Related Articles Spiritweb Michael

Spiritweb Michael List
1998 - Week 15


SUMMARY:  Another year begins on the list.
Dualism and inputs are discussed. Especially how inputs might influence musical composition. 


THE POSTS:

 

Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 06:44:17 -0400
Subject: Re:Converstions with god

Ow ow oski wrote:

 

> [clipped]
>
> 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've read both books. And I tried very hard to contact this "God". What I kept getting was something that called itself "Spirit", and defined itself as the highest part of my own being that I could comprehend. The relative "height" of myself that is contacted depends on my openness to, and my familiarity with, the subject matter being discussed. The better I am able to comprehend the subject, the higher and clearer that part of me is on that subject. I've asked some high questions of my "Spirit" and all I got was a bright light filled with knowledge that I could not at all even begin to understand at my present state of comprehendability(?). Weird feeling. I've even forgotten what my questions were, although the knowing bright light is still here/there waiting for me to become smart enough to comprehend it. Funny... feeling..., man!

Spirit said that indeed this is what happened to Neale Donald Walsch. His mind, when he channeled those books, could only accept that source of knowledge as "God", not as higher aspects of his own being.

Part of my entity when channeled about a similar subject said that, as an analogy: "To one of your body's cells, the whole body is God."

As far as specifically channeling GOD or the TAO I have never ever been able to get a peep of a verbal answer. But what I have gotten was (a) an inner wordless knowing of the answer, or (b) an outer physical demonstration of the answer.

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


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 08:27:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-11 of Michael Teachings List

Mike H:

 

SNIP
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.
END

 

I seem to recall something from an early book - I don't keep records of anything and can't quote exactly, but you'll remember and get the idea. The discussion was about reincarnation ... and Michael said something to the effect that belief was not necessary, making the comparison to a leaf falling from a tree - the leaf doesn't have to believe or even be aware that it must fall - but it will still happen ... I would think that would be truth.

Now if all the big shot trees in the forest got together and decided that every leaf was going to have to believe in the "fall" and subsequent death and reabsorption in order to be accepted, saved, redeemed, pick one ... that would be dogma.

So, perhaps we simply shouldn't demand that anyone (even ourselves) accept what clearly appear to be truths to us at any particular point in time.

Comments?

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 07:34:40 -0600
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: NEWSLETTER]

Mike wrote:

 

>     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

 

Yes, the newsletter would be an opportunity/forum to share more personal experiences and views at greater length. Narratives, essays, articles, perspectives, opinions/editorials. I should think that the themes and topics would (potentially) be limitless. I also think that if the Listers' needs for exchange and expression are already being met by the List, then the newsletter won't be successful.

Someone will need to be responsible for making editorial decisions. I sense that there's an evolutionary push for more and deeper exchange, and this could provide the place for that to happen. Also, we can share our art, our poetry, our joys, triumphs, and sorrows--our unique voice. So, what do you think? These are just my thoughts.

Gloria


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:57:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Thumbs

 

> 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

 

Jody,IthinkwhatDaveistryingtosayisthis.Gina(Mnemosyne)


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 98 08:59:02 -0700
Subject: Re: Shakespeare

 

> I kinda figured when I read the original post this issue would be raised.
> (snip)
> 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."
> (snip)
> 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.

 

John & anyone else interested:

I gone over this same issue many times. I have talked to people who have had four or five different readings given to them and on and on...

My abridged explanation follows:

Most of us use most of the overalls at some time. For example, there are times when I have to use dominance when I am taking on a leadership position, there are times when I have to use power mode when I am teaching, and when I am driving the freeways I use caution mode, etc etc. Our primary set is our default set but but when need be, we will use other sets to handle specific conditions. For example: If you were to read my overleaves when I am arguing passionatly you may get that I am a cynic in passion mode. That is the "energy" that I am projecting at that time.

Many of us use the Michael Teaching as a Teaching, but what is it we are learning and how are we learning it? Some of us may need to learn the overleaves by trying them on or testing them out. Let's say I am channeled as a mature warrior, goal of acceptance, stoic, moving center, aggression mode, with a chief feature of martyrdom (sounds like an ambulance driver). From here I can accept the set as my own or I can go about testing it against my life to see if it fits. In my case it doesn't come close, so I have a good idea what I am not but what is more important is that I have learned more about those particular overleaves. I may have found a greater understanding of acceptance or stoic and I can identify when I am using them - expecially in their negative poles in false personality. Process of elimination, which works for some of us. What I have done through the process is learn something about that particular overleaf set though and by learning that set I have come to a better understanding of the overleaves.

So if someone channels Billy S. as a scholar, and somebody else gets sage instead of complaining about accuracy (which I know you are not doing), we can apply the positive and negative poles to what we know about that person and see which one fits. It could be that they both work quite well, but in the process we have learned more about Sage & Scholar.

The mid causal plane is described by some as a teaching plane. In our world of public & private education, the teachers that make the students do most of the work show better end results. Are the two that much different? Is Michael acting as a teacher who gives us sets of problems that we solve. The problems are based in the overleaves and by solving the overleaf problems we incorporate the system within ourselves. It could be that all Michael has ever given us is the basics of the chart and we are doing all the rest (I have already gotten in trouble over this so please refrain from firing cannons).

YOurs -- Ted

Artisan/scholar Essence Twin/skeptic/growth/observation sliding to
power/stubbornes-2arrogance/growth/intellectually centered moving part.


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:21:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Emily

Mike H,

Funny you should mention the Michaels merging w/some other entity. I was just wondering a few days ago when would be a good time to post an open question to all the channels on the list and open another "can of worms".

Where does Michael go for "higher" inspiration, and what would be the next step in the Michael(s)' evolution (so to speak)?

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:47:17 -0400
Subject: Akashic Truth Points

Dear Michael Teachings Listers,

Yesterday I asked the Michaels about my channeling accuracy and they said as far as channeling overleaves is concerned: my accuracy has maxed at around 95% when I use the birthdata, and around 70% when I do not use the birthdata.

They also added the following points regarding the accuracy of channeled data:

1) Using the birth data information is a major aid in helping them in obtaining and channeling overleaves.

2) Any other information that may help them "home in" on one "truth point" out of several is of great value. A "truth point" is a location in the akashic that satisfies the requirements of the questioner's question. Better to give them too much initial reference data and get one truth point, rather than not enough data and get several truth points.

3) The release of ambiguities concerning a channeling is a goal of the search for the truth point.

4) The caring about the singularity (whether it is singular or not) of a truth point more than strongly held beliefs or opinions is of extremely great importance,

5) Be willing to check and re-check answers and to change them as necessary. Ask Michael whether the data you have is from a singular truth point or not. If you consistently get more than one truth point for your question when you desired only one then assume that your question needs re-phrasing. Do some detective work.

6) Those channels that consistently check and recheck and adjust their channeled data will normally have the greatest accuracy. This does not mean re-asking Michael the same question the same way. Rephrase your questions and with the "intention" of finding a singular truth point for that question.

7) Those channels that are willing to back off a bit and to question their channeled data have the greatest chance of helping the Michaels and themselves to "home in" on the single "Truth Point" for that particular question if one exists.

8) The asking of questions and searching for and homing in on a truth point is a cooperative process.

9) The searching and homing in on the truth point as asked for is not a one-step process as many believe it to be.

10) Michael suggests that we constantly check the veracity of all channeled data. Ask the least little question regarding apparent or possible contradictions, and with the "intention" of finding "the" or "all" the truth point(s).

11) Disconnect your expectations from the channeling process.

12) Disconnect your desires from the channeling process.

13) Focus on asking clear and accurate questions. Take little or nothing for granted.

14) If and when you and Michael arrive at a truth point try comparing that truth point with your own akashic search results if you have dared to search the akashic yourself. :>)#

15) Asking good questions is just as important as getting good answers.

16) Getting good answers is of little value if the question and its context are not understood.

--
Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
   7th level Old Scholar/Server, Observation, Acceptance, Idealist,
   Emotional Part of Intellectual, Impatience/Stubbornness
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:24:29 -0700
Subject: Priests

Barbara Taylor wrote:

 

   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.

 

Priests

+ = compassion
- = righteousness

Hmmmmmmmmmm.

Kath ::::well aware of her own tendency to slide from dissemination to oration::::::::


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 98 18:56:03 UT
Subject: RE: Digest No. 1998-04-13

 

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

 

Sorry Katherine - I will add your name to the list of the people whose posts I ALWAYS read (I get them all in a long single message, so it is hard sometimes to figure out who sent what, especially AFTER I've snipped it. Still love what Brin has to say, too!

 

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

 

Barbara,
Remember too that most of us drawn to non-traditional spiritual paths have had our fill of priests, ministers, rabbis, or whoever appears to think that they are somehow closer to "the truth" than we are, and therefore have the right to correct the rest of us. Perhaps you are not aware of the forcefulness of your posts (writing something down tends to make it far more powerful than simply saying it, when the person can hear your tone of voice and see your face.)

 

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.

 

Jeanne, I volunteered before to contribute my Scholarly, picky, every-comma-matters editing skills - offer still stands.

 

    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 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

 

Doesn't Michael say - I think through Shepherd - that "God" is the consciousness of the Tao? That would imply to me that God would know itself to be part of something larger, and that we could not talk to that larger whatever . . . except, of course, as far as we are all part of it and talk to it every time we have contact with our essences.

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


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:26:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Shakespeare

To all, I've left most of both posts in so you can see and get the flavor of the entire thing without having to go back and read the previous posts. I think this is important regarding the Newsletter. Jeanne

John wrote:

 

> >I kinda figured when I read the original post this issue would be raised.
> (snip)
> >
> >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."
>
> (snip)
>
> >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.

 

Ted wrote:

 

> John & anyone else interested:
>
> I gone over this same issue many times. I have talked to people who have
> had four or five different readings given to them and on and on...
>
> My abridged explanation follows:
>
> Most of us use most of the overalls at some time. For example, there are
> times when I have to use dominance when I am taking on a leadership
> position, there are times when I have to use power mode when I am
> teaching, and when I am driving the freeways I use caution mode, etc etc.
>
> Our primary set is our default set but but when need be, we will use
> other sets to handle specific conditions. For example: If you were to
> read my overleaves when I am arguing passionatly you may get that I am a
> cynic in passion mode. That is the "energy" that I am projecting at that time.
>
> Many of us use the Michael Teaching as a Teaching, but what is it we are
> learning and how are we learning it? Some of us may need to learn the
> overleaves by trying them on or testing them out. Let's say I am
> channeled as a mature warrior, goal of acceptance, stoic, moving center,
> aggression mode, with a chief feature of martyrdom (sounds like an
> ambulance driver). From here I can accept the set as my own or I can go
> about testing it against my life to see if it fits. In my case it doesn't
> come close, so I have a good idea what I am not but what is more
> important is that I have learned more about those particular overleaves.
> I may have found a greater understanding of acceptance or stoic and I can
> identify when I am using them - expecially in their negative poles in
> false personality. Process of elimination, which works for some of us.
> What I have done through the process is learn something about that
> particular overleaf set though and by learning that set I have come to a
> better understanding of the overleaves.
>
> So if someone channels Billy S. as a scholar, and somebody else gets sage
> instead of complaining about accuracy (which I know you are not doing),
> we can apply the positive and negative poles to what we know about that
> person and see which one fits. It could be that they both work quite
> well, but in the process we have learned more about Sage & Scholar.
>
> The mid causal plane is described by some as a teaching plane. In our
> world of public & private education, the teachers that make the students
> do most of the work show better end results. Are the two that much
> different? Is Michael acting as a teacher who gives us sets of problems
> that we solve. The problems are based in the overleaves and by solving
> the overleaf problems we incorporate the system within ourselves. It
> could be that all Michael has ever given us is the basics of the chart
> and we are doing all the rest (I have already gotten in trouble over this
> so please refrain from firing cannons).

 

Ted, this is exactly the kind of thing that I think the Newsletter should carry in it's opening area for Newbies. Something that really explains the discrepancies we are always chewing over on this list and it's an excellent explanation of "validation". If you are someone else who feels able could work up an introduction to the Michael Teachings for Newbies so that they won't be terrified the moment they start to read posts on the list or the newsletter (when it's up and running), it would be of great help. Of course it would need to be short and sweet, if that's possible.

Jeanne


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 07:53:32 +0800
Subject: Re: truth...

At 09:26 PM 4/11/98 -0000, Dave wrote:

 

>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

 

But to many who are on the 6th level, particularly of Mature Age, karmic drive can feel very intensive and they can feel exactly as you described, "rigid set of occurences that leaves us powerless and in a position of little control". :-)

It is no wonder people have this idea, especially in the illusion of separateness that is the physical plane.

J J Tan


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:55:32 +0000
Subject: Re: Beyond the causal?

Judy wrote:

 

.........................................................................
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.
.........................................................................

 

Not so, IMO.

A Course in Miracles (http://www.acim.org) was channeled, purportedly at least, from the infinite soul who was/is Jesus and presumably is of the higher planes. The Course itself was channeled by a woman with a taste for old literature, so the text is steeped in obscure language (more so than Michael!). However, there have been subsequent channelings from Jesus (a.k.a. Jeshua), by far the best and clearest of which is presented in the book ‘Dialogue on Awakening’ by Tom Carpenter. This is probably the book I would want to have with me on a desert island. I have met Tom a couple of times and he is one of the most enlightened people I know.

PS- I love Conversations With God, though I agree it’s probably coming from the mid-Causal plane. Notice also how it's turned into a successful multi-million-dollar industry... but at what price?

      B a r r y
_____________________________
just back from Easter retreat


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:57:12 +0000
Subject: Re: Newsletter / Truth

Jeanne wrote:

 

.........................................................................
I would like some input from other students (not channels) on the
idea of some of us putting together an online newsletter.
.........................................................................

 

I like the idea, and I happen to be a scholar with web-design skills, but not as talented as Christine Daae, my sister-in-law (who wrote: “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.” Are you volunteering, Christine??? I will if you will!). I’ve personally been compiling my own ‘mini-encyclopedia’ of Michael concepts (in my own words) for private use; this could also easily be turned into a webpage if anyone’s interested.

Jeane also wrote:

 

.........................................................................
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.
.........................................................................

 

There isn’t one truth ‘out there’ because it’s IN HERE, in you. The core of you is universal Truth, and you can certainly ‘grasp’ it. Words cannot convey it except indirectly, symbolically. But you can experience it directly as your Self.

Otherwise, I quite agree with everything you say Jeanne!

In a similar vein, J J Tan wrote:

 

.........................................................................
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.
.........................................................................

 

Oh THAT old chestnut. How can you conclude that “there is no Truth” if we are all perceiving facets of it?

IMHO we can’t *perceive* the Truth itself because we ARE the Truth, and we can only be aware of our true nature directly, by consciously being who we are. This reminds me of a Quaker meeting I once went to out of curiosity. Quakers are nice enough, and the Quaker path is more genuine than most, but there was an intellectual discussion going on about the nature of “truth” (only between the men -- the women had left to make the tea). They had all agreed that there is no absolute Truth, only the personal truth of each individual. So I asked them, “but what if YOU ARE the absolute Truth?” I wasn’t invited back.

How’s this for a koan: Is it *really* true that there is no Truth? I mean really, ABSOLUTELY true?

B a r r y
_______________
in a funny mood


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:57:57 +0000
Subject: Re: Truth 'n' dogma

Mike H wrote:

 

.........................................................................
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.
.........................................................................

 

Here we go: Truth is something you recognize within yourself. The classic self-realization is “I am”, the recognition that one really exists in an absolute way. Let’s say you’ve just had an “I am” realization. Now take the words “I am” and get everyone else to repeat them out loud in the hope that they will *perceive* themselves in a way that agrees with Truth as you’ve experienced it. Punish or excommunicate anyone who questions the words, no matter how much it doesn’t feel right for them. Promote those who go along with it, no matter how ignorant they really are. Now you’ve got yourself a dogma.

The Michael teachings are are representation of Truth which would become a pointless dogma if we were to insist on acceptance of certain words rather than seek the Truth to which they point.

B a r r y
_________


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:55:00 -0500
Subject: Re: a little correction

Dave Wrote:

 

> 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

 

Sigh, yes, we all have our crosses to bear don't we. We poor little Teddy Bears. We look to the Michaels and say "What have we done????????"
ROFL

Love and uproarious Laughter (and I don't know him, do you?)

Jeanne


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 22:03:10 -0500
Subject: Lori and All Re Newsletter

Just wanted to let all of you know that I've been printing out the messages from everyone who wants to participate in the Newsletter. I'm going to go over all the ideas and post them for you to decide what you want and how you want it. The only thing that I personally want to see in the newsletter (above all else) is an opening statement for the Newbies and Lori's idea of having her channel an astrological type forecast based on the Roles.

If anyone who has not yet posted to the list or to me or Lori, wants to be involved let us know. I think that rather than being like the list itself, it will generate new and fascinating topics for the list. And to all of those who have volunteered, YES, YES, YES. We need and want you.

Love and Laughter and the sweat of my brow :-))

Jeanne

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


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:44:03 -0700
Subject: Re: a little correction

Jeanne wrote:

 

> Sigh, yes, we all have our crosses to bear don't we. We poor little Teddy
> Bears. We look to the Michaels and say "What have we done????????"
> ROFL

 

Well hey I'd be proud to have you all as honorary members of MY entity!! I guess I got a little thing for big teddy bears.... :-))))

TTFN!
Lori
-----------------------
Old scholar who has been watching waaaaaaaaayyyyy too many of Disney's
Winnie the Pooh videos at the insistance of a 2-year old who points at
the TV and says, "Pooooh! Poooh!" And who now feels she understands
Melissa (javex) a whole lot better too.


Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:59:29 -0700
Subject: Re: :-o Lori and All Re Newsletter

Jeanne wrote:

 

> Just wanted to let all of you know that I've been printing out
> the messages from everyone who wants to participate in
> the Newsletter. I'm going to go over all the ideas and post
> them for you to decide what you want and how you want
> it. The only thing that I personally want to see in the
> newsletter (above all else) is an opening statement for
> the Newbies and Lori's idea of having her channel an
> astrological type forecast based on the Roles.

 

Oh boy--look at me--I volunteered to get totally out of my comfort zone and do something I never do--forcasts. Will they be accurate? My scholar wants to know. Can I let that attachment go? We'll see. It'll either be really neat or really cheesy.

Dave--won't you write something for us??? I'll give you some of my cheese...from the forcasts.... (yes bribery gets me anything--it's the real key to abundance.) ;-p

Thank you Jeanne for taking the helm on this! It should be a lot of fun!

BTW: Regarding that Emily merger with Michael--I think you guys got it all wrong!! I think it's not Emily, it's really MLE, an acronym! Betcha can't guess what that stands for!

Lori
The Silly Scholar


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:35:12 EDT
Subject: I have another question..this one is about twins!

And maybe, if it has been covered in the past, please do tell and I'll search the archives. Has Michael ever said anything about twins? I mean, I would guess that twins must at least be TCs, yes? Twins came to mind after the short discussion of Jesus and cloning...it seems that lots of people out there (like my mom, how frightening!) think that if a clone is made it for some reason would have the same soul of a person. I mean, perhaps I am being naive in a biological sense, but it is just like identical twins, yes? Am I being arrogant and missing something here? (yes yes and I must also admit I get very upset when people seem to think that evolution means that we have no souls...personally, I find science to be very enlightening and inspiring in a spiritual kinda way!) Regardless, this got me thinking about what it means to be a twin. Is there anyone on the list that is a twin (frat. or pat.) who has had their overleaves done for themselves and their twin? What has Michael said about that kind of relationship? Do we each probably "try out" being twins with our et at some point in our grand cycle? I imagine we must, yes? Thanks for listening to yet another silly question by me! My my I can't ever stop asking questions...that's why everyone hated me in school! Are there other scholars out there who have that problem? Is it an issue of maturity? Probably is, to a certain extent. Mature soul...wanting to talk talk talk to people but being a scholar and wanting to know know know...

byebye! Kris


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 16:19:29 +0800
Subject: Re: Re:Conversations with god

At 03:59 AM 4/13/98 -0000, Mike H 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.
>>
>> 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 H

 

IMO, whoever wrote that we cannot communicate directly to the Source is erred. Kenneth Broom wrote very nicely about TELLING the Tao just recently, so that's the communication. :-)

On the other hand, we may not be able to understand anything the Tao has to tell us, but that is not the same as "cannot communicate directly".

:-)

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:02:47 -0700
Subject: Re: Dogma and Relibion (1998-14/1482)

 

| From: Barbara Taylor
| Subject: Re: Dogma and Relibion
| Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 10:15:23 -0700
|
| 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.

 

Uh, huh. See recent posts WRT excluded channels.

 

| There exists (for some people) an illusion of separation. Other
| know it is only an illusion made possible on the physical plane.

 

But that illusion is very real *on* the physical plane, and that is where we are so we must deal with it.

 

| 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?

 

Criticism can lead to awareness of a problem, necessary to effect meaningful change.

 

| 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.

 

Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings, carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students? Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?

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


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:03:11 -0700
Subject: Re: Truth (1998-14/1503)

 

| From: Jody B
| Subject: RE: Truth
| Date: Sun, 12 Apr 98 14:45:08 UT
|
| > 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.
|
| I pray there never will be! Sheri Tepper wrote a sci-fi book [in which]
| beings could not understand the humans' preoccupation with getting
| everyone to agree on one point of view.

 

What does one's point of view about something have to do with accuracy in channeling? Either it's accurate or it isn't. It is to be expected that, in any group of people, there will be different views, opinions, positions, whatever. But a channeling is supposed to be the process of receiving information from a discarnate source. So any views or opinions that enter the channeling process are distortions that undermine the value of the material received.

 

| 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...

 

As above - of course not everyone will agree (on about any subject you care to bring up!). But more consistency (accuracy) in channelings would lessen the tendency to disagree WRT the teachings IMO.

 

| 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.)

 

I would tend to agree with your assessment.

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


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:03:30 -0700
Subject: Re: Ken Broom's Entity (1998-14/1506)

 

| From: Jeanne H
| Subject: Ken Broom's Entity
| Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 11:01:25 -0500
|
| So again Ken ... 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).

 

Hey, be glad we're not Sages!

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


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:03:49 -0700
Subject: Organized religion and choices (1998-14/1522)

 

| From: Dave
| Subject: Re: THE WORD
| Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 19:09:40 EDT
|
| 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?

 

You may pity their personality, but remember their experience is by choice. Their essence needs that experience or they wouldn't be there.

 

| I think you would be instinctively remembering those days in your past
| when you used to subscribe to similar beliefs.

 

Of course, but *at the time* it was a needed experience. So it is not amiss IMO to realize that the same holds true for others.

At the risk of over-simplification (which it is), you might look at it this way - we are all on a trip to Disneyland. Just because I rode the Teacup ride yesterday and want to ride the Matterhorn today, should I pity other people who just got to the park and want to ride the Teacups?

 

| I certainly find organized religion unappetizing.

 

Probably true of most older souls.

 

| 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

 

No question about that - I got sick on those blasted Teacups! (Just kidding. :^)

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


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:04:09 -0700
Subject: Re: Shakespeare (1998-15/1535)

 

| From: ted fontaine
| Subject: Re: Shakespeare
| Date: Mon, 13 Apr 98 08:59:02 -0700
|
| John & anyone else interested:
|
| I gone over this same issue many times. I have talked to people who
| have had four or five different readings given to them and on and on...
|
| My abridged explanation follows:
|
| Most of us use most of the overalls at some time.

 

Boy I'll bet that's cozy!

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


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:04:30 -0700
Subject: Re: Akashic Truth Points (1998-15/1538)

Kenneth,

 

| From: Kenneth Broom
| Subject: Akashic Truth Points
| Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:47:17 -0400
|
| Dear Michael Teachings Listers,
|
| Yesterday I asked the Michaels about my channeling accuracy and they
| said as far as channeling overleaves is concerned: my accuracy has maxed
| at around 95% when I use the birthdata, and around 70% when I do not use
| the birthdata.
|
| They also added the following points regarding the accuracy of channeled data:

 

This is for me, by far, the most useful information you have posted. Your Scholar is definitely showing here. Thank you.

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


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:04:51 -0700
Subject: Re: God iconsciousness (1998-15/1540)

 

| From: Jody B
| Subject: RE: Digest No. 1998-04-13
| Date: Mon, 13 Apr 98 18:56:03 UT
|
| Doesn't Michael say - I think through Shepherd - that "God" is the
| consciousness of the Tao?

 

No. God is the consciousness of the universe.

 

| That would imply to me that God would know itself to be part of
| something larger, and that we could not talk to that larger whatever . . .
| except, of course, as far as we are all part of it and talk to it
| every time we have contact with our essences.

 

Apparently it has been done.

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

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

    The Tao gives birth to the universes. New universes come into being
    from time to time. One universe builds on the lessons of the last
    universe. When a universe is born, it is like a baby being born.
    It is new. It doesn't know what is yet to come. All the
    possibilities are inherent in it. But none of the realizations of
    those possibilities have yet occurred. There is a core consciousness
    for a universe just as there is a core consciousness in you. Your
    toe and your finger have consciousness, but they are not the core
    consciousness of your body. God could be defined as the core
    consciousness of the universe, and as such it is evolving. [RUOW]

    Let's delineate between the Tao and God--God being the overall
    consciousness of this universe, the Tao being that which propagates
    universes. Everything springs from and returns to the Tao. [RUOW]

    Where do Right Use of Will and the subsequent books that claim to
    be channeled from God come from?

    This channel is indeed tapping into an aspect of the organizing
    force, the highest or most generalized aspect of consciousness, of
    this individual universe. (She is not tapping into the Tao itself,
    which is the source of this universe.) This consciousness does not
    converse in language as human beings know it. (In fact, neither do
    we, but we are closer to the physical plane and relate more readily
    to it.) With its assistance, she is translating this input into
    what are for you intelligible terms, in her own way. It could look
    quite different through another channel. [RUOW]

---

RUOW = "Right Use of Will" / http://www.Summerjoy.com/RightUse.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 -

RUOW = Edited Michael Other

===


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 04:05:10 -0700
Subject: Re: Beyond the causal? (1998-15/1543)

 

| From: Barry
| Subject: Re: Beyond the causal?
| Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:55:32 +0000
|
| Judy wrote:
| .........................................................................
| 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.
| .........................................................................
|
| Not so, IMO.
|
| A Course in Miracles (http://www.acim.org/home/fip/index.html) was
| channeled, purportedly at least, from the infinite soul who was/is Jesus
| and presumably is of the higher planes.

 

Not yet.(§1)

 

| PS- I love Conversations With God, though I agree it’s probably coming
| from the mid-Causal plane.

 

Not if those who say it was channeled from the author's essence are to be believed. If one is incarnating, one's essence cannot be mid-causal.

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

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

§1 -

   »Jesus, as now experienced by those in this time frame who connect
   with him directly, is mid-astral simply because that is what works.
   His entity is recombining on the upper astral, but he works mostly
   with the physical plane from the mid-astral in order to give better
   access to those who are physical. Soon this will no longer be necessary.« [JS1.356]

 

---

JS1 = »The Journey of Your Soul« V1 / Shepherd Hoodwin

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 -

JS1 = Author »Edited Michael«

===


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 07:24:38 EDT
Subject: Re: a little correction

Lori,

Have you tried the new PBS show "Teletubbies"? My 18 mo old is crazy about it.

Martha
(who is usually too tired to contribute much in the way of intellectual thought here but appreciates the adult conversation)


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 23:25:43 +0800
Subject: Re: Shakespeare

At 04:58 PM 4/13/98 -0000, ted fontaine wrote:

<snip>

 

>Most of us use most of the overalls at some time. For example, there are
>times when I have to use dominance when I am taking on a leadership
>position, there are times when I have to use power mode when I am
>teaching, and when I am driving the freeways I use caution mode, etc etc.
>Our primary set is our default set but but when need be, we will use
>other sets to handle specific conditions. For example: If you were to
>read my overleaves when I am arguing passionatly you may get that I am a
>cynic in passion mode. That is the "energy" that I am projecting at that time.

 

<the rest snipped>

Well, I would like to comment just on this point... being that this is something I mentioned before, about "changing Goal"... Having more flexibility with certain parts of our overleaves (as described so nicely by Ted Fontaine), I believe that it is possible to change all of our overleaves that we chose for one particular life-time. Shepherd mentioned that we chose our set of overleaves for a particular purpose. I can confirm (validate) that I am most efficient (pragmatic -- that being my Attitude... so that doesn't really say much) when I'm using my current overleaves.

On the other hand, as mentioned in several books, and described so nicely above, we do make use of other types (energy) of overleaves, depending on circumstances. On reflection (hind-sight), I think we "stick to default" when we are otherwise "unprovoked", or "unconscious".... or in our habitual patterns. If we become really conscious of a particular moment in time, we will then be able to choose what type of action/reaction (energy of overleaves) to use. e.g. When we're being slapped in the face, do we choose Reserve Mode? Or do we choose Passion Mode? Power Mode? :-) Or Chief Feature of Arrogance? Martyrdom? Guess nobody functions this way, eh? :-)

I suppose the Role can't be change even if we consciously try to, but that's just what "I suppose". :-)

As for Soul Age, that is even more mutable, especially for older souls (like us). We can act (manifest) a Young age, or Baby age, or anything "younger" than we currently are. It is no wonder channeling information at different times can get different overleaves. In Journey of a Soul, Shepherd also mentioned about reading overleaves from akashic records and from the person (aura, energy). He also mentioned that reading from aura is a lot faster, and in our present-day Impatient society, that would be what most clients (and newbies?) prefer. And down goes the accuracy.

Well, that's it... I have nothing more to add. :-) (how about that for a "profound ending"... really unbecoming of a Sage)

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 19:45:55 +0000
Subject: Re: See the new casting model

Fellow students,

I had a sleepless night recently trying to piece together the new casting info from Caris and Ed. Finally I sat down to visualize it on paper. It took shape quite well, and helped me understand the casting system a lot better. I'm so pleased with myself that I've done a web page illustrating the model, with '3D' diagrams AND a full table showing correspondences between 'raw number' and casting position within the new model. All are welcome to view the results and comment:

http://www.michaelteachings.com/visualizing_new_casting.htm

      B a r r y
__________________________________________
Mature Scholar sleeping better now...zzzzz


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 16:29:25 EDT
Subject: Re: Organized religion and choices (1998-14/1522)

In a message dated 98-04-14 16:06:46 EDT, you wrote:

 

Just because I rode the Teacup ride yesterday and want to ride the Matterhorn today,
should I pity other people who just got to the park and want to ride the Teacups?

 

You should pity the people who sit in the lunch that I left splattered inside the Teacups.

Dave - an annual pass holder to Disneyland. :-)


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 15:48:50 -0500
Subject: Sage bashing!!!!

Dick Hein wrote:

----snip----

 

> Hey, be glad we're not Sages!

 

Hey Dick,

   I resemble that!!! Watch it, or us sages will gang up on you and tell you so many funny jokes you'll cry!!! (Boredom or laughter is your call.)

John M


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 17:58:12 EDT
Subject: Re: Lori and All Re Newsletter

In a message dated 98-04-14 03:29:13 EDT, Jeanne writes:

 

If anyone who has not yet posted to the list or to me or
Lori, wants to be involved let us know. I think that
rather than being like the list itself, it will generate new
and fascinating topics for the list. And to all of those who
have volunteered, YES, YES, YES. We need and want you.

 

I guess I'm confused about what the format of this newsletter will be. Will this be an organized collection of articles by regular contributors, along with special features, or just a free-for-all like the list? Will it be sent on the list itself? Will it be distributed monthly, weekly, daily, or just random? I don't understand the web site connection. If it's a web site, it's not a newsletter.

I might have missed an earlier post that described the nature of the newsletter, so somebody fill me in.

Dave


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 17:59:42 EDT
Subject: Re: :-o Lori and All Re Newsletter

In a message dated 98-04-14 04:21:32 EDT, Lori writes:

 

Dave--won't you write something for us??? I'll give you some of my
cheese...from the forcasts.... (yes bribery gets me anything--it's the
real key to abundance.) ;-p

 

Damn...now I have to earn my cheese. No fair....:-( ;-p

Dave - All typos are the sole responsibility of my cat.


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 18:46:26 -0500
Subject: Newsletter News

Some of you have asked if the Newsletter would be just like the list and I thought I should address that and a few other issues.

The main reason I thought (with some help from a few others) we needed a newsletter was for the purpose of giving Michael Students something with a structure. And forgive me darlings, but our posts are generally anything but structured. LOL. But we have many members who never post anything to the list and we often get Newbies who are quite possibly given short shrift (unintentionally) when they don't understand what is going on. Example, coming in in the midst of a messy, Michael Math discussion. A newsletter that contains 1) basic information for newbies, (where to find the Quizzes, etc.); 2) good indepth pieces such as Ken, Brin, Gloria, Barry and some of you others put out occasionally (i.e., definition of Essence); that give all of us an opportunity for reflection and more meat for discussion on the list; 3) a monthly Channeling from various Michael Channels who are interested in contributing (gives all of us a feel for our different channels, which we don't have now unless we visit a lot of Websites, or have a channeling done for us personally - and I would add that those of us away from large metropolitan areas don't have this one-on-one opportunity very often); 4) Some whimsey, humor, poetry, individual pieces that members wish to contribute, which gives us an opportunity to know each other better; and 5) a Book or Tape Review that would give enough of the flavor of the item to let someone who hadn't purchased it, decide whether or not they wanted/needed that particular book or tape and if it was at their study level.

If some of you have other ideas, please let's have them. This should be for us, about us, and most importantly by us. All of the information we get comes from the Channels. This is an opportunity for the "Students" to take some responsibility for strengthening the "Michael Teachings" which we believe in. Be political, call it a "Grass Roots Movement". (I'm waiting for Thumbless Dave's response to that!)

Also Barry and Christine - HELPPPPP! I know nothing about HTML. But Lori is supposed to check with Rene regarding our doing this on Spiritweb. If that doesn't work out and we need a Website, I do have something in mind.

Okay - responses please.

Love and Laughter and now reading "Newsletters for Dummies"!

Jeanne

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


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 98 00:22:44 UT
Subject: RE: Teddy bears

Okay, I'm curious. If the 5th entity is teddy bears, what is the 2nd entity?

Jody B


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 98 01:21:48 UT
Subject: Accuracy redux

Dick wrote:

 

"What does one's point of view about something have to do with accuracy in channeling? Either it's accurate or it isn't. It is to be expected that, in any group of people, there will be different views, opinions, positions, whatever. But a channeling is supposed to be the process of receiving information from a discarnate source. So any views or opinions that enter the channeling process are distortions that undermine the value of the material received."

 

I'm wondering how we can ever know if a channeling is "accurate." If 10 channels agreed on a detail and one did not, I would not assume that the 10 who agreed were right. What if one channel had managed to clear himself or herself of all interference or influences and the others had not?

IMHO the fact that we have many channels and they don't always agree forces us to do exactly what Michael said in MTM: validate what is said for ourselves. For me that means checking it out with my gut (a/k/a my essence) and seeing if it rings true or not. And then I can only say it's true for me, not for anyone else.

As far as the value of the material: I value the Michael teachings for the quantum leaps they have allowed me to make in understanding myself and what it is I'm doing here. If I got nothing else from the teachings from now on, or if new information came through that contradicted everything that had been said so far, I'd still spend the rest of my life being grateful for how I've been helped by the basic concepts. Shakespeare's overleaves don't matter to me; I didn't know the guy, I was in Japan at the time. (I have a pragmatic attitude, can you tell?).

(I'm having so much fun here! Haven't had the opportunity to debate "the things that really matter" since college. My scholarly self is just reveling in seeing how many "sides" there can be!)

-----<--{@ Jody
Mature scholar enjoying herself


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 19:45:43 -0600
Subject: The new casting model by mature scholar, Barry

Wow! What an incredible job you've done! We've got homework now, studying the new casting model. I understand the drive you experienced, the incredible NEED to UNDERSTAND this thing, to bring it into the dimensional language of our realm, where it has MEANING, and provides visual TOOLS whereby we may begin to grasp something of the order and design of the Tao. Uh, did I get carried away here?

Gloria, a/k/a Geebee Geebs and Jibes


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 19:07:09 -0700
Subject: Re: 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 H

 

   Mike, I heard that at one of Steve C's classes but I thought the name was Lydia. As I recall they did not get along.

Ted Fontaine


Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 21:05:52 -0500
Subject: Re: See the new casting model

Barry,

That is fantastic. I don't understand all of it, but it's starting to make some sense. The curved triangles will take some more study for me. But I'm amazed at what you've done. Thank you.

Jeanne


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 00:36:57 EDT
Subject: Re: Newsletter News

In a message dated 98-04-14 23:02:49 EDT, you write:

 

If some of you have other ideas, please let's have them. This
should be for us, about us, and most importantly by us.
All of the information we get comes from the Channels. This
is an opportunity for the "Students" to take some responsibility
for strengthening the "Michael Teachings" which we believe in.
Be political, call it a "Grass Roots Movement". (I'm waiting for
Thumbless Dave's response to that!)

 

For starters, I have two quick suggestions:

  - I think the site should have downloadable GIF's of all the female Michael students. Of course, the photos must be taken of each prospective student without the spiritually confining restrictions of their clothing. Then we'll rate them on a drool scale of one drop thru ten. However, long sinewy strands of glistening saliva, that make a determination of such a drop ratio impossible, will earn the stimulating female in question a free plane ticket to Dave's place of residence, so that she can assist him in battling those physical plane detriments that sometimes result from a separation with the Tao. Yes, this would be good work indeed.

  - If current technology allows, a special "Scratch & Sniff" site would also be stimulating. Aren't you dying to know what each role smells like, and if there are distinctions between one role to the next? Of course, I think the most telling aromatic example would be a S&S specimen of the fecal matter from each soul age. Aren't you dying to quantify such statements like, "Hi, I'm a 7th level old soul, and my shit don't stank!"

Dave ;-)


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 02:44:54 EDT
Subject: Re: See the new casting model

Dear Barry -- Good work, so far. One thing is truly amazing, though. You have the whole thing 90 degrees different in orientation. It really twists my mind to look at it.I hope this will make it easier to visualize.

I hope this very narrow layout displays properly in e-mail. Most pipes we see are round, but for this one, our model has three flat sides. Imagine columns 1,2, and 3 are the three sides (Truth, Love, Beauty, whatever). Each symbol X is one block of 49 cells. All the X's are one entity. The + and _ symbols are blocks of 49 of the entities above and below. Do you see how the X's are staggered? If this diagram below were on a big enough sheet of paper you could fold it with two folds so that the edges touch. The two outside edges are joined so you have a triangular cross section as below.

        123

        +++
        X++
        XX+
        XXX
        XXX
        XXX
        XXX
        XXX
        _XX
        __X
        ___


               1   3
             1       3
           1           3
         1               3
       1                   3
     1           M         3
   1                           3
2    2    2    2    2    2    2

Here "M" is the middle or the hollow part inside the "pipe". Each 1,2, or 3 is a column of 7 X 7 = 49 cells extending into the third dimension (into your computer screen). The actual cross section might well be curved rather than flat. You could follow this interior space all the way around the "energy ring" of 12 cadres of 7 entities. People are said to have important connections with the two others in their corresponding position on the other two sides. These energetic links pass from their backs through the interior space to the backs of these two special cadence mates.

Does this make it fit together better?

All the best, Ed

 

 


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 03:03:15 EDT
Subject: Re: See the new casting model

Very macabre and spellbinding! This is the kind of creeping horror that will curl your hair. It's a tale that goes straight through your heart like rats' fangs. Definitely a sundown feast that won't end until the chill of dawn.

I'm looking forward to further entrys. Keep me posted. ;-)

Dave


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 03:33:24 -0400
Subject: Sex vs Chocolate

20 Reasons Why Chocolate Is Better Than Sex

1) You can GET chocolate.

2) "If you love me you'll swallow that" has real meaning with chocolate.

3) Chocolate satisfies even when it has gone soft.

4) You can safely have chocolate while you are driving.

5) You can make chocolate last as long as you want it to.

6) You can have chocolate even in front of your mother.

7) If you bite the nuts too hard the chocolate won't mind.

8) Two people of the same sex can have chocolate without being called nasty names.

9) The word "commitment" doesn't scare off chocolate.

10) You can have chocolate on top of your workbench/desk during working hours without upsetting your co-workers.

11) You can ask a stranger for chocolate without getting your face slapped.

12) You don't get hairs in your mouth with chocolate.

13) With chocolate there's no need to fake it.

14) Chocolate doesn't make you pregnant.

15) You can have chocolate at any time of the month.

16) Good chocolate is easy to find.

17) You can have as many kinds of chocolate as you can handle.

18) You are never too young or too old for chocolate.

19) When you have chocolate it does not keep your neighbors awake.

20) With chocolate size doesn't matter.

--
Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
   7th level Old Scholar/Server, Observation, Acceptance, Idealist,
   Emotional Part of Intellectual, Impatience/Stubbornness
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 04:19:11 -0400
Subject: Re: See the new casting model

Barry wrote:

 

> Fellow students,
>
> I had a sleepless night recently trying to piece together the new
> casting info from Caris and Ed. Finally I sat down to visualize it on
> paper. It took shape quite well, and helped me understand the casting
> system a lot better. I'm so pleased with myself that I've done a web
> page illustrating the model, with '3D' diagrams AND a full table showing
> correspondences between 'raw number' and casting position within the new
> model. All are welcome to view the results and comment:
>
> http://www.michaelteachings.com/visualizing_new_casting.htm

 

Great work Barry, you deserve to be pleased with yourself.
But what about folks like me?
I am in the 5th Entity of Cadre 3 (Hoodwin).
I am the 1,481st fragment of a total of 2,185 fragments in my entity.
I am the 225th scholar of a total of 490 scholars in my entity.

For those entities that have more than 1,029 fragments, does your model repeat itself after every 1029 fragments? The Michael entity has 1,050 fragments, and my entity has 2,185 fragments.

--
Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
   7th level Old Scholar/Server, Observation, Acceptance, Idealist,
   Emotional Part of Intellectual, Impatience/Stubbornness
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 04:41:59 EDT
Subject: Re: The new casting model by mature scholar, Barry

In a message dated 98-04-14 23:42:44 EDT, Gloria writes:

 

Wow! What an incredible job you've done! We've got homework now,
studying the new casting model. I understand the drive you experienced,
the incredible NEED to UNDERSTAND this thing, to bring it into the
dimensional language of our realm, where it has MEANING, and provides
visual TOOLS whereby we may begin to grasp something of the order and
design of the Tao. Uh, did I get carried away here?

Gloria, a/k/a Geebee Geebs and Jibes

 

and here I just liked the pretty colors....;-p

Dave


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 07:07:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Newsletter News

You may have already said this... but, it sounds like it will be more of a teaching manual for the newbies... I for one, need it.
pj


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 18:54:18 +0800
Subject: Re: Newsletter / Truth

Barry wrote on 14/4/98 1:01 am:

 

> How’s this for a koan: Is it *really* true that there is no Truth? I
> mean really, ABSOLUTELY true?

 

Wow! It really looks like (a) I phrased my words wrongly, or (b) I am too "beginner" in my perception.

Thanks to all who responded directly and indirectly to my post. Now is my time to digest them. :-)

J J Tan
=====!=====
Put aside Truth, just appreciate the mystery that is called The Universe.


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 18:55:03 +0800
Subject: Re: Dogma and Relibion (1998-14/1482)

Dick Hein wrote on 14/4/98 12:01 pm:

 

> Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
> carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
> Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?

 

Well, I don't know about others, but I usually leave "role modeling" for Baby Souls. Do you need a role model to follow or imitate? I hope you don't. And I hope what you wrote about was out of the moment's reactions, not what you need deeply. Anyway, I think there are some religions that are particularly good with providing and requring role models.

J J Tan
=====!=====
Put aside Truth, just appreciate the mystery that is called The Universe.


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 18:55:40 +0800
Subject: Re: Truth (1998-14/1503)

Dick Hein wrote on 14/4/98 12:02 pm:

 

>What does one's point of view about something have to do with accuracy in
>channeling? Either it's accurate or it isn't. It is to be expected that,
>in any group of people, there will be different views, opinions, positions,
>whatever. But a channeling is supposed to be the process of receiving
>information from a discarnate source. So any views or opinions that enter
>the channeling process are distortions that undermine the value of the
>material received.
>
>As above - of course not everyone will agree (on about any subject you
>care to bring up!). But more consistency (accuracy) in channelings would
>lessen the tendency to disagree WRT the teachings IMO.

 

As far as my current knowledge goes, you wll need to become a Nagual like Don Juan and Carcos Castaneda, to lose self-importance, so that any "channeled" information is no filtered in any way, conciously or not. Do we have any nagual channeler here? :-)

J J Tan
=====!=====
Put aside Truth, just appreciate the mystery that is called The Universe.


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 06:28:52 -0700
Subject: point of view and channeling

 

>What does one's point of view about something have to do with accuracy in
>channeling? Either it's accurate or it isn't. It is to be expected that,
>in any group of people, there will be different views, opinions, positions,
>whatever. But a channeling is supposed to be the process of receiving
>information from a discarnate source. So any views or opinions that enter
>the channeling process are distortions that undermine the value of the
>material received.

 

The point of view is the filter through which the information comes. That is why information varies so much from one channel to another both in flavor and in actual information. The overleaves are simply an obvious area of variance. But the information varies from channel to channel in lots of ways. One person may be interested in numerology separate from Michael Math. Another person may not give much credence to numerology. The two will channel differently on these aspects. A lot of channels don't like to channel the math element at all or if you ask questions about it will simply say they don't like dealing with the math.

Channeling is not simply like picking up a telephone and listening to information from another plane. It is information filtered through the mind, vocabulary, habits, attitudes and understanding of a particular person. If the personality of the person is very pronounced, the channeling will usually be filtered through that personality and that filter may be very marked. If through inner work, the fragment is able to let go of the personality more and become more neutral, the channeling may well be less influenced by their own nature, the nature itself can become thinner, so to speak. But that residual color and style will be there to some degree. We can see that from this list. (In India they speak of this at length. They call the filters vasanas. They have information, a kind of spiritual science, that speaks of all of this in great detail. Probably from some of our entity and cadre mates....:)

For me a good example of how this works is the current understanding of parallels. While we are in bodies, in a plane where time is important, we have a tendency to think of parallels as endless 3-dimensional spinoffs. To me, this clearly feels like an understanding that serves the personality who looks at the idea of parallels from the point of view of a body moving through time. From the point of view of another plane, they might speak of parallels meaning something quite different, that interpreted through our filters and understanding on this plane comes out sounding like these endless spinoffs, with endless bodies living endless variations and on and on into complexity. From the point of view of a causal plane where time is simultaneous, a parallel might be true, say, just from the aspect of the mind. Each moment there is a seed thought, the awareness might spin out into thought as far as one wanted/needed to experience. That itself might be the level of reality, it might be of a fine vibration like instantaneous thought, having a kind of reality without the necessity of having endless 3-dimensional bodies actually living in 3-dimensional worlds. Regardless of what the actual truth may be for a moment, you can see how the understanding and point of view will affect the information. Perhaps in this case the current standard view of parallels might hold sway for 20, 30, 100 years, and then in the case of any shift in understanding, there might be a realization of a more subtle and accurate truth like any of the changes we have in our understanding of science. The fact of how it works doesn't change, only our perception of that fact. So when people considered the earth flat, it didn't change the shape of the planet we live on, only the shape of people's current perceptions of that truth.

A channel is no different. There is gradually expansion in understanding with leaps now and then, but a channel won't be able to express what they have no conception of at all, no basis for understanding. That's why some channels -- say with medical background now or at some time previous -- can channel about precise medical information while others will focus on areas they know more about. I do believe, in itself, focus on any area, known or unknown will begin to bring in knowledge, information and understanding about that area. That is how we learn. And through focus we can attune ourselves to vibrational information and open ourselves up to new things. But it still comes through the filter of the person to a greater or lesser degree. And without a doubt the degree to which we may believe this is happening is going to vary too :).

I want to add with this that what we can understand is often greater than we might imagine. There is such a thing as instantaneous knowing. A whole body of information can enter into you in a flash and then it can take years to bring it into form. Or it can take some time to put that understanding that came in an instant into words to express to others.

This is a good place to mention that information can come through in a lot of different ways. Perhaps the further the plane is from our own, the more the information will come through simply in energy that requires being translated into words. Being able to attune to that energy is itself transformative.

I know some want just the facts please, but it's not so simple especially as the information is newly coming in and our understanding and vocabulary is expanding to take in new models, which can only ever be approximations useful to understand facets of the reality itself.

For those just beginning, there is lots of information that is accurate enough to be useful in adding greatly to our understanding of the world and our interrelationships. Why people are different and why you are who you are. Just at that level, the Michael information has been marvelous. I'm sure it will continue to be fine tuned, adjusted, corrected, but that doesn't take away from how powerfully it affects the lives of those who've come across this information. And how powerful the tools are that we've already been given especially the more we use them.

Maybe the point of view itself is the difference between our plane and another. Because all the planes are here simultaneously and it is as our awareness expands that we become aware of them.

Best to all, Brin


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:18:14 +0800
Subject: Re: See the new casting model

At 07:49 PM 4/14/98 -0000, Barry wrote:

 

>Fellow students,
>
>I had a sleepless night recently trying to piece together the new
>casting info from Caris and Ed. Finally I sat down to visualize it on
>paper. It took shape quite well, and helped me understand the casting
>system a lot better. I'm so pleased with myself that I've done a web
>page illustrating the model, with '3D' diagrams AND a full table showing
>correspondences between 'raw number' and casting position within the new
>model. All are welcome to view the results and comment:
>
>http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~barrym/michael/cadre.htm

 

Somehow I can't access that URL, got a message that says "does not exist". Is there anything I'm missing?

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 13:06:28 EDT
Subject: Re: Oooops (was New Casting)

In a message dated 98-04-15 03:04:24 EDT, Dave writes:

 

Very macabre and spellbinding! This is the kind of creeping horror that will
curl your hair. It's a tale that goes straight through your heart like rats'
fangs. Definitely a sundown feast that won't end until the chill of dawn.

I'm looking forward to further entrys. Keep me posted. ;-)

Dave

 

Ooooops....I meant to send the above paragraph to a mailing list about fiction. Sorry...I guess it was more tired than I thought. ;-p


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:42:44 +0200
Subject: Accuracy and Concordance

Dick Hein wrote:

 

>| Doesn't Michael say - I think through Shepherd - that "God" is the
>| consciousness of the Tao?
>
>No. God is the consciousness of the universe.(=DF1)

 

Actually I don't think we can expect a large and somewhat loaded term like God to be used the same way in all channeling. In some contexts Michael has spoken of prayer as being directed to one's own essence, which would make the essence God... This also fits in with my own understanding of essence. At our last study group session here Michael, addressing the question of the exact meaning of "false personality", after discussing the term a bit said, "false personality is not really a scientific term however, we would caution against trying to make an iron clad definition that may be used in all contexts. Channeling doesn't work that way." In other contexts in my channeling Michael has cautioned against using channeled teachings as if they were a new bible. As tempting as it is to search for a source of certainty I don't think the Michael material can be used concordantly.

Dick also wrote:

 

>Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
>carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
>Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?

 

I think you're misunderstanding the function of Soul Age. Old souls are working on different issues, or perceiving from a different perspective than, say, mature souls, but this doesn't make them any more "advanced" spiritually nor closer to perceiving the Tao. Mature souls may be much better role models and much more in touch with the loving heart of the Tao than old souls. And because issues of relationship are so accented in the mature cycle mature souls may be even more in tune with the meaning of the Michael teachings, since so much of the teaching is focused on relational issues. So I'd suggest you may be the role model rather than needing to seek it in old souls.

Peace,

Katherine E. D.
violist, fiddler and cat person

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


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 18:22:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Newsletter News

First I read your post, and then I read Kenneth's about Chocolate and I have to wonder what's in your drinking water?????? Poor babies!

Love and Laughter and shipping Hershey Bars to Dave & Ken :-))))))))

Jeanne

 

> For starters, I have two quick suggestions:
>
> - I think the site should have downloadable GIF's of all the female Michael
> students. Of course, the photos must be taken of each prospective student
> without the spiritually confining restrictions of their clothing. Then we'll
> rate them on a drool scale of one drop thru ten. However, long sinewy strands
> of glistening saliva, that make a determination of such a drop ratio
> impossible, will earn the stimulating female in question a free plane ticket
> to Dave's place of residence, so that she can assist him in battling those
> physical plane detriments that sometimes result from a separation with the
> Tao. Yes, this would be good work indeed.
>
> - If current technology allows, a special "Scratch & Sniff" site would also
> be stimulating. Aren't you dying to know what each role smells like, and if
> there are distinctions between one role to the next? Of course, I think the
> most telling aromatic example would be a S&S specimen of the fecal matter from
> each soul age. Aren't you dying to quantify such statements like, "Hi, I'm a
> 7th level old soul, and my shit don't stank!"
>
> Dave ;-)

 


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 98 16:50:46 -0700
Subject: Re: Dogma and Relibion (1998-14/1482)

 

>Dick Hein wrote on 14/4/98 12:01 pm:
>
>>Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
>>carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
>>Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?
>
>Well, I don't know about others, but I usually leave "role modeling" for
>Baby Souls. Do you need a role model to follow or imitate?
>I hope you don't. And I hope what you wrote about was out of the moment's
>reactions, not what you need deeply. Anyway, I think there are some
>religions that are particularly good with providing and requring role models.
>
>=====!=====
>Put aside Truth, just appreciate the mystery that is called The Universe.

 

Dear Dick & JJ and All Others

The thought popped in as I was reading the above that there could well be a greater support circle with the Michael Teachings (As far as I am personally concerned there is a greater support circle). The Michael Teaching like any other group may also have a support circle and all channels/students/teachers occupy a place within the support circle.

For those of you new to support circle positions they are as follows:

Love
Knowledge
Compassion
Mentor
Beauty
Child
Humour
Discipline
Anchor
Healer
Enlightenment
Muse

How different the child position may look from the discipline position, the healer position from the anchor position, and the humour position from the compassion position.

Yours -- Ted


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 98 16:50:57 -0700
Subject: Re: RE: Teddy bears

 

>From: Jody B
>
>Okay, I'm curious. If the 5th entity is teddy bears, what is the 2nd entity?

 

Pound Puppies (Just Kidding)

Ted Fontaine


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 19:53:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Newsletter News

PJ wrote:

 

> You may have already said this... but, it sounds like it will be more of a
> teaching manual for the newbies... I for one, need it.

 

No PJ, I was just stating that I felt there should be an abbreviated, basic explanation of "Michael" and then information regarding the links to enable Newbies to find out more about themselves. I think there should be something for everyone or it's not a Newsletter. I've just had the feeling over the past few months that many come here not understanding what "The Michaels" are about and needing a little direction and not getting it. I also believe that if someone comes searching here, chances are their Essence guided them here and they shouldn't be just sluffed off, but should be allowed a little space and knowledge so that they can decide for themselves if they want to learn more. We have such an advantage over many of the souls who have only recently begun the search. If there's no resonance they should move on, but they should have the opportunity to understand a little of what we are about before they try to make that decision.

Love

Jeanne


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 21:43:26 EDT
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

In a message dated 98-04-15 18:45:02 EDT, you wrote:

 

<< Dick also wrote:

Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say? >>

Katherine:
I think you're misunderstanding the function of Soul Age. Old souls are
working on different issues, or perceiving from a different perspective
than, say, mature souls, but this doesn't make them any more "advanced"
spiritually nor closer to perceiving the Tao. Mature souls may be much
better role models and much more in touch with the loving heart of the Tao
than old souls.
And because issues of relationship are so accented in the
mature cycle mature souls may be even more in tune with the meaning of the
Michael teachings, since so much of the teaching is focused on relational
issues. So I'd suggest you may be the role model rather than needing to
seek it in old souls.

 

I would like to think that no soul age has a particular monopoly on a loving heart. And I disagree that the Michael teachings are structured around relational issues. I've always thought that the core of the teachings revolved around the development of our own personal evolution? Regarding role models, I agree that mature souls are much more adept in the mastery of certain facets that can lead to them appearing well-adjusted in the physical game, while old souls tend to tire of sweating the little stuff, that from their perspective, seemingly drowns them in an endless myriad of pointless details. Thus, the mature soul becomes the master of all the integral components of life, reciting its dramas and playing its arias like a great Shakesperian actor or a master musician, while conversely, the old soul pulls away from such turmoil, aging like a fine wine, and focusing on the big screen version of existence, and the few spiritual truths it may contain. Of course, my scenario would bestow neither soul age as the most suitable role model, unless the game of life involves being what appears to be the most well-adjusted in terms of societal standards. But that's not really the nature of the game, is it? Nevertheless, I still believe your final assessment holds many elements of truth: We should never under estimate are own power in accessing the vast knowledge and truth which resides in all of us. And we can all be our own role models if we are simply not afraid to look within, regardless of soul age.

Returning to the original quote that Katherine addressed, I want to add that I think the main thrust of Dick's comment was concerning channels, and how ironic it is that despite their ability to channel wonderful insight from the Causal plane, they sometimes fail to practice what they teach. That's not a judgement call, just my interpretation of what I think Dick was trying to say, and I'm sure he also meant it as an observation, and not a judgement. Regardless, it's an interesting point, and one the shows that we're all coming from the same place, with the same issues, and that hierachy means nothing.

Dave


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 19:40:32 -0700
Subject: Re: Truth 'n' dogma

 

>Here we go: Truth is something you recognize within yourself.

 

    Barry,
    I agree and that reminds me . We watch the X files regularly but one thing that bothers me about the show is the phrase they use
The Truth is Out There.

I think the show is misleading in that regard.

    Mike H


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 98 02:31:22 UT
Subject: RE: Digest No. 1998-04-15 of Michael Teachings List

Kenneth wrote: "my entity has 2,185 fragments."

OOOh, Kenneth . . . I never met anyone with such a large . . .entity!

------------<--{@
Jody
Mature Scholar batting her eyelashes and giggling


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 20:10:52 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

 

>Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
>carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
>Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?

 

Actually, Old Souls are terrific role models for that "don't give a f@*!" attitude toward life.

Anne H


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 23:44:45 EDT
Subject: Re: The Zen Master

Jumping on Ken's chocolate band wagon....

   The Zen master steps up to the hot dog stand and says:
   "Make me one with everything."

   The hot dog vendor fixes a hot dog and hands it to the Zen
   master, who pays with a $20 bill. The hot dog vendor puts the bill in
   the cash drawer and closes the drawer.

   "Where's my change?" asks the Zen master.

   And the hot dog vendor responds, "Change must come from within."

Dave


Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 21:32:54 -0700
Subject: point of view and channeling

 

> A lot of channels don't like to channel the math element at all or if you ask
> questions about it will simply say they don't like dealing with the math.

 

    I have wondered if a less mathematical view of Michael Math might be to look at the structure of the fragments within entities as a grouping of colors where each color represents a role. Isn't that what the Michael Math is all about, the additional overleaf influence we get from the position we have in our entity? The colors would represent the different frequencies where the red end of the rainbow would relate to more grounded roles and the blue end would relate to the less grounded roles. Red is lower in frequency than the other colors and blue is the highest frequency as would be seen on an optical color chart.
    Mike H


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:36:50 EDT
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

I would add a couple of points to what Dave says in following up Katherine about soul ages and the Michael teachings, etc.

1) Michael said right at the beginning "This is a teaching for old souls" (or very similar words) in MFM, though I can't locate it exactly at the moment. They made that point IMHO to distinguish the Michael teachings from innumerable mature soul teachings available in this era. (All manner of stuff to do with psychology, relationships, spirituality, and "quality of life" issues.) "Old soul teachings" I believe could be described as anything that includes the concept of soul ages, reincarnation, metaphysics, and the large- scale view of the universe and its workings.

2) The difference there is that mature soul corresponds with 4th or heart chakra and old soul with 5th or throat, which is about communication, teaching, wisdom, etc. I don't believe the books mention it, but the soul ages correspond very clearly with the chakras. Each soul age is about the gathering of experience and learning of lesons pertaining to the area of life connecting with a particular chakra.

It might seem that both mature and old are about love, opening the heart, acceptance, agape, but there is a difference. Mature souls are developing that experience while old souls have already "graduated" from it and are not focused on redoing that school grade, so to speak. Old souls go on to formulate a broader knowledge of everything that includes the mature soul understanding as a subset, while mature souls don't really have the old soul understanding as a part of their own. Old souls are supposed to be able, if they choose, to be detached from "soap opera" in order to see and deal with or teach about a larger, "more "global" universe. (Often mature souls regard this detachment as "coldness".) Of course it's common for both mature and old souls to not be manifesting their true soul age and to have plenty of issues, drama, or interpersonal "growth" to work through on the way to being able to love easily and readily. Mature souls will usually learn to master loving with a relatively small group of people, while older old souls learn to be in a space of unconditional love for anyone and everyone.

3) Re judging quality of channels by how well they put it into action in their own lives...no -- imperfect correlation. I would definitely hold a "spiritual teacher" strictly to that standard. A channel is just doing a cosmic job of being a vehicle for someone to communicate through; usually by prior agreement, and the channel's ability to channel well is just an ability, not necessarily connected to how he or she lives life. In fact I'd rate most of the channels I have met (a couple of dozen) as not up to the "spiritual teacher" standard, but so what? I'd expect channels to live up to a standard of integrity with regard to their channeling process.

Lots of good posts lately Dave, Ken, Brin, others. The old list is bubbling.

All the best, Ed


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:53:10 EDT
Subject: point of view/colors/numbers

Dear Mike -- About the overleaves corresponding to colors....in some way they are a vibration like sound or color and each person is like a little orchestra of many tones. The harmonies and disharmonies between different vibrations have an effect on how people's "chemistry" works.

It isn't a continuum from 1 through 7, though. The impression I get from all the channeled material so far is that all the overleaves correspond to the whole numbers 1 through 7; no 1.38962 or 5.064's, thank God.

I asked Seth Cohn once when he was channeling just "what" the overleaves were in terms of vibration and also, what was it that vibrated. He said, I believe, that the overleaves were energy vibrations and that they had different wave characteristics. But he couldn't easily put into words what these characteristics are. Each number had a different vibratory pattern and a being who could see the energy could be able to tell the different number vibrations apart. Maybe Seth can come in and elaborate on this????

All the best, Ed


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 05:02:05 EDT
Subject: Re: Dogma and Relibion (1998-14/1482)

In a message dated 98-04-15 19:52:01 EDT, Ted writes:

 

How different the child position may look from the discipline position,
the healer position from the anchor position, and the humour position
from the compassion position.

 

Uh, Ted...you left out the missionary position. ;-p

Dave


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 08:17:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Zen Master & Hot Dog Vendor

 

And the hot dog vendor responds, "Change must come from within."

 

Applause from those of us lurking in the gallery!!!

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 98 15:29:13 UT
Subject: RE: Michael students/greater support circle

Well, I know what position Dave occupies!

By the way Dave, I thought your "rat's teeth through the heart" apparent response to Barry's drawings of the castings was you expressing delight and approval in your own idiom.

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


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 11:46:20 -0400
Subject: Re: RE: Digest No. 1998-04-15 of Michael Teachings List

Jody B wrote:

 

> Kenneth wrote: "my entity has 2,185 fragments."
>
> OOOh, Kenneth . . . I never met anyone with such a large . . .entity!

 

Rat proud ta meetcha ma'am. Howse about we mosey over to the Overleaf Lounge and talk some scholar stuff over a cupla agape punches.

Actually entity 5 describes themselves as a High Accomplishment entity (or words like that), meaning that they want to accomplish as much as possible during their physical sojourn here, so they somehow doubled up on their fragments. This includes folks like Oscar Wilde, Johann Pestalozzi, Voltaire, and Beethoven.

---
Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
   7th level Old Scholar/Server, Observation, Acceptance, Idealist,
   Emotional Part of Intellectual, Impatience/Stubbornness
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:33:01 +0800
Subject: Regarding Don Juan and Castaneda

So far, I have yet to read a lot of information from Michael with regard to the teachings from Don Juan and Castaneda. It is understandable that not many are interested... so I wonder if it is OK for me to ask for any information (or validation) here via the channelers. Well, I'll shoot anyway... hope someone is kind enough to pick it up...

I have read from various postings that in some workshops, Castaneda was reported to mention an aspect of teaching, or phenomena, which they called "cyclicity". That human beings are "cyclic beings", and our "energy body" (or the luminous spheres) are connected to certain other human beings in a string/chain. It was described like beads in a strand. That people on the same strand (connected cyclically) have very similar external appearances (like family members, though no direct relationship) and also very similar personality traits (and also "energetically"). Castaneda and his "nagual woman", Carol Tiggs, reported that in some of their "dreamings", they traveled to some other worlds where other people there recognized them as different persons. This sounds like "parallel universe" to me, but that does not explain the cases of >this universe< people being very similar for being on the "same strand".

Actually Castaneda and his group of people proclaimed (according to their "seeing") that reincarnation does not exist, and explain the phenomena of past-lives memories as memories of these other people (connected on the same "strand").

What does Michael has to comment on that? Aside from saying that Don Juan has his own version of reality, the universe as described by him (and Castaneda) does seem to extend beyond their confine (proximity) of their usual activities.

On a side note, I read in a book by Robert Monroe (Journey Out of the Body) that he "entered another person's body" on some of his out-of-body trips. Sometimes this takes place without him being prepared, sometimes there was a pull that he could not resist, and he did not feel like it was a case of "possession". Also, he reported that in one of these other "bodies" that he took over temporarily, one was in such a world that is definitely different than ours, with different technological developments. Superficially, this sound a bit similar to the "cyclicity" as described by Castaneda. But could it be that Monroe was simply occupying the body of his other fragments (of the same Essence)? In a parallel universe?

I apologize if other members find this off-topic. Or if I am asking really irrelevant questions (to personal development). Or if channeling for answers would take volumes and tome of scripts... :-p I am just curious, and since Michael channeling seem to be largely reliable, I am curious as to what they have to say about this...

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 12:36:12 -0500
Subject: April 25th reminder

For anyone who may have missed my previous post:

      We are hosting a gathering of Michael students and friends on April 25th in Fort Worth, Texas. I will be channeling a group session, and introducing some new information. This will be followed by a BBQ and hang time for folks to get to know eachother.
      If you'd like to join us, e-mail me for info.

Caris and Terry

old king who loves parties
and her ET husband, an old warrior who is a gallant host


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 13:54:34 EDT
Subject: Re: RE: Michael students/greater support circle

In a message dated 98-04-16 11:35:28 EDT, Jody writes:

 

Well, I know what position Dave occupies!

 

Oh, yes...the hunka-hunka burnin' love position, right?

 

By the way Dave, I thought your "rat's teeth through the heart" apparent
response to Barry's drawings of the castings was you expressing delight and
approval in your own idiom.

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

 

Actually, it was, but I thought it would be funny if it looked like a mistake. ;-p Oh, well......:-)

Dave


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 13:59:24 EDT
Subject: Book Promotion

Thank you for your book-promotion suggestions.

I did searches both in Alta Vista and Amazon, and didn't come up with 1001 Ways to Sell Your Book. I'll try a used book dealer.

I e-mailed Ken Dashow about the "Edge of Reality" radio show.

I signed up for Link Exchange, and now need to make a banner. I tried the two online banner-creation services, and didn't like the fonts or backgrounds. The software they offer is PC-only (I'm a Mac user). Any ideas? The banner can only be 7k. I may try "hiring" one of their free services, but it seems like it would be harder to get what I want that way.

All the best,
Shepherd


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 15:26:33 EDT
Subject: Finding Used books

I wrote a friend in the used book business about finding out-of-print Michael books and the one suggested to me. He replied:

 

I did a quick computer search for the books you are seeking and did not find
the 1001 Ways book.

I do not have any Michael books myself. There are a number of Michael books
in the databases; I believe I saw one copy of Michael's People and several
copies of More Messages. You can search 6 databases at one time by going to
www.mxbf.com. Set to Lists instead of Tables, is my advice. You will
probably find some duplication, as some dealers participate in more than one
database. Be sure to confirm availability by phone or e-mail before sending
any money; often the book has been sold but the database has not been updated.

Some of the databases allow you to enter a permanent "want". You have to do
this individually, not through the mxbf search engine. Interloc.com,
Bibliofind.com, and ABEbooks.com.

 

Best,
Shepherd


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 21:25:02 +0000
Subject: Re: Oooooops

 

Very macabre and spellbinding! This is the kind of creeping horror
that will curl your hair. It's a tale that goes straight through your heart like
rats' fangs. Definitely a sundown feast that won't end until the chill of dawn.

I'm looking forward to further entrys. Keep me posted. ;-)

Dave

 

Thank God for that -- I thought it was a comment on my web-page about the new casting model.

    B a r r y
_____________


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 21:38:02 +0000
Subject: Re: loadsa fragments

Kenneth wrote: "my entity has 2,185 fragments."

Yeh, but I bet my dad's bigger than your dad.

Thanks for your input though -- it's completely put a spanner in the works for my pretty model!

B a r r y
_________


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 18:19:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-15 of Michael Teachings List

In a message dated 98-04-16 11:47:48 EDT, Ken writes:

 

includes folks like Oscar Wilde, Johann Pestalozzi, Voltaire, and Beethoven.

 

That's an impressive list. I guess I must have been the one token peasant in the entity. Well, it's a job somebodys got to do. ;-p

Dave


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:24:55 +0200
Subject: Accuracy and Concordance Redivivus

Dave wrote in reply to a posting of mine:

 

>I would like to think that no soul age has a particular monopoly on a loving heart.

 

I agree completely, I was only emphasizing the Mature soul in my posting because Dick is a Mature soul and he was speaking of Old souls as role models to younger souls.

Dave further wrote:

 

>And I disagree that the Michael teachings are structured around
>relational issues. I've always thought that the core of the teachings
>revolved around the development of our own personal evolution?

 

Actually, what I wrote was:

 

>...so much of the [Michael] teaching is focused on relational issues.

 

I was thinking of things like Essence Twins, Cadence Mates and Task Companions etc... Karma, Aggreements, Quadrates, Support Circles... these elements of the teachings (and there are more) which have a lot to do with relationships... However, as I mentioned above, my focus on Mature souls was a rhetorical device addressing what Dick had said. In the main I agree with the points Dave made. (I'm not going to quote it all here, but it was a good letter)

Peace,

Katherine


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 20:40:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-15 of Michael Teachings List

Emily Baumbach describes us as Teddy Bears and Ewoks. But since there are a plethora of Scholars and Artisans, she is probably referring to the sprinkling of Sages thrown in for a little spicy seasoning! Hang tough Dave. You are not alone.

Jeanne a/k/a Ewok 1


Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 18:55:01 -0700
Subject: Re: loadsa fragments

    Hi all,
    One night I was at a non Michael channel's house for a group channeling. I forget who he was channeling. The discussion came up about the Michael concept of parallels and the channeler attempted to bring Michael in for a session. He did not succeed and he commented that "I don't have an agreement with Michael to channel them". Another thing he said was "they are a huge entity". I believe someone channeled that the Michael entity has grown since the original 1040 fragments or whatever they used to be. Has anyone heard anything similar?
    Mike H


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:26:25 EDT
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance Redivivus

"Redivivus." I have never seen that word before. But I just looked it up. I'll have to add it to my arsenal.

Dave :-)


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:30:05 EDT
Subject: Re: Re: loadsa fragments

In a message dated 4/17/98 1:52:32 AM, Mike H wrote:

 

the original 1040 fragments

 

Was it 1040, or is it just tax time?

John C


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 02:56:28 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

I'm just curious if any of the Michael scholars here have ever seen an overleaf reference for the Hungarian composer, Bela Bartok. Actually, I'd love to know what entity and cadre he resides in. I've always thought that even if it meant living a life as a termite, such an existence would be worth it if I could dine on the floorboards of a home that played Bartok's music. I'm particularly fond of his 6 string quartets, which I think offer some of the most profound, and awesome musical utterances ever composed for the genre of modern Western music. Dark, and foreboding, majestic and triumphant, Bartok seems to tap into the emotional and intellectual embodiment of the human spirit; musically peeling away layer after layer of the soul like a museum curator, his nimble fingers sometimes revealing painfully tragic elements, but always returning to embrace the indefatigable eternal beauty that represents our true essence.

Of course, let me guess, nobody here has ever heard of Bela Bartok? ;-p

Your loss...:-)

Dave


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 15:35:42 +0800
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

At 08:10 AM 4/17/98 -0000, Dave wrote:

 

>Of course, let me guess, nobody here has ever heard of Bela Bartok? ;-p
>
>Your loss...:-)
>
>Dave

 

Well, we are going to perform Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra next week. And it's a "killer" for most of us because of the difficult passages for each instrument. On the other hand, we have tried playing Mozart after R. Strauss's music, and most of us agree that the ultimate "killer" is still Mozart. :-) Sorry for the "musical interlude" here. :-)

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 04:03:46 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

You lucky dawg! ;-p I've only had the privilege of performing that piece once, and I wasn't playing principal. You're probably tackling one of the greatest works of the 20th century, so make us proud. ;-p Didn't you say you played violin? If I ever get out your way, we'll have to play through his trio piece called "Contrasts." Do you know it?

Anyhow, once again, any scholars or channels got any info on Bartok's overleaves and entity?

Dave


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 17:28:02 +0800
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

Yeah, it was tough. When our orchestra toured Europe in 1989, we "played through" (rather than perform) it almost everyday, under our ex-music director (who has a severe case of Self-Deprecation/Arrogance... and not-so-incidentally, quite incompetent as a conductor). Now, we are playing under the baton of Okko Kamu, a rather well-known conductor in Europe (Finnish in origin -- how do you spell that word? Not "finished", for sure. ;-p). Many of us are looking forward to really playing the music with him, despite the difficulty.

Regarding the trio, well, sorry I am not so familiar with many chamber music. That was probably one of the reasons I work in an orchestra -- I enjoy the rich and diverse tone colors an orchestra can make. And yes, we have performed Bartok's 2 violin concertos before, though I can't quite recall who were the soloists. I don't mind taking a look into that trio you mentioned. :-) If I can have access to it in Singapore... (violin music in Singapore is as hard to find as a crab basking in desert sun... most music stores in Singapore don't know what's "string quartet", or "trio")

Actually I don't mind finding out the overleaves of W.A. Mozart... if it is not already available...

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 06:40:51 EDT
Subject: Re: Regarding Don Juan and Castaneda

In a message dated 4/16/98 6:43:14 PM, J J Tan wrote:

 

I have yet to read a lot of information from Michael with regard to the teachings
from Don Juan and Castaneda.....I apologize if other members find this off-topic.

 

I find it most fascinating when other teachings and channeling are discussed... The parallels and discrepancies. Great food for thought.

Ow ow oski


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 07:06:18 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

In a message dated 4/17/98 7:12:11 AM, you wrote:

 

Of course, let me guess, nobody here has ever heard of Bela Bartok? ;-p

 

Also composed "Bluebeards Castle" and some delightful beginning piano pieces. I cannot think of the title now. But, played them in college. If you have minimal keyboard facility, you might want to check them out.
PJ


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 07:09:36 -0400
Subject: RE: Bela Bartok

Dear Dave and J.J.

I'll put Mr. Bartok's overleaves, and Mr. Mozart's, in the database a little later today.

--
Peace and Light to You and Yours,
Kenneth Broom, The Happy Scholar
   7th level Old Scholar/Server, Observation, Acceptance, Idealist,
   Emotional Part of Intellectual, Impatience/Stubbornness
aka I.A.M. Research,
Columbia, Maryland, USA


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 07:16:15 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

In a message dated 4/17/98 7:36:02 AM, J J Tan wrote:

 

Well, we are going to perform Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra next week.
And it's a "killer" for most of us because of the difficult passages for
each instrument. On the other hand, we have tried playing Mozart after R.
Strauss's music, and most of us agree that the ultimate "killer" is still
Mozart. :-) Sorry for the "musical interlude" here. :-)

Actually I don't mind finding out the overleaves of W.A. Mozart... if it is
not already available...

 

When I read the Bartok post, I was thinking "humm... Bartok... nope still would have to be Mozart for me". The simplicity is deceiving. Maybe it is different for those who have played him. I often find myself head to toes covered with goosebumps... now I would say that music was channeled, wouldn't you?
PJ


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 07:46:08 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

Synchronicity - just heard one of those string quartets on the radio a couple of days ago! Hmm, searching mushy brain, can't remember which one. But it was beautiful....

MysticGirl


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 08:34:50 -0400
Subject: Book Promotion

Shepherd,

Let us know if you get picked up for "Edge of Reality". I'll be listening.

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 08:43:04 -0400
Subject: Bartok

Dave,

Geez, any musician worth his/her salt knows who Bartok is. That's the guy who tripped us up in piano class because we couldn't GUESS what the next note was going to be. We actually had to READ the music.

By the way, I've overcome the disdain of my childhood, and now truly love his music.

I'm not a channel, so I can't give you any info that you are seeking, but I agree, it would have been fun to hang around while he was writing!!

Gina (Mnemosyne)


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 15:29:14 +0000
Subject: Teletubbies: the shocking truth

Hi gang,

Just received Shepherd's "Journey..." book.

Scholar heaven.

Anyway, let's get down to really serious matters. Someone (I forget who) recently announced the arrival of the Teletubbies on US TV. I'm a big Teletubbies fan, so if you want to know more read on... (Otterly, you'll love it I'm sure.)

Teletubbies, a daily show for pre-schoolers (they LOVE it), first started showing here (in the UK) about a year ago. Despite the fact that it's shown at 7:30 am. it became an instant cult hit with college students and other drug users, and caused no end of controversy in the national press. Basically, if you watch the Teletubbies you don't need psychedelics or rave culture - it's a mind-expanding trip on your own TV.

The teletubbies themselves are four 'aliens' who live in a saucer-shaped underground chamber. Whether they are infantile aliens without parents or aliens who are infant souls is one of the many mysteries of the show. They look like brightly-coloured babies and speak baby-talk and can barely string two words together. The four characters are:-

1. Tinky Winky
    sex: male
    colour: purple
    chief feature: carries a handbag! [US: purse]
    The actor who plays him is a stand-up comedian.

2. Dipsy
    sex: male
    colour: green
    chief feature: has a Yorkshire accent, but I think this will be altered for US broadcast.

3. Laa-Laa
    sex: female
    colour: yellow
    chief feature: loves to sing and show off (sage! sage!).
    Also has a big top hat made out of zebra fur.

4. Po
    sex: female
    colour: red
    chief feature: Chinese accent, and just incredibly cute

Oh, there's also a vacuum cleaner called "Noo Noo". And some sinister looking 'periscopes' which emerge out of the grass to tell the Teletubbies when it's "time for tubby bye-bye." And a silver windmill which sprays some kind of magic radiation and sends the 'tubbies into ecstasy as their heads light up. And (creepiest of all), the sun in the sky is an ethereal 6-month old Christ-child, blue-eyed and babbling. (Essence looks like this?).

The teletubbies live in what look like a beautifully-kept golf course. The sky is always blue, the grass is vivid green. The rabbits are HUGE (specially imported from New Zealand, I hear). It's actually recorded in a field outside Stratford-on-Avon, where old Shakespeare came from.

50% of each programme is the same every day -- the Christ-sun rises, the 'tubbies come out to play, then the windmill starts up, and one of the 'tubbies gets a video image of young kids in his/her stomach. We then cut to some 5-min video of kids playing at the beach or whatever. When it's over, the 'tubbies scream "Again! Again!" and the whole thing is repeated (that's the tedious bit, but the 2-yr olds seem to love it). Then it's back with the Teletubbies who are now up to no good, like making "tubby-tustard" or "tubby-toast", or falling over and giggling. Then the periscopes announce it's time for tubby bye-bye, and the sun sets.

It's gorgeous, haunting and totally mesmerizing.

The press controversy is about the "dumbing down" of TV, as though older kids and adults were "supposed" to watch Teletubbies as well as toddlers. There was also a silly outcry about drugs references which in fact sprang from a spoof article in one of the satire magazines (Private Eye). For instance, the tubby-toast they make is round with a smiley face, an obvious attempt to get pre-schoolers to take LSD.

More controversy occcurred when the BBC tried to ban all the emerging websites discussing the Teletubbies' sexual habits and so on. (Do a search -- they're great).

Personally, I suspect the Teletubbies are a reincarnation of the Banana Splits. But well worth watching in terms of validating the Michael teachings!

      B a r r y
______________________
Time for tubby bye-bye


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 98 08:45:40 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

 

>>Right. And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
>>carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
>>Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?
>
>Actually, Old Souls are terrific role models for that "don't give a
>f@*!" attitude toward life.
>
>Anne H

 

Old Soul
Positive Pole - Insight

Negative Pole - Apathy

Ted Fontaine


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 14:47:48 EDT
Subject: Re: Teletubbies: the shocking truth

Eh oh Barry!

Actually, it's Dipsy who has the top hat and Laa Laa has a giant ball. I'm a two week veteran of the 'tubbies now so I know these things!

They changed all the voiceovers to American accents, but the tubs still sound British as well as the kiddie clips. I can see why this is such a hit - I'm just as addicted as my 18 mo old. The pinwheel thing seems to disturb my daughter - she says 'uh-oh' with the tubbies but looks very worried. Same when they hide at the beginning of the show and say 'where have the Teletubbies gone?' - she looks at me with big wide eyes.

Okay, most of you think we're nuts now, but check it out. I'm serious.

Martha


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 15:00:21 EDT
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

In a message dated 98-04-17 11:48:56 EDT, Ted Fontaine writes:

 

Old Soul
Positive Pole - Insight

Negative Pole - Apathy

 

Damn, there's yet another negative pole that I'm in. I think it's time to wave that white flag. ;-p

Dave


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 15:05:36 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela & Wolfgang's Overleaves

In a message dated 98-04-17 13:28:30 EDT, Ken Broom writes:

 

Bela and Wolfgang are now part of the Overleaf Database.

 

Thanks, Ken. I just checked it out. ;-)
I would have to say that your designation of Mature 6 for Bartok sounds perfect.

Dave


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 16:04:34 EDT Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

In a message dated 98-04-17 07:17:14 EDT, PJ writes:

 

When I read the Bartok post, I was thinking "humm... Bartok... nope still
would have to be Mozart for me". The simplicity is deceiving. Maybe it is
different for those who have played him. I often find myself head to toes
covered with goosebumps... now I would say that music was channeled, wouldn't you?
PJ

 

I would think that most music making involves channeling in one form or another. Concerning Mozart, I'm a great champion of his music, especially his chamber literature for winds. His classic sense of structure and line has a marvelous sense of elegance and beauty that is largely unmatched by other composers. In regards to Bartok, he speaks in a completely different language, a unique marvel of simple melodies, compelling dissonances, rhythmic complexity and harmonic abstraction. Frankly, I love both composers, but Bartok brings the tears gushing down my face. Many people find him a rather tough-nut to crack, and are perplexed by his harmonic voice, but beneath the surface of his sometimes daunting exterior, lies some of the most passionate and structurally brilliant music ever written.

Dave :-)


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 16:32:14 EDT
Subject: Re: Bela Bartok

In a message dated 98-04-17 05:31:54 EDT, J J Tan writes:

 

I don't mind taking a look into that trio you mentioned. :-) If I can have access to it in
Singapore... (violin music in Singapore is as hard to find as a crab basking in desert sun...
most music stores in Singapore don't know what's "string quartet", or "trio")

 

"Contrasts" is challenging, but masterful. I think you'll enjoy it. :-)

Dave


Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 21:30:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

 

> I would add a couple of points to what Dave says in following up Katherine
> about soul ages and the Michael teachings, etc.
>
> 1) Michael said right at the beginning "This is a teaching for old souls" /.../
>
> Of course it's common for both mature and old souls to not be manifesting
> their true soul age and to have plenty of issues, drama, or interpersonal
> "growth" to work through on the way to being able to love easily and readily.

 

In a Michael Data Sheet that Emily Baumbach channeled for me, I was channeled by the Michaels as 5th Old, manifesting as 2nd-3rd young in order to synchronize with young souls in my milieu. Is that what you are referring to in this sentence? Was it from "MFM" or a later channeling? This was the first time I could remember hearing about "manifesting as a younger soul age." It makes sense, but it was all new to me.

Love, Laughter and Going Through Childhood AGAIN????? :-))

Jeanne


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 01:00:47 EDT
Subject: Re: Manifested soul age

Dear Jeanne -- It's mentioned various places, especially in Shepherd's books and he also channels it in his charts. Shepherd defines it (P. 214) as "the average level of our personality's perspective at a given time". There is lots of good material about manifested soul age in the following pages.

Michael said somewhere that a large majority (2/3?) of people were manifesting younger than their true soul age. This would include most children, so the fraction of adults wouldn't be so high. That's what I was referring to. It's pretty easy for an older soul in a younger soul environment to go along with the milieu and tend to forget his/her older perspective.

IMHO manifested soul age can be a confusing term because what you look like to someone else in the externalities (appearance, car, house, who you associate with, etc.) may look like one kind of manifested soul age; while "where you're at" internally in your personality may well be a different manifested soul age. This might account for it being hard for channels to pin down or agree on manifested soul age as easily as they might on one's true soul age. I would speculate that Emily's 2nd or 3rd Young for you might be the "external" version above, for I doubt if you were "internally" being that level that you would be hanging out here with the rest of us!

A person manifesting their true soul age is generally more likely to be contented with their lot in life than someone manifesting a lower level, for the latter probably has a vague feeling of spiritual discontent that they are not living up to their potential. I don't sense much of that in you from the sense of your writings.

All the best, Ed


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 02:09:03 EDT
Subject: true personality/post monad/channeling

Hi everyone,

      More often than not, it is not until after the completion of the 4th internal monad, which usually takes place anywhere from age 35-50, that the true personality, which includes the manifestation of the accurate soul age, happens. Until that time, many of us are caught in the familial expectations and icons, or that which has been learned by us, projected upon us, and essentially the 'false' personality. This is best described as the negative poles of the overleaves. It's not to say that wonderful things cant happen, including essence contact, before the mid-life transition, but after the process, the life task really gets into gear with the true personality in the drivers seat:)

      Just a brief note on the life of channels: My experience as a channel and also as a human bean is that it is much like any other profession where one-on-one contact is involved: it is important to be as clear as possible during the work, and this certainly is alot easier when your life is energetically clear as well. I think it is important for channels to work with the teachings as a Michael student as well, and not only as the translator from the causal plane. There is also the influence of the soul age, level, overleaves etc... not to mention chief features! Unfortunately channels dont have the 'how to do it' book either- we can only do our very best to work with the information and be as accurate as possible during the channeling.

      best regards, Victoria Marina (AMT Michael channel)


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 09:54:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Digest No. 1998-04-18 of Michael Teachings List

Hi Everyone,

My name is Lynne, I've been studying the Michael Teachings about 10 years--I started with those Chelsea Quinn Yarbro books and continued on and read others...I got a great chaneling from Aaron Christianson at the Michael Educational Foundation and I've been wanting to get back to more seriously keeping in touch with the teachings again.

I'm a Scholar with a Sage ET, married to a Artisan with a Scholar ET. It works:-)

About Old souls setting examples and young souls and the like: I read a wonderful piece in one of the books about how we need each soul age, and each soul age does something well. If the world was run by old souls, of course, we'd get little done. It's the energy of the Young souls that help run the world...etc.

I am an Old, teetering between 3rd and 4th level. I know apathy is a big problem for me.

Enjoying this so far, just wanted to say hi.

Lynne T


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:46:23 EDT
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

In a message dated 4/17/98 3:47:16 PM, Ted Fontaine wrote:

 

Old Soul
Positive Pole - Insight

Negative Pole - Apathy

 

So ?

John C


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 10:46:37 -0500
Subject: Old Fashioned Stew

In the threads of the last few weeks we've discussed the Soul Ages and who is attracted to the Michael Teachings. I think our E-Mail List is like a wonderful old fashioned stew where all available ingredients have been tossed in the pot and what is coming out is a really delicious, spicy dish. It amazes me that in this one location we have such an interesting, diverse group of people. So many roles, so many Mature and Old Souls and so many really fascinating points of view. I think regardless of abrading overleaves, we are all quite fortunate to have each other's input into the myriad of questions we seem to come up with. I can't speak for anyone but myself of course, but I am learning by leaps and bounds and I have enough food for thought for the next two or three years. Ed was right, this list is really boiling and I look forward to my continuing education.

Love, Laughter and Sampling the Dish :-))

Jeanne

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


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 23:40:25 +0800
Subject: Re: Manifested soul age

At 06:00 AM 4/18/98 -0000, Ed wrote:

 

>A person manifesting their true soul age is generally more likely to be
>contented with their lot in life than someone manifesting a lower level, for
>the latter probably has a vague feeling of spiritual discontent that they are
>not living up to their potential. I don't sense much of that in you from the
>sense of your writings.

 

I think I have that kind of "vague feeling" before. Can't say that I am completely without it now, though... :-)

Just my own validation...

Regards.

J J Tan


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:59:53 -0700
Subject: colors and roles

 

>     I have wondered if a less mathematical view of Michael Math might be to
>look at the structure of the fragments within entities as a grouping of
>colors where each color represents a role. Isn't that what the Michael Math
>is all about, the additional overleaf influence we get from the position we
>have in our entity? The colors would represent the different frequencies
>where the red end of the rainbow would relate to more grounded roles and the
>blue end would relate to the less grounded roles. Red is lower in frequency
>than the other colors and blue is the highest frequency as would be seen on
>an optical color chart.
>    Mike H

 

I've always tended to see the roles in terms of colors too and enjoy using the rainbow analogy, but I've also noticed that the colors don't seem to fall neatly along the pattern of a rainbow's colors which has confused attempts to say which color is which role. While reading Mike's comment I realized a possible why. As we look around the planet there are colors that are everywhere in nature, because those attributes are widely needed. In the same way there are large percentages of some of the roles like servers which are needed everywhere and smaller percentages of some roles that are needed, but not in the same concentrations. So for instance, servers might be green, like the grass, and growing things which we find all around us. Servers can do what they are here to do anywhere, with easy access to serving at any soul age so they correspond to the number one. Artisans have always felt like blue to me. (I know there are lots of different takes on which roles are which colors....) As two's, artisans can begin to create well even as baby souls, again creativity like serving being basic to the system. So now we have the colors of the grass and the sky. Warriors as threes stabilize the system and remind me of the ground, the bark of the tree, of the rocks and minerals. With the first three we have the basic colors in the world. Again though, it feels like that is only one facet of the truth of colors and vibrations in relation to the roles. Sages also feel blue to me. The 5's and 2's being a flip of each other like parts of the interweaving of a mobius strip. The way we fit together, the cardinality and ordinality turning back on themselves, also has this dimension, this sort of interweaving. Kings could be red like the element of fire or like the colors of the sun which they often feel reminiscent of in bearing and effect and priests might be violet, which shows up in nature through the inspiration in the color of flowers and such -- existing in nature though not as widely as colors like green, blues, browns. Scholars to some degree seem to take on the colors of what they study having a more innate neutrality.

I strongly agree that when we think of our vibrations being interpreted as color or tone, we are multidimensional in our influences and expression rather than just one note or one color. We're more like chords of tone and color forming palettes of energy to orchestrate in patterns of all sorts, some pleasing and harmonious, some discordant, often experimental, and sometimes -- forming symphonies.

Best to all, Brin


Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 16:32:11 EDT
Subject: Re: colors and roles

In a message dated 98-04-18 15:01:25 EDT, Brin writes:

 

Artisans have always felt like blue to me.

 

That's interesting, as I've always identified with the color blue. If blue is the color of Artisans, I could certainly get into that. Though, I've also read that color is associated with soul age. Michael Newton, in his book, "Journey of Souls," says that colors represent the stages in a soul's development. I don't have the book in front of me at the moment, but I believe he said that the beginning soul is completely white, and as it progresses, it shifts through shades of red, yellow, and finally ends up at blue. The advance soul is typically blue, or even purplish. He also mentions that seeing an entire community of these intermixed globs of light, is like staring at a celestial Christmas tree. Makes you wonder about the real origin of some of our favorite customs :-)

Dave


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 02:00:32 EDT
Subject: Mozart/Michael- check it out

Hi guys-

      Did you notice that the overleaves for WA Mozart are in the original MFM by Quinn Yarbro? (mature sages) He is slated to be a sage, which I would agree with, considering he was also channeled, in the original group, to be the past incarnation of Michael Jackson. I know, its sounds weird.... But think about it.
Victoria


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 03:56:21 EDT
Subject: Re: Oh, Ken...

Ken, I noticed you accidentally omitted the e-mail adresses of Mozart and Bartok. Could you fix that?

Thanks, bro...;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 04:39:52 EDT
Subject: Re: Mozart/Michael- check it out

In a message dated 98-04-19 02:02:04 EDT, Victoria writes:

 

Hi guys-

      Did you notice that the overleaves for WA Mozart are in the original
MFM by Quinn Yarbro? (mature sages) He is slated to be a sage, which I would
agree with, considering he was also channeled, in the original group, to be the
past incarnation of Michael Jackson. I know, its sounds weird.... But think about it.
Victoria

 

I did think about it for at least 5 agonizing minutes.

Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=Michael Jackson
Mozart=MichaelJackson Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=MichaelJackson
Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=MichaelJackson Mozart=Michael Jackson
Mozart=MichaelJackson Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=MichaelJackson
Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=Jerry Springer Mozart=Michael Jackson
Mozart=MichaelJackson Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=MichaelJackson
Mozart=Michael Jackson Mozart=MichaelJackson Mozart=Michael Jackson
Mozart=Michael "crotch grabbing-child molesting-Elephant Man grave robbing"
Jackson......Ugh...I just can't get into it. ;-p

Besides, I just don't see any similarities betwen the two. Sure, they were both child prodigies, but that's about as far as it goes. In terms of creativity, they're not in the SAME league. I can more easily accept (I think it was Joya Pope's?) reading that Mozart is now the humorist, Dave Barry. Although he's obviously using "humor" as his expressive vehicle, Mr. Barry has that same creative, and highly spontaneous spark that Mozart so effortlessly bestowed on all of his works. Plus, Mozart, in his letters, showed glimpses of the kind of gross, sophomoric humor that Barry would later use to win a Pulitzer prize with. Personally, I thought he deserved the Nobel, but who am I to say. ;-p

Even more humorous, Dave Barry went on tour with a rock band of celebrity authors, one of them being Stephen King. I hear they were terrible, but their sell-out audience didn't care one bit. Anyhow, just some additional trivia for ya.

Wait a minute! I just had a flash of inspiration. Slowly but surely...here it comes..Yes, that's it! Bela Bartok is a previous incarnation of Stephen King!!!!! ;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 04:45:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Manifested soul age

Ed wrote:

 

> Michael said somewhere that a large majority (2/3?) of people were manifesting
> younger than their true soul age. This would include most children, so the
> fraction of adults wouldn't be so high. That's what I was referring to. It's
> pretty easy for an older soul in a younger soul environment to go along with
> the milieu and tend to forget his/her older perspective.

 

This is quite interesting to me and when I first got the Data Sheet I read it and set it aside. I think there may be a "residue" around me from the last 10 years of my life. Have been very isolated from a spiritual standpoint for that period and used to occasionally tell my Son, "It's time to read "MFM" again. I need an attitude adjustment."

 

> IMHO manifested soul age can be a confusing term because what you look like to
> someone else in the externalities (appearance, car, house, who you associate
> with, etc.) may look like one kind of manifested soul age; while "where you're
> at" internally in your personality may well be a different manifested soul
> age. This might account for it being hard for channels to pin down or agree
> on manifested soul age as easily as they might on one's true soul age. I
> would speculate that Emily's 2nd or 3rd Young for you might be the "external"
> version above, for I doubt if you were "internally" being that level that you
> would be hanging out here with the rest of us!

 

I also wonder if being a Sage with a Priest ET who is on the Astral at this time might account for some of that sense a Channel might feel when doing my overleaves. One of the things I've felt "compelled" to do off and on througout my life, is take up "Causes". It's always felt uncomfortable when I've done it, but I can't seem to stop myself. Example: Women's Rights in the 60's & 70's; now pitting myself (along with multitudes of others) against the Navy in an effort to stop them from doing LFAS tests in the oceans. Would the extant Priest ET be contributing to that? I would have achieved more in actuality in this life if I'd had a Warrior ET. (LOL)

 

> A person manifesting their true soul age is generally more likely to be
> contented with their lot in life than someone manifesting a lower level, for
> the latter probably has a vague feeling of spiritual discontent that they are
> not living up to their potential. I don't sense much of that in you from the
> sense of your writings.

 

You do give me hope that I've gotten past the need to experience Youth again.
Sometimes I feel very "old", but I no longer feel lonely since I've found all of you out there in cyberspace.

Love and Laughter and Losing the Battle to Gravity :-))

Jeanne


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:00:40 EDT
Subject: Re: Mozart/Michael- check it out

In a message dated 4/19/98 8:40:50 AM, Dave wrote:

 

Besides, I just don't see any similarities betwen the two. Sure, they were
both child prodigies, but that's about as far as it goes. In terms of
creativity, they're not in the SAME league.

 

Yes, and much of the standard classical repertoire is the stuff Mozart wrote before the age 12. I doubt that 200 years from now that people will be studying and performing "One Bad Apple" with the same ardour.
PJ


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:36:23 -0700
Subject: Re: point of view and channeling (1998-15/1583)

Brin,

Thank you for a very thoughtful post. I think I am beginning to get the picture.

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


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:36:45 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance (1998-15/1586)

 

| Subject: Accuracy and Concordance
| Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:42:44 +0200
|
| In other contexts in my channeling Michael has cautioned against using
| channeled teachings as if they were a new bible. As tempting as it is
| to search for a source of certainty I don't think the Michael material
| can be used concordantly.

 

I am somewhat uncomfortable with what seems to be a drift of the teachings toward less and less specificity, from the early material (Yarbro) to what is appearing now (essentially do it yourself). Maybe some people like the flexibility of a moving target; of course it shouldn't be cast in stone, but I think it needs a certain degree of stability.

 

| > And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings,
| > carry on as they do, where does that leave us younger students?
| > Heck of a role model, wouldn't you say?
|
| I think you're misunderstanding the function of Soul Age. Old souls are
| working on different issues, or perceiving from a different perspective
| than, say, mature souls

 

Right...

 

| but this doesn't make them any more "advanced" spiritually nor closer to perceiving the Tao.

 

Are you saying all the experience gained through the younger ages is for naught? That one isn't closer to agape as one approaches cycling off?

 

| Mature souls may be much better role models and much more in touch with
| the loving heart of the Tao than old souls. And because issues of
| relationship are so accented in the mature cycle mature souls may be
| even more in tune with the meaning of the Michael teachings, since so
| much of the teaching is focused on relational issues.

 

Interesting point.

| So I'd suggest you may be the role model rather than needing to seek it in old souls.

 

Hmmm. Interesting thought.

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


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:37:04 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance (1998-15/1594)

 

| From: Anne H
| Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance
| Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 20:10:52 -0700
|
| > And if Old souls, especially channels of those teachings, carry on as
| > they do, where does that leave us younger students? Heck of a role
| > model, wouldn't you say?
|
| Actually, Old Souls are terrific role models for that "don't give a
| f@*!" attitude toward life.

 

Hmmm. :-/

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

 


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:37:22 -0700
Subject: Re: Mozart/Michael- check it out (1998-15/1654)

 

| From: Victoria
| Subject: Mozart/Michael- check it out
| Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 02:00:32 EDT
|
| Hi guys-
|
| Did you notice that the overleaves for WA Mozart are in the original MFM
| by Quinn Yarbro? (mature sages) He is slated to be a sage...

 

I don't understand "slated to be..." That sounds like a role change; is that what you mean?

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


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:37:40 -0700
Subject: Re: Manifested soul age (1998-15/1657)

 

| From: Jeanne
| Subject: Re: Manifested soul age
| Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 04:45:31 -0500
|
| I also wonder if being a Sage with a Priest ET who is on the Astral at
| this time might account for some of that sense a Channel might feel when
| doing my overleaves. One of the things I've felt "compelled" to do off
| and on througout my life, is take up "Causes". It's always felt
| uncomfortable when I've done it, but I can't seem to stop myself.
| Example: Women's Rights in the 60's & 70's; now pitting myself (along
| with multitudes of others) against the Navy in an effort to stop them
| from doing LFAS tests in the oceans. Would the extant Priest ET be contributing to that?

 

Undoubtedly, IMO.

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


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 98 09:46:20 -0700
Subject: Re: Re: loadsa fragments

 

>Hi all,
>    One night I was at a non Michael channel's house for a group channeling.
>I forget who he was channeling. The discussion came up about the Michael
>concept of parallels and the channeler attempted to bring Michael in for a
>session. He did not succeed and he commented that "I don't have an
>agreement with Michael to channel them". Another thing he said was "they
>are a huge entity". I believe someone channeled that the Michael entity has
>grown since the original 1040 fragments or whatever they used to be. Has
>anyone heard anything similar?
>    Mike H

 

Mike

That's 1050 fragments (according to some).

Nice round number since 1050/7 = 150 cadences

I have yet to speculate on Causal Merging but if anything comes through the pipeline I will let you know.

Ted


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 98 09:46:18 -0700
Subject: Re: Accuracy and Concordance

 

>In a message dated 4/17/98 3:47:16 PM, Ted wrote:
>
><< Old Soul
>Positive Pole - Insight
>
>Negative Pole - Apathy >>
>
>
>So ?

 

Sorry, I really just don't care....

Ted


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 14:24:46 EDT
Subject: Mozart

 

>Did you notice that the overleaves for WA Mozart are in the original MFM
>by Quinn Yarbro? (mature sages) He is slated to be a sage, which I would agree
>with, considering he was also channeled, in the original group, to be the past
>incarnation of Michael Jackson. I know, its sounds weird.... But think about
>it.
>Victoria

 

Victoria, do you happen to recall the channel and year of the Michael Jackson info--I couldn't find it? That seems plausible and probably right to me, at least in light of how Mozart was fictionally depicted (based on research) in the play and movie "Amadeus," although, to me, Michael Jackson looks like a stereotypical artisan.

I hate to add fuel to the fire on celebrity overleaves discrepancies, but this is from transcripts of the original group dated 5/22/74 (predating Yarbro), likely channeled by Sarah Chambers (two other channels sometimes participated):

 

Why do I have an affinity with Mozart?
YOU ADMIRED HIS PRECISION. THIS WAS A MIDCYCLE MATURE ARTISAN IN THE
INTELLECTUAL PART OF MOVING CENTER, YES, IN THE PASSION MODE, IN ARROGANCE AND
DOMINANCE, AN IDEALIST.

 

BTW, when Sarah channeled "midcycle," it simply meant 4th level. In Yarbro, it refers to a blending of 3rd and 4th.

Just to compare, on page 142 of Messages from Michael, under Sages, it says:

 

The first is a third-level mature sage in the observation mode with a goal
of dominance, a skeptic in the emotional part of intellectual center, with a
chief feature of impatience.

This first fragment was Wolfgang Theophillius (later Amadeus) Mozart.

 

All the best,
Shepherd


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 11:46:34 -0700
Subject: Sled Dogs in Alaska

 

> Yes, and much of the standard classical repertoire is the stuff Mozart
> wrote before the age 12. I doubt that 200 years from now that people
> will be studying and performing "One Bad Apple" with the same ardour.

 

One of the most stunning statements (to me anyway) anywhere in the Michael material is this one from MFM (I'll omit the irritating all-caps format):

"The third [fragment under discussion] is a final-level old priest in the caution mode with a goal of growth, a pragmatist in the intellectual part of moving center, with a chief feature of impatience. This fragment lives in Alaska, where she raises dogs. Her most noted past life was in her young cycle, when she was at her most zealous. At that time, she was Plato, the companion and record-keeper for Socrates."

To this day, my best Michael-aware friend and I use the term "sled dogs in Alaska" as a sort of shorthand to alert ourselves when we're making that easy mistake: trying to relate our judgment of someone's style, level of accomplishment, or apparent consciousness in this world to his or her soul age.

Here is one of the greatest minds that ever lived, the foundation-stone of much of western civilization, raising dogs in the wilds of the Great White North, and for all we know, doing it badly. Who'da thunk it? You can't tell by looking, and especially not by looking at what the media present us with.

Anne H


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 21:57:29 EDT
Subject: Re: Sled Dogs & Wolfie

Yes, I recall reading that passage, too. Though, I didn't find it surprising. It seems like a perfectly acceptable lifestyle for a final level old Priest. And I agree that we can't make determinations about a person based solely on their accomplishments in life, or the vehicle they choose to express themselves. But I'll make an exception regarding Mozart vs.Michael Jackson. Just kidding. ;-p Actually, although I find this thread pretty humorous, the comparison betwen the two fragments makes me want to scream. Yeeeeeeaaaaaoooooowwwwww!!!!!!!

On the other hand, ponder for a moment, if Michael Jackson had played the title character in the film "Amadeus," he would have been the FIRST actor to have portrayed himself, uh er, I mean, portrayed a person he used to be, or once was, or.....It's kind of confusing, isn't it?
Though, I just had a scary thought: Is Ben Kingsly the reincarnation of Gandhi???
;-p

Seriously, there's one point about this thread that shouldn't be forgotten: WE CAN'T PROVE ANY OF IT! :-)

When you have a situation that deals with historical figures being coupled with present-day personalities, there's just too much room for doubt. True, through repeated assertions from the group, a general consensus can be conveyed via collaborative statements like, "Think about it," "Yeah, that sounds right," or "Well, if the original channel said it it's gotta be right," and this can lead us to believe that there IS a connection between Mozart and Jackson. (Not to be confused with Andrew) But all that's really occuring from such a collective is the emergence of a kind of communal reinforcement. There's still no empirical data to warrant such a belief.

The second thing that can transpire is what many psychologists like to call "selective thinking." This involves a thought process which when faced with generalities and specific details, ignores the inaccuracies of the comparison, and accepts the few general claims or chance agreements as proof of accuracy. In this type of occurance, what it really boils down to is: what do we WANT to believe?

Finally, when you have a reincarnational comparison being drawn between two fragments, a situation develops where channels and students can wildly speculate, because there is no area where their assertions can be disputed by the FACTS. Think about it....

Anyhow, I thought I'd play the "Devil's advocate" for a moment.

Dave ;-) Who thinks Beethoven is really Pee Wee Herman


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 22:53:46 EDT
Subject: Re: Mozart

In a message dated 98-04-19 14:29:43 EDT, Shepherd writes:

 

at least in light of how Mozart was fictionally depicted (based on research) in the play and movie "Amadeus,"

 

I wouldn't place too much weight on Hollywood, Shepherd. Most Mozart scholars largely dispute most of the events in that movie. There even isn't any conclusive evidence that Mozart had frequent quarrels with Salieri. And it's now generally agreed that he died of renal failure, not the rumored poisoning that many romanced about concerning the events of his demise.

Demise? <---That sounded so "haughty." ;-p

Pardon me...(DAVE SLAMS HEAD AGAINST KEYBOARD SEVERAL TIMES...)

Ahhh....MUCH better! :-)

Anyway, I think the most positive aspect of the film is that it opened the composer's works to a much wider audience. I would even go as far to say that Mozart's works are more popular than Michael Jackson. Though, I shudder to think what kind of wealth Jackson might realize if he could collect on Mozart's royalties. ;-p

Dave


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 23:15:52 EDT
Subject: Mozart:slated to be

Hi Dick,

      I intended to say that Mozart was channeled, at least by one of the original channels, as a sage. Apparently, he was also channeled as an artisan. I would agree though that MJackson is 5th mature. Hes very eccentric!
Victoria


Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 23:22:48 EDT
Subject: regarding Mozart- again-and the Lizard Nation

Hi Shepherd

Well that's confusing! I do see Jackson as a sage, or at least 5th level mature.
I think it quite plausible that he and Mozart were one in the same, be it sage or artisan.

Some of the original material that has been very mixed up- in fact, there is even some of the channeled material from Soleil that was published as being from Michael, when in fact it wasnt. (Soleil, for those of you who don't know, was an alien fragment who was actually a Michael student, and Soleil was contacted during the original groups. He was an old soul, Saurian, and some of his words are in the original MFM) So we always have to remember to self validate the material.

hugs Victoria


Next Page | 1999/3   
.....................................................................................................................................

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