Sustained Reaction Archive - Page 12
Archive Message Index
Corraboration From: Valen Yzabal Date:
"The problem is that aside from the books and the assertions of Castaneda and his colleagues (and copycats) there is no independent account of DJ's existence (aside form the claims of people like Merilyn Tunneshende). So you're assuming what you're trying to establish--that the books describe real realms of awareness as taught by an old Indian sorcerer." --Lonnie
Some time ago someone mentioned a couple of people that supposedly could corraborate "don Genaro's" existence (it might be in the archives). I found the reply by the BF's puzzling, so I did some investigation of my own.
I got and read the following books:
"Star Warrior" by Bill Wahlberg
"Song of the Deer" by Lightning Strikes and Jan Orsi
"Lightningbolt" by Hyemeyohsts Storm
Now, it's interesting that this SwiftDeer fellow mentions that his "benefactor" was portrayed as "don Genaro" in the Castaneda saga. There's even a picture of him in "Star Warrior" (someone posted the picture here: http://www.goldenarrow.ch/Dongenna.gif).
It says there that Tom "Two Bears" Wilson (aka don Genaro) "crossed over" in 1980. This ceremony was attended by, among others, Rolling Thunder and Hyemeyohsts Storm (his book "Lightningbolt" is incredible, I highly recommend it).
In those aforementioned posts it was stated that two of the Chac Mools were rumored to have been involved with SwiftDeer. However, it seemed to me that the claims made by this person were being dismissed soley on the argument that he was benefiting from Castaneda's notoriety and therefore clung to the idea that Castaneda didn't write fiction. This would have been fine if they had bothered to talk to the guy (or Mr. Storm) personally, but it seemed they were making their judgements based on information gathered through the net.
I don't think it would be hard to arrange an interview with either of these men to discuss the topic of the existence of "don Juan." Further, the background of Tom Wilson could be investigated to see if he could have indeed been "don Genaro" and consequently have known a "don Juan." He seems to have been well known in the Navajo community and in the Native American Church (there was an article written about him in Pschology Today or something in 1974, or'73).
When I came across this information I thought it was a good lead for the SA investigators to do some "fieldwork." But after seeing how it was sumarily dismissed made me question the true motives for all that is being done at this site.
I think you're only reading part of the information here, probably because you've already got your conclusion in mind.
The don Genaro story is more complicated than that. For instance, somewhere here there's an account of Carlos going out with a sorcerer named Ramon or something like that, then coming back with a funny story he would later use over and over and attribute it to don Genaro.
The don Genaro claim is the most common one of all. It's all over the place. I believe I've heard at least 5 claims that someone is don genaro, or that someone was taught by don genaro, or that don genaro is still alive and is a particular person. That's why no one wants to investigate.
If you dig up good info, I'm sure Corey will consider using it here. There's still a desire to try to track down don Juan.
Valen Yzabal, formerly Badger I, and before that (based on the content and some stock phrases in posts before and after the name switch) PI hobbyist extraordinaire "Kevin Peterson" (who has yet to reply to the one e-mail message I sent him after he posted his addresses a few weeks ago) claimed:>>>> Some time ago someone mentioned a couple of people that supposedly could corraborate "don Genaro's" existence (it might be in the archives). I found the reply by the BF's puzzling, so I did some investigation of my own.<<<<
Who are you calling a "BF" bozo? When, at Castaneda's repeated insistence, I finally asked my mother about it, she claimed to have been orgasmic at my conception, for whatever in the hell that's worth to anybody.
>>>>I got and read the following books: "Star Warrior" by Bill Wahlberg "Song of the Deer" by Lightning Strikes and Jan Orsi "Lightningbolt" by Hyemeyohsts Storm <<<<
I have two of these three books, and I think they're execrable. I admire your high tolerance for self-serving, self-important and truly boring quasi Native American mumbo jumbo by people with ¼ to 1/8th Native American blood and a penchant (especially in the case of Mr. Storm) for constantly writing about themselves in the third person.
>>>>Now, it's interesting that this SwiftDeer fellow mentions that his "benefactor" was portrayed as "don Genaro" in the Castaneda saga. There's even a picture of him in "Star Warrior" (someone posted the picture here: http://www.goldenarrow.ch/Dongenna.gif).<<<<
If Castaneda is pretty dubious as a source regarding the characters that, from all logical indications to date, he invented, then why the hell should we give much credence to people who are trying to sell books (or fuck groupies or whatever, in the case of SwiftDeer, known in his younger days primarily for his "sexual healings" and other sex therapy with a lot of borrowed Native American lingo) by "borrowing" those characters for their own self-aggrandizing purposes? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but if you prefer huckster C or D to huckster A, I guess that's your right.
>>>It says there that Tom "Two Bears" Wilson (aka don Genaro) "crossed over" in 1980. This ceremony was attended by, among others, Rolling Thunder and Hyemeyohsts Storm (his book "Lightningbolt" is incredible, I highly recommend it).<<<<
"Incredibly" bad, sophomoric, pretentious and narcissistic, I'll give you that.
So CC claims don Genaro "crossed over" with don Juan in 1973, and the self-styled Hyemeyohsts Storm (whose father was German, and mother part Indian) claims that it was 1980. BFD.
>>>>In those aforementioned posts it was stated that two of the Chac Mools were rumored to have been involved with SwiftDeer. However, it seemed to me that the claims made by this person were being dismissed soley on the argument that he was benefiting from Castaneda's notoriety and therefore clung to the idea that Castaneda didn't write fiction. This would have been fine if they had bothered to talk to the guy (or Mr. Storm) personally, but it seemed they were making their judgements based on information gathered through the net. <<<<
"Clear" to you, presumption man. I've talked with Kylie's sister, with whom she used to be very close. She confirmed Kylie's prior involvement with SwiftDeer. So what's your point?
>>>>I don't think it would be hard to arrange an interview with either of these men to discuss the topic of the existence of "don Juan." Further, the background of Tom Wilson could be investigated to see if he could have indeed been "don Genaro" and consequently have known a "don Juan." He seems to have been well known in the Navajo community and in the Native American Church (there was an article written about him in Pschology Today or something in 1974, or'73).<<<<
It might not be hard to arrange such an interview, but for me it would be hard to endure. If you think they are valid sources for information, go right ahead. We will certainly be interested in whatever you turn up. Based on their prior work, however, they seem highly dubious sources to me.
>>>>When I came across this information I thought it was a good lead for the SA investigators to do some "fieldwork." But after seeing how it was sumarily dismissed made me question the true motives for all that is being done at this site.<<<<
The "SA investigators" here are primarily me. There are a lot of leads that I've developed, and that have come up as a result of this site, that seem worth investigating, and which are being followed up as time permits. Others may be interested in the "lead" that you are proposing, and I welcome their efforts if they are inspired to contact either of these guys. (I'd suggest starting with "Swift Deer," who seems to be in the worst health.) I don't have the time for this particular inquiry, however, because I have many other leads that have a much likelier payoff (i.e., people who knew Castaneda and the other self-styled "apprentices" of don Juan at various times of their lives, or who were part of his group at various times) than asking an inferior huckster about a superior huckster.
Thanks for sharing a little more insight into your makeup, however. You apparently condemn people who, at their own expense, on their own personal time, have generated a lot of new information and gone to the trouble of sharing it with the public. But if one or two of them suggest, for fairly rational reasons, that a lead that *you* think they should follow is not of much interest to them compared to other leads, then their overall motives should be questioned for failing to do the work you think they should. Seems like you're quite a "piece of work" yourself. ;-)
So Carlos Castaneda's work was fiction, you say, but what difference does it make? What difference does it make if there is a lineage with generations of teachings behind it, or if Carlos just made it all up?
It depends on what you want to do what difference it makes. Taking a trip to Mexico, for example, to look for the places where the reported events in the books took place might be fun even if you think the books are fiction. On the other hand, if you really want to find don Juan then the knowledge that the books are fiction might make a difference. Information according to Biologist and Anthropologist Gregory Bateson is "a difference that makes a difference." Thus a work of nonfiction is different from a work of fiction in its intention to portray events as they actually occurred. If the distinction makes no difference to you, then for your purposes it's not important and will therefore not enter into your plans and calculations.
"moi": I'm confused by the way you use the word "fiction", when before that you say that he took his ideas from different sources. In that case is it fiction?
Lonnie: Of course fiction can play with ideas, silly. That's part of its appeal. Or maybe writers of fiction from Shakespeare to Aurthur C. Clarke have been misled.
"moi" Or it is just the "testimony" that is fiction? But that seems not to be very important to you? Let me ask you this, have you had a lot of friends in your life that you could life with for twenty-five years? I know I have not. If the only purpose Castaneda, Donner-Grau and Taisha Abelar had was to make money and rip people off, what do you think kept them so close for so many years? Especially the first ten years, say? What was going on? Why didn't Carlos just claim to be a fiction writer working on a series of books about awareness?
Lonnie: Whatever you may think of the likelihood that 2 or more people would choose to live together for 25 years in the best of circumstances, the fact is that many people do so, probably for a range of reasons that would fill a small encyclopedia. There is also a wide range of possible motivations for publishing fiction as nonfiction. Many of them have been pretty thoroughly explored on these web pages.
"moi": I personally think a lot more people would have bought the books if they were put out as fiction. I think a lot of people were put off reading them because Castaneda had such a weird reputation. And then he could have done that American Express commercial and made a million bucks for a day of his time. He could have portrayed himself as a Hollywood writer, gone to all the party's, probably had a lot more women when he was young and perhaps even more able to enjoy them. I would like to challenge you to go over to Nagual.net or any place where you can get a "quotes generator" that puts out "Castaneda Quotes". You look at all of them and then really think about the way Castaneda lived his life, think about how many years those same women stuck around him, hell, practically lived with him, on and off, in a rather modest house for twenty-five years - Why didn't Carlos just get married and have children and have affairs? Why did the women keep coming back to him? Why did they put up with each other? It's too easy to say that they were being supported. Think about real life situations and egos at work. I believe they had to have a connection to a deeper purpose than just wanting to be able to have a roof over their heads and go shopping when they felt like it to continue to be with Carlos for that many years. Also, how do you resolve in your mind the idea that *if* Castaneda was stupid enough to leave this paper trail etc. and "get caught" in so many "contradictions", how can you also presume to think that he himself was able to "make up" or "pick out" the information that *if* Don Juan did exist, it took *generations* to develop? How could little Carlos have done this all by his flaky self? That seems more like the contradiction, to me.
It seems to me that you're basing your argument on conjectures about CC's motivation and on what seems likely to you based on your experience. I think those are reasonable places to start. Our experience and sense of things based on that experience is really what we have to work with. Let's say that Carlos and Crew did have some deeper purpose. I'm willing to operate on that assumption. There are more possibilities than one for what that purpose might have been. Armchair conjecture will only take one so far. Why not go through all the material on this site (and any other material you think is pertinent) with the idea that Carlos and the witches DID have some deeper purpose, but without any preconceived idea (especially without accepting what Carlos claimed) that purpose might have been and see how the evidence stacks up?
Lonnie, I have to say there is something rather delightful about this response of yours. I would be tempted to call you a very good stalker, but I have a feeling you might not take it in the exact way I mean - still, I see patience, cunning, ruthlessness and sweetness in your response. Just one thing about the whole fiction/non-fiction issue - I used the word "source" in a way that probably was not clear. I meant that if someone goes to interview certain sources or reads non-fiction and uses it as a source, then what they write about based on it would tend to *not* be fiction - if they use material that is "historically accurate" or otherwise has a history of it being "true fact" behind it. They might incorporate that "truth" within a framework of a fiction piece, though, I think is what you are rightly pointing out. But I am, as I said, happy that you at least seem to have understood where I was coming from, and I agree that it is "armchair" based...And while I have read quite a bit of the info available on this site already, I will take your advice and try to see if I can come up with some other "deeper purpose" that might possibly seem deep enough to have kept the group together for so very many years. Thanks for your thoughts, Lonnie. moi.
ive found that for my self, one of the more profound uses for seeing ,is to look into the eyes of another being,human or not,and feel the reallity of that being, to know fully that somewhere inside that little black dot,is an awareness much like my own,in that "it"to has feelings,fears,pains,the desire for happiness and meaning,and the undescribable aspects too. but also that "it"has its vast differences, whatever goes into making "it"it ,and "me" me. to be there looking into those eyes,with the awarenes that we are both indescribable entities,with the unique opportunity to share a common piece of space-time,and knowing that we are both beings that are going to die, is truly an occasion for "looking,looking breathlessly". try looking into your own eyes into a mirror,and doing your best to remove all of your fantasies about yourself,and bring on the realization that you are a being that is going to die. humble yourself before yourself. it is sobering. it is scary. it is as real as it gets. look and see as far back into that little black dot as you can. i have found that for myself, alittle smoke takes it to new levels of soberness until you have the feeling down pretty good. you have to spend some time with it with no other concernes on your mind,no hurries, no other goals other than becoming more of the fact that you exist. what will you do with that fact once you know it? choose wisely. daniel
Corey. What happened to Native-view/Euro-christian view=Berdache? Did you miss it? It is not in the archives. If you read it, did you think it was invalid? If you did, I suppose it would be easier to dismiss the charge of unconscious genocide. Do you think If I looked into your eyes, that I could tell by them, whether you indulged in unconscious genocide? Don't answer. I thought the question was pretty humorous and ironic when it was posed to me. I am going through all the essays, and the book "Seeing Castaneda".
Nyai asks: >>>Corey. What happened to Native-view/Euro-christian view=Berdache? Did you miss it? It is not in the archives. If you read it, did you think it was invalid? If you did, I suppose it would be easier to dismiss the charge of unconscious genocide. Do you think If I looked into your eyes, that I could tell by them, whether you indulged in unconscious genocide? Don't answer. I thought the question was pretty humorous and ironic when it was posed to me.<<<<
Our personal senses of humor continue to diverge greatly.
What I archived from this page for the past few weeks amounted to over 200 of the more than 500 posts. Doing this excerpting and reformatting is a mind-numbingly tedious task, but since the brains at Microsoft give us FrontPage 2000 owners the option of creating Discusions pages without any automatic means of cleaning up and archiving that material, I spend hours listening to loud music and cursing Bill Gates while I archive this stuff manually. I tried to save the stuff that seemed relevant to the general topic of discussion, and of interest to more than one person. I don't remember that particular post well enough to tell you why I didn't include it in the archives, but I'm sure I didn't think it was "invalid."
As to your "joke" about "unconscious genocide," I could start by noting that the phrase is an oxymoron, because the definition of genocide requires conscious intent: "the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national or racial group." I might also share the fact that you and I are both descendants of cultures that have experienced genocide--in my case the Celts, whose language and spiritual practices were systematically stamped out by the English when they took over the home territiories of my forbears (my grandparents came to the U.S. this century from Ireland and Cornwall). But what I mainly feel like telling you is that if you want to continually throw about a potent term like "genocide" in reference to petty things, like the selection of individual discussions page posts for archiving, then you will simply dilute the real meaning of such horrors beyond recognition. Is that really what you want to be doing?
P.S.: Here's a direct quote for you from Castaneda at the August 1995 intensive workshop, on August 20, 1995: "I refrain from speaking of the Catholic Church, but that's easier than speaking of the American Indians, a very touchy subject these days. But they deforested plains and burned U.S. land. There's nothing sacred, nothing spiritual. Ritual. We fall prey to all those things."
All nation's cultures and all paths have been subject to genocide at some point and at some level. If I hadn't written that before, it is because I forgot to put it in. My intentions for asking about the Berdache post are for the information that was in it. It is not my information, it is information that has relevance to more than one subject, and on reading the quote that Castaneda said that Natives had burned land, and deforested plains, if I understood it correctly, it has to do with him. I should rephrase 'unconscious genocide' to 'the unconscious participitation of some with the genocide that others engage in. But its a long phrase, and it is nit-picking to say 'unconscious genocide' is an oxymoron. I stated in a post responding to Linda that atleast Corey appears to comprehend my posts and doesn't twist around my meanings. But maybe I was wrong. (But what I mainly feel like telling you is that if you want to continually throw about a potent term like "genocide" in reference to petty things, like the selection of individual discussions page posts for archiving, then you simply dilute the real meaning of such horrors beyond recognition. Is that really what you want to be doing?" As well as what Corey thought was my "Joke" was something Linda wrote to me, saying if I met her and looked in her eyes, I would be able to tell that she wasn't engaged in genocide, conscious or unconscious. I thought the idea was funny and ironic. My response is if I am going to be continually misinterpreted and my intentions made to look egotistical and nefarious, than I just won't post anymore. I realized when reading Corey's "RE;DANIEL L. post, that I've been insensitive to what some people here are going through. I myself have not experienced that. It may be hard to believe for people here, as I have noticed, but some people can check out a path objectively without being submerged in its leaders influence or emotional traps. I have some knowledge of many paths. I like to learn about different techniques and philosophies. Even if the person made it all up, every path is made up by someone at some point. Everything is a belief based on experience, soem opt to believe other's experiences rather than have their own. I was going to re-post the berdache post information, but even if Corey didn't think it invalid, it couldn't have made an impression, although it should have since he asked me about it, as he said he couldn't remember it well enough to tell. My basic point there was that people in society, and even in the gay community are going around with the term "Berdache" thinking that natives used that term refering to various sexual preferences and outlooks that were accepted in the native society. They were accepted, but the term Berdache was of european origin. Used by european soldiers to refer to natives that they encountered, who the soldiers suspected were gay. It is an older term on the level of the term 'fag'. Yet this is the term Corey used describing a particular part of native culture. This is my point for evidence of unconscious participitation of misconceptions. (But they deforested plains and burned U.S land) That is a misconception that helps genocide. I don't know if it was deliberate or not. (There's nothing sacred, nothing spiritual. Ritual. We fall prey to all those things.) That is a subjective opinion, in which some natives would agree with. Like Gerald Vizenor, a member of the chippewa tribe. I feel that everything is sacred, and nothing is sacred. Even though we don't speak on the phone or whatever. I feel our posts shoudn't be taken out of context of what is written, If we don't agree on something. The simple expedient would be to ask for a meaning, rather than offer the most decadent meaning one can think of.
With affection and comradeship, Nyai
Nyai recently concluded: >>>>I feel our posts shoudn't be taken out of context of what is written, If we don't agree on something. The simple expedient would be to ask for a meaning, rather than offer the most decadent meaning one can think of.<<<<
It's fascinating to me that you should be so thin-skinned in this respect, since you have repeatedly distorted the meaning of other's responses to you in the last several weeks so as to demonize them as "genocidal" and/or destructive to Native Americans. If that's not trying to come up with the most "decadent" reading possible, I don't know what is. That was the reason I addressed you the way I did in my prior post. I'm glad I got your attention for what you've been doing, albeit you've projected that behavior onto others.
According to cognitive dissonance theory, there is a tendency for individuals to seek consistency among their cognitions (i.e., beliefs, opinions). When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors (dissonance), something must change to eliminate the dissonance. In the case of a discrepancy between attitudes and behavior, it is most likely that the attitude will change to accommodate the behavior.
Two factors affect the strength of the dissonance: the number of dissonant beliefs, and the importance attached to each belief. There are three ways to eliminate dissonance: (1) reduce the importance of the dissonant beliefs, (2) add more consonant beliefs that outweigh the dissonant beliefs, or (3) change the dissonant beliefs so that they are no longer inconsistent.
Dissonance occurs most often in situations where an individual must choose between two incompatible beliefs or actions. The greatest dissonance is created when the two alternatives are equally attractive. Furthermore, attitude change is more likely in the direction of less incentive since this results in lower dissonance. In this respect, dissonance theory is contradictory to most behavioral theories which would predict greater attitude change with increased incentive (i.e., reinforcement).
Dissonance theory applies to all situations involving attitude formation and change. It is especially relevant to decision-making and problem-solving.
Consider someone who buys an expensive car but discovers that it is not comfortable on long drives. Dissonance exists between their beliefs that they have bought a good car and that a good car should be comfortable. Dissonance could be eliminated by deciding that it does not matter since the car is mainly used for short trips (reducing the importance of the dissonant belief) or focusing on the cars strengths such as safety, appearance, handling (thereby adding more consonant beliefs). The dissonance could also be eliminated by getting rid of the car, but this behavior is a lot harder to achieve than changing beliefs.
1. Dissonance results when an individual must choose between attitudes and behaviors that are contradictory.
2. Dissonance can be eliminated by reducing the importance of the conflicting beliefs, acquiring new beliefs that change the balance, or removing the conflicting attitude or behavior.
Individuals experiencing cognitive dissonance deal with it in two ways:
1. Increase the number of consistent cognitions - In order to assimilate inconsistent information to their worldview, individuals experiencing dissonance will increase then number of consistent cognitions, thereby abating the dissonance. This often involves rationalizing...i.e. myopic focus on facts, logic, or experience which reinforces an existing worldview. In most instances, the offending inconsistent cognitions are dismissed altogether as a result of this myopic focus on extant consistent cognitions. This is called "rationalizing" because the individual seeks out semi-logical conclusions using extant cognitions and newly created consistent cognitions in order to find a way to invalidate the inconsistent cognitions. The reader must understand that we are not talking about
2. Decrease the number of inconsistent cognitions - Individuals change their attitudes to compensate for inconsistent cognitions. Instead of rationalizing, the individual excises the inconsistent cognitions from their worldview. This is more consistent with mode 1 thinking. When presented with logic or facts inconsistent with their worldview,
i must thank this site for giving me a much more observant way of reading written material. I recently ordered and have read several of tom brown's books. good stuff. all fine and dandy. and all i can say is i no longer read and IMMEDIATELY believe anything. it's a wonderful raise of awareness. now i just read and enjoy. whereas before i would become instant "believer" and messiah follower - now i just read - and even better - some part of me can ferret out the bullshit. it's so cool! anyone else have similar reactions? thanks. it's so liberating! most recently i saw through when carlos attributed to don juan the notion of how carlos would do anything to help break another's chains... it didn't ring true then - and now i see it as it truly is - as a clever device to substantiate the fiction of his liberating the blue scout - and creating his/her backstory as it were.
Yeh, ok. So he lied, like all sorcerers, even imperfect ones, he lied, cajoled, entertained, somewhat impeccably, somewhat crudely, he fascinated us with his stories and grandiose themes. He took some in and 'mistreated them'; although only a few seem to be complaining loudly now. He extended his reach to many and still... lied. He died, un-impeccably, as if there is an un-impeccable way to die. There's just death, let's not get so hung up about it. He taught us a lot about it, maybe from other sources. Cleargreen is not so clear. They lied also, like faithful practitioners of an imperfect art. They're not nearly so good at it and it shows. Not talking about the death of the man who couldn't stop talking about it was not very smart nor proper.
Putting all the weird and histrionic behavior behind; what's up...
A. There's a lot of consistency, in a certain philosophical way, throughout the series. B. There's incredible impact in the narration. C. There's an incredible reach to a subsection of the population absolutely across cultures. D. There's a definite impact of the passes from all sorts of people from many backgrounds. E. There's no obvious inconsistency, with the culture and environment of the series. F. There's a possibility that there was a measure of truth to the series, the incidents, even to 'some' of the characters. There's nothing, yet, on s.a. that specifically discredits the principle characters, other than by extrapolating on the reasons of current or recent lies. G. There may be a probability that there was license to exaggerate given at some point during the narration by the author. We'll have trouble uncovering the threads of that.
Question: Can you discount powerful narrative given in an original way, in a novel setting? I'm not saying it's great literature, it's not. It isn't simple or copy-cat lies either. What does that make him? What's your call?
It's weird, perhaps its reach is less awesome than we first imagine, and perhaps there are shortcomings to his interpretations, but can you discount the possibility of authenticity to his experiences?
A good post!
It's like, as if, I truly admired the music of J.S. Bach and was able to be transported by the sound of it, to some other dimensions of consciousness. If that were so. Now, I find out that Bach was a mean jerk, someone that abused his wife and children and also a miser. What does that do to the music? It does change my attitude in some way, forever. It makes it more difficult to appreciate the music with this image of the man. And I certainly would not join the Bach fan club. I need to move my mental processes to 'view' the music in a more abstract way, separate from the man, to have anything left.
What do we have left?
I go back to Dan's comparison of the cc's work to receiving the Publisher's check in the mail for a $1,000,000. It looks wonderful but the check is not cashable. The document I received first heralds me as the 'Prize Winner'. Later I find out I am not a Prize Winner. But that isn't the end of it. For this treasured document is loaded with sub text and clues. Sent to 'me' personally, this letter informs the 'Prize Winner' in the most succint way, what life is.
Erik Grafstrom writes:
"It's like, as if, I truly admired the music of J.S. Bach and was able to be transported by the sound of it, to some other dimensions of consciousness. If that were so. Now, I find out that Bach was a mean jerk, someone that abused his wife and children and also a miser. What does that do to the music? It does change my attitude in some way, forever. It makes it more difficult to appreciate the music with this image of the man. And I certainly would not join the Bach fan club. I need to move my mental processes to 'view' the music in a more abstract way, separate from the man, to have anything left. "
Funny thing. There was a Jazz trumpet player and singer named Chet Baker who died about ten years ago. His playing was simple elegance. Sometimes he'd play so far behind the beat that you were almost certain he was lost. It was cool because it always turned out that he knew right where he was and where he was going, and when he pulled it off it felt like the top of your head would come off.
On the other hand, Baker was a drug addict and, by all accounts, a total and complete fucker. He'd screw over his mother for a fix. In fact, his career was set back for a while in the sixties because someone who had just had enough of him knocked out his front teeth. Since all his money at the time went into drug purchases, it was a while before he could afford to go to the dentist. It's really hard to play the trumpet with no front teeth.
I still listen to and enjoy his music, but if he was teaching a class in human relations, I'd definitely stay away.
I think the point is, is that you can easily believe anything at all, so what is there to believe? Don Juan is definitly real. If realy has existed on this earth or not, he has effected me. I have had my paranoid stages, and believe me, it's just as easy to know I have a penis as it is to know that somone is watching you, or plotting to kill you. How do you think crazy people end up crazy? they simply have relaxed their ideas about how this world works, or lived a fucked up life to begin with, and never got a hang of the peramiters. The point is that every belief is just an assumption, even if they are paralell with what happens to us. That's my take.
At least a couple of people were kicked off of the Cleargreen-controlled Tigre list today for having independent thoughts. Cleargreen apparently could no longer tolerate its hard core of workshop payees being subjected to opinions other than Cleargreen's. (I guess that old concept of "fluidity" died along with the Nagual.)
Here's the policy the moderator "reissued" today after offending parties were knocked off. What's new is that there used to be only two points that were used to kick people like myself off of Tigre (after I was thrown off, the new "rule" the anonymous moderator set forth was that people not practicing Tensegrity or who crossposted the posts of others to other lists were banned). Now the Cleargreener moderator has invoked the *entire mission statement* of the list as a basis for eliminating non-conforming thought.
So now people whose posts are not "focused on the wonder, on the mystery of awareness," are subject to removal. I kid you not. Looks to me like the "social order" ain't got no monopology on "stupidity and egomania."
From: Tmoderator <email@example.com Subject: Repost: Charter Update
During the past few days, several members have expressed their concern with the current direction of events at Tigre. They suggested enforcing the guidelines, as well as sending reminders to the list.
In accordance with these members' suggestions, here is the Tigre Charter Update, originally sent to the list on July 12, 1999:
*** Dear Tigre and Tango:
The intent behind the creation of the Tigre Mailing List was to provide practitioners with a space in which they could have access to high-quality intersubjectivity. As such, it involves a commitment to keep this forum non-moderated; this is the only way in which subscribers would have enough freedom to share their experiences or points of view with other practitioners.
This commitment still stands and will stand in the future for Tigre. Each one of us (and by 'us' I mean all those who have been lucky enough to find a path with heart, from the most inexperienced novice to the most experienced practitioner) has had experiences related, one way or another, to the presence of what sorcerers call Intent. These experiences encompass a wide range of possibilities. Perhaps a movie provided us with a jolt from the abstract;or a book, a joke, a thought. We can share all that and thus help in creating a new type of intersubjectivity. This exchange can be done under the form of story-telling, reccomendations, original essays, literary excerpts, or in whichever way subscribers prefer to do it.
Of course, there can not be a new intersubjectivity if we insist on using our old syntax, the syntax of the social order. Any exchange at Tigre must be focused on the wonder, on the mystery of awareness. And this focus should be kept at all costs. A prisoner escaping from hell does not take hell with him on his back. Such focus, obviously, automatically excludes personal taxonomy. The syntax of the social order pushes us to create and sustain such taxonomy. We are constantly on the lookout for personal data on our fellow men, gathering information about them and comparing it to the structures of our internal dialogue, which defines the self. Finally, when this information is collected, we proceed to judge all those around us.
As human beings, we are still lured by the doings of the old syntax. However, as practitioners, we can not allow its momentum to grow. Gathering personal information about our fellow practitioners in order to judge them in public is not an option or a topic of discussion within this new intersubjectivity. Our fellow practitioners are all those who practice Tensegrity, even if some of them know only a few passes. This, of course, includes Carlos Castaneda, his cohorts, and all the people at Cleargreen.
Again, the exchange of information at Tigre should be focused on the wonder, on the mystery of awareness. If this purpose is not fullfilled, the moderator reserves the right to remove subscribers from the list. Another, more drastic option merely implies deleting the list if the scales are tipped towards the stupidity and egomania which characterize the syntax of the social order. Tigre is an experiment in this regard; an experiment to see if we, as practitioners, are capable of enough self-control to exchange high-quality intersubjectivity.
Let's intend this forward!
With affection to all, Tmoderator.
Thank you, Tmoderator.
At least a couple of people were kicked off of the Cleargreen-controlled Tigre list today for having independent thoughts. Cleargreen apparently could no longer tolerate its hard core of workshop payees being subjected to opinions other than Cleargreen's. (I guess that old concept of "fluidity" died along with the Nagual.)
While no one has any doubt about the fascist purge at tigre, could you please state how many members of the SA private members mailing list espouse views which are opposed to the party's platform? May I apply for membership to SA?
Theophilos asked: >>>>While no one has any doubt about the fascist purge at tigre, could you please state how many members of the SA private members mailing list espouse views which are opposed to the party's platform? May I apply for membership to SA?<<<<
I haven't counted exactly, and I gather that some people's views change on a periodic basis, but it is very safe to say that there is a range of opinions on SA. SA does not have a "party platform," and it has taken a long time for something of a consensus to form on some topics (I was blasted to hell by everyone back in February when I started sharing some of what I knew about CC & Co.), but a mailing list where everyone has the same point of view would be pretty boring and pointless (as those left on Tango and Tigre will soon find out). If you sincerely were interested in joining the SA list, I would ask you my couple of standard questions by private correspondence. And, unlike Tango and Tigre (which were theoretically open to everyone who had been to a Tensegrity workshop), I have been known to reject people for membership on SA if they can't communicate well in English (which, absent functioning Babelfish, is the current language of the list). At any rate, if you are really interested in joining in this discussion and are not Nyei or one of the other self-styled apprentices of Castaneda, feel free to send me a private message that I can respond to privately.
Dan, the only one that sounds "cultish" in this exchange, to me, is *you*. You are saying that anyone who uses the term "path with heart", no matter what the context, is part of a cult? Did you read the rest of it? Are you a part of that list so that you could tell us what the messages were on the list that caused the moderator to make the statement made? The statement, to *me*, seems to be saying that it does NOT WANT the list to deteriorate into yet another avenue to explore ways to build personal ego or discuss personal history, there seem to be plenty of places to go if you want to do that. If you at SA did NOT have your own personal SA list, then maybe you would have some kind of point about the general "cultishness" that could be said to be manifest in the creation of a list that picks and chooses who can and cannot contribute and what is appropriate and not appropriate for posting. But Corey just wrote recently how you at SA want a place where you can feel comfortable and "trust" the people you are going to be "sharing" with, so what if the people at TIGRE want there space to be focused on "the awe in awareness" or whatever the exact description was. You, on the other hand, begin to sound like YOU are part of "The Cult of the Disappointed" when you continue to think you see "cult behavior" popping up everywhere you look.
The statement, to *me*, seems to be saying that it does NOT WANT the list to deteriorate into yet another avenue to explore ways to build personal ego or discuss personal history, there seem to be plenty of places to go if you want to do that.
One of the wonders of awareness is that anyone who is aware can observe and learn from experience. My impression is that the TModerator would like to exclude certain areas of awareness by making them off limits because they bring up questions about some of the basic assumptions about the "path with heart" as it is currently being marketed.
If you at SA did NOT have your own personal SA list, then maybe you would have some kind of point about the general "cultishness" that could be said to be manifest in the creation of a list that picks and chooses who can and cannot contribute and what is appropriate and not appropriate for posting. But Corey just wrote recently how you at SA want a place where you can feel comfortable and "trust" the people you are going to be "sharing" with, so what if the people at TIGRE want there space to be focused on "the awe in awareness" or whatever the exact description was. You, on the other hand, begin to sound like YOU are part of "The Cult of the Disappointed" when you continue to think you see "cult behavior" popping up everywhere you look.
There's nothing special about the SA list. Anyone who wants can go to onelist.com and start their own special list. Many members of the SA list were fairly close to the action for a number of years. One popular theory that has been put forth to explain the existence of the SA list is that it was founded by disgruntled members of the Sunday classes because they weren't, ultimately, allowed into the "inner circle".
That's one theory. On the other hand, whether or not you consider Carlos & Cleargreen Inc. to be a cult, it is increasingly apparent that there was more going on behind the scenes than is being admitted and probably much less going on in others than is being claimed.
It seems very unlikely, in other words, that anyone was navigating very far outside of west LA except to workshops via TWA.
Lonnie "take me shopping in the second attention, baby"
It would be really nice now if my cut and paste worked, but it doesn't. Funny, this feels like it has a lot to do with the post about "the intent of words" further up a ways.
After reading what you said about the intent of the TIGRE list, I went back and re-read what the Tmoderator had written. The first time I read it, it seemed pretty clear, at least to *me* again, my take was that the moderator wanted the list to focus on the *awe* in our daily awareness. Now, it may be an awesome world, by and large, on the whole...whatever...but while I think that having a particularly great burger or something may just make *someone's* day, it is not *necessarily* a real eye-opener, or something that might help someone else on their way to "a higher awareness"...I mean, I admit, depending on the way it was written about, there is always the possiblility that it could. Anyway, the stress seemed to be on the idea that personal history and stuff written to inflate ones own ego, or stuff written so we can just "pigeonhole" someone...that was not where the list itself wanted the list to go -- it WAS mentioned that contributers to the list had WRITTEN to the moderator, sort of "complaining" or noting that the list seemed to be headed in such and such direction, right? I mean, I am not on the list, so I don't know, but I asked Dan if he was or if he knew for sure what posts had prompted this. So when I reread the moderator thing, whereas the first time, I had just noticed that it said that the list was for practitioners of tensegrity, and when it said "including Carlos Castaneda and his cohorts", I just thought, yeah, okay, they practice tensegrity...but after you made your statements, I saw that in another light. I think I'm not explaining this well....what I mean to say is, at first I *really* saw what the moderator *said* to be a simple reflection of the intent to get the list moving back toward a direction of posting about *awe* or maybe special experiences, maybe not exactly important enough to be included in a warriors book of important events, but along those lines somewhat, and to stop any postings about personal history type stuff. I just glanced over that part about Carlos and his cohorts being practitioners of tensegrity, and, as such, of course, also part of the group, like I said. But I think you are trying to say that what the moderator really wanted was to stop postings about the personal history OF CARLOS CASTANEDA and his cohorts, which is why the moderator specifically mentioned them at that point - as a reminder that they ARE part of the group, and so posting about their personal history should not be included in posts to THAT LIST. Now, if the intent is to stop postings about personal history and focus on awe in awareness, then what is wrong with reminding people that Carlos and co. ARE also people with personal history, and their personal history is no exception to the rules of that group? I don't know, then you say there is nothing special about the SA group?? You say anyone can start a list. But I was only saying that I know that Dan thinks of himself as now *OUT* of a cult, he certainly doesn't say that he sees himself as part of a Cult of SA people, and SA has a private list, so why should TIGRE's *private list* be seen as cultish, when SA's list is not??
I have to start leaving more white space. Okay, the last thing is you say you don't think Castaneda navigated much further then somewhere in LA - and something about shopping in the second attention. Carlos Castaneda, for the MOST part of his life, did NOT give big seminars or come out in public to collect admiration. It's true I don't know what he was doing for the first sixty years of his life, but I *think* he spent a lot of time around people who took this awareness shit pretty seriously, even if they didn't get all that far in your extimation. I have to go now, anyway, I'll write my thoughts about "shopping in the second attention" later. d.
I guess my main point is that on Tigre honest questions that aren't concerned exclusively with questions of personal history or attempts at self-aggrandizement (at least as I read them), questions that other faithful and committed tensegrity practitioners are willing to tackle are being defined as petty questions about personal history and egotistical attempts at self-promotion.
But, hey, it's their list.
And while it's true that CC and the Witches qualify as tensegrity practitioners, it's not true that they are just any tensegrity practitioners. They are the originators. They are the ones making the claims about the meaning and effects of tensegrity. They are the one's whose veracity has been called into question.
For example, if it became widely known that Morihei Ueshiba, the founder of Aikido in its modern form, had gotten slapped around by some welter-weight amateur boxer, it would put a serious damper on people's ability to believe in Aikido as a valid martial art or way.
"And while it's true that CC and the Witches qualify as tensegrity practitioners, it's not true that they are just any tensegrity practitioners. They are the originators. They are the ones making the claims about the meaning and effects of tensegrity. They are the one's whose veracity has been called into question." --Lonnie
How does the "veracity" of Castaneda & the "witches" prove or refute "the meaning and effect of tensegrity?"
If the stuff "works" it works. If it doesn't, then that's that. But whether it does or not is contingent on your own practice and experience, not on "stories" (whether fabricated or true).
If it was proven, beyond reasonable doubt, that EVERYTHING Castaneda wrote and talked about was the complete truth, it would still have no bearing on whether tensegrity worked for YOU. Or vice versa.
"... it would put a serious damper on people's ability to believe in Aikido as a valid martial art or way." --Lonnie
The thing is NOT TO BELIEVE but to KNOW in an experiential way!
The thing is NOT TO BELIEVE but to KNOW in an experiential way!
Yes very true. But how many worthwhile things have you undertaken without the believing that it would be worthwhile before you began? And how long does it take to get results? Ideally, you get incremental results from day one--or at least you find it enjoyable. But surely one has some intended goal that is beyond the small pleasures of practice (though perhaps in the long run it's the small pleasures that keep you coming back).
Is it enough that doing tensegrity makes you feel better? If so, then cool--it will probably do that for you. Do you think that doing the intent series will increase your ability to concentrate and persist in pursuing a goal? Many will testify from their experienc that it does and others will say that it doesn't.
Where, then, is the sharp boundary between knowledge and belief?
Absolutes are easy to state but difficult to fit into one's schedule.
diana-when next you manage to "step into dreaming",go "there",wherever"there" happens to be and find out for yourself.Assuming an ancient lineage of sorcerers of which dj.dg.and cc were all recipients and proponents,an etheric record of those individuals,their practices and activities,would exist.check it out. stunning tenacity-happy hunting. p.s.of course,by the time you gain that degree of control over your dreaming,you won't care a fig whether carlos was talking about sorcerers or salami dealers
Why do you think that once someone could access something like the "akashic records" or whatever you want to call them, that they would not be interested in "the world" anymore? It's like that Zen thing, "before enlightenment, chopping wood, gathering water, after enlightenment, chopping wood, gathering water." I'm sure that the following little story is gonna somehow just add to the "diana and the seven dwarfs" type shit, but...there is a woman who does stuff that I guess most people call "psychic" type stuff...and no, it's not like Dionne Warwick and the Love whatever type shit. The woman has written some books, and she does do "readings", and she says she does have a "spirit guide" that helps her, and she goes into a state where she can access the type of stuff you were talking about. A lot of years ago I had "a reading" done. It was over the phone, I had never met the woman. I'm sure that you'll think it's crazy to believe that anything "psychic" was going on, you'd probably think that somehow the woman was just getting the info from me, by the questions she asked or by me not realizing I was saying certain stuff. But I did tape the conversation, and I didn't hear myself giving away anything that could have accounted for the stuff she "knew". One thing that I thought was really pretty good was that my brother, who died, had a nick-name for me that had nothing to do with my actual name. It was just something dumb he called me, and I had not heard that nick-name used a lot. Since this woman had said that I had had a brother that died, and I swear to you, the first words out of her mouth correctly stated the way my brother had died, it wasn't like she asked this and that and then said it, it was like "oh it was _________", and it was, she was correct... anyway, I told her that it was really important to me to know if she was telling the truth, if she *really* had this connection to "something" that was "telling" her this stuff, and I asked her if she would mind "proving" it, by telling me the nickname.....she said that she was telling the truth, that she had been "strange" since she was a little girl, she used to "see" things that others could not...Sooooooo, she said she would try and get the nickname...she said, it starts with _____, and she was right, and then she named the next letter, then she blended those sounds and kind of "drew them out", and I was just listening...I did say "oh my God" at one point, but I didn't add any letters to the name, and a moment later, she had the name, off by one letter - the last letter, which she had as an "a" when it should have been a "y". Well, it's just a dumb story, I mean it did really happen, but that woman can "step into dreaming" and she still gets her hair sunstreaked...I was just really curious why you made that statement you made, about not caring if something was... 'something' or salami?...d.
Diana-if there was a point it was only that were you able to do those things yourself,carlos"stories would no longer have the force of imperative but merely curiosity.its worth noting dj. indicated the extraordinary activities of sorceres required loads of dark alien energy and the "only source of that energy was from the world of the IBS;something he abhorred:they were almost by definition antithetical to freedom in that their"s was a world of slavery and indulgence.Its a curious fact that its not the person who chooses power,but rather power that chooses the person;also interesting is taisha's admonition that the second gate of dreaming is the graveyard of failed sorcerers.if you have an interest in alternate acounts check out pr gaenir's story at www.firedocs./Bewilderness/;also interesting is "psychic warrior"by david morehouse.also a very simple and complimentary series of exercises to Ten. are "the five rites",descibed by peter kelder.i think the title of the new edition is"the fountain of youth".anyway,its impossible to assess magical acts without magic spectacles.sorry to hear about your brother.a for the epithet,who was with the seven dwarfs?
Lets take the discussion to a more neutral domain. The following events are hypothetical, but you may recognize the smoke...
Suppose you are a guitar player. Everyone has heroes; suppose yours is Jimmy Page (there's even some cross-over, since Page admitted to being interested in the possibilities suggested by the writings of Aleister Crowley). You've been an avid fan for 25 years. You've learned every lick he ever recorded (you long since forgotten "Stairway to Heaven"). You read that he used a D-Sus (DADGAD) tuning to record Black Mountain Side on Led Zeppelin's first album. Experimenting with that tuning and looking for other players who have used it has lead you to all sorts of great players: Davy Graham, Pierre Bensusan, Bill Mize...
For years you have searched for the aprocryphal "early sixties session work" that Page was purported to have done, but without success (all kinds of mysterious shit was going on back in them early sixties). Still, you remain faithful. You believe. He must have gotten his chops somewhere. He must have some background. Surely, he didn't come roaring fully formed out of Eric Clapton's ass when Clapton left the YardBirds...
You're sitting around with a couple of other guitar players. One's a friend of yours; the other you just met. The conversation comes around to Page and the alleged London sessions. The new guy, quite an animated and entertaining character (call him Carlos), says "oh, yeah, the London sessions." Your friend Keith (Wyatt, not Richards) says--"well, if Page played on so many records in the early sixties, where are the albums?" (rotten scientific skeptic--always wanting "evidence").
Carlos looks up at the ceiling. He gets up and starts pacing around. "Look man," he says, "page played on those sessions. I have all the recordings." He pauses to let that sink in. You're thinking "ALL RIGHT!"
"And," he continues, "I have the only copies left in existence! I'll make some tapes and sell them to you for $1000 each."
"I'll have to hear them first," says Keith.
Question: Are YOU reaching for your money yet?
He takes you to see and hear the albums. The covers are damaged beyond recognition. There is no way to see who the musicians are. It doesn't much matter though. Back in those days session guys almost never received credit. You listen to the albums. The mix is muddy. There's some guitar playing in there, but it's hard to make out much in the way of details.
All the while Carlos tells you what rare finds these are and how anyone who even has tapes of this material is going to be rich when the collectors get wind of it. Gold from Page's formative years!
Question: Do you hock your guitar and fork over the cash?
That's a pretty sloppy analogy, but nice try! :-)
"Do you hock your guitar and fork over the cash?" --Lonnie
My question is, if you know how to play guitar, and know how to play Jimmy's stuff (alternate tunings, etc), why would you even bother looking for old recording sessions? Why not just continue playing and develop your own playing style (or play in a band, write songs, etc.)?
I'd be much more interested in a pact with Lucifer (not Satan ;-}) to be a guitar wiz. Ala Robert Johnson.
The devil went down to Georgia, he was lookin' for a soul to steal. He was in a bind, 'cuz he was way behind, so he was willin' to make a deal...
"That's a pretty sloppy analogy, but nice try! :-)"
"Do you hock your guitar and fork over the cash?" --Lonnie
My question is, if you know how to play guitar, and know how to play Jimmy's stuff (alternate tunings, etc), why would you even bother looking for old recording sessions? Why not just continue playing and develop your own playing style (or play in a band, write songs, etc.)?
Well, sure, but then you wouldn't be analogous (however sloppily) to someone who thinks that Carlos has the gold.
Page isn't my guitar idol, by the way. The analogy was based on an actual conversation (sans the Carlos character).
Can I try a few changes to this little story and ask you what you think? First of all, say that "Carlos" was someone you had heard about for twenty-five years. You knew all along that there was a guy named Carlos who was rumored to have those records. The thing was, he never came around much. He didn't play any big concerts at all, sometimes he would show up at a little club and just jam for free. He was just this really private person, he was not seeking out the limelight AT ALL, for years and years and years of his life. Now, time passes, and Carlos has been made aware by the fan mail his agent keeps telling him is piling up, that a lot of people out there are achin' to hear those records, and they wouldn't mind meeting Carlos and hearing him jam a bit, too. But Carlos actually had been told by Jimmy that Jimmy was giving HIM those records, but Jimmy wasn't sure that the WORLD was ready for them. Jimmy had his own crazy ideas about stuff, and Carlos would often muse about what the heck exactly Jimmy meant by a LOT of the crazy stuff Jimmy said! Well, Carlos' sixty-fifth birthday rolls around before you know it. Carlos thinks and thinks. Carlos thinks maybe it's best to share Jimmy's stuff with the rest of the world for a whole bunch of reasons. Carlos sets out to make some tapes of the records, and he offers these tapes to people who want to buy them. He doesn't get the mafia to go out and break anyones legs if they don't want to buy the tapes, he just decides that his time on this earth is coming to an end, and so maybe it might be a good idea to share his own knowledge and share the music he has been keeping for himself, using it to work with, to get ideas from, whatever, it's time to let the world share in a little bit of it. He puts out the tapes, individually. You can buy one, and if you like it, come back and buy some more. If you think it's shitty and you are only buying it as an investment - if it's shitty to YOU, why invest in it, unless you are just a greedy fuck or something. If it's just that you want something of JIMMY's, and you are not SURE it's Jimmy's, well, do you LIKE IT OR NOT? Does it work for YOU or not? Do you want to trust this guy or not? This is your life! Make a DECISION! The thing is, if you are talking about Tensegrity seminars, if you were a true warrior and went to the seminars in the mood of a warrior, then no matter what, if the stuff worked for you or if it didn't, you'd assume responsibility for paying your money and taking your chances. If you were hoping the seminars would help "give you energy" so you could start to do dreaming or whatever, if you felt like it was helping, then you'd go back for more, if not, you'd stop going, right? If you were a "volunteer" who went to the seminars 'cause you thought it was cool to meet Carlos Castaneda and be able to tell your friends at work that you met him, and have something to talk about at that next dinner party, and maybe you'd get a little exercise that you needed anyway, and you'd be entertained, then WHAT are you so pissed off about?? Dan...and I think even Greg said that if Carlos Castaneda wasn't dead, knowing EVERYTHING they know about him now, they would *still* go to another seminar, because he was THAT GOOD a story teller and entertainer, and they just enjoyed being around the man *that much*. So, what are they bitching about??? Mostly the SA people were saying, well if you hired someone to fix the roof and someone did a bad job and ripped you off, you'd complain too...and Dan said that Corey is just someone who just REALLY does NOT like to be ripped off! But if you would all pay the money to see him TODAY AGAIN...If it's not the MONEY.....then I just don't get what they are complaining about...
Thanks for the opportunity to clarify. While Greg and Daniel have both indicated they would continue to go to workshops if CC was still around, I would not, thank you very much. Also, since SA includes, as I've said, a range of people, from people still attending workshops and Tensegrity groups to people who think I've been way too soft on Cleargreen and Co., it is a real misnomer to say there is an "SA" opinion. It is a place of independence (the list, I mean) where workshop-goers who don't mind co-existing with those who are digging up Castaneda's past share their feelings as part of processing what we've been through with this path (and our proximity to Castaneda and his gang) these many years. Hope that clarifies.
I didn't say I'd go to workshops. What a huge waste of valuable time, not to mention a sure way to bind up your attention by focusing it on something false!
I just said if I had the opportunity to hear Carlos speak again I'd go. He was always totally entertaining. And he did seem to know something about awareness, although it probably came from creating devil's weed jelly and soup recipies.
"Can I try a few changes to this little story and ask you what you think? "
"First of all, say that "Carlos" was someone you had heard about for twenty-five years. You knew all along that there was a guy named Carlos who was rumored to have those records. The thing was, he never came around much. He didn't play any big concerts at all, sometimes he would show up at a little club and just jam for free. He was just this really private person, he was not seeking out the limelight AT ALL, for years and years and years of his life. Now, time passes, and Carlos has been made aware by the fan mail his agent keeps telling him is piling up, that a lot of people out there are achin' to hear those records, and they wouldn't mind meeting Carlos and hearing him jam a bit, too. But Carlos actually had been told by Jimmy that Jimmy was giving HIM those records, but Jimmy wasn't sure that the WORLD was ready for them. Jimmy had his own crazy ideas about stuff, and Carlos would often muse about what the heck exactly Jimmy meant by a LOT of the crazy stuff Jimmy said!"
I'm with you so far. Of course Jimmy's just a guitar player who wrote a few good tunes, had a few moments of brilliance, likes to read Aleister Crowley, and was addicted to heroin for a number of years. In other words, Jimmy had some interesting ideas, moved a lot of people in various ways, and has flaws and foibles just like anyone else. Then the other issue is how likely is it that Jimmy would squirrel away all those recordings and only give them to Carlos?
"Well, Carlos' sixty-fifth birthday rolls around before you know it. Carlos thinks and thinks. Carlos thinks maybe it's best to share Jimmy's stuff with the rest of the world for a whole bunch of reasons. Carlos sets out to make some tapes of the records, and he offers these tapes to people who want to buy them. He doesn't get the mafia to go out and break anyones legs if they don't want to buy the tapes, he just decides that his time on this earth is coming to an end, and so maybe it might be a good idea to share his own knowledge and share the music he has been keeping for himself, using it to work with, to get ideas from, whatever, it's time to let the world share in a little bit of it. He puts out the tapes, individually. You can buy one, and if you like it, come back and buy some more. If you think it's shitty and you are only buying it as an investment - if it's shitty to YOU, why invest in it, unless you are just a greedy fuck or something. If it's just that you want something of JIMMY's, and you are not SURE it's Jimmy's, well, do you LIKE IT OR NOT? Does it work for YOU or not? Do you want to trust this guy or not? This is your life! Make a DECISION! The thing is, if you are talking about Tensegrity seminars, if you were a true warrior and went to the seminars in the mood of a warrior, then no matter what, if the stuff worked for you or if it didn't, you'd assume responsibility for paying your money and taking your chances."
Okay, leaving the (admittedly) sloppy analogy behind, I've read the books several times each, and I have the tapes (except for the most recent one). I have spent very little money on the whole affair (much less than the thousand dollars mentioned in the analogy), and I don't regret any of it. I was impressed (once upon a time) by the audacity of what I believed to be Carlos's challenge to the prevailing view of the world. I liked his stories and wanted to believe him. I was willing to be persuaded. I was probably 70% persuaded at one time. But dreaming is dreaming. You don't fly when you're awake. Becoming silent, you can notice things that you wouldn't otherwise. "Power plants" can open dimensions of experience that you didn't know (or else had forgotten) existed. When you "come down" whatever you learned becomes a part of you, but life and the world go on. There is a time for talk, a time for reading and writing, and a time for silence. And their is a time to acknowledge where you are at and distinguish fantasy from experience (yeah, yeah, fantasy is a type of experience). There is a time to call a lie a lie.
I came to a point where I realized that not having to believe uses up much less energy than having to believe.
I can't speak for the others. I consider Corey a friend (though we've never met face to face). There are people on Tigre whom I consider friends, as well (though some of them won't communicate with me now).
Tensegrity has some beneficial effects. There are other things that I have found work much better for me and my own personal goals--which don't include scooping up imaginary energy from an imaginary luminous coccoon and rubbing it around on my (somewhat imaginary) body. Nowadays, I prefer to stick with the somewhat imaginary rather than the flat-out imaginary.
Nice talkin' to ya,
daniel, if you get right down to ,everything is cult behavior. you cant get much more cultish than the daily telivision zombification. but i hope you will not give up on bringing attention to this, because it is worthwhile for individuals to evaluate there own behavior to the "cult mirror" and see what reflects back. while all behavior is cultish, we should strive to pick our cults wisely. i would be very intrested in reading a comprehensive ,all in one place, account of your explorations, and results as you seem to have spent a fair ammount of effort. if you just sit and kind of just ride the wave of moving through space time ,how do you deal with the painful desires to just get up and go watch TV with the rest of america. what actualy happens to you if you persist, do you get any mental sensation of tearing through a membrane of habitual boundries or what.
I can pretty much do whatever I want in dreaming now days. I've developed so much control that all I have to do is lie down, close my eyes, and I'm presented with an infinite amount of directions to go.
It's because of that that I find the cleargreen thing so frustrating. People keep saying that "it works!". But it doesn't. That's the cult brainwashing talking. If it really were working, they'd realize that dreaming is infinite, that Carlos just made up a bunch of stuff, and that the people at cleargreen don't know what they're talking about because they're just running around parroting concepts carlos used to market himself. Worse yet, they keep watering things down to fit their own abilities.
What I'd like to say is, just close your eyes, open up a dreaming window, and see for yourself that Carlos' teachings are a bunch of crap. You can go left, right, straight. This system that makes your run around spouting harsh discipline is idiotic. It doesn't work. A few funny sensations while you're exercising is normal. A high when you're hanging around with your friends praising each other is also normal. That's what makes it a cult, feeding off each other's emotions to attain a spiritual high, then using the terminology to explain, justify, and protect yourself from taking an honest look at your life.
greg, i would like to read a little summery of your story on all this. as a late commer, i think ive missed some things that you may have to offer as far as your experiences with coming into contact with "the teachings" and whatever events came after. im familiar with all of the garbage doings, or undoings if you wish. i applaud your diggings because if your going to make wild assed claims for people to base signifigant chunks of their very being on, then you open yourself up to the curios searchings through your crap to see what they can see. you have provided us all that care, an invaluable service. sincere thanks, daniel
Not much of a story to tell... so I'll briefly highlight:
When I first met Carlos, I had not read one word of his books, so my experience was seeing and hearing him in the present moment... without any prior intellectual preconceptions from his writings.
I did what he taught me to do in the private classes and "dreamed" in spades... (now I am exploring more abstract experiences on my own...)
ALL of Carlos' wild ass claims were music to my ears, and I became a model TB... very active in the Tensegrity groups and attended a LOT of seminars... We had groups of friends over to go on full moon sorcerer hikes in the hills... and thoroughly enjoyed our Castaneda experiences.
Gabi and I, working as an "energetic unit", followed the omens and applied Carlos' teachings in a way he never intended them to be used... which led to what you already know,unfolding as we followed his energetic thread.
Even knowing about Carlos' personal life... since I was not personally subjected to any of it... I'm not the least bit bitter or angry, because we were observers... not participants in his personal life.
Cleargreen came after us legally trying to get the trash and the film during the probate hearing... but in the light of what has been coming out... we are the LEAST of their problems.
That's about it... if you have specific questions... I'll be happy to answer you in this forum about what we saw and found out.
What did Nyei do when she found you outside of Carlos house on Pandora that night? Was she angry? Thanks.
We had gone to Carlos' house on so many Tuesday nights to pick up the trash, we had totally lost any fear of getting caught. In fact when Nyei caught us... it was more humorous than anything else.
We were walking away from the house when we heard someone come out of the gap in the hedge. Nyei caught up to us and angrily pulled the bags of trash out of our hands and said that we would never get close to them, as she walked away. Little did she know at that time what we were REALLY doing (video). It was funny to watch her carrying all those bags back to the house as if they were valuable.
After that, they stopped putting out the trash the night before the pickup day. So we just waited intil they got tired of getting up early in the morning to put out the trash... and in a few weeks, they did, so we just went back to picking it up Tuesday night as usual... but went later they left Carlos' house.
One of the Chacmools, Nyei, Reni, or Kylie, usually came to Carlos' house to do the dinner clean up at night, because we could hear the dishes clinking in the kitchen. Usually we would wait till they were done and had left the house, but some nights we would just go get the trash even if they were there. That was one of those nights.
Concurrent with that time, Kylie was being stalked by some guy who threatened her, so they were very concerned that we might have been working in concert with him. I talked with Kylie the next day and assured her that we meant no harm and what we did, we did on our own. She was also VERY concerned that we would tell people where Carlos lived. I promised that we wouldn't, and we said nothing about all of this until more than six months after Carlos died.
i am sorry daniel, i went back and reread my post ,and the second part not at all comprehensable. i have a hard time dealing with everyone not being able to share my headspace, at least when i am trying to facilitate communication. nevermind that i jumped topics. i was asking what experiences you may have had ,just forcing yourself to sit for hours at a time, what kinds of mental sensations youve come up against when faced with desires to "worry about it later" and just get up and do something else. do you feel anything like trying to tare your consiousness through a "membrana" of sorts as you keep persisting? in essence, please tell me about whatever you can of your knowledge in being still. i can hardly do it. im just betting though, that prolonged sitting ,and quiting cigarettes or something, puts a mind in touch with a closely related type of anguish. maybe the voice that tries to get you to give up trying ,gets silenced once you are no longer allowing even the slightest bit of your mind to be open to the possibility of giving in. your thoughts? daniel
Carlos watched endless hours of TV. Don't fall in to the cult mentality that you're too superior to watch TV. Florinda and Taisha were so bored they went to nearly every movie, having to take along their "friends".
TV isn't the problem. You just have to learn to get entertained by sitting, so that you'll look forward to it. But even if you get to the point that you're navigating into incredible realms, the instant the navigation subscides there's the desire to go do something else. You just have to find the time anyway.
It was like piercing a membrane at first, but not in the magical way you might visualize. It was more like teaching myself that if I put out a continuous effort, without stopping, eventually something HAD to happen. I developed the confidence that I should just stay in the chair forcing silence until something happened.
That took years of sitting, but probably only a few months of fully concentrated work, at about 2 to 3 hours per night.
So at first that membrane is really motivational. But later, when it gets easy, there's a visual membrane of sorts. I get it now just by closing my eyes. It's like a membrane between the flat blackness of just closing your eyes, and the empty space that can replace that when you're dreaming attention comes on. You aren't dreaming at that point, but you are sensing space in front of you, dreaming space. From that point of view there are many directions to go. You can do anything (but probably won't be able to). So you sit and wait for movement, to the left, right, straight. As you move, the space becomes more defined. For instance, I move to the left, and realize there's a hallway there. I feel a door on the right, a door at the end. Then I start to get a visual sense, I see the beginnings of a dream of being in a house in a hallway. If I don't like that dream, I back up, the way I came, by thinking about the original empty space I just moved away from. Then I'm back there. I move to the right instead. There's an arch made out of plants over there, an outside scene.
That's what dreaming is like for me now days, when it's in concrete form.
On the other hand, if you want to follow cleargreen, dreaming is slowly going to water down into a normal high you get from embracing your friend at a workshop and having a good heartfelt, self-agrandizing conversation about what good warriors you are and how loyal you are. What great energy!
Energy is completely unnecessary for dreaming, in fact you'd probably have an easier time dreaming if you were near death, at the lowest energy possible.
i was hoping that you would give a summery of your stance on everything. i see that you are still quite open to the possibilitiy that carlos was legit. ive really enjoyed your presence here and hope that youll continue to give your views despite the judgements and lables. i just think it could help me to evaluate things myself if i could "hear" why, despite what we now "know"(yeah i know, jesus!) you still have some faith. if you dont mind sharring this bit of info. i would really like to hear a detailed discription of exactly what you now believe about THE TEACHINGS. i personaly do not even know what I think! im in that "dissonence" feeling that someone described, and even though we can read many peoples viewpoints here, we rarely get anything comprehensive, and in one post, to summerize their feelings on the issue. besides the 'nuff said ,there is no don juan you idiots type of thing! daniel
I read Castenada for the first time when I was just out of High School. At about this time I also went to my first peyote meeting. I thought the ceremony would be like Carlos discribed in the book but it was nothing like that. I never fully trusted what Castenada had to say after that yet I still bought the books as they came out. I still am holding my judgement about all this and keeping an open mind I hope. I would like to know Corey what Carlos was to you.
Hi Daniel, That's quite a question! I really don't know quite how to answer it. I can't think of any way to kind of sum up what I believe about the teachings into a few paragraphs. I guess I'd just kind of repeat what I've said here - that I think there was an actual apprenticeship going on between Carlos and Don Juan. And I think that a lot of what Don Juan recommended for Carlos to do, was based on Carlos' own "personality", while there are other concepts that are more "general" and that do make up a "way" for people to be able to "build personal power" or "get more energy" of the type that enables one to begin to "explore other worlds". It just kind of makes sense to me that if you stop putting all your attention into self-importance type stuff, and focus on different aspects of "this world" then you usually do, you are likely to begin to alter your own perception of things, and maybe begin to "tune in" to some stuff that Don Juan says is there for anyone to see. In fact I think he goes further then saying anyone "can" see it - I think Don Juan means that what lies "out there" is an "energetic fact", so that as soon as one begins to follow these recommendations in a bona fide manner, the only things that *can* happen, will happen. I think that is why Don Juan says that we don't really need teachers, or that we only need a teacher to make us aware that it is all "there", and all we need to do is to take the focus of our lives off of the "self" and turn our attention to the mystery, and then the mysterys begin to reveal themselves to us....of course, it's not "easy" - it may be "simple", in a way, but not easy. Because, as everyone knows already, it's one thing to think about something, and another to do it. Anyway, I think that Carlos "lived" this stuff, and of course,he was AFFECTED by it all. I think some crazy stuff happened to the guy -- you know, one thing that keeps coming back to mind is that "super-pussy" speech. Carol says something like "the real mystery is not how I could be cyclic with the Death Defier, the real mystery is how I could still be sane enough to be here and talking to you right now". And, yeah, a lot of people are gonna say, "oh, are you sane?", but how many humans could *take* dealing with the kind of stuff going on in Castaneda's world day in and day out without going bonkers? So, when I see that Carlos and the witches somehow managed to stay together and, I think anyone would have to agree just from the VOLUMES of shit put together - books, lectures, workshops, tensegrity...this was not some HOBBY for these people, there was just TONS of sheer information put forth by them all. And I think Carlos was what he said he was, someone who got "swallowed" by a world he set out to explore. Yeah, a lot of that world is mind-boggling, or reason boggling. I don't think it would be easy for ANYONE to even begin to get a grip on the idea of "being in two places at once", for example. But it just brings it back, for me, to the same old question. Who or what am *I*? If I say that I am a perceiver, then what part of me perceives what part of "the world"? Don Juan said, "we are perceivers, we are an awareness, encased in here - meaning inside of this body. But, according to him, you can get that encased "awareness" outside of the boundary of "your body", and you can "use it" to perceive from anywhere...Daniel, I have to go now, but I wanted to at least let you know I'm thinking about what you asked.......so bye for now. d.
>>? while there are other concepts that are more "general" and that do make up a "way" for people to be able to "build personal power" or "get more energy" of the type that enables one to begin to "explore other worlds". <Snip> In fact I think he goes further then saying anyone "can" see it - I think Don Juan means that what lies "out there" is an "energetic fact", so that as soon as one begins to follow these recommendations in a bona fide manner, the only things that *can* happen, will happen.>>I am assuming that you mean that people, by following "general" guidelines are able to "explore other worlds" in a physical manner. In other words, are people able to "get more energy" by following the concepts outlined in the books (in a bona fide manner of course) and to alter their molecular structure so that they can physically go into other universes?
You know, that is a really interesting "concept", but I asked one of the so-called "apprentices" of Carlos Castaneda if he had taken them to the "other side" and was told no. How come, if the Cleargreen gang have been with Castaneda for a period of ten years or more, that not one of them have been taken or been to the "other side"? Not one. And since they had the benefit of being under the direct tutelage of someone whom you only have words of admiration for, how on earth can they expect to succeed on their own?
>> Because, as everyone knows already, it's one thing to think about something, and another to do it.>>
Perhaps they thought that multi-partner lesbian liaisons were going to give them an edge that Don Juanís supposed party did not have? So, I guess they thought about it, then they did it. Didnít seem to help much though. Of course, this may have been the Blue Scoutís idea, and who is going to question the motives of such an impeccable and superior being from another universe?>>Anyway, I think that Carlos "lived" this stuff, and of course,he was AFFECTED by it all. I think some crazy stuff happened to the guy -- you know, one thing that keeps coming back to mind is that "super-pussy" speech. Carol says something like "the real mystery is not how I could be cyclic with the Death Defier, the real mystery is how I could still be sane enough to be here and talking to you right now". And, yeah, a lot of people are gonna say, "oh, are you sane?", but how many humans could *take* dealing with the kind of stuff going on in Castaneda's world day in and day out without going bonkers?>>
Since Castaneda seems to have continued the ingestion of jimson weed way after his supposed "apprenticeship", I do believe it had an effect on him in a permanent manner, one of them bringing about the permanent destruction of his liver. The other way that this seems to have affected him is that his experiences seemed to have intensified what I can only judge as outright woman hating behavior. At one of the German workshops, a "tracker" told a story of how he told her that he was going to make her learn belly dancing and have her dance naked with just a strip of cloth around her waist to destroy the princess within her. She was so distraught that she was in tears and almost urinated on herself. This same "tracker" told me that Castaneda told her that she may have been full of "nervous" energy, but that she was still a bored fuck. Another woman who got out before the Cleargreen circus got off the ground, tells the story of how, she was once near tears and Castaneda was there with a huge smile on his face, saying something like, "Wouldnít it be nice to be something other than a princess or a dog?" Apparently a number of people did go bonkers, some having to be hospitalized even. There are reports of suicide attempts and we still do not know where Taisha, Florinda, Nuri, Talia and Kylie are, do we?As for the *sanity* of Carol Tiggs, I would like to remind you that she has been a prime factor in the perpetuation and continuation of this little "sorcery charade" with the remnants of Castanedaís "apprentices". Perhaps Cleargreenís recent webpage update regarding menopausal women has to do with her current deteriorating condition. No doubt she has to take hormone replacement therapy like one of the former residents of Pandora Avenue. Too bad "sorcery" canít do much about those annoying "hot flashes", huh?>>And I think Carlos was what he said he was, someone who got "swallowed" by a world he set out to explore. Yeah, a lot of that world is mind-boggling, or reason boggling.>>
I think that Carlos was an incompetent fraud, who used the itsy, bitsy, teeny, weeny bit of information he gained through his informants and drug usage to parlay himself into being the great and powerful "Nagual". The really sad thing is that I feel that he did believe that he was going to make it to freedom and not die that horrible death of having his brain eaten away by ammonia because of liver malfunction.
>>I don't think it would be easy for ANYONE to even begin to get a grip on the idea of "being in two places at once", for example.>>
Oh, that "being in two places at once" thing again. So, tell us what your take on this phenomenon is. The only thing that comes to my mind is that perhaps a separation of an energy body would account for this description, but the claim was that Carol Tiggs was actually gone "physically" for ten years. Why did Cleargreen not say one word about this "being in two places at once" (in reference to Tiggs) until *after* Corey made information to the contrary public?
>>But it just brings it back, for me, to the same old question. Who or what am *I*?>>
I am no longer concerned about who or what I am. If anything, I am more free than I ever was before and for the most part, I look out upon the world and into myself with wonder and awe. I do not need Cleargreen or anyone else to do this.
Hi Leonard, I was just looking over where I left off, and I guess it would be pretty hard to wet your pants if you were naked. Anyway, I wanted to ask you about something YOU said. You said that you actually thought that Carlos did believe that he was going to make it to freedom. If you DO believe that, then doesn't that put some other kind of spin on the things he did like saying to that woman "Wouldn't it be nice to be something other than a princess or a dog?" I mean, breaking the mirror of self-reflection is something that is supposed to be "helpful", right? And although Don Juan may have had a bit more finesse, to me this just sounds like Carlos' way of trying to be a "petty tyrant", and if Carlos BELIEVED in "freedom" and a "path to freedom" through breaking the mirror of self-reflection, then "upsetting someone" would be, I imagine, a *small* price to pay for what was at stake.
Then we get into the two places at once thing, and you ask why didn't Cleargreen mention this BEFORE Corey Donovan made public the stuff about Carol Tiggs being around during the time she was supposedly gone for ten years. Well, the CONCEPT of being in two places at once was NOT something Cleargreen "made up" just to "cover" this. The concept had already been written about. So if someone is suddenly ASKING, hey, how can it be that supposedly Carol was in the second attention and then Corey finds papers showing someone with that name applied for a marriage liscense during one of the years she was supposed to be gone. Well, also, I never thought that Carlos had stated he was using exact names, or dates in the books. In fact, I thought just the opposite was true, that he was kind of changing the names and dates, and cities, because he was "doing away with personal history" and because he didn't want any of his friends to be trying to play detective and follow him around and butt in to his life. But still, I think that he did say that Carol was gone ten years, and that she did return in either 1983 or around there...but *CLeargreen* even made some statement like "can you help us deal with the personal history stuff..." - in other words, wasn't cleargreen saying they did not KNOW, but were just trying to give us what they thought COULD be an explanation?? Did Carol Tiggs *herself* say that she had been in two places at once "bodily" and that she had come back and gotten married? I'm glad you feel the awe and mystery and freedom you say you feel...I just don't know why you are still so seemingly pissed then, if you came away from it all in such wonderful spirits, one would think you would feel better about the path that led you there, maybe?...d.
Leonard opined:>>>> So if someone is suddenly ASKING, hey, how can it be that supposedly Carol was in the second attention and then Corey finds papers showing someone with that name applied for a marriage liscense during one of the years she was supposed to be gone.<<<<
Diana, you seem like a sweetheart, and I sure would want you on my side if I needed an advocate. Day in and day out, you look for real and imagined contradictions in what others say, and try your damnedest to uphold the myths we've been given by Castaneda and Co., seemingly by all means necessary.
Well, you're a trooper, and the continuing process of doing this--of trying to square what you want to believe with the facts (and Cleargreen's behavior) as they continue to unravel should be a major cognitive dissonance of the kind that Castaneda loved to talk about.
As far as Carol's marriage and later divorce to her fellow acupuncture student during the time she was supposed to be in the Second Attention (and now claims, at least on the lists they control if not on their website as yet, that she was just "projecting" herself back here from time to time), your hypothesis that someone else might have used her name doesn't wash. I've talked to witnesses to the marriage and others who knew Carol before and after her marriage and divorce, and it was the same "Chunky Chuckie" in all instances. I know that this explanation won't suffice for you, and you'll just assume that I don't know enough about how one projects oneself and how solid the projection is and endless questions of this ilk, but I just thought I would add to your growing load of cognitive dissonance with what real people who have nothing to gain either way are saying about our friend Carol.
>>But your next remark, about how Carlos told a woman that he would have her learn to belly dance and then dance naked with only a strip of cloth around her waist for the "princess" in her -- you say she was so distraught she almost wet her pants -- was this WHILE she was dancing nude or just at the THOUGHT of having to dance nude? If it was just at the thought of it, she was kinda a wussie I would have to say. But I think maybe Carlos was just trying to be a "petty tyrant" to help her break her mirror of self reflection.>>
When I read your reply, my immediate reaction was to begin retching. Honest, I almost threw up when I read this. It reminds me of a reaction I once had as a small child who watched a man beat an animal to death.
Then in the following post:
>>Hi Linda, I was just looking over where I left off, and I guess it would be pretty hard to wet your pants if you were naked. Anyway, I wanted to ask you about something YOU said. You said that you actually thought that Carlos did believe that he was going to make it to freedom. If you DO believe that, then doesn't that put some other kind of spin on the things he did like saying to that woman "Wouldn't it be nice to be something other than a princess or a dog?" I mean, breaking the mirror of self-reflection is something that is supposed to be "helpful", right? And although Don Juan may have had a bit more finesse, to me this just sounds like Carlos' way of trying to be a "petty tyrant", and if Carlos BELIEVED in "freedom" and a "path to freedom" through breaking the mirror of self-reflection, then "upsetting someone" would be, I imagine, a *small* price to pay for what was at stake.>>
Then I was moved to tears when I read this extrapolation of your previous reply. My feeling is that Castaneda was in a deranged state of mind when he verbally or physically attacked women. I donít think it had anything to do with helping any of the women lose their self-importance. Also, from the accounts of a woman who was the subject of some of this behavior, men were never treated in this manner. Only women.>>Then we get into the two places at once thing, and you ask why didn't Cleargreen mention this BEFORE Corey Donovan made public the stuff about Carol Tiggs being around during the time she was supposedly gone for ten years. <Snip>...but *CLeargreen* even made some statement like "can you help us deal with the personal history stuff..." - in other words, wasn't cleargreen saying they did not KNOW, but were just trying to give us what they thought COULD be an explanation?? Did Carol Tiggs *herself* say that she had been in two places at once "bodily" and that she had come back and gotten married?>>
It is not clear to me whether Cleargreen made a statement about wanting to have someone help them deal with the personal history stuff. Which Cleargreen are you referring? The employees or the shareholders and/or directors? Since Carol Tiggs is a shareholder and director, is she not capable of taking responsibility for public statements made by the organization?
>>I'm glad you feel the awe and mystery and freedom you say you feel...I just don't know why you are still so seemingly pissed then, if you came away from it all in such wonderful spirits, one would think you would feel better about the path that led you there, maybe?>>
First of all, I am not even a fraction as angry now as I was six months ago when I figured out that those in whom I had placed a great deal of trust had lied to me. The abuse of women by Castaneda and Co. has also upset me tremendously. There is no way that I will ever accept an explanation of this abuse as being a sorcererís maneuver to help women lose their self-importance. In addition, as I have stated before, I am grateful for the people whom I have met as a result of becoming involved with Cleargreen. Since I went into this as a relatively happy person, I canít really claim that I became any happier because of my involvement. I also think generally happy people can still experience anger and find that their overall outlook on life is not colored by that emotion.
If you think saying someone is a wussie, someone who BY CHOICE was hanging around Carlos Castaneda and studying the WARRIOR'S WAY, and Carlos told that person to learn to belly dance nude, either as a way to break the mirror of self reflection, or as a not doing, or as a show of ruthlessnes - why don't read what Dan Lawton had to say about why Carlos was ruthless with people- He was THERE-if that made you wretch I have no idea what either one of you was doing hanging around Carlos. Go to tea partys.
"Carlos told that person to learn to belly dance nude, either as a way to break the mirror of self reflection, or as a not doing, or as a show of ruthlessnes"
...or because he was a horny old man who liked to come up with reasons to get his followers nekkid all the time, or because he was a control freak who knew how to manipulate people by keeping them psychologically uncomfortable.
"why don't read what Dan Lawton had to say about why Carlos was ruthless with people- He was THERE"
I was there. To me, his "ruthlessness" almost always came off as cranky domineering behavior, and I should recognize it for I'm inclined to my share, but unlike CC I'm honest enough not to regard it as a "virtue".
I remember often wondering why CC paid *so* much attention to the women in the Sunday class (and hardly any attention at all to the men). From the vantage point of what we now know it seems so totally, pathetically transparent. I can now vividly recall scenes where CC was standing five feet in front of me practically drooling over some girl --- right in her face fussing over her, obviously making her uncomfortable too. At the time, I was too much the TB to put these actions in their proper context.
Ruthlessness redefined: feeling justified in being a domineering asshole.
"if that made you wretch I have no idea what either one of you was doing hanging around Carlos. Go to tea partys."
Tea parties --- hmmm, that sounds like fun. Just so long as no one was spoiling the fun of being there, conversing, and drinking tea with some sort of authoritarian controlling crap, or making an "issue" of whether or not a particular person took part.
would you be willing to tell ,in the most direct,non romantic, non fantastical unless it applies ,manner that you can, about your peyote experience? i would love to hear it ,and any others that would be willing to share their peyote experiences. thank you misun for responding . if you are able to tell any long term difference, let me know how the peyote experience still affects the way you think, feel, and act today.
I was 18 and raised as a catholic. The Native American Church has many members here where I live. I was not raised in this tradition. I went to the meeting a frightened young man more or less on a dare. The meeting was at the home of a medicine man named Henry Crow Dog the peyote was very hard for me to eat especially the green fresh buttons. I ate as much as I could I didn't have a great vision or anything like that mostly I remember being afraid and uncomfortable. the meeting lasted all night. I came out of the meeting Changed, at that time I can remember only a hazey feeling that everything was beautiful the trees the land everything seemed to have a pattern to it. Those were only surface emotions that was all I had to explain what I was experiencing Today I know that Peyote gave me a lesson a simple one That The Earth is a living being down to every grain of sand. Something I didn't know or believe possible before that meeting.
In "Carol Tiggs III," someone (probably Corey) writes --
In the chapter entitled, "The Nagual Woman," Castaneda relates that "Almost immediately after finding me [i.e., 1960?], don Juan encountered a double woman. ... He then describes how, when don Juan was living in Arizona, he had found this double woman working at a government office where he went to fill out an application. He returned virtually every day for three months...
Out of curiosity, have you thought of checking which govt office this might have been? Was Carol 12 at this time, etc?
I think that that nagual woman was none other than Joannie Barker.
Aurelius asks: >>>>In the chapter entitled, "The Nagual Woman," Castaneda relates that "Almost immediately after finding me [i.e., 1960?], don Juan encountered a double woman. ... He then describes how, when don Juan was living in Arizona, he had found this double woman working at a government office where he went to fill out an application. He returned virtually every day for three months... Out of curiosity, have you thought of checking which govt office this might have been? Was Carol 12 at this time, etc?<<<<
I have been working on it, actually. When I'm ready with a complete report, I'll give it. Carol did attend summer school in Mexico City in the summer of '67 (not working at any gov't office) so that is the earliest opportunity she would have had to meet "don Juan." I don't believe she met "don Juan" due to a number of other facts that, again, I will report when they are confirmed and can be reported in their entirety.
Something I've been surprised by lately is that getting in to dreaming, directly from waking, is easier when you feel like you've accomplished something that day.
That's difficult if you're in the cult rut of doing your little bit of tensegrity, hitting yourself on the head for bad thoughts, and fantisizing about where you're going to fit in to don Juan's lineage. Not to mention the hindrence of worrying about money because you spent too much going to workshops.
It's easier with your attention focused on your waking life, with the idea of success.
Yea, I know, this doesn't really sound like a dreaming technique post. But it is. I just like to put a little anti-cult humour in to it.
What I'm trying to describe here is this: Get some confidence, work on your daily world, without limiting it to a few simple warrior's precepts, and the results will really help with your dreaming. The only thing that might hang it up is finding time. If you get too preoccupied with your life, you won't take time out to concentrate on dreaming.
I guess what works for me lately is being successful by working hard, but without getting too obsessed. Then I make sure to try to get silent at night, with the good feeling of the days successes. Then the dreaming window opens. It's as if the mind has an internal battle going, to stop dreaming at all costs. But if you've worked hard, and succeeded, the mind lets go and allows some play time in dreaming.
One of the appeals of a cult is that for people who feel uncomfortable in the world the cult provides a safe range of defined feelings. Basically, a potential cult member feels some lack in himself and is attracted to the cult because it provides a quick fix in the form of behavior modification. This behavior modification takes the unhappy person away from having to figure out what's wrong internally and allows them to focus on the cult manifesto, it's rules, and to use the group support mechanism as a safety blanket.
Here's a common theme among tensegrity practicioners and it's actual translation into non-cult speak:
"Any exchange at Tigre must be focused on the wonder, on the mystery of awareness. And this focus should be kept at all costs."
Translation: It's safe to go around pretending you are feeling mystery and awe for the world because you can repeat that to yourself when other unwanted feelings start to slip through. As a bonus, if you repeat it often enough it will produce a high sensation. This technique's effectiveness as a barrier to pre-cult feelings is reduced if you start to question the cult manifesto.
Here's a another cherished tensegrity cult term: "A path with heart"
Translation: Your entire life is now planned out for you with rewards of happiness waiting for you in the future so long as you devotedly follow the cult path. If you deviate from the cult path then unwanted previous feelings will return.
Here's my least favorite cult term, and it's translation:
"If it works, who cares about the factual crap?"
(Tensegrity practicioner's inner secret thoughts): "I know it works because I had a couple of weird sensations at one workshop (but I ate too much pizza). And one time, when my eyes were real sweaty and I was out of breath, I strained my eyes and peered sideways at the stage and saw a glow around one of the energy trackers, I'm sure it wasn't just that spotlight shining in my eyes. In fact, it was shaped a little like an energetic moth! Besides, if that was just a normal distortion, I did get in to dreaming really good one time. And anyhow, there's plenty of other people doing magical stuff, the people in cleargreen are learning group dreaming. This stuff must work, all those people can't be exagerating, even if I am. It works, I feel better than I used to (couldn't possibly be from being a few years older, eating better, and exercising regularly).
could you please tell more about opening up a dreaming window. spare no unpretencious detail,as i would really like to know. thank you for the post about daily accomplishment,that makes a LOT of sense. and also, i am curious how you can prove that carlos made up crap through your dreaming. and, in reference to sitting and gaining silence, have you ever done that in dreaming?
>could you please tell more about opening up a dreaming window. spare no unpretencious detail,as i would really like to know.
I guess I learned to do that by looking for anything "different" when I was sitting in a chair learning to be silent. At the beginning I wasn't specifically trying to get in to dreaming, I was just trying to learn to be silent. I noticed many sensations, too many to list, but one in particular lead to opening a dreaming window and that was when I noticed that "space" became 3D if I got silent enough. You could also say there was a golden shine over the blackness, or that if you fan the darkness by following a circular path with your eyes a tiny burst of orange light would appear in the center.
It seems to me that there's some kind of struggle in the beginning where the mind won't allow conscious access to dreaming. Maybe that's training we get as children. You just need to break that training by trying again and again. As you try you'll learn on your own, just by trying. The idea that you need someone else to give you secret techniques is silly. I just repeat my own secret techniques because I know it will get people interested, but in the long run you're going to discover your own methods.
The most important thing to do is actually try. Drop the cleargreen crap, it's just a distraction. It keeps you from really learning by giving you the feeling that if you just follow orders you don't need to do anything else. I don't know ANYONE so far who has put in the effort it requires to get dreaming on demand, not inside cleargreen or outside. I know people who made strong efforts, for a short time, then stopped.
Where are all the interested parties?
>and also, i am curious how you can prove that carlos made up crap through your dreaming.
Simple. Learn to get dreaming on demand, learn to see, and you'll find out he simply repeated one time events that happened to him as if they were rules that applied to everyone. I could come up with all kinds of "rules" I'd "seen". Here's something I saw yesterday, every bit as valid as Carlos' "seeing", which means it's useless crap:
Carlos used to describe the back and forth motion of the flier's mind as opposed to the circular movement when free from the flier's mind.
Actually, he was mistaken.
The thought process moves in a spherical manner. I've seen that movement, it's like the awareness is traveling on the top of a sphere, at a fantastic height over it's resources, perhaps the subconscious. If the subconscious is relatively uncluttered (silent), then the movement is unhindered and the general direction is spherical and full. But when the area below the sphere becomes cluttered, or filled with worries, the motion is interrupted.
I've seen it get filled. It gets filled by an amber outline of objects of worry. They stack up like a city under the dome of the thought process. A few don't disrupt the flow, but when the mass of clutter rises close to the height of the sphere surface the movement is interrupted. The awareness can't move around freely but instead moves back and forth between highest peaks of the clutter inside the dome. It seems to be a sideways motion only because it encompases a small portion of the arch.
I actually saw that. But I would go around claiming that was really what was going on, or that it could be used in anyway to help other people. For me, while I was "seeing" it, it was a fact. I really was interpreting the flow of my thoughts as moving over a spherical surface, with the clutter of my subconscious down below. I could peer in to any of those amber outlined pieces of junk below and see exactly what worry it was, stacked down there in my subconscious. It was an absolute fact because it was a complete perception that applied to things actually true about my mind.
The part Carlos made up is claiming he saw that repeatedly or that it was a universal truth.
Anyone who really learns to dream or to see is going to find this out. Carlos did with his "seeing" exactly what he did with people in his group. He exagerated, misrepresented, and even lied to get the best possible profit from his capabilities. And people go around endlessly repeating those petty lies as if they were part of a "path with heart".
>and, in reference to sitting and gaining silence, have you ever done that in dreaming?
I've checked out whether I'm "silent" inside a dream on many occasions. You can certainly think during a dream, if you want to. If you don't try to think you're likely to be relatively silent. But sitting down to deliberately become silent, inside a dream, is a good way to end the dream. Dreams tend to destabilize if you don't keep a constant variety of things happening. Your attention must remain on the dream or else it will either go away or change. Sitting with your eyes closed would cause a dream change almost immediatly.
A few years ago I read a book called Adventures Outside the Body. There were techniques descibed to have an OBE. In practice, I managed to get to the stage were I feel the precusory body vibrations. It also feels as though I were exerting a bodily pressure on a membrane. In a dream when I pierced this membrane I heard a loud popping sound and felt a rushing , sucking feeling as if caught in the undertow of a wave. This feeling reminded me of a dream I had 20 years ago when a close relative appeared to me at about the same moment that he suffered a serious stroke. In the background of the dream was a constant rushing noise of an ocean with the sucking feeling of an undertow. The relative was afraid and asked me if it was ok to go into it and I clearly understood 'it' to be death. The dream I had 20 years ago was significant to me especially because at that time I almost never remembered dreams, and still didn't until recently. Before the dream I had no knowledge that the relative was sick, he was 1500 miles away and I had not spoken to him for several weeks.
Now, in the book mentioned above, it is suggested that many of the great prophets had OBE's and that maybe where they got information. Specifically St. John described things while he was " in the spirit". Reading the passages in the Bible with these comments, I think it is probable that St. John is referring to a type of dreaming or OBE experience.
If this is so, the question is, can valid information be obtained from this experience that isn't whimsical?
Eric:A few years ago I read a book called Adventures Outside the Body.
Can you tell me where I might find this book or at least who the author is? For many years I experienced the vibrations and sleep paralysis without knowing what was going on. I would struggle to get out of bed for fear that I would die. Only after reading CC's books did I learn to use them as an effective springboard into lucid dreams.
Here it is:
William Buhlman Out of body experiences Book: Adventures Beyond the Body