Sustained Reaction


Sustained Reaction Archive - Page 13

Archive Message Index

What is this thing called ki? From: Lonnie Date: 12/10/99
Re: What is this thing called ki? From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/11/99
Re: What is this thing called ki? From: Lonnie Date: 12/11/99
TO MISUN From: daniel Date: 12/10/99
Re: daniel From: MISUN Date: 12/11/99
A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Aurelius Date: 12/10/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: greggabi@aol.com Date: 12/10/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/11/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Aurelius Date: 12/11/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/11/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Aurelius Date: 12/12/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Calixto Date: 12/13/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Aurelius Date: 12/11/99
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/11/99
guitars, teaching masters, and workshops. From: sven Date: 12/10/99
Dreaming inside another dream From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/11/99
Congratulations! From: Valen Yzabal Date: 12/11/99
Re: Congratulations! From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/12/99
Breaking the power of reflexive world views From: Aurelius Date: 12/11/99
Re: Intendant From: Bishop Date: 12/12/99
Re: Intendant / What is Knowledge? From: Aurelius Date: 12/12/99
Re: Intendant From: Lonnie Date: 12/12/99
Re: Intendant From: Jason Date: 12/12/99
DANIEL LAWTON AGAIN From: daniel Date: 12/12/99
Practising or Realising? From: Peter Date: 12/13/99
Re: Practising or Realising? From: Cara Date: 12/14/99
Re: Practising or Realising? From: Aurelius Date: 12/14/99
This thing called infinity is linear From: Lonnie Date: 12/13/99
Real Abuse from CC & Co. From: Cara Date: 12/14/99
Further Meditations on Physics From: Aurelius Date: 12/14/99
Re: Further Meditations on Physics From: Aurelius Date: 12/14/99
re: Further meditations on physics From: Steve Law Date: 12/14/99
Re: See for Your Self From: Corey Donovan Date: 12/15/99
Elaborate technique to get in to dreaming From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/15/99
Remote Viewers: The Secret History of America's Psychic Spies From: Aurelius Date: 12/15/99
Re: Blast from the Past From: Theophilos Date: 12/15/99
Re: Blast from the Past From: P. Bridge Date: 12/15/99
Re: Blast from the Past From: Corey Donovan Date: 12/15/99
Castaneda & Philosophy From: ixtlan@eleutheria.com Date: 12/15/99
Re: Castaneda & Philosophy From: Lonnie Date: 12/15/99
Derrida & Castaneda From: ixtlan@eleutheria.com Date: 12/16/99
Re: Derrida & Castaneda From: Lonnie Date: 12/16/99
A vague impression on existence From: ixtlan Date: 12/17/99
Flows From: Evan Date: 12/15/99
How Emotions Work From: juliablue@hotmail.com Date: 12/15/99
Re: Blast from the Past From: Janus Date: 12/15/99
Tea Party From: Leonard Zimmerman Date: 12/15/99
Re: Tea Party From: Theophilos Date: 12/17/99
Re: Tea Party From: Leonard Zimmerman Date: 12/17/99
Petty T --- moderator, that is... From: Calixto Date: 12/16/99
Tmoderator is Nyei? From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/16/99
Re: ...even worse stuff than is on this web page... for Dan or Corey From: John L. Date: 12/17/99
Re: ...even worse stuff than is on this web page... for Dan o... From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/18/99
A CULT THAT REALLY "SUCKED" From: daniel Date: 12/17/99

-----

What is this thing called ki?
From: Lonnie
Date: 12/10/99

Hey Badger,

Back to the ki discussion.

I said:

"There are other possible approaches to take in understanding this type of phenomenon that don't involve invoking new entities, forces, etc." --Lonnie

Badger:

Please enlighten me. What approaches are these?

You may not be advocating the view that ki is some kind of ethereal force that becomes available as one becomes more "spiritually advanced" or any variation of that idea. If not, bear with me; you still may find something of interest in what follows.

First of all, to become a very advanced practitioner of Aikido (or of Taiji) or any other "internal" art it is not necessary to "believe in ki". One Aikido 9th dan that I know has remarked that "people talk about ki because they don't understand physics and physiology". A Taiji practitioner that I know who has spent some time studying with Chen Xiao Wang (from Chen village, currently living in Australia, and as I understand the 19th generation banner carrier for chen style Taijiquan) told me that CXW doesn't talk about qi; he talks about "ground path" and "leg strength".

My own teacher does like to talk about "energy" and "allowing the energy to do what it wants."

Most "demonstrations of ki (or qi)" in the context of a martial art are demonstrations of relaxed extension and structural alignment. So, for example, you've probably read stories of Ueshiba sitting in seiza with a row of people one pushing the other the final one pushing on his head in an attempt to push him over and failing. I think these stories are true because (1) I've seen a picture of him doing it and from the picture it is clear how Ueshiba did it; (2) I was able to reproduce this trick myself with very little effort; and (3) I could show anyone how to do it within 5 minutes. If you look at the picture you will see that Ueshiba is leaning forward so that his adversaries are pushing directly along the length of his spine and straight into the ground. He has aligned himself so that they are trying to push the planet. Barring Archimedes' "place to stand" they are very unlikely to succeed. The only real trick is to keep your neck relaxed with a slight sense of lift from the top of your head (famous from so many descriptions of how to stand when doing a Taiji form). This allows you to propagate the force from the push through your neck and down your back. Tensing your neck and shoulders is likely to lead to injury.

Let me make it clear at this point that I don't believe that what I have just described is "all there is to the phenomenon of ki." I don't view it quite as reductionistically as Chen Xiao Wang (but I'm not going to be the one to argue with him about it).

If it's so simple, why does it supposedly take so long to attain proficiency in Taiji or Aikido? Simple. In order to be able to do the trick described above, in order to be able to relax into the push, you have to know it will work and you won't be injured. You can acquire this certainty in a very short period regarding a specific, well understood situation. It takes a long time to (a) learn how to adapt to a dynamic, constantly changing situation using the same principles and (b) acquire the confidence to allow the natural dynamics to work for you, rather than trying to "force techniques."

If someone grabs your wrist with such force that you can feel the bones grinding against one another (something Ueshiba reputedly could do) it's difficult to remember that it doesn't take any strength to point your little finger at his shoulder and thereby by totally disable his system of levers. (If you're having trouble picturing this, go a dojo where they teach such things and have someone show you).

So one aspect of ki involves flexibly and dynamically aligning your body with your attacker's (or partner's) so that his structure is compromised and his force is being directed into the ground. In performing this alignment it is necessary that your whole body function as a unit so that your body becomes a tensegrity structure (referring to Buckminster Fuller's idea not Castaneda's) that distributes any load over the entire body, and small movrments begun at one part of the system tend to be amplified as they propogate through your (and your attacker's) body like a wave.

In performing these adjustments, you can't be thinking "okay, I need to relax my shoulders, okay mind in the hara," etc. The resulting adjustments will be too gross, too late, and carry too much tension. It's like trying to improvise over some changes in a jazz tune. If you are thinking "okay I'll play D dorian over this bar and Ab melodic minor over the G7....", well it's already too late. If someone grabs your wrist you move the parts of your body that aren't being held and focus on the grabber's shoulder, if that's what you want to affect. Your body makes continual micro-adjustments in response to whatever idea or object you are focusing on. Visualization can be a very powerful aid in this regard. If you imagine a stream of water (or ki) surging out of your hara, through your arm, and up through and out your attackers shoulder your body makes the appropriate adjustments automatically (assuming it has prior experience of the desired structure). All the microadjustments share a common orientation. They are coherent (to use a metaphor from optical physics), harmonious (to use Ueshiba's term), and they produce an incredible amount of force that seems to spring magically out of nowhere.

Learning to coordinate all of this with the breath makes these adjustments even more powerful.

So the Chinese say qi (breath/energy) follows yi (mind/intent); li (strength/power) follows qi.

Now here's the interesting part. According to my teacher you can continue to refine this process. No one has found the ceiling on this "manifestation of ki." The techniques can continue to get more and more powerful and allow more and more energy to flow through the system.

That's my current, flawed understanding.

Lonnie

-----
Re: What is this thing called ki?
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/11/99

I once studied Tai-chi with an extremely good teacher, Dr. Fung. A couple of things he said seem applicable to what you just said.

He said that americans got carried away with the idea of chi, that to the chinese it was just as much physical as supernatural. Being american, I immediatly ignored this and started to probe for supernatural stuff, and got him to come up with tails of being able to move leaves with a chi breeze, pick up objects with "sticky chi", etc. But still, he didn't exclude the physical as being part.

This tai chi was extremely embarassing to watch, because it was so sexual. I'd studdied tai chi several places before, learning a couple of different sytles, but I'd never seen anyone go that low, acheive that much alignment with their back leg, or curve their spin as far back as he could. It was like watching a drunk woman do a nasty dance at a party.

He pushed me through a door one time, literally.

Anyway, I concluded that aligning the back leg with the upper body was absolutely necessary, and he even said that and proved it by showing very old pictures of all the masters, and pointing out that they ALL did that. He then contrasted that with modern masters, who didn't align. He said in Hong Kong they laughed at those people and had a saying, "The horse died".

When I related this on SA a year or two ago one of the local "experts" on tai chi claimed that this was simply "so and so style", and not a particularly important style.

It seems to me, that since Ueshiba studied tai chi, maybe he studied with an old time master and also got the importance of alignment, and being japanese he proceeded to condense it down and use it as the basis of something new.

Do you see the same connection between alignment with the back leg and good tai chi (tai ji)?

-----
Re: What is this thing called ki?
From: Lonnie
Date: 12/11/99

From: Daniel Lawton Date: 12/11/99

Comments I once studied Tai-chi with an extremely good teacher, Dr. Fung. A couple of things he said seem applicable to what you just said.

He said that americans got carried away with the idea of chi, that to the chinese it was just as much physical as supernatural. Being american, I immediatly ignored this and started to probe for supernatural stuff, and got him to come up with tails of being able to move leaves with a chi breeze, pick up objects with "sticky chi", etc. But still, he didn't exclude the physical as being part.

Anyway, I concluded that aligning the back leg with the upper body was absolutely necessary, and he even said that and proved it by showing very old pictures of all the masters, and pointing out that they ALL did that. He then contrasted that with modern masters, who didn't align. He said in Hong Kong they laughed at those people and had a saying, "The horse died".

When I related this on SA a year or two ago one of the local "experts" on tai chi claimed that this was simply "so and so style", and not a particularly important style.

Lonnie:

Well, he's had arguments along those lines on other lists, as well.

Dan:

It seems to me, that since Ueshiba studied tai chi, maybe he studied with an old time master and also got the importance of alignment, and being japanese he proceeded to condense it down and use it as the basis of something new.

Do you see the same connection between alignment with the back leg and good tai chi (tai ji)?

Lonnie:

I'm no Taiji expert, but I've played around with some fairly serious practitioners from time to time, and I think there are similarities in body mechanics and strategies between the two arts (Aikido and Taijiquan). There are differences, as well.

If you look at pictures of Ueshiba doing techniques you'll see the alignment you speak of consistently. I think that there are good structural and dynamic reasons for that, though that doesn't mean (as I know you know)that one drags ones leg around as though wearing a splint.

I think that there is real magic in these arts, but the magic comes from working with the physical, physiological, and psychological principles involved. I think that's part of what Ueshiba meant by the phrase "being in harmony with the universe."

Lonnie

-----
TO MISUN
From: daniel
Date: 12/10/99

could you please explain the details, if it is not to personal, of how you were changed by your peyote experience. how were you before, how were you after? has your daily activity undergone any change? how was your personality affected? do you consider your experience to be benificial? have you suffered any types of mental anguish afterward? would you do it again? please pardon my interegation , but im considering it my self, so i would like to know more from non bookwriting people who cut through the romance. gracias daniel

-----
Re: daniel
From: MISUN
Date: 12/11/99

I am a member of an Indian Tribe. Peyote is for members of the Native American Church anyone 1/4 or more Native American blood can join. I have no authority to speak about what goes on in a peyote meeting. personally I was raised a catholic in a strict boarding school I new nothing about the culture of my own people. Peyote opened me up. I saw that Indian people were not what I had been taught. I am on a path with a heart. it is my indian way of life. It is not a religion or a spiritual exercise "Mitakuye oyasin", that is the main basis of our philosohy it means, "all my relatives' i.e. everthing in the universe is related. My start learning about this way of life was my experiences with peyote.

-----
A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/10/99

Many on this list, including the illustrious Daniel Lawton, say they have never witnessed a magic anomaly with a physical effect, and instead view all this as a figment of their (vast) imaginations.

The following experiment may or may not convince you, but it has at least the benefit of being extremely simple. When I first noticed this, it really rattled me, but now I view it as routinely obvious.

It helps to be relaxed, though definitely not asleep. In its original form, I was for a time in the habit of taking hot steamy baths. To get the water the way I wanted it, I would sit in the tub, with the shower curtain drawn (all steamed up), and as the tub filled, swirled the hot water around me to keep my feet from getting scalded. However, I doubt any of that is necessary, since you could just as well be sitting in your favorite La-z-boy recliner.

Anyway, here is the trick: Close your eyes, relax, and move your arms around until you develop a definite mental image of them that matches what you're feeling via your muscles. Then bring the tips of your fingers (or the edge of your hand) up level with what seems to be your "eyes," so that if you opened your eyes, your hand should be right in front of your eyes. Don't touch your face, and keep your hand a few inches away.

Now open your eyes. This doesn't always work for me, maybe 20% of the time I am "working my mental description of the world" so well that my hand really is right in front of my eyes. However, the great majority of times, it's in front of my forehead.

Show of hands, how many know what's in your forehead? Right, something called the Third Eye, which among other things resolves images of ethereal objects, including your hands and arms, which are loaded with ethereal energy and are very easy to see, at least in a vague outline. (Before writing this post, I tried it a few times while relaxing on my sofa, and it worked fine.)

If you can't "see" even a vague mental image of your arms with your eyes closed, then maybe the trick won't work. However, for anyone not in the throes of "scientific denial," this may serve as a straightforward demonstration of an effect that's obviously outside of the current scientific reductionist model of the world.

Aurelius

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: greggabi@aol.com
Date: 12/10/99

Aurelius,

I smiled when I read your description... because in 1968 I met a man named Roy Masters who was teaching a simple meditation exercise which involved eyes closed while slowly raising the back of the hand to touch the center of the forehead.

The back of the hand FEELS like it is passing right THROUGH your head BEFORE actually physically touching the forehead!

The center of the forehead is the place from which we see thoughts...

...just before our attention is drawn away from the present moment by first our fixation upon the them...

...and then our immersion into that thought stream.

To me, the center of the forehead is like the crow's nest, or lookout, high on the mast of our little sailing ship. From that place of unobstructed observation, it is easy to navigate, because approaching danger is easily seen long before it arrives...

...but when awareness falls off that lookout...

...separated from the precious air of the present... the ship cannot be steered... as we drown in the sea of thought.

Sometimes things simple and stupid can be suprisingly profound...

Well... maybe only to the simple and stupid. : )

Greg

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/11/99

You're easily satisfied. I'm not even satisfied seeing an exact copy of the entire room with my eyes closed, including a working and accurate clock on the wall. My hands ending up over my "third" eye just isn't going to do it.

Try this. Get a 25 pound weight and hold it up for 2 minutes in each hand, then put it down and repeat the trick. You'll undoubtedly find your hands somewhere else. Does that mean the weight moved your third eye?

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/11/99

Daniel Lawton said: You're easily satisfied. I'm not even satisfied seeing an exact copy of the entire room with my eyes closed, including a working and accurate clock on the wall.

A: This makes you an interesting case. The term "doubting Thomas" comes to mind. Remote viewing, precognition, telepathy, and even psycho kinesis are all relatively well established. I find it extremely difficult to believe you've never had a bona fide non-reductionist experience. What in your mind would constitute "proof" of a non material effect?

Daniel Lawton said: Try this. Get a 25 pound weight and hold it up for 2 minutes in each hand, then put it down and repeat the trick. You'll undoubtedly find your hands somewhere else. Does that mean the weight moved your third eye?

A: What trick? Can you be more explicit about the effect you're referring to? I don't have any 25 lb. weights near at hand.

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/11/99

>Remote viewing, precognition, telepathy, and I find it extremely difficult to believe you've never had a bona fide non-reductionist experience. What in your mind would constitute "proof" of a non material effect? even psycho kinesis are all relatively well established.

Those would do it. But I haven't seen any evidence they're well established. Last time I posted some doubts people pointed me to all kinds of web sites. None provided any proof, just classes they were teaching, and unsubstantiated stories not as interesting as the ones Carlos told.

I believe scientifically telepathy has been established as a very minor percentage deviation from random, not enough to exclude the possibility of humans learning to beat the test sometimes. The remote viewing is a big disappointment, I haven't seen any real accomplishments beyond some good human intuition. Can you point me to some actual info that shows it's established?

>What trick?

The same one mentioned. Get your arm used to supporting a heavy weight, then see where you palm ends up when you try the eyes closed thing. My guess is that your internal visualization of where your hand is tends to include a small weight since you don't usually have to visualize something at eye level unless you are holding something. So if you fool your muscles with an even heavier weight I bet your hand will end up above your head. But I'll try the experiment without the weight tonight anyway, I'm always looking for any clues.

There probably isn't really any magic in the world, and that wouldn't be so sad since it would cause us to focus back on learning and exploring, which is magic enough. But I'd be happy to find out there was magic.

Seeing isn't magic, neither is dreaming. It's manipulation of perception and awareness, native capabilities of our bodies and minds. Why we've chosen to ignore it as a society is beyond me, but it doesn't justify people coming along and making all kinds of self-serving claims the way cults like cleargreen do. They're worse than the ones that ignore it.

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/12/99

>>> Daniel Lawton said: I believe scientifically telepathy has been established as a very minor percentage deviation from random, not enough to exclude the possibility of humans learning to beat the test sometimes. The remote viewing is a big disappointment, I haven't seen any real accomplishments beyond some good human intuition. Can you point me to some actual info that shows it's established?

As far as books, 3 very good ones are "Remote Viewers" (in SA's bookstore), "The Conscious Universe" by Radin, and "Parapsychology, the Controversial Science" by Broughton, which I recommended to Corey to add. I thought all were excellent, but if you've only got time for 1 try Radin.

You have your conclusion slightly misstated. The deviation of the experimental results from chance is small (between 3-30%), but the probability of the deviation being due to chance is lower than 1 in a trillion, i.e., the findings are extremely significant. Also the experiments have been subject to withering attack, and are designed to eliminate even the hint of possible fraud.

As Radin notes, when Galvani discovered the electric current, by making the frog leg move, the effect was quite weak. But now that we understand it better, we have trillion watt electric power networks.

I think a big barrier is our not having a clue how to discuss these effects, as I note in my post below on "reflexive" world views.

Aurelius

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: CalixtoM
Date: 12/13/99

Daniel Lawton:

"I believe scientifically telepathy has been established as a very minor percentage deviation from random, not enough to exclude the possibility of humans learning to beat the test sometimes. The remote viewing is a big disappointment, I haven't seen any real accomplishments beyond some good human intuition. Can you point me to some actual info that shows it's established? "

Aurelius:

"As far as books, 3 very good ones are "Remote Viewers" (in SA's bookstore), "The Conscious Universe" by Radin, and "Parapsychology, the Controversial Science" by Broughton, which I recommended to Corey to add. I thought all were excellent, but if you've only got time for 1 try Radin. "

I vaguely recall exchanging a few e-mails with a person associated with Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research about 5 years ago (I was in a discussion with some skeptics on sci.skeptic at the time) --- and I'm pretty sure it was either Dean Radin or Roger Nelson. Whichever, I recall he was a nice fellow, an intelligent person. The crux of our conversation boiled down to his feeling that they had some pretty compelling evidence which was nevertheless still regarded as pretty much inconclusive even by the researchers themselves. Kind of the same sort of story as the one you'll usually hear from Dr. Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia, who is probably the most credible past-life researcher in the world.

There is good research info along these lines which is downloadable from PEAR:

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/5.html

What I strenously object to is comparing the efforts of sincere and honest "paranormal" researchers to arrogant, deceptive, dishonest tricksters like CC and company. It just doesn't fly at all anymore, not for me. And so, while I am still quite interested in these issues, personally I am no longer even willing to discuss them in the context of Castaneda.

As for "magic tricks" involving perception, I am currently reading a totally fascinating book on how the human brain is capable of creating all sorts of bizarre "tricks" of perception. I may even post some of this information eventually, if I can force myself to care enough to bother.

-C.

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/11/99

Daniel,

By the way... Next time you're looking at that perfect copy of your room with your eyes closed... Check the parallax and tell me whether you're viewing the scene from 1-1/2 inches above your normal eye level.

Aurelius

-----
Re: A very simple (stupid) magic trick
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/11/99

The perception deffinately doesn't match the bodies point of reference, but it's not consistant like you're hoping for. Typically, my head is pointed down because I'm using the stick technique. So I should see downwards, and I usually start out by noticing my knees, but when I look up my head hasn't moved. I guess it's like a seperate energy body if you want to use that terminology and want to assume there's a real view of the room going on.

Usually there's something clearly wrong. For instance, I don't have a clock on the wall. I have a desk clock. The wall clock is from 10 years ago, I got rid of it, but there it is in my dream room copy. And it works. It didn't work that well when I had it.

-----
guitars, teaching masters, and workshops.
From: sven
Date: 12/10/99

Many years ago I met a fellow who rebuilt guitars. He had one with a straight, narrow neck, it had no label on the inside and it sounded great. I liked it so I bought it. I intended to learn to play.

For many years after that I thought it was broken.

Then one night another fellow coaxed some sweet sounds from it and he seemed to do it with very little effort.

On many other occasions I was presented with the opportunity to hawk that guitar for things I wanted and needed. I just put that guitar down a few minutes ago. It seems to work fine now. The problem wasn't in the guitar...it was in the fingers and the timing.

I am so glad I kept that guitar.

I used to work for a carpenter. He was a journeyman, a master, as good a ever I have worked with. I spent many hours on the other end of his tape measure. "Hold it here like this" and "Hold it right on the end and pull it tight so I can get this", he would say. I remember him saying "when are you going to learn to bring your nail bag with you when you climb up here?"

Now, these many years later I know how to measure and cut and plan my way through any project.

I sure am glad for the time I spent with that man.

There is discussion amongst a few local practice groups. Howard Lee is doing workshops outside LA. They are considering sponsoring one of his workshops. Induction to Energy. Thinking over the topic of exorbident fees... For the moment, the picture I would intend to capture... A group of us, Howard Lee guiding us through a kung fu form, doing a full form together, ..... .

Looking back over past workshops, the money is a non issue. I could care less. I have learned , through associating with other workshops and practice sessions, how to soak up and absorb. I know what I got from those sessions. I think it would be time well spent.

So...for my vote...keep the guitar, do the work, go to the workshops, and listen to the lessons... .

and it sounds like everyone should try to get out of LA for a short time.

thankyou for your attention.

-----
Dreaming inside another dream
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/11/99

In another post I said that sitting down inside a dream and closing your eyes and trying to become silent is a good way to end a dream.

That's not quite true, I felt a little dishonest for saying that.

If you get good at holding a dream, nothing is going to end it. It will fade to black, but you'll instinctively hold on, due to constant practice, and instead you'll get a dream change. And ending dream is really just a dream change too, and during a dream change you have the opportunity to grab on to anything you see and select that new dream. So waking up isn't a problem once you can clearly recognize dream changes. On the way "out" you can grab something else and make that solid.

This fact can be used to "dream within a dream", which to me is nothing more than a simple dream change.

I know that Carlos made this in to some super duper way to stabilize a dream, a magical state, but in reality it's just a risky way to switch dreams. The active methods are better, and a lot more fun. Would you rather lie down and try to go to sleep in a dream, or jump through a painting on a wall into the new landscape? In the one case you drop your awareness, let if temporarily fall off dreaming, then hope to regrab dreaming somewhere else. In the other case you never drop dreaming. You just pick something new, something more fresh.

Any dream change successfully made, with awareness of the dream perserved, stabilizes the dream. That's why this "secret" dreaming technique of dreaming within a dream can be said to stabilize the dream. If you're capable of pulling this off you're already capable of holding a dream.

I've tried this particular technique many times. Back in the days when I was a true believer I was sure I could still feel my reclined body back in the original dream. This gave me a base of feeling. If the new dream started to fade I had the reassurance that I'd end up back in the original dream. The added confidence made it easier to hold the new dream. At times I was even able to detect 3 seperate conditions. The current dream, the previous dream, and my sleeping body.

But dreams are strongly influenced by expectations. If I'd been told that dreaming like this causes the first dreaming body to become immersed in grape jelly, and it was presented in a believable fashion, I'm sure i'd have felt the jelly melting under my armpits as I moved around in the second dream.

Noticing dream changes, learning to change dreams, learning to hold dreams (which really means learning to grab a new one when the old one changes to waking), is what it's all about. Not secret techniques. The secret techniques are placebos to build a reward system to keep you on the cleargreen money wagon.

If you guys won't wake up because of the factual info presented on these web pages, how about doing some real work to become real navigators> Then you'll wake up because you'll realize Carlos was just playing "expert". You'll realize what a deception it is to take your own personal observations and use them to convince people you have universal knowledge.

The only universal knowledge is that if you practice you'll learn, whatever the topic.

-----
Congratulations!
From: Valen Yzabal
Date: 12/11/99

"It just seems self-congradulatory to you because it's still important to you." --Denial Lawton

No, it seems that way because you like to pat yourself on the back because "all the time" you've put into practice, so much more than those you know, and so much more than the Cleargreeners. And also because of your trying to come across as the dispeller of falsehood (as perpetrated by Castaneda & Co.) in terms of dreaming and seeing. Here YOU are, the diligent apprentice, that through sheer time and effort YOU have determined that Castaneda was full of shit - because YOU discovered it! That's not self-congratulatory!? Then what do you call that?

"I could go into great detail on that, and no one would accuse me of bragging beyond the small amount we do everytime we mention something we do." -- Lawton

Unless you constantly mention the long hours you've put into doing this (so many more than others you know of)and make categorical generalizations of what is possible and not possible in the olive-pickling arts.

"People get all bent out of shape when you talk about dreaming because it's supposed to be the be-all end-all of being a super duper sorcerer." --Lawton

I thought "silent knowledge" was.

"Why aren't you accusing them of self-congradulatory accounts?" --Lawton

You actually compare your accounts with theirs? Perhaps your memory fails you.

I don't recall them making their dreaming experiences point to them as experts on the subject. Perhaps if you injected less interpretation and proselythizing into your accounts, nothing would be said.

"Maybe you're confusing the fun I have with bragging." --Lawton

No, I'm confusing all the little pot-shots you take at Castaneda when you relate your "expertise" as "bragging." Hey Ma, look a' ME!

"Do a lot of dreaming, then see if it's such a big deal." --Lawton

What's "a lot?" How about 30 years? I've been conscious in my dreams since I was a child (my parents were really into all that stuff), so have my brothers and sisters (is that bragging?). What's funny is reading the categorical statements you make about the "value" or "practical use" of dreams. It doesn't match our experiences.

You're right in that dreaming is a vast arena of exploration. But, by the same token, you can't realistically set the limits on the possibilities as you've done on ocassion. It's like landing in the desert from "somewhere else" and concluding that you can't swim in the ocean (as your nagual had claimed).

Same with "seeing."

I learned homeopathy several years ago. After I gained some familiarity with the remedies I was able to prescribe based on my "perception" of certain "colors" aroung certain parts of the patient's body (all I had to do was select the remedy that matched the color). I was about 90% effective in selecting the appropriate remedy. The other 10% was mental interference, i.e. I knew intellectually that the symptoms called for such-snd-such a remedy, not the one indicated by the "color."

The thing is, I don't know if this would be considered "seeing." Those "colors" weren't perceived as such, but rather as a dullness in the brightness around a person's body. My ascribing "color" to the dullness was a matter of feeling. I perceived something as blue because it gave me the same feeling as when I "see" something else I know is blue.

I have other examples.

Now, is this "practical?"

On the dreaming stuff, I'm curious to know if you've learned to enter delta sleep at will.

On a last note, when you make statements of expertise on a subject, those that know little or nothing probably won't contest whatever you claim either because they don't care or don't know. Those that do know might say something if they see you saying something misleading, or they might not care and say nothing.

At any rate, if others in this forum "do a lot of dreaming" as you say, they may end up not agreeing with Castaneda, but they may end up not agreeing with you either!

That's the vastness of this enterprise.

-----
Re: Congratulations!
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/12/99

Nice to see someone with a real interest.

>No, it seems that way because you like to pat yourself on the back because "all the time" you've put into practice, so much more than those you know, and so much more than the Cleargreeners.

You're hearing what you want to hear. I do that because I've been saturated for years with hearing the cleargreeners say things like, "We don't practice dreaming", "You can't talk about dreaming", "Don't worry about dreaming, save energy and it will happen", and now, after not practicing, not talking about it, all of a sudden, when the head guru is gone and they need some supernatural porno to entice people with, they claim they're "learning group dreaming".

Here's a prediction: They'll "teach" group dreaming to the workshops, it won't work, then when that glamour wears off they'll "teach seeing" and everyone will be all excited again. Then when that doesn't really work, they'll teach people how to "experience the 3rd attention". Of course, eventually everyone will be old and tired and leave.

They've given people the model of doing nothing except what they are told, not genuinely trying to do anything on their own. Carlos didn't give people that model, it came from cleargreen. He was constantly encouraging experimentation and hard work. The follow orders thing is a pecking order result. The apprentices always set things up like that, in any organization. Otherwise the people who clawed their way to the top feel bad.

So my idea is to tear down that heirachy by motivating people to actually get down to doing whatever it is that attracts them to this stuff, so they can find out now, not later. The only thing that attracted me was dreaming and seeing, so that's what I talk about. I repeat how many hours I've put in to keep people froms saying I'm just good at dreaming, and there's no way they could do that. But I can't win. If I point out that I had to work hard to get here then I'm accused of bragging about how hard I worked. But if I don't say how hard I worked, I'll be accused of bragging about how talented I am. I'm sorry if I didn't get the words just right for you, but it sounds like you have a bug up your butt anyway and there's no pleasing you.

>And also because of your trying to come across as the dispeller of falsehood (as perpetrated by Castaneda & Co.) in terms of dreaming and seeing.

That's exactly what I'm trying to do, guilty as charged. So I guess you're take on it is that although I'm doing exactly what Carlos described, having worked hard doing what he recommended, my results aren't something I can use to dispell myths because somehow I must have gone wrong, since I found out he was exagerating and misleading people. But if I agreed with him 100%, I suspect you wouldn't have such a large bug up your butt. Maybe just a knat.

>I thought "silent knowledge" was.

I get that up the yin-yang and have to say it's overrated. Come on, this stuff isn't difficult to get to happen. Get silent, knowledge comes, you get unsilent, it's useless. Silent knowledge will tell you (after you get over trying to use it to prove your myth) that Carlos was making up arbitrary rules. There can't be any rules!

>You actually compare your accounts with theirs? Perhaps your memory fails you.

I don't get that one. You mean if I posted some of their more arrogant claims you'd rail on them too?

>I don't recall them making their dreaming experiences point to them as experts on the subject.

Then you missed most of their stories. I'll relate some if you want.

>Perhaps if you injected less interpretation and proselythizing into your accounts, nothing would be said.

There isn't anything I can do to please someone who still wants to hang on to Carlos' myths. I used to have an employee who couldn't wake up in the morning. He said I should wake him up. Well, no matter how I did it, he was damned angry each morning. After he came to his senses, he appologized, but that didn't make it any more pleasant for me each morning when I got hell, no matter how I tried to wake him up.

>No, I'm confusing all the little pot-shots you take at Castaneda when you relate your "expertise" as "bragging."

I'm Guilty of the pot-shots, he deserves them and more. But how that's bragging I don't know. Where were you when Carlos was taking pot shots at everything in the world, for hours a day in front of audiences?

>After I gained some familiarity with the remedies I was able to prescribe based on my "perception" of certain "colors" aroung certain parts of the patient's body (all I had to do was select the remedy that matched the color).

Let's test that. Does the patient have to be naked? If not, then you should be able to identify a person under a sheet because you previously saw a color in a specific spot. Bet you can't. If you can, there's 1 million dollars waiting for you at the skeptics society. Isn't that enough motivation?

Look, people make up all kinds of things. I'm not going to believe you "see" colors that mean anything unless you have some kind of evidence because just about every corner psychic says that. The point is, we need to mature and stop buying everything. I'd love to see supernatural proof of special abilities gained through dreaming and seeing. That's why I keep trying myself. But we shouldn't be stupid about it. If someone is selling something based on their abilities, we ought to be darned skeptical.

Looks to me like you're suffering from expert syndrome yourself and are angry with me because I'm saying it's not important.

>The thing is, I don't know if this would be considered "seeing." Those "colors" weren't perceived as such, but rather as a dullness in the brightness around a person's body.

Well now I'm feeling bad for being so hostile, but it's appropriate to reply to a hostile reply with hostility. But you're in to an interesting topic here. Sorry for having ants in my own pants.

I'm a stickler for the rules, so at first I only allowed something to be seeing (to me), if it was a completely abstract vision, which started from a waking state, encorporated what was going on at the time in the real world, and had an accompanying voice explaining it.

But then there's that sticky subject of silent knowledge. My strict personal deffinition would throw out silent knowledge as seeing. But silent knowledge gives instant insight, so why would a voice be needed, and it always encorporates something from the real world. It's so fast there's no long druglike vision.

And then sometimes, in dreaming, the dream gets so wild and energetic, it's pretty hard not to say something different is happening, so why can't it be called seeing.

Personally, I think there's all kinds of seeing. Just about any altered state can turn in to seeing. I believe something should be called seeing when it's no longer a virtual world, one of your own making, and starts to encorporate outside information, factual information derived either from senses or from memory you don't normally have access to. Then it becomes an interpretation method for processing valid input. But it can still be dreamlike, and can certainly be something vague. To me it's seeing because what's experienced is in the realm of "energetic facts", meaning it's absolutely true, without any possibility of denial, at that time (but not later for me).

Wouldn't it be nice if Carlos and the group had come down off their high horses and discussed the topic with us instead of just telling stories about their extreme seeing episodes (which usually had faulty conclusions)? Carlos used to taunt us with promises to "talk shop", but he was too busy with his latest female conquests to even pay attention to what was going on.

I'd like to see a dialogue like this one, but there's no way to have it, either because people get hostile when you dare to discuss it, or maybe because the true believers are afraid to talk about it (cleargreen does punish direct experiences if you relate them), or maybe because nothing's happening out there. I don't know which it is. Something's happening with you. How come you're siding with the people who like to keep a gag on things?

>Now, is this "practical?"

I'd like to find something practical like that, then I'd test it myself. Now don't get insulted when I say I didn't believe you, you know yourself, so what does my opinion matter? And there are a lot of crackpots running around. Haven't you heard the wild claims.

>On the dreaming stuff, I'm curious to know if you've learned to enter delta sleep at will.

I used to do a ton of meditation. A lab hooked me up about 20 years ago and detected delta waves, and also a lot of beta when I wasn't meditating. But I don't know anything about it, so I didn't know what it meant.

I haven't payed too much attention to the bio-feedback thing because I started out as a true-believer and Carlos was down on such things.

>On a last note, when you make statements of expertise on a subject, those that know little or nothing probably won't contest whatever you claim either because they don't care or don't know. Those that do know might say something if they see you saying something misleading, or they might not care and say nothing.

Well, I hope they say something. If people start talking about it, and confidence spreads that anyone can do what Carlos described, it won't matter to me if I get yelled at a bit for "bragging". This page has already had a tremendous effect. People who came in here denying everything at least admit the facts. They don't care about the facts, but they admit them. So I'm hoping people will try to do dreaming and seeing on their own, by working outside the rigid workshop routine. I don't really care what they conclude, so long as they get weaned from mommy.

>At any rate, if others in this forum "do a lot of dreaming" as you say, they may end up not agreeing with Castaneda, but they may end up not agreeing with you either!

Why would I care if anyone agreed with me? The best thing I could find is someone that could consistantly do something supernatural, told me I was dead wrong, there was practical value, then proceeded to give me a working technique. Carlos sure didn't do that.

>That's the vastness of this enterprise.

Thanks, sorry for the grouchy reply, but if you get huffy with me that's what you'll get back. Sometimes things sound meaner in a written post than they were intended. I'd add the moticons but they seem more mocking to me than explanitory :)

-----
Breaking the power of reflexive world views
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/11/99

/// I'd provide some references, but you need a way to interpret them]

I've done a fair amount of reading about the history of science. One can start with Kuhn's classic "Structure of Scientific Revolutions," and I recommend Galileo's original "Dialog of the Two World Systems," in which he pits the Ptolemaic and Copernican systems against each other in a Socratic dialog. But what is amazing about Galileo, and many other breakthrough scientists, is his devotion to mustering facts and observations that others would not have regarded as evidence for anything, and then showing how they fit together to produce a consistent picture, in a new world view.

Early physics was more what we would call common sense. For example, if the world spins around every day (as called for by the Copernican theory) it must be always spinning at great speed. But why when you throw something up in the air, or shoot a cannon in any direction, can you never notice it? The object falls just as if the Earth were not spinning. To handle this problem (one of many), Galileo explored the problem of relative motions. In fact the cannon ball does travel a different absolute distance when fired East versus West, because at the moment of firing it has the velocity vector of the Earth.

He performed many experiments to get a handle on this. He watched a fast horse rider drop a weight, and saw that it rolled forward in the direction he had been riding. He dropped weights from the top of a ship's mast under full sail, and noticed that they fell straight to the bottom of the mast, not somewhere else, because the weight had the horizontal velocity vector of the ship when it was dropped. Here's an amazing one. He took a cage full of butterflies into the hold of a ship under full sail, and let them fly free. The butterflies were not flattened against the cabin wall, but flew normally despite the ship moving at a good clip. Thus the greatest physicist of his time labored to convince doubters that "the Earth really does spin, but you can't notice it." For his trouble he narrowly escaped the death penalty, and died in prison.

/// the effects need to be pieced together, can you think like Galileo?

Fast forward to the present. I read of a study where someone found a tribe that uses the same word for blue and green. When shown 2 "different" color samples they reported they were the same color. Thereby, in the minds of some, proving you can only think about things that you have words for.

/// you need to have an accepted way of talking about it]

My position is this. No one with any degree of intellectual honesty can deny there are strange phenomena that we don't have decent explanations for. Such as flying saucers, of which I saw one once. These are the anomalies at the edge of our world view. But Western rationalism remains strong. It delivers new versions of Nintendo, so it is not in crisis. Nothing is (at the moment) threatening to being it down or replace it. And it has its defenders, who rabidly shout down anyone who challenges it.

Change will come, as it is inevitable that people of the future will consider us as ignorant as we regard the people of the past. However, we do not seem to need more or better experiences. Even before CC burst on the scene with his potentially inflated tales of magic, there was plenty of other anecdotal material to work from. The problem is, if your language has no word for green, you literally can't see what right before your eyes.

Therefore, the only way to make any progress is to tackle the hard problem of sorting the experiences and data and from them building and testing a model of the world that includes both them and sciences as special cases of something bigger. Even if people weren't throwing rocks at you, this is a very risky endeavor, because you are bound to generate a lot of wrong hypotheses along the way, and look like a fool. And you never get any points for being wrong. Far safer to polish the brass handles of some accepted theory than attempt to develop a new one.

/// a new form of science needs to emerge, or be remembered]

I guess what amazes me is that so few people have attempted this, such that if I succeed, I may rank as a great teacher (probably 70 years after I'm dead, that is). I've got various fragments of my "book" lying around, which might be entitled "Analogous Transformations and the Ring Theory," and have resolved to put them up on a web site sometime next year. I can attempt to offer pieces of my reasoning and conclusions from time to time in a "drive by" manner, but you need the entire chain of reasoning, and all the arguments around each postulate, to make any sense of it. And alas it is not a revenue generating activity, so every time I try to spend time on documenting it, some business crisis intervenes. Also, the keys to some of the very hard problems are just now being handed to me, so the theory keeps changing, but I think it's getting more stable.

Aurelius

-----
Re: Intendant
From: Bishop
Date: 12/12/99

Correct me if I am wrong,under your beliefs, everything can be understood, it only takes more time and development, per the human mind. This can only be true if the contemporary human mind is not only at it's apex, but the highest possible development any mind can achieve. If it is possible to understand everything with the present human mind, given enough time and incisive "analyses", then what more could a further advanced species or mind hope to grasp? Postulating that we are sophisticated enough to understand everything is dangerously androcentric.

-----
Re: Intendant / What is Knowledge?
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/12/99

Knowledge and the human mind are strange things to work with. I would say we are so far from working up to our capacity that it is ridiculous to worry any time soon about where our limits might be.

I read somewhere that early humans walked upright with large brains and opposable thumbs for several million years prior to the dates for the first worked stone tools.

Harvey discovered the circulation of the blood in the early 1600s.

Immanuel Kant proposed that the Milky Way was a wheel of stars, like the fuzzy nebula so far away.

Plate tectonics and continental drift were unknown until the 1960's. It took the interstate highway system to blast enough rock cuts to give geologists the data to see what was going on.

Look at it this way:

Reality is extremely complex, and maybe even infinitely complex. Consider DNA or atomic physics. We had to drill deep, and devise sophisticated idea mapping systems to make any sense of the data.

So let's say that "infinity" is also very complex. However, it's loaded with patterns and paradigms, because among other things each element of any world or reality must know those patterns to interact with the other parts of that reality. The trick is to master the "order of subsets."

If you want to "think" about something, you need to slow it down into a visual representation.

One of the bigger barriers is that these experiences come with a built in sense of awe and sacred nonsense that turns off your normal mental functioning, thereby causing you to fail to make any progress towards figuring out how the illusion works.

Whereas in reality you can just add to your model that when X happens "one gets befuddled."

Every effect in DJ can easily fit within a model that says the aura is a giant Bose-Einstein condensate (of stopped atoms) that has extremely low mass, and (in addition to its day job of holding the body together) is capable of tunneling, can selectively interact with different universes, and can select and manipulate dimensionless chreodes (or intent).

If this is so, then the key effects will be maximized when your "mind" drops to under a billionth of a degree from absolute zero.

This is a major big deal when you experience it. But it's trivial to "understand" it, once you grasp what's going on. Some day all of this will be taught in elementary schools.

Aurelius

-----
Re: Intendant
From: Lonnie
Date: 12/12/99

Aurelius writes:

"I may be in a minority on this, but I am convinced that the opinion (whether from those of a religious or scientific persuasion) that there are things that cannot be known, experienced, or discussed is bunk."

Hey Aurelius,

Since I wrote something a while back that could be construed to mean that I take the position you are criticizing, I'll respond.

Aurelius:

"Some experiences are indeed difficult to understand, but in that case we need to develop more penetrating anaylses."

I agree.

"At some point everything will be known and given a description. To assert otherwise is first of all without any provable basis, but more importantly, it is a palisade to the ego."

To make an assertion either way on this issue is without a provable basis. To assert that everything will be known is to take seriously the incredible steps humans have taken in understanding a complex and subtle world. Thus, there is evidence for that claim, but no guarantee that some phenomena as yet unencountered will defy our attempts at understanding. To assert that there are things that are unknowable is to take seriously how little of what is is actually understood and to make the projection that there will always be things that we do not understand.

Either position involves an inductive inference whose validity depends on ones evaluation of the probabilities involved. Thus either position involves a probabilistic rather than a deductive argument and is (by definition) without a provable basis.

"Very convenient. If I cannot know or understand something, then let's define it as unknowable. This gets you off the hook for being the unspeakably stupid moron that you actually are."

Rather an extreme inference to draw. Plus you've stacked the deck (hedged the premises). If you CAN'T know or understand something you may be a "stupid moron" from the point of view of someone who can.

If they don't know or understand something and don't want to go to the effort to do so, then some people might be inclined to say that it can't be known. In my opinion, this state of affairs might support the conclusion that they are lazy, lack sufficient free time, etc. Whether it says anything about their intelligence depends on further arguments you would have to make concerning the correlation between intellecutal laziness and lack of intelligence.

"There are advanced civilizations out there where all this is totally obvious. Unfortunately, we don't happen to be living in one of them."

Cool. It may be unfortunate that we don't live in one of them. Unless, of course, you enjoy the process of discovery.

Lonnie

-----
Re: Intendant
From: Jason
Date: 12/12/99

To know the unknowable you must be obliterated, where then is the knower?

-----
DANIEL LAWTON AGAIN
From: daniel
Date: 12/12/99

have you ever set up a dreaming situation where you invited someone of greater knowledge to come and help you learn more? please tell about it. what type of encounters have you had with dreamt people that have talked to you? if you are able to dream that you are different characters ,then you have at least one practical use for dreaming as a tool for spiritual growth. im quite sure that if you put your self in the position of a black lady in 1942 walking down a chicago street it would be worth a few man of knowledge points or something. it seems to me that our greatest ignorance is what it is to be in the shoes of our fellow beings. for anyone truly interested in seeking knowledge , this seems to be a great place to explore. very scary to think of taking on the pain of others, but it seems that with the pain ,would also come the joy of understanding ,and the loss of the personal ego. i know that its just a show, but have you ever noticed how hummble sam bekket is on quantum leap? please take note ,i AM NOT cutting on you. this is as much for everyone else to read also. it just came to me as i typed ,and is really amazing for me to be thinking about. gracias DANIEL, and everyone. yall(im from the south ,homiez) are a fun ass bunch of folks! daniel

-----
Practising or Realising?
From: Peter
Date: 12/13/99

I would be really interested to know if any one has thought about the issue of realisation over practising. Let me explain. In the movie 'The Matrix' the issue of "realisation" is thrown around. I found this interesting as it's something I've been reading about (I forget where). It's about the possibility that the mind is 'tricked' into thinking that it's learning where in actuality it's gaining belief/confidence in an ability that it already has. Being a guitar player I become conscious of this principle after I have a rare session where my improvisations seem to come from outside of me (I feel like I'm tapping into something). It also makes me wonder whether the sounds I made are mine or are simply a specific kind of 'voice' given to an already present set of "energies". I also think that it only happens rarely for me because you need to be extremely mind-clear (and almost trance-like) and makes me admire the 'masters' (Jazz?) who do this at will, anytime.

Logically, what makes me sceptical at this is the notion that there are people who sincerely believe that they can do something and still fail (a la famous picture of Yves Klein jumping from a building as if launching for flight). But then you're faced with a dilemma like Schroedinger's cat where you simply do not know until you try it. Also there could be an effect in play like 'reverse placebo' where any doubt would effectively cause the experiment to fail. So in a sense I feel as though my mind is going in circles trying to solve this (koan like) riddle.

I hope one of you can shed some light on this...

Peter

-----
Re: Practising or Realising?
From: Cara
Date: 12/14/99

Peter,

You do bring up an interesting subject, one I cannot claim to have any objective knowledge about, yet have experienced. It seems that when I have experienced what I call a "state of grace" is when I have without purpose or intention left behind my self-consciousness. Once a person playing guitar invited me to play with him. I'd never played, yet he showed me a few cords and I ended up accompanying him (in a very limited sense) rhythmically. I was surprised after the fact to realize I'd just played guitar with someone.

I do think it has to do with a trance-like state of concentrated awareness that allows one to express talents our rational minds have prevented us from knowing, i.e, if I'd never had guitar lessons how could I play guitar, etc. I also believe (and this may be naive) that there is such a thing in existence as a stream of consciousness, the akashic records and so forth that in rare moments we can merge with and draw from. I do also believe that "Practice makes Perfect," though, and as in acting, it is best to study your lines until you're blue in the face, then throw them out. They are there when you need them. This is where realization follows practice.

Thank you for your thoughtful post.

-----
Re: Practising or Realising?
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/14/99

I've wondered about this in regard to abilities that I somehow seem to have.

At first I thought I was just a talented original creator who was figuring things out as I went along.

However, the effects went a lot farther than I had ever expected, so I'm having a hard time believing that it's me that doing them.

I think it's also (b) partly being guided by higher outside consciousness, and (c) partly remembering things I must have mastered in prior lives of intense study and dedication.

All three of those elements seem to drive my work.

-----
This thing called infinity is linear
From: Lonnie
Date: 12/13/99

This thing called infinity is linear.

What is infinity? The word infinity points to the possibility that something done once, twice, thrice, can be done again and again in succession--without end.

"Infinity", the noun, refers to a concept, not to a thing, a place, a state of mind, or any other unary process or event.

Infinity has no plans; it has no intent. Infinity is projected time and space, projected space/time.

Infinity is an emergent property. It "appears" as a necessity born of finite reasonings about a finite number of elements.

Ah, infinity...it's "out there", "beyond the horizon", and yet--how many more times will you watch the full moon rise?

Lonnie

-----
Real Abuse from CC & Co.
From: Cara
Date: 12/14/99

<This is part of an SA post I made as a response to the "goings on" at the Tigre site>

  Replica Watches  Replica Watches

Although I was with them pre-Cleargreen, or actually slightly after a few workshop they'd done (one in Arizona, then when I was joining them they went to Maui for the first time - this is '93), so I have no personal vendettas, nor do I know any of the people except Reni, Naie, etc. What irks me is their condescension and control attempts. It is sooo patriarchal - reminds me of the trips they laid on me about not telling anyone anything the "Naugual" had told me - this is all AFTER THE FACT, of course. The "rules" were never laid out until I'd already committed an offense and was then blamed for it, punished to the inth degree, ostracized, publicly humiliated (in front of the group that is) plus, the rules were always changing, as was the dogma. So my attitude presently is as you might guess - "Fuck You!" and whatever I can do to "undo" them I would do so with pleasure and pride. Exactly this type of brainwashing and dysfunctional conditioning is what keeps so many bright people stuck, preventing them from possibly achieving some valuable growth and awareness in their lives.

-----
Further Meditations on Physics
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/14/99

As stated in my prior posts, I believe that magical experience, including Carlos Coyote, can be positioned with a knowledge system that is not inconsistent with science.

However one needs to be a cutting edge philosopher of science, who can visualize and evaluate potential paradigms. This is difficult, and tedious, but it has the huge advantage that the viewpoint is entirely reducible to words that have (for the most part) confirmable meanings, and therefore the result is non-theocratic. Anyone who can master a language can in theory gain access to this form of knowledge without intermediation by (potentially) corrupt priests.

Wittgenstein declares in Tractatus Logico Philosophicus, his seminal text of logical positivism, which is by far the dominant philosophy of our times --

What can be said can be said plainly. What cannot be said we must pass over in silence.

I call this Wittgenstein's Boundary, a chalk circle we may not step out of. But if we can devise penetrating new analyses of phenomena, we can break through the Boundary, or at least push it several layers deeper.

I've written two long papers on various aspects of my theories, which I will post on their own web site next year. Meanwhile, unless someone tells me to stop, I'll post a few bite size chunks to SA from time to time. Like Lawton and his Dreaming, this is Aurelius and his Worldview.

"Know where you are in Time." -- Emerson, Lake & Palmer

Can you think like Galileo? Many issues in physics remain deeply mysterious. Many felt that Newton's theory of the heavens created deeper questions than it solved, because there was (and is to this day) no explanation for Gravity, the most obvious "ghostly action at a distance" problem there is. There is also no meaningful explanation of inertia, momentum, or angular momentum.

Nor do we know what "space" is. Immanuel Kant noted that unlike other concepts, there is only one space, and therefore what we can compare are only parts of the same space, not instances of different spaces. He considered space to be a form of intuition.

Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (1904) was the death knell of theories of "aether" which was alleged to be the medium of conduction for light and radio waves. The Michelson Morley experiment (1889?) had shown that the speed of light is the same in all directions, despite the obvious rapid motion of the Earth through space. Einstein declared "there is no ether."

Others, notably Lorentz, felt there could still be an aether, one that was compressible, and changed shape exactly in step with other movements, so that it merely "seems" invariant. Famous modern guys, notably John Bell, author of Bell's Inequalities, have remarked that there is nothing incompatible with Lorentz's ideas. The problem is that no experimental test can demonstrate it, so it's outside the chalk circle.

But right now, let's not try to talk about space, because it requires to many notions to be developed before it will make sense. A better use of time in this post is to just talk about where we are, as a topic for contemplation. It's been years since I reviewed this, so the following might be off a little, but is basically accurate.

The Earth rotates around its axis every 24 hours, and is about 25,000 miles in circumference. Therefore at the Equator you are moving a little over 1,000 miles per hour. Hence Galileo's problem, if a cannon ball is fired from East to West, prior to its firing it is already moving 1,000 mph, then you "accelerate" it so it moves 1000 mph + whatever speed it leaves the gun. But since the Earth beneath also continues to move 1,000 mph. The cannon ball lands exactly as far away as if you had fired it to the West.

However, we are doing more than just rotating. We are also moving ~18 miles per second around the Sun, ~30 miles per second around the Galaxy, and the whole Galaxy is moving about ~30 miles per second towards the constellation Virgo. So at some times we might be moving 78 miles per second, which is 280,000 mph, or over 400,000 feet per second.

So why can't we feel it? Maybe it's a trick aether within which time and space are cleverly warped so that it always looks normal, no matter how fast you're going. Actually it seems very likely to me that this is the case. The aether is the fine lines of the Ring Theory, but more about that later, once we can derive it properly.

Consider facing into that wind, which would be a deep level of chaos. Consider that your atoms must really do so, thereby sparing you from having to be aware of it. DJ says (somewhere) "outside the safe boundaries of the Tonal a wind is blowing, no metaphor. It's a real wind that can blow your life away." Say thank you to your atoms, for putting up with this huge amount of crap, so you can have whatever experiences you're having.

If we can harness the wind, we'll tap an amazing power source, albeit at the cost of political drama with Lord knows what kind of struggle for control, or maybe slowing the Earth and causing it to fall towards the Sun. But that will be another chapter in human history.

That's all for today's meditation on physics. In future posts I'll tackle the problems of dimensionality and infinity. The world we're living in already has some of the hallmarks of infinity. Be grateful for all that is done on your behalf.

Aurelius

-----
Re: Further Meditations on Physics
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/14/99

>>> "Alias dudu" (huh?) said: What is all this about. What are you trying to realise with words by internet about your little experience of the ME? Why you don't get together to really accomplish something mystical, something great? Why you don't go somewhere outside our own point of reference?

If this experience of selflessness is so uniquely valuable, then why have literally all of the people in my life who claim to have had it so deeply flawed as individuals?

Why do I in my plodding way now understand the infinite so much better than they do? I am saying quite seriously that if anything, getting immersed in the infinite is a huge barrier to understanding it. It makes you feel like you are so superior, and yet you are just as ineffective as before.

Why the haste for quick experience in the infinite? What does it buy you? What are your objectives? It is a hallmark of all fundamentalists that they want the Rapture of Christ to happen right now.

My position is, I believe, more subtle. It's cool to flip into the higher dimensions, but our world is so disorganized now that there's no social support for it, and hence all such efforts are individual and unique. We already have tons of realized masters and experiences, and what does it buy us. The world still hangs by a thread of military, ecological or biological disaster. Our spiritual practice is not measurably better now than it was 3,000 years ago.

I do the work of the world. The world needs to move forward. The way forward is not to drag everyone into the rapture of christ, or any other such uniquely personal realization.

The way forward lies in developing a deeply founded general understanding of the working of the universe, so that all may share in it without intermediation or the mere quirk of innate personal gifts.

In my view, the next-next-next step, the one we must take precisely now, lies not in going off and having some kind of deep personal experience, which is neither unique or useful. Rather it lies in building a bridge of words that all may walk upon. To move everyone towards these realizations in a fully democratic and open manner, free from the absurd abuses of all prior religions and cults.

I believe this is the path of pure understanding, which last time I checked was a fully authorized method of spiritual progress.

Aurelius

-----
re: Further meditations on physics
From: Steve Law
Date: 12/14/99

Aurelius wrote:

"...and the whole Galaxy is moving about ~30 miles per second towards the constellation Virgo."

Virgo is within our galaxy, isn't it? As far as I'm aware all the stars in the night sky are. It's only faint blobs like Andromeda which are outside our galaxy.

Other than that, I thought it was quite good.

Yours pedantically,

Steve

-----
Re: See for Your Self
From: Corey Donovan
Date: 12/15/99

"Fuzzball" writes:>>>>Mr. Donovan thinks Mr. Storm's writing is "execrable."<<<<

Yup, it's true. But since my basic philosophy is to present the facts and let people make up their own minds, here are a few excerpts from Valen Yzabal's favorite book, Hyemeyohsts Storm's *Lightningbolt*

"This is the story of what it was that changed my life. In this book you will meet Lightningbolt. I, Hyemeyohsts, am Lightningbolt. There are two reasons I use this name and title my book *Lightningbolt.* There were people who were very precious to me who called me by that name. The second reason I use the name Lightningbolt is that I am no longer the same young man. I am now in my fifties. Lightningbolt became Hyemeyohsts. . . . . In the story you are about to experience, you will journey along with Lightningbolt on his search for his identity and freedom. You will be present with him as he battles his massive ignorance. There is not a lot of explaining about what young Lightningbolt is seeking during the opening episodes of the book, so have patience. Allow yourself to not know, and ride along with Lightningbolt through Montana and Wyoming and through his time. The picture will become clearer as you and Lightningbolt get to know one another."

As the tale wears on, Mr. Storm finds out that an old woman whom he sees regularly at his reservation, Estcheemah, is "one of the latest of a long, unbroken line of Zero Chiefs. Much of their information was studied and taught in many ancient Temple-Schools of the Americas and passed down through the discipline of the Flower Soldiers." This Zero Chiefs' tradition supposedly goes back to some mythic "City of the Great Avenues" in ancient Mayan Mexico or Central America, and the book is full of nice photos of Mayan temples, along with pictures of animals and totems and medicine wheels.

How does a North American Indian woman become privy to the New Agey "peace and light" style secrets of the ancient Maya? Don't expect an answer from this book. And, conveniently Estcheemah dies at the end, and Mr. Storm supposedly doesn't use her real name or identity anyway. (Sound familiar?)

Mr. Storm claims: "The teachings the Zero Chiefs present to our world can change our lives for the better. Through them, we discover that there is no mysterious, murky, dark side of humans, or of Creation, that people are forced to fall victim to. Instead, we learn the reasons for the battle within the human Self. We learn that human ignorance is our greatest enemy--not Creation, not Life, not our Mother Earth. We also learn many of the reasons we humans were created. . . . . Estcheemah taught me that human ignorance and fear are our greatest enemies. She told me that the Zero Chiefs of long ago discovered that humans will do anything, including murder, to escape Self Responsibility. This, she explained to me, is why so many people in our world are confused about who they are and why they are here. . . . . Here was a human who knew the true importance and measure of Life. Estcheemah knew our Mother Earth. She had the courage to speak of Creation and all the other things I was so desperate to learn about. 'Life is precious,' Estcheemah told me. 'It is the most profound of all experiences known in Creation. Life is Sacred and ever present because Life is Presence. To try to escape the rigors and rewards of Mother Life is to escape Existence.'"

But there must be some content in a picture-jammed book of over 500 pages you insist, even if there is more white space than one has ever seen in any book devoted to a narrative? Okay, here's the core, the "Discipline of the Flower Soldier":

'The Discipline of the Flower Soldier has taught how training for battle helps humans understand the delicay of Life,' Estcheemah told him. ["Him" is Mr. Storm, who always refers to himself in the third person.] 'And war teaches how very easy it is to kill. Life must be respected.' 'How does duty to the Self train the mind?' he asked. 'We can tell our Self anything, right? What is the truth for the Self?' Estcheemah smiled at Lightningbolt's questions and enjoyed how he wrestled with the obvious. 'Yes, some of us speak to the Self,' she answered. 'Flower Soldiers have learned that Life is the truth for those who live. Death is the truth for those who have died.'" . . . . 'Teach yourself, Lightningbolt. This is the only way you will end the pain of your desperate ignorance. Ignorance is the greatest foe of the Flower Soldier. For us Flower Soldiers, Self duty is the path to achievement and Self command.'"

So "Valen," or whatever your name is, if you found a real profound, life-changing message in this book, I'm happy for you, but to me, the writing and level of attempted bamboozlement of the reader is "execrable." If it were a child's coloring book, it would be one thing, but this Storm dude has more ponderous self-importance than a U.S. Senator. Give me the fictional "don Juan" any day.

-----
Elaborate technique to get in to dreaming
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/15/99

Here's a new technique, which works everytime for me, but really doesn't do anything at all in and of itself. The thing that usually jumps out at me while I'm doing it is that I end up taking a side road, that has nothing to do with the technique. Yet I end up in dreaming anyway, so I still credit the technique. For instance, I start the technique, wonder when it's going to work, then realize the incredible detail at which I'm visually seeing what I was trying to do. So much so in fact that I notice I'm standing in a dream world.

So if anyone likes to hear about more techniques (they pay good money for them at workshops!), here's a freebie.

Lie down before bed, close your eyes, and visualize building facades in a row, in front of you. There are some streets in Los Angeles like that, continuous building facades. Try to imagine building facades with mild features. No dark doorways, no deep windows. Flatness is best. Don't put any streets in the middle, it should be continouos from left to right.

Hopefully it will be a little visual after a while, but the technique will probably work even if it isn't. If it's not visual for you, I'd put more time in to learning to get silent. It's more entertaining if things get visual. I never had visual results until I spent a lot of time learning to get silent.

Now, out of that line of facades cut a square. Put some people in that square, standing vertically, with their arms up. They should be so close together that they form another facade, a facade of people, completely filling in the square.

Visualize them with clothes that don't stand out, so that if they are standing very close together they wouldn't really be much different from the rest of the building facades. I don't know if it makes any difference, but I always visualize them slightly to the right of center.

Now imagine the people are waving slightly from side to side, in an attempt to blend in with the facades. Look at the overall row of facades, without focusing on any particular detail, with the intention of noticing how the side to side motion of the people makes them practically invisible.

For me, by now I'm in to dreaming, but not because of the technique, but because by now some other unrelated opportunity has presented itself.

I didn't mean to imply this was a special dreaming technique, but it's typical of what personally developed dreaming techniques can be like. Complicated, irrational, personal, but they work. The idea of Zuleica giving you a secret technique handed down for generations, involving a coffin and the planet mars, seems really naive and sounds made up to me.

-----
Remote Viewers: The Secret History of America's Psychic Spies
From: Aurelius
Date: 12/15/99

Lawton asks: The remote viewers book will provide compelling evidence that people actually can do that?

SRI and NSA ran a remote viewing activities for many years. The author interviews a large number of the people who were involved in them. A lot of cool stuff happened (generally with certain star performers) until Congress got spooked by the hard core determinists and shut it down.

Evaluating any form of subjective evidence requires great care. The best approach is to keep score on how "consistent" various uncorrelated sources of information seem to be. The more uncorrelated the better, to minimize believer bias.

This in turn leads you to formulate hypotheses about what those seeming consistencies may be telling you. But if you don't have any models of potential consistencies (isomorphisms) it is nearly impossible to develop or evaluate new paradigms that might validate the observational data.

Those who don't seek this kind of knowledge don't find it.

-----
Re: Blast from the Past
From: Theophilos
Date: 12/15/99

I have read hundreds of posts in the past month. Yet in spite of all the "evidence" and compelling stories from the reformed members of SA, I cannot subscribe to their conclusions. It's not that I don't want to believe in their conclusions, or that I don't value their opinions. The man may definitely have been the sociopath you claim that he is. There is no need to cling to any beliefs concerning the man or his books. Yet I can't help but comment on the farcical nature of some of the testimony.

Dan Lawton is a business man. In his testimony he repeatedly emphasizes such things as the amount of money spent travelling to workshops around the world, the amount of time spent on Dreaming and Recapitulation, how everyone knew that he was a model warrior. He spent X dollars and Y time in a venture which has yielded 0 return. Is this for real? Can CC's books (or any such teachings) be measured in these terms?

In one of the excerpts from the 1997 interviews Dan boasts about the physical transformation he underwent and the fact that 40 lbs were shed. The interview at certain points begins to sound like an endorsement for a butt master or some such commercial product. Again, the sales pitch from the business man. But Dan was the unwitting victim under the cult influence at the time, and now soberly states:

<<<<I lost weight by starving myself because Carlos made such a big deal out of appearances. I ate 500 calories a day for about 6 months. That was pretty typical in the class. You got a big reward from Carlos if you lost weight, so people really got in to that>>>>

Basically stating that the weight loss was a misguided attempt for a pat on the head from the Guru. The pattern and the themes of Dan's testimonies are always running in the same direction. Please forgive me for playing the devil's advocate, but the trial thing is SA's game not mine. Dan, I hear you on a lot of things, but most of all I hear a disgruntled business man who's not happy with the kind of returns on his investment. I also hear someone who wanted recognition for his efforts. I don 't think any type of spiritual endeavors will ever be your cup of tea. The benefits will always be a little on the sublime side.

As for myself I don't see any need to draw any conclusions either way. The benefits that I gleaned from the books will not be affected either way. Most of us did not travel all over the world to follow the Guru or participate in the workshops. However, many of us did learn the value of breaking our routines, erasing self importance, Dreaming, and many other things, even if only to a small degree. Not everyone is looking for the $100,000,000 sweepstakes jackpot. As time goes by undoubtedly many more people will voice their unfilled expectations, but a few will remain grateful for the sense of mystery invoked. Two very different perspectives on the same thing.

If you listen carefully you can still hear the faint cracking of gourds.

t

-----
Re: Blast from the Past
From: P. Bridge
Date: 12/15/99

Dan Wrote: <<<<I lost weight by starving myself because Carlos made such a big deal out of appearances. I ate 500 calories a day for about 6 months. That was pretty typical in the class. You got a big reward from Carlos if you lost weight, so people really got in to that>>>>

Theosophis writes: " "Basically stating that the weight loss was a misguided attempt for a pat on the head from the Guru. The pattern and the themes of Dan's testimonies are always running in the same direction."

I have to agree. The way Dan acted is exactly how you turn a person into a guru. Dan wanted the auditory hallucination of Carlos saying "hey you look great" which in the warriors way does not compute! Some guy says Lose Self Importance and Dan gets all wrapped up in his appearence. Some guy says change your routines and Dan starves himself to death. And of course some must have percieved Carlos as an 'all seeing, all knowing' for surely he would know if you were being naughty (self important) or nice (impeccable). With concerns like these Dan surely wasn't practicing the warriors way he was continueing the social way of achieving something. If Dan really understood the warriors way he would have been able to see that his own selfimportance was only getting worse by being in the Sunday Group. And if the warriors way was really important to him he would have left the group.

Theosophis writes: "Please forgive me for playing the devil's advocate, but the trial thing is SA's game not mine. Dan, I hear you on a lot of things, but most of all I hear a disgruntled business man who's not happy with the kind of returns on his investment. I also hear someone who wanted recognition for his efforts. I don 't think any type of spiritual endeavors will ever be your cup of tea. The benefits will always be a little on the sublime side."

Yes, it is very interesting to note that a business man is a person who sells things and will say or do whatever is needed to sell something. If you feed Dan Cleargreen stuff, Cleargreen stuff comes out of him. If you feed Dan Sustained Action stuff, Sustained Action stuff comes out of him.

Where are his own thoughts? What is this persons individuality made of? Where is the real Dan Lawton?

P. Bridge

-----
Re: Blast from the Past
From: Corey Donovan
Date: 12/15/99

So this is "pick on Dan Lawton" day, huh? He can handle it, and more, and he certainly doesn't need me to defend him. I just want to remind you that it's going to take more to justify your continued veneration of "don Juan" and his creator than these transparent attempts to discredit Dan based on his own guilelessness and frankness.

Theosophis writes: "Basically stating that the weight loss was a misguided attempt for a pat on the head from the Guru. The pattern and the themes of Dan's testimonies are always running in the same direction."

P. Bridge writes: "I have to agree. The way Dan acted is exactly how you turn a person into a guru. Dan wanted the auditory hallucination of Carlos saying 'hey you look great' which in the warriors way does not compute!"

I respond: What the fuck?! Are you still using groupspeak terms like "warriors way" to put down people who have shown more commitment to this path than you've probably ever dreamed of? You are way, way offbase. Dan, in my experience, wasn't looking for Castaneda to say anything laudatory about him. I remember Dan being concerned that Castaneda was not as tough on us Sunday people as he was his own group. If anything, Dan wanted to be told where he was going wrong, and didn't want Castaneda to pull any punches. It was Castaneda who, for whatever reasons, used to laud a number of us. (In retrospect, the men that he lauded, for the most part, were the wealthier or more influential, whom he may have seen as being in a position to help him in some way.) And after Dan sent Castaneda a letter about his improved health, Castaneda used to take credit all the time for Tensegrity having saved Dan's life.

P. Bridge continues: "Some guy says Lose Self Importance and Dan gets all wrapped up in his appearence. Some guy says change your routines and Dan starves himself to death. And of course some must have percieved Carlos as an 'all seeing, all knowing' for surely he would know if you were being naughty (self important) or nice (impeccable). With concerns like these Dan surely wasn't practicing the warriors way he was continueing the social way of achieving something. If Dan really understood the warriors way he would have been able to see that his own selfimportance was only getting worse by being in the Sunday Group. And if the warriors way was really important to him he would have left the group."

What crappy, misplaced judgments. The fact is Dan, and others in the Sunday group, did what Castaneda has don Juan advise him to do regarding his admiration of "Professor Lorca" in his last book: "Sorcerers don't admire people in a vacuum. They talk to them; they get to know them. They establish points of reference. They compare. What you are doing is a little bit infantile. You are admiring from a distance." [The Active Side of Infinity, p. 120]

Dan went for it. He didn't sit back "admiring from a distance." First he published out of his own pocket the Nagualist Newsletter, which brought a lot of people together for the first time, and helped generate a larger audience for what were to become the Tensegrity workshops. Then he got invited to Sunday sessions after the August '95 workshop. A year or so later, he got invited to many night sessions with Castaneda and his companions, a drive of an hour and a half or more one way from Dan's home in Orange County on a daily basis.

Dan was relatively fearless too about talking up and asking questions in class (something that most were afraid to do, especially after those who asked "stupid questions" inevitably got disinvited). He really got as close to Castaneda as it was possible for anyone but his lovers and favored few to do, and learned everything he could from him. And, like others of us in Sundays who were continually told that we were all going to "go together" with Castaneda and his group (meaning, somehow, "into Infinity" when Castaneda left), Dan was prepared to sacrifice all for whatever was asked of him. (Some of us "survivors" have gotten together and shared notes over the last several months, and one of the strong running themes is that most of us didn't expect to still be around at this point. Castaneda had so emphasized that we were going to be "leaving" soon, and insisted so successfully that all are focus be on him and what he was asking us to do in our lives that we stopped planning for any kind of future.)

So for you to malign Dan as someone who was just going to classes to get a pat on the back is sheer "armchair warrior" garbage. You weren't there, many of us were, and we are trying to get across our experience for those who are interested just as well, objectively and completely as we can. It regularly appears, however, that many on this page have their "shields" or filters turned up to maximum most of the time.

And, of course, the few of us willing to try sharing our experiences in this environment have expected ongoing, hostile attacks of this sort. (The reason you don't hear from more of us is because others are too sensible to waste time communicating with people who are out to twist their words simply to perpetuate their own fantasy images of someone they admired from afar.) But I suggest that you show a little more respect for yourself by trying to be a little more open to what people are trying to say to you here, speaking from the heart, about a subject that most of us here have taken very, very seriously. At minimum, I submit that the cheap shots are far beneath someone who claims to be on "the warriors' way."

-----
Castaneda & Philosophy
From: ixtlan@eleutheria.com
Date: 12/15/99

Hello, everyone. I'm a Japanese reader of Castaneda. I've written some notices on Castaneda in alt.dreams.castaneda. Now I come to know this site. My conclusion is that his words are to be put in the world of western philosophy.

Because he used some notions that philosophers elucidated, and surprisingly, he did not deny his involvement with western thought.

My hope is that Don Juan's words become clear and clear so that its meaning and limits emerge in front of my eyes.

I'd like to write down here some items or focuses of arguments such as time, space and so on.

There was an article here on Hermeneutics, comparing with J.Derrida, I didn't have time to comment it, but when it comes to Derrida, I surely doubt this is hopeful.

Because if Derrida read Castaneda, I think, he will perhaps deny Castaneda. What Derrida fought is Heiddegerism in that existential thought appealing to death, 'inner voice' come to some 'spiritualism' that has danger of Fascism. Of course, the story will not be so simple. But at least Derrida wouldn't go straight to Castaneda, I surmise.

-----
Re: Castaneda & Philosophy
From: Lonnie
Date: 12/15/99

Ixtlan writes:

"There was an article here on Hermeneutics, comparing with J.Derrida, I didn't have time to comment it, but when it comes to Derrida, I surely doubt this is hopeful.

Because if Derrida read Castaneda, I think, he will perhaps deny Castaneda. What Derrida fought is Heiddegerism in that existential thought appealing to death, 'inner voice' come to some 'spiritualism' that has danger of Fascism. Of course, the story will not be so simple. But at least Derrida wouldn't go straight to Castaneda, I surmise."

Derrida argued against what he called the "metaphysics of presence" on political, philosophical, and psychoanalytical grounds. He adapted Heidegger's analytical method (historical de-struction) to his ends and over-turned (in the sense of turning them upside down--not of refutation) Heidegger's conclusions.

I don't know whether Derrida read Castaneda, but it's fairly likely that Castaneda read Derrida, since Derrida was making something of a splash in academic circles in the late sixties.

The (possible) link between Derrida's ideas and those of Castaneda has to do with Derrida's argument that there is no experience of "true presence" at any point in the cognitive/perceptual chain of events. Neural processes are processes of coding and decoding (metaphorically, reading and writing) and textuality (in which meaning/being is mediated in the absence of the referrent by the word, code, or sign) prevails.

Thus, perception is, in Derrida's sense, interpretation.

Of course, Castaneda, like Heidegger, Plato, and many others critiqued by Derrida, having attempted to erase the prevailing mark of authority (in Castaneda's case, western rationality), attempted to replace it with his own.

In other words, according to Derrida, western thought is like a palimpset where each successive "authority" attempts to erase what came before and replace it with his own discourse, his own claims to privileged access to Being.

I would say Castaneda fits very well within Derrida's paradigm.

Lonnie

-----
Derrida & Castaneda
From: ixtlan@eleutheria.com
Date: 12/16/99

Thank you for your comment. Do you have an impression that the problem of 'interpretaion' is something that Derrida and Castaneda's common base ? That is at this point they agree ? And apart from it, there is so called a 'metaphysics of presentation' in Castaneda that Derrida would reject ? I can not but think that No.12 of Castaneda is a sort of phono-logos-centrisme. In this sense, Derrida can be a weapon to criticize Castaneda.

-----
Re: Derrida & Castaneda
From: Lonnie
Date: 12/16/99

Ixtlan writes:

"Thank you for your comment. Do you have an impression that the problem of 'interpretaion' is something that Derrida and Castaneda's common base ?"

I see moments of similarity between the two. I think they're after different game (this, of course, is just my interpretation).

"That is at this point they agree ? And apart from it, there is so called a 'metaphysics of presentation' in Castaneda that Derrida would reject ? I can not but think that No.12 of Castaneda is a sort of phono-logos-centrisme. In this sense, Derrida can be a weapon to criticize Castaneda."

I think that Castaneda was aware of Derrida's ideas because in one of his talks he mentions the "French Deconstructionists" and says that some of them are brilliant but in the end their position just leads to confusion. Also, whenever making fun of the French and Academia in the same context, he always refers to Michel Foucault, who was, I believe, one of Derrida's teachers.

I think that Castaneda, having argued from a hermeneutical perspective on perception that the "world" (extreme equivocation on this word) is an interpretation built on an underlying energetic reality, attempted to establish himself as the sole remaining authority on this reality (the end of the lineage, the last nagual).

If this isn't logocentrism, I don't know what is. It fits perfectly into Derrida's criticism of everyone from Plato to Heidegger. If anything, Castaneda is an unusually blatant example of what Derrida calls the phallic or totalizing gesture, the gesture of authority, the claim to priviledged access to knowledge, direct experience of the face of pure Being.

So, having erased the Logos in the form of Christianity, Eastern Mysticism, Western Science, whatever you grandma told you, whatever anyone but Carlos told you, he writes the Logos back into the discourse in the form of that dual entity, the Nagual.

Lonnie

-----
A vague impression on existence
From: ixtlan
Date: 12/17/99

At first I have to point out that Don Juan discourse radiates some tone that we can't but refer to 'existentiel'. 'Existantial' means a theorie of existence, while 'existentiel' means an attitude toward existence(by Heidegger). Take an example from the fourth volume, Tales of Power.

"If you come here ready to die, there shouldn't be any pitfalls, or any welcome suprises, or any unnecessary acts. Everything should gently fall into place because you're expecting nothing." --- That's easy to say, don Juan. I am on the receiving end, though. I am the one who has to live with all this. --- It is not that you have to live with all this. You are all this. You're not just tolerating it for the time being. Your decision to join forces with this evil world of sorcery should have burned all the lingering feelings of confusion and should give you the spunk to claim all this as your world." (Tales of Power, Touchstone book,1974, P.155)

Expecting nothing, because of death awareness, signifies having no time. The possibility faded. Normally this sort of situation is a bad thing. Nevertheless don Juan takes it as a kind of salvation. We don't know why it changes to a salvation of men.

But so called existentialism including that of Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Jaspers has an intuition of 'cyclic structure' of human phenomenon. For example, if we fall into despair, it is this despair that saves us.

A danger, imminent situation can be taken as, at the same time, an opportunity of salvation. Experiment is ex-peril, this thinking is itself of dangerous in some cases. But we proceed despite of it.

The latter words of don Juan are involved with 'the world'. The world is pulled to the 'ego', 'I', so 'I' and 'the world' is not divided into two parts that usually contrasted as 'subject' and 'object'. 'You are all this' means that you are the world, the world is you.

Thus we obtain two major points, discorse of death(decision), discorse of the world. In each aspects we can find these how akin to Existentialism. So profound that we can't distinguish don Juan from the amount of Kierkegaard's Heidegger's Jaspers' opinions.

-----
Flows
From: Evan
Date: 12/15/99

Do any of you feel flows around your bodies? I once was on a controled substance, zoning out and breathing. At a particualar moment I became aware of forces, or tensions. I would turn my head to left breathing in and the right breathing out, like the recap movment. All the sudden as I would turn my head left I felt a tension or flow, it would gain momentom till I would turn it right, it was like I was turning my head against a flow intill it came in sinc with the right movment. Though not as intence (exept for certane ocasions) I felt the flows ever since. I have even extend it and form it. I have done experements with cats where I would zoom sum energy past there noses, or whetever, and watch what hapens. Nothing conclusive but there has been many sincronis moments.

I bought the tensegrity book, and emidiatly lost it (allong with my guitar, a story within it's self) and never got into it. But, since I came aware of the flows I have discoverd moving and dancing does "exite" the flowy feelings in my body. So I discoverd that "tensegrity" is also a universal tool, but puting into such regamented paterns cramps my style. I like thinking of it like the extetion of the dance of my mind. Form follows function.

Has anyone here done Akido? It has the most likable, elegant theory that I have ever seen. It's a soft martial art that focuses outside forces (a punch maybe) and instead of blocking it and triing to punch the other guy faster, you use his force to equalize the confliced emidiatly. what I like about it is that the "mind" has forces of it's own, so when we communicate we are just doing a more (alot More) complex version of sparing. So if you can get past the imidiate meanings behind words, and feel there force, you can exicute dances that inhace the dance of your "body" by thousand. Unity is what it is all about. Ideas "about" our body fracture it's unity! So start not doing the habitual ideas of the mind. It truly is a joyfull experance.

I had forgoten about carloses "power pet" was a cyote. There trixters you know, allong with bugs bunny.

-----
How Emotions Work
From: juliablue@hotmail.com
Date: 12/15/99

Hi all!

I recently stumbled on the following quote from the book "How Emotions Work" by Jack Katz. I found it to be helpful in trying to understand the mechanisms behind the (presumed) suicides of some of Cleargreen's elite. The [bracketed comments] are mine.

"Members of elites know that they cannot escape the privelages of their status. When wars fail [as in Japanese who commit ritual suicide] and markets crash [as in bankers and stock brokers who jump from 11th floor windows], leaders know that they will not suffer as much as will the lesser participants they have long called upon to sacrifice and maintain the faith. For those who were in elite positions, there may be no way to avoid living in the disgrace of relative comfort and status if they continue to live, and that comfort and status would belie the true nature of their long-professed committments to the collective enterprise. In their suicides they hope to instill honor into their elite status as having always been based on a communal spirit. Through suicide the self is taken out of society in order that a noble spirit may remain in support of the community. In the eyes of the honorable suicides [as opposed to suicides motivated more by the desire to avoid unpleasant feelings] their self-sacrifice is believed to be altruistic, helping those who remain sustain the faith that their sufferings are rooted in honorable committments."

I thought it was interesting that though the author was talking about Japanese officials committing harakiri and financial moguls jumping out of windows, that this notion (choosing to kill oneself in order to preserve the integrity of a group belief that has supported one's elite status) might also be applicable to the scenario that has presumably taken place in our small corner of the world. At least it makes some sense to me. So what the hell, maybe it will help others here get some clarity on the topic too.

Julia

-----
Re: Blast from the Past
From: Janus
Date: 12/15/99

Theophilos wrote: "Most of us did not travel all over the world to follow the Guru or participate in the workshops. However, many of us did learn the value of breaking our routines, erasing self importance, Dreaming, and many other things, even if only to a small degree. Not everyone is looking for the $100,000,000 sweepstakes jackpot. As time goes by undoubtedly many more people will voice their unfilled expectations, but a few will remain grateful for the sense of mystery invoked. Two very different perspectives on the same thing."

And P.Bridge wrote: "If Dan really understood the warriors way he would have been able to see that his own self importance was only getting worse by being in the Sunday Group. And if the warriors way was really important to him he would have left the group."

Those who put so much money and commitment into attending seminars, and particularly those in the Sunday group, came off worst. Some of you may be very cold and clear in your thinking, but I doubt whether, if you had had the chance or opportunity to become part of the Sunday group and meet with the man, you would have been able to maintain the dry and dispassionate style of critique you display here. It's easy to point out mistakes and misconceptions and criticise motivations after the fact, in the light of the Post-Castaneda world in which 'of course' he failed to glow and burn and leap out of the world.

I wasn't there, and I'm grateful for that. If I had been I'm pretty sure I would have fallen in at least as deeply as Corey and Dan and the rest. From across the ocean I invested heavily in Carlos. His work was massive, dense and inscrutable, obscure and enlightening at the same time, pointing as something deep beyond intuition and seeming to challenge almost every orthodoxy available. It shot down western rationalism and pissed all over New Age wooly whismy all at the same time. You could feel the glow of the guy from the other side of the world, sense his power and charisma and audacity, his wildness. I wasn't sure I believed him when he said he was going to leap into infinity, but I desperately wanted someone to challenge the grey modality of the times, and if anyone was going to do it my money was on him.

The crucial thing is he said he was going to do it, repeatedly and emphatically, over and over again. He charged tons of cash to teach people techniques that would allow them to follow him. He even said in interviews 'come with us, make the leap out there, we will find you'. His teaching wasn't open ended, just a means of becoming your "true self" and being whatever you wanted to be; it was goal oriented, teleological. Very specifically aimed at a very particular definition of transcendence.

And he failed, or so the evidence implies. Failed so dramatically - his wasted, cancer riddled body pumped full of morphine at the point of death then hurriedly and secretly cremated - that the question remains whether he ever really believed it himself, whether any of it was any more than just a big scam, a joke, the merry dance of a charismatic and emotionally cold, intellectually brilliant trickster. From stuff I've heard here and elsewhere I've considered the notion for months that it was all a self-delusion, there's no magic and no nagual, nothing byond the evryday. If all you do is read SA that's the sort of conclusion that starts to seem obvious and inescapable. But then I remember the truly wondrous events I've experienced on this path, without Castaneda or any of you, and the equation starts to balance.

The purpose and task of SA as I see it is to unearth the truth behind his death, behind Cleargreen and the understandings and motivations of the rest of the party. We have a right to know.

Ok so those who were in deep and closest to him are those who feel most wounded and betrayed, and their attacks and criticisms do seem overtly vicious and damning. Hell hath no fury as a cultie scorned. But I think behind them and supporting them there's a great body of Castanedarians who are able to hold onto both perspectives and keep hold of the value of much of the teachings while wanting and needing to know the truth about what was really happening on the inside.

Janus

-----
Tea Party
From: Linda Zoontjens
Date: 12/15/99

Diana wrote:

>> Why didn't you all just LEAVE if stuff that bothered you was going on when you went to see Castaneda or interacted with Cleargreen or the witches???>>

I was not a member of the Sunday class, so I have had limited interaction with Castaneda, the witches and Cleargreen employees. I can assure you that if I did see Carlos dogging women or physically attacking them, that I would have stepped in and said or done something to prevent this from happening.

Iíve mostly helped Cleargreen with organizing events in my home city and with their bookstore and registration at workshops. Iíve spent a lot of time on the phone, speaking with Grant and have to say that he has always been one of the nicest and sincere of all of the Cleargreen staff I have gotten to know. I understand that he is no longer employed there. Geovanna, another very nice person, once spent a night in my home while Cleargreen had an event here because she was in charge of the bookstore. At the Boston workshop this Spring, I was in charge of the bookstore.It was not until I went to the Boston workshop that I started getting news of the goings on at Cleargreen. Until that time, I consciously did not believe that Castaneda had died. I thought, "Oh, they faked his death and he must be in Mexico somewhere, preparing to burn from within." I heard last September that Greg & Gabi had taken videotapes of him and that he appeared to be in failing health. I thought that he must have been performing a "stalking" maneuver. In April, I heard that the Blue Scout was actually born in 1957 and that Carol Tiggs was married and going to acupuncture school when she was supposed to have been in the "Second Attention", as well as the rumors that CC had had sex with all the trackers. I spoke with Nyei in May and she told me that sorcerers can be in two places at one time in regards to Tiggs and that it was impossible for the Blue Scout to have been born in 1957 because she was "so young". She denied having had sexual relations with Castaneda as well.

It was not until June that I assimilated all of the information available and finally came to the conclusion that these guys were not sorcerers and were, in fact, running a scam. The entire process from when I found out about the videotapes to when I had this realization took about nine months. So obviously I was in denial for a long time because I did not have all of the facts at one time available to me. If everything that is now available on the website had been available to me in the beginning, I would have discontinued participation much earlier.

So, Iím thinking that for some folks, the assimilation process may take longer or be shorter depending on the individual. I also think that more information will eventually become available and those who will be hardest hit will be those who continue to cling to denial in the face of contradictory facts.

-----
Re: Tea Party
From: Theophilos
Date: 12/17/99

Linda wrote:

<<<It was not until I went to the Boston workshop that I started getting news of the goings on at Cleargreen.>>>

Would you reveal what goings on at Cleargreen that you discovered at the workshop?

<<<As I was selling the Cleargreen products, I began to feel really sick and queasy about foisting a package of lies on the public. I don't know how those guys can do it. >>>

You mentioned that it was in June that you came to the conclusion that it was all a scam. What realization did you come to in Boston that made you feel this way?

Another thing which I am curious about. The energy at that workshop seemed to be quite low. I mean people were really dragging their asses. They were huffing and puffing, and couldn't seem to get the movements. These were pretty sedate and gentle movements that people were struggling with, at least in my area. But then even the instructors were forgetfull at times. Was this typical of workshops over the years? How would you compare the Boston workshop to earlier ones?

t

-----
Re: Tea Party
From: Leonard Zimmerman
Date: 12/17/99

Theophilos wrote:

>>Would you reveal what goings on at Cleargreen that you discovered at the workshop?>>

From my previous post:

In April, I heard that the Blue Scout was actually born in 1957 and that Carol Tiggs was married and going to acupuncture school when she was supposed to have been in the "Second Attention", as well as the rumors that CC had had sex with all the trackers.

Actually, to be fair, I found out about most of the goings on (that I know about) after the workshop, which included information about orgies, women being abused, people within Cleargreen having drug and alcohol problems, parties which included the ingestion of Datura, as well as the information contained in the chronologies.

Theophilos wrote:

>>You mentioned that it was in June that you came to the conclusion that it was all a scam. What realization did you come to in Boston that made you feel this way?>>

In April, I was still under the perception that perhaps the lies could possibly have been some sort of stalking maneuver, but that the possibility we had all been fed a pack of lies could have been true as well. Coming around to the absolute and final conclusion that these guys were frauds was a process that took me until June. Perhaps it is similar to the feelings that people have when they have a terminal illness and realize that they are going to die. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross who wrote a book called Death and Dying writes that people go through five stages when they have this realization. The stages go in progression through denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.

>> The energy at that workshop seemed to be quite low. <SNIP> Was this typical of workshops over the years? How would you compare the Boston workshop to earlier ones?>>

I was mostly busy at the bookstore to really notice how the workshop was going, but people told me that they felt that the Boston workshop seemed to have low energy. Since I was so busy and overwhelmed about the information I had received, I donít want to compare it to other workshops.

-----
Petty T --- moderator, that is...
From: Calixto
Date: 12/16/99

Creating the first anonymous TModerator account for Tango moderation was, in retrospect, a very stupid mistake on my part. The person I created it for became, basically, a pawn for Cleargreen, and then passed it on to ... god knows who. And so now we have a puppet for Cleargreen controlling the main practitioner mailing lists. Great.

I always thought (and still do) that anonymity on the internet should be supported, since in a discussion where every voice is equal, it really shouldn't make any difference who one is, the thing is whether or not one's arguments stand on their own. But now I could almost kick myself for failing to see that this obviously DOES NOT APPLY when the anonymous position in question is a position of AUTHORITY and CONTROL, because then that person is NOT in a position of equality with other list participants, and therefore should be identifiable and accountable. Having an anonymous moderator sets up a situation where "hostile takeover" is possible, thus it can easily result in all kinds of undesirable scenarios.

In short, it is totally UNETHICAL to have an anonymous moderator, and thus it fits perfectly with the rest of the things those scumbags do, and hey, come to think of it ... it now seems FITTING to have an anonymous tyrant moderating the practitioner mailing lists.

I mean, in the overall scheme of things it's not like it really matters anymore or anything, right? :-)

-C.

-----
Tmoderator is Nyei?
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/16/99

I have to guess that Tigre's Tmoderator is Nyei. I say that because of the repetition of cult babble that matches other messages Nyei has created for the web page. Such as "personal Taxonomy". And if it isn't Nyei, whoever it is is certainly copying her lingo. Who was it that claimed there wasn't any cult babble around her and people were being unfair?

It certainly wouldn't be surprising for Nyei to openly deny Tmoderator is connected to cleargreen. Nyei is the one who can turn an ordinary phone conversation into dreaming, redefine sex to protect Carlos' image, express her total love for the blue scout because of her alien origin, and deny the obvious facts based on a gloss she inherited from Carlos such as "she looks so young".

But that's just my speculation. Anyone know who Tmoderator really is? To me it's really sinister if Cleargreen is controlling the mailing lists. It's like the take over of the cult warning network by the scientologists.

-----
Re: ...even worse stuff than is on this web page... for Dan or Corey
From: John L.
Date: 12/17/99

You have said several times that you want to see Cleargreen crash. What is your first line argument against Cleargreen? What is the number one thing Ďrevealed? so far on this site or elsewhere, that would bring it down?

-----
Re: ...even worse stuff than is on this web page... for Dan o...
From: Daniel Lawton
Date: 12/18/99

Realistically, the only thing I believe will bring it down is the inevitable return of one of the witches or the blue scout, to undo it. But that will take a long while away from Carlos' influence, plus a change in life style. Might take them 20 years to realize what they did.

For now there isn't much hope, especially since some of the true believers are starting to make up wild tales about their energetic experiences at workshops. In the old days Carlos would have slaughtered anyone making such claims, but these days I suspect any supernatural lie will be greatly appreciated by cleargreen. So if enough people start claiming there are tentacles coming out of the energy tracker's vaginas, or that they commonly share dreams with cleargreen folk, I expect there won't be anyway to kill this sick group.

But the benefits of bringing it down are that the honest facts, including details we don't know yet, would be available. I still believe that Carlos did in fact learn to use his perception in a different way, perhaps some kind of zenlike state of silence. I'd like to know. But as long as the "myth" is held up, with people turning into god and living 5 billion years, we won't be able to find out what Carlos was really about.

Considering he himself said he'd given us everything we needed, it's odd that people insist on giving up the benefit of the colapse of cleargreen in favor of shelling out more money to have rehashed workshops with Carol Tigg's new lies added.

Menopause anyone?

-----
A CULT THAT REALLY "SUCKED"
From: daniel
Date: 12/17/99

i was vaccuming today, and remembered that i had been taken in by a cult before, but had never realized it until looking through the eye ive gained by studying this forum. a few years back, i took a job selling kirby vaccum cleaners. when you go to get the job, they have others come in at the same time and give you all a presentation ,and have you leave for an hour to think about it. only come back if you think youve got what it takes. if you come back, they tell you that they could tell youd be back and the others wouldnt, and make you feel part of a well kept secret, that this is a little known ,easy way to get rich, and they chastized people like lawyers for going through so much trouble and schooling, whereas youre going to make more money than them just by following their proven winner formated sales techniques. every morning ,i swear to god, they had us sing kirby songs together before going out to sale. they tell you that having your own office with people working for you ,is just around the corner, right from the beginning, but youre always just short of what you need, and there trying to figure out what youre doing wrong, but sure its just a miner glitch and will be identified. i found out that the only people who had offices, were the main mans best freinds that got into it with him in the begining. even though in the begining i was promised a gauranteed weekly minimum, iwas later prased for my true dedication for going some weeks with a zero paycheck and told that such dedication would surely get me an office. one of them decided that if i got some expensive jewelry to show people i had money, which i didnt, then i would start to feel the vibe and join their ranks. when i told them that i was not into material things, they said that i was sick, and took me to one of their houses to show me what it was like to have things and have people respect you for it, to cure me. they actualy said cure me. when i wouldnt get some jewelry and buy a new prestigious car to elevate my financial vibe, i was literaly ignored and forced to leave. i promise you this is not a joke, but kirbys really are good vacuum cleaners, or to use their taxonymy or whatever, HOME MAINTANANCE CARE SYSTEMS! the kirby office later closed, and my old boss left town and was never seen around here again. (i live in a pretty small town) daniel

Sustained Reaction Archive Page 14