the next step of their evolution. I'm sure others would have lists of what they would like to see and be part of creating.

I think in the beginning the understanding of what the AMT sought to be inevitably varied widely and was not clearly understood. The words initially describing the intent and vision were broad and somewhat general. Easily interpreted in many ways. Those whose lives are intertwined with Michael in some way thought/hoped that we might somehow be a part of this. That seems natural to me. I don't think it all arose from attempts to control anyone, simply be included. Not just that we could pay and come to events. But do and be more involved in ways that really serve and represent us all. This would include those people who have already spent much time involved with Michael in some way, those who are clearly identified, those yet to become known. It is understandable if the AMT simply wants to do what they planned. It is understandable if others were looking for something to meet the needs of a larger whole or of segments that each person may have as an area of specialty that they focus on. In other words, is this part of the whole stew working out, because my specialty is x and that is what I bring to this. I bring this vision, this talent and I want to make sure the facts line up or the social part is handled or whatever it may be.

Let us consider that all may have had better intents than we might realize -- clearly hampered by whatever shortcomings and limitations stopped these intents from being carried out in a way that might serve everyone better.

Best to all, Brin


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 15:40:26 EDT
Subject: Ordering Books

 

So which would you rather have a purchaser do - buy directly from you which
gives you a larger immediate return, or buy from a book store which may
cause that store (and possibly others in the chain if it is a chain store)
to make further purchases at the wholesale level?

 

I'd prefer people order directly from me, because I'm not convinced that one more bookstore request makes much difference (they'll likely just order it and then forget about it). I think that it would take a bunch of people going to a particular store within a short period of time to make a difference. But recommending the books whenever you go in is helpful. If they have the books, recommending that they display them with the front cover out, rather than just the spine, is also helpful.

Best,
Shepherd


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 15:03:37 -0500
Subject: Re: AMT

Ah Brin,

How do you do that? You have managed to see all sides of the issue and present it in such a clear way; from the organizers to those with their faces pressed to the window. Bless you.

Jeanne Holley


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 18:20:44 EDT
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-12 of Michael Teachings List

In a message dated 98-04-12 12:09:00 EDT, Barbara writes:

 

 

I suggest that you check the facts ("validate"), rather than create more gossip.

 

Don't be so quick to label John as just another disgruntled dalmonger out to bust the system with his odious scandal. I can't speak for him, but I personally have heard from a couple reliable sources, that several channels were excluded from AMT's conference for reasons that were both childish and motivated by issues of petty judgement. I see no reason to reveal the individuals involved, because I'm assuming that AMT will acknowledge their mistake and take corrective measures. Therefore, in this particular case, I think it's safe to say that these rumors are not merely the result of the kind of gossip that goes in one ear and over the back fence.

 

You have complete choice about what you listen to and what you
believe. Two of my "laws": Reality is a state of mind. People
don't see the world as it is .. they see the world as they are.
   Separation is an illusion, and some folks -- because of soul
age or their own self-karma -- choose to try to create
dissension where there is none. So be it.

 

Personally, I find this paragraph rather condescending. Because we chose to voice an opinion about an incident that we felt was unfair, we're now being segregated into a class of individuals who promote factionalism? Yes, you didn't specifically point your vindictive finger, but if you couple your comment about gossip with this one regarding dissension, I think the implication is strong enough.
Barbara, are you the duly designated spin-doctor for AMT, or just a self- appointed guard dog? From the information I have heard, AMT is fully aware of the incidents John and I refered to, so it's very irritating to me when the only solution is to label the people who disagree as being nothing more than malcontents, who are obviously self-karmic, or of a lower soul age. Is that dandruff, or am I just having to dodge the flakes from the upper crust?

In closing, before somebody pounces on me for lacking acceptance of others and perhaps, life in general, let me strongly say that my only issue with AMT is to plead that they maintain a decorum of professionalism here, and refrain from making decisions about who is in the "IN crowd," based on their own political agenda. Regarding acceptance, I don't believe it means you have to be a wimp, or lack the courage to stand up for your beliefs. As the Bard once said, "Cowards die many times before their deaths, but the valient never taste of death but once."

Dave


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 18:23:01 EDT
Subject: Re: a little correction

In a message dated 98-04-12 10:48:09 EDT, Ken Broom writes:

 

Dear Martha,

I am sorry, but I am not of the 7th entity, I am of the 5th entity. Lady Jeanne made a mistake.
However we all can still share love and high regards. More hugs back to you both.

Peace and Light to You Both,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar

 

Yes, I had thought Ken, like me, was 5th entity, and in the same cadre. I always like to remind fellow entity mates that I'm part of the family, and then stand back in amusement to listen to the terrified shrieks which normally follow -- "Dave in my entity? No...say it ain't so!!!!" ;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 15:35:13 -0700
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-12 of Michael Teachings List

Dave,
   Remember the role of priests -- to inspire people to be the best they can be. At the same time we are are distressed by anything that creates disharmony, and often concerned very deeply with justice and ethics. That trait is particularly in the 6th entity.

Barbara


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 18:47:21 EDT
Subject: Re: Channeling Celebrities Overleaves

In a message dated 98-04-12 12:44:33 EDT, Jeanne writes:

 

I must concur with John regarding channeling the overleaves of
celebrities. It may be fun (I have Emily's Celebrity Book) but it
is a risky business without that person's involvement and it can
be very troubling to newbies.

 

I agree, as well. I have always thought that the celebrity overleaves, although admittedly entertaining, were one of the more trivial aspects of the teachings, and nearly impossible to "validate." And ironically, they probably represent the portion of the teachings that could gain the most appeal to the masses, yet they are also the most riddled with errors. Of course, why do I care? I'm an artisan, so if I don't like something, I can just create something new. ;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 19:09:40 EDT
Subject: Re: THE WORD

In a message dated 98-04-12 12:51:58 EDT, J J Tan writes:

 

Organised religions are just one of these choices. I used to pity those
who chose to follow these religions, but I have no right to do so. Those
who make such choice are either real Baby Souls who really need this part
of the growth process, or ... well, any soul age can find solace in
organized religions.

 

Why can't you pity those who are trapped in the quagmire of an inflexible faith? I think you would be instinctively remembering those days in your past when you used to subscribe to similar beliefs. I certainly find organized religion unappetizing. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth, probably like the way I felt during my female incarnations when I had to perform my wifely duty -- down on both knees, desperately trying to avoid the kind of gag reflex that might result in a painful miscue regarding the placement of my front teeth.
Just kidding...;-p

Seriously, you made a good point. Everyone has their own set of lessons to learn and teach. But isn't it sometimes fun to just say, like Shepherd stated the other day, "Been there, done that" ? ;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 19:37:38 -0500
Subject: Newsletter

Hi everyone,

Lori and I have communicated (by e-mail not telepathy) and we are both intrigued about doing a newsletter. No one responded to me before, but I'll ask again. If anyone else wants input here please let us know, on or off the list. Think this will be a fun project.

Love, Laughter and Lift Off! :-))

Jeanne Holley

5th Level Old Sage/Priest ET;Discrimination;
Passion; Pragmatist; Self-Dep/Arrogance/
Intellectual Center, moving part


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 18:54:32 -0600
Subject: Re: NEWSLETTER

Yes, I'm interested--not sure how much I have available time-wise, but I think the evolutionary push is here now. The Agony and the Agape, the everyday lives of Michael students--the trivia, the triumphs, the doubts, the insights, and epiphanies. The horror and the glory, the joys and sorrows, the ebbs and flows...

Anthing goes--humor, truth, AND dogma. Even Barbara Taylor--for the prickly edges.

No devas, huh, Jeanne? Well, we'll see how you feel about that later. They've been photographed already. Let's see, the late Dr. E. Kubler-Ross mentions them in her autobiography, "The Wheel of Life," and I personally met a man who travels across the country with his stories, slides, and photos--of devas.

I think we could get some folks to submit stuff. So, OK. Your turn.

Gloria


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 08:59:13 +0800
Subject: Re: THE WORD

At 12:09 AM 4/13/98 -0000, Dave wrote:

 

> Seriously, you made a good point. Everyone has their own set of lessons to
> learn and teach. But isn't it sometimes fun to just say, like Shepherd stated
> the other day, "Been there, done that" ? ;-p
>
> Dave

 

Wellll... I don't know whether it was "fun"... because I don't really feel it that way. :-) But I do say that a lot of the times. Since as early as 10 years Old, if not younger. Which is one of the reasons why I am always feeling "old"... and on a semi-retirement mode. The fun part comes when I get to re-experience some of the Young Soul activities, with regard to striving to perfect oneself when learning a certain activity/art (playing violin, learn to ice skate, archery, even dancing). As you can see, these activities (except dancing, where I need a partner) involves only myself, sort of a competition against myself in pushing to the limits. That was the fun part. :-) Because I can say "Been there, done that, and I can show you, too". :-)

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 19:41:22 -0700
Subject: Re: THE WORD

 

> But now, when I have found more peace with myself, I realize
> that "more advance" is just a play of ego.

 

    One of the books I read said the last thing a master learns is to let go of having to be right. I think Michael said that religion can help prevent baby souls from generating too much karma.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 20:02:26 -0700
Subject: Re:Conversations with god

 

> One aspect that I found interesting was that this "god" pointed out that it
> was a part of yet a greater entity. Yes, it was still "god". For me this has
> a hint of "essence" in it.
>
> Any others out there who have read this book?

 

    I haven't read the book but have read somewhere in non Michael material that you can't talk to the "source". The source is supposed to be the source of all that is. Is the source the same thing as the Tao? I have wondered if there is a part of what Michael calls the Tao that is inaccessible to communication which maybe the non Michael material is calling the source. If there is a part of the Tao that Michael says you can't talk to then what they say agrees with what I have read elsewhere.
Otherwise I see a mystery here.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 20:34:08 -0700
Subject: Michael's entity merging with Emily

    Hi all,
    I remember Michael mentioning an entity "Emily" they were merging with as a part of their evolution. Emily was given one other name I don't know about, maybe someone on the list remembers what it was. Emily was largely priests and scholars and I guess the Warrior and King energy of Michael clashed a bit in the attempted merging. Did anyone hear if Michael finished that merging? I remember hearing people on a tape kidding Michael about Emily.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 20:52:18 -0700
Subject: [Fwd: Re: NEWSLETTER]

    Hi all,
    Well, we built a Deva house for the Devas about a foot tall with furniture and a light inside. We also read stories to them in the summer. I had contact with a wolf spirit (whatever the heck that was) that Michael confirmed. In spite of all of that I feel I don't understand what they are or what kind of consciousness they have. In our evolution aren't we supposed to be Devas as an early experience on the physical plane? There is a group of some kind of spirits where we live that is not happy with what mankind has done to the planet. We told them we understood.
    The newsletter I take it would include more personal material and not necessarily all Michael material? I am not sure how it would be different from the list unless the topics are more wide open.
    Mike Huttinger


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 00:04:12 EDT
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: NEWSLETTER]

In a message dated 4/12/98 9:02:41 PM, Mike Huttinger wrote:

 

Well, we built a Deva house for the Devas about a foot tall with
furniture and a light inside. We also read stories to them in the summer.
I had contact with a wolf spirit

 

Sounds wonderful!!

Robin


Next Page | 1998/15   
.....................................................................................................................................

Michael Teachings Home | Welcome | Michael FAQ | Soul Age | Roles | Overleaves | Advanced Topics | The Nine Needs | Michael Channeling | Related Articles | Channels & Resources | Michael Tools | Michael Books | Michael Chat | Michael Student Database | Links