2000 - WEEK 16 Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14288 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: AB Well, here now is an opportunity, so perfectly laid out that I cannot help but add my responses. First, Craig provides us with a quote from Alice, the philosopher/spiritualist. Then, Chris, the scientist, seemingly, counters her teaching. At least I think he opposes it, but then, he always looses me, when he attempts poetry and colloquialisms. I have to agree, totally, with Alice, because having just read that, find it to be the MOST accurate description, I have yet to read, of the most REAL experience I have had in this life. " A flash of light breaks through to aspiring mind; a sense of unveiled splendour for a moment sweeps through the the spirant, tensed for revelation; a sudden realisation of a colour, a beauty, a wisdom and a glory beyond words breaks out before the attuned consciousness of the artist, in a high moment of applied attention, and life is then seen for a second as it essentially is." When that happened to me, there was no doubt, at all, that it was more real than anything the physical senses had ever or would ever perceive. Then Chris tells us that it is wrong to try to teach children the discipline needed to reach such revelations. I think he, first, needs to explain what sucking eggs is, because SCIENCE has left us with eggs which are not safe to suck. Then, he should also consider this. Children, which are not given any form of guidance/teaching, do not turn out to be little angels, on their own. Research, applied in Germany in the 40's, proved quite the contrary. They turned into hideous monsters. I suspect that Chris is not really telling us that we need to stop trying to teach our children. After all, he is teaching teachers to become better teachers. I agree, that we must stop teaching them all that crap that dogmatic religions try to ladle out, but does he not see that most of us, on this list, have already discarded that part of the old religions. Sword rattling may get the attention of the masses, but, for many here, this attempt at drama only makes us think he is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Let me point out that I don't say Chris is wrong. I understand his research, look forward to learning more of it, and I was the one that begged him to rejoin the Keys, when other's responses had driven him to leave. What I am trying to suggest is that, somewhere between the thinking of the Philosopher and the Scientist, there lies a "middle path", that we all need to find and use. And I think that Chris is really much closer to this middle path than his scientific verbiage allows most to see. I hope he is not insulted by my critique, as it was meant to aid in the furtherance of the work and was not intended as a "put down", of any kind. Would it be unkind, to tell a budding songwriter not to quit his day job, before he gets his tunes on the radio? With all due respect, Rick -- ICQ # 19753992 visit my web pages at http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ and http://petracity.intercosmos.com/index.html The only really natural diet http://www.neanderthin.com have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14289 From: Rick Audette Subject: [OT] Additional Artwork http://petracity.intercosmos.com/page_5.htm Still no text on page 5, but all the pictures, for that page, are now in place. This sequence of illustrations has Petra using her mind, with a little guidance from Glenda, to transform her plain white room into a thing of beauty and utility. BTW, if you like the artwork, feel free to make and use copies. I am not putting any copyrights on the comic. It is my gift to mankind. Rick -- ICQ # 19753992 visit my web pages at http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ and http://petracity.intercosmos.com/index.html The only really natural diet http://www.neanderthin.com have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14290 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Re: [Rick] Re: AB Hello Rick ... Some part of Rick seems to be having quite a strong reaction to what I am writing ... "Then, Chris, the scientist, seemingly, counters her teaching. At least I think he opposes it, but then, he always looses me, when he attempts poetry and colloquialisms." Where does the label of Scientist come from? Is this a projection and perhaps limiting description of who you perceive me to be .. and where you perceive my work as coming from....? Whilst this label is applied, there is the implication of the division between the Church and Science ... with the followers of the Church being the "good guys" and the Scientists the "bad guys" By the way, it was religion which originally split Heaven (Soul) from Earth (body) and separated the priest and the healer from and created the two separate languages .... the original pain in the neck comes from the head being separate from the body "Then Chris tells us that it is wrong to try to teach children the discipline needed to reach such revelations." Where did I say that? If the Child already knows these things, and is aware of its oneness with God ..why does it need a revelation ..? Or is this an adult's projection on the child? "Then, he should also consider this. Children, which are not given any form of guidance/teaching, do not turn out to be little angels, on their own." Anyway .. what is an angel ... I never used that word Rick .. is that what was projected on you as a child "Research, applied in Germany in the 40's, proved quite the contrary. They turned into hideous monsters." Lets see ... '40's .. that was 60 years ago ... hmmmm Germany .. now what was Germany going through 60 years ago .. this date is right in the middle of WWII Now lets see ... the children of Germany inherited thousands of years of idealogical warfare from the adults who would consider themselves the peers and teachers of these children who became the victims ... to perpetuate the history of monstrocities they had been taught by the adults. BTW ... Do I detect in here the concept of Original Sin ... I always thought that in Law, someone was innocent until proven guilty .... except in Canon Law "I suspect that Chris is not really telling us that we need to stop trying to teach our children. After all, he is teaching teachers to become better teachers." Did I say that? The true teacher cannot teach anything .. but can only remind someone of what, on some level, they already know .. "I agree, that we must stop teaching them all that crap that dogmatic religions try to ladle out, but does he not see that most of us, on this list, have already discarded that part of the old religions." Hmmm ... this is why there are quotes from the dogma and doctrine of a 2000 year old religion being used to support the arguments and persuasions within the debate on this list ... and why the same debate is carried out in a language, the etymology of which, is rooted in Roman Catholic Definition and Translation "Sword rattling may get the attention of the masses," hmmm ... I can't find that Sword, Rick .. can you show me when I took it off ... and where I disposed of it because I released the need to defend myself and what I write...? "but, for many here, this attempt at drama" Huuuh? "only makes us think he is throwing the baby out with the bath water." Huuuuh? "Let me point out that I don't say Chris is wrong. I understand his research, look forward to learning more of it, and I was the one that begged him to rejoin the Keys, when other's responses had driven him to leave." No .. I left because I was busy writing a series of seminars for members of the State Welfare and Education Departments "What I am trying to suggest is that, somewhere between the thinking of the Philosopher and the Scientist, there lies a "middle path", that we all need to find and use." They are, in reality, walking the same path .. the only thing that is keeping them apart is a language held on to out of pride and prejudice ... "And I think that Chris is really much closer to this middle path than his scientific verbiage allows most to see." Where do I use Scientific Verbage ... if you would like me to write in the language of the Psychologist and the Scientist, then I am quite happy to do so ... There is an interesting discussion on the moulding of the consciousness states of a child from birth to enlightenment which I could post here ... I needed a dictionary to read it .. and I had to go back to my textbooks to grasp the meaning of some of the words it was using ... and when I did this, I threw the report out with the bath water "I hope he is not insulted by my critique, as it was meant to aid in the furtherance of the work and was not intended as a "put down", of any kind." Not at all, Rick .. I see more in what you are writing than many might think ... "Would it be unkind, to tell a budding songwriter not to quit his day job, before he gets his tunes on the radio?" Aaah weeaaal ? I have always said that which assists me to find a manner of speaking and use of words which makes what I am writing more easily acceptable without reaction from the reader .. But then, haven't you noticed. Rick, that oft times I do write to invoke a reaction ... which is a revelation of some hidden program from the unconscious thus bringing it to the light of consciousness ... which is the definition of Enlightenment. "With all due respect, Rick" Thank you for the reaction ... and the re-en-actment Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14291 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: OT .. Children CHILDREN People of the Earth, people of the Planet, Command of the Earth has been entrusted to your care. Honour it. *** The colours of the sky, the colours of the water were once blue and blue. Now they are grey and brown. *** The colour of the grass was once green. Now it is poisoned yellow. *** The colour of the earth, once rich black brown, is now a myriad of colours, a poisoned rainbow. *** I would say to the Children "Wake Up". *** I would say to the Parents "Wake up". *** I would say to the Adults of the world Wake up and hear the cry of the Children generations distant, the cries of the unborn, for theirs is also the right to Planet Earth. *** You are merely guardians, trustees, custodians. *** The land is not yours, the trees are not yours, the seas are not yours. *** You are here because Mother Earth permits. *** But whether or no you understand, whether or no you accept, you are pledged to a bargain as has every generation before you, to honour respect and care for that on which you walk. *** It is your children who would show you the way. *** It is your children who cry when the hunter's arrow strikes, when the harpoon finds its mark, when the bullet pierces the flesh. *** The Children cry, for they remember, for they know, for they look to their future and see the wanton destruction by their ancestors. *** It is the children who see the futility of war, for they see with clarity that there is no reason bar the petty hatreds of men. *** They remember the purpose of their incarnation to enjoy, to learn, and further, they realise that learning need not take the path of destruction. *** Listen to the children, and listen to the cries of the unborn, that they also may have a chance to experience Planet Earth. *** This I would ask, for I am Father Sky. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14292 From: J J Dewey Subject: Emotion and Karma I have started a new endeavor, my friends, and created an e-mail newsletter that will have some of the best of my teaching posts. I just sent the first issue out to 2800 on my mailing list so this should help expand the influence of the teachings. I also plan soon to start a physical newsletter. We will have to charge something for that to cover costs, but it will allow many to have a good clean hard copy of the best of the teachings. I'm sure there are some on this list who have received the newsletter by e-mail. If you do not want to receive it because you have read all the archives or for some other reason let me know. On the other hand, if you do wish to be on the newsletter list just send me an e-mail and let me know. Write SUBSCRIBE in the subject area. If you wish to receive a free copy of the physical newsletter (for those in the US) also send along your physical address. Glad to see you delving into Alice A. Bailey, Craig. That was a good quote. What was there in particular that impressed you? Geoffrey made an interesting list I thought I would comment on briefly: "I have been part of this list for about a year but I still do not feel that I am one of you. My life is different from most of yours as:" As far as I am concerned Geoffrey you are pretty close to me. Note my comments in parenthesis I do not have allergies (Nor do I) I do not have rashes (Nor do I) I have never been suicidal (Nor have I) I do not have major illnesses (Nor have I) I have had no major accidents (Had one but it was a great learning experience) I do not smoke (Nor do I) I do not drink (This is where I have one up on you. I am a moderate drinker and studies show that moderate drinkers, especially of red wine, are healthier - and perhaps happier - than teetotalers.) I do not take drugs of any kind (Nor do I) I do not use the Bible to back up what I say (I use whatever people believe in to assist with the assimilation of the truth, but of course, you may use if different approach than you do now if you presented the amount of material that I do. It is understood here that the final authority is always the soul.) I am still happily married to my first wife (You couldn't be happier than I am to be at a distance from my first wife and with my current sweetie) I run my own business (And I too) I am too busy to write often here (So am I but I just push myself and write while others are sleeping. Right now it is 3:30 AM and I'm just getting started) I have no financial problems (I pay all my bills and can always buy a new pair of underwear when I have the need some so I guess I'm OK here too) I have no relationship problems (Neither do I, but there are some that have a relationship problem with me) I really enjoy a beautiful life (I would describe mine as interesting rather than beautiful. I like the word "interesting.") I am not paying off any karmic debts, so what am I doing here? (How do you know this my friend? I've had fun paying off some of mine. For instance, I'm paying off karma by teaching this group and am enjoying it immensely. Also about one life in seven is a Sabbath and fairly carefree so this may be your time of rest and relaxation. Maybe you'll find yourself working much harder in the service of mankind in the next life.) I have not been through the Dark Night nor do I intend to. (All go through this sooner or later whether they intend to or not. If this life is your Sabbath you won't have to be concerned about it at present) I try to live with the Christ Consciousness (I think all of us on the list do this) I am really grounded (I consider myself fairly grounded also.) I listen to my intuition (I'm with you here too). I need to work on my modesty (Some think I need work here too, but I don't think or concern myself much about this). I am trying to learn by other peoples mistakes (We're in harmony here). I must be doing something wrong somewhere as I am much to happy, or maybe we are allowed to just enjoy this life. JJ We are certainly allowed to enjoy life my friend. I am glad we are both enjoying the ride here. Everyone has their ups and downs and I'm sure I have had my share of problems, but even in the darkest night I find things to enjoy and a future to look forward to. I think most people on the list have a pretty positive attitude. Check out Craig for instance. It's just that if a bee stings you your attentions is drawn to that small part if your body that hurts to the exclusion of the 99.9% that is feeling fine. Conclusion: Overall Geoffrey we are much alike and I know I have much in common with many on the list. Thus you probably do too. Thank you for your unique post. Thank you Claire and Sanna for clarifying your thoughts. In this case an exchange of thoughts brings us closer to agreement, or at least understanding. There are two points in Sanna's post I will comment on. (1) "I don't remember who, but somebody said that karma is created when one or both (or several) parties have any energy involved. If nobody cares, nothing happened. For example, I don't think any of you cares what kind of toilet paper I buy." Karma is usually defined as either a debt to be paid or a positive balance from which one may draw benefits. Thus the mere act of caring has little to do with the creation of karma. I believe I know the teaching you are referring to, however, which I believe to be a true one and it goes something like this. Strong emotion such as love or hate, desire or repulsion, fear or protectiveness creates not karma, as we understand the term, but an energy link that will bring you into repeated contact with the person with whom you share such emotion. If such emotion carries with it any degree of attachment then this person must be faced in relationship again and again, life after life, until you learn to let go of him and the emotion connected with the relationship. Even the lower octave of love creates this problem. Love from this angel would be defined as: "the desire to keep another in relationship because of what they do for you rather than what you can do for them as the prime motivator. This is why forgiveness is so important. If you hold a grievance and do not forgive then that negative feeling crates a link that will draw that person back into your life until you do learn to forgive him on all levels. Imagine the future consequences if you have a dozen people in your life that you have not forgiven. In a future time or life you will have a dozen annoying people in your circle of work or friends and be beside yourself as to how you could have such bad luck in choosing associates. If you merely have a feeling of attachment toward another a real debt (karma) is not created. Thus you can free yourself of the link instantly at the moment you let go of attachment. This concept is probably why some believe that you can release yourself from karma with a decision - because they have mistakenly called the linkage of attachment a karmic debt. Instead the linkage we have to others because of attachment merely holds a lesson to be learned. Karma is different. You can learn your lesson, but still owe the debt just as happens in real life. You can run up your credit card balance too high and learn the lesson not to let that happen again, but the sinking in of the lesson does not pay the bank. You often find yourself making payments long after you have learned to not over extend yourself. The linkage because of emotion creates no karmic debt, but is immediately dispelled by forgiveness or the release of the binding emotion. (2) In response to my comment on breaking promises Sanna states: "There again, humanity has made a collective judgment that it is "wrong" to share sexual partners with others. That is not the ultimate "truth" in my mind, but something we have made so." The main point I was making was not around sex, but around the subject of honoring your commitments and your word. If a person makes a promise to not eat peas and another is depending on this promise for some reason then he should honor his word. If he does not want to honor it then he should seek a release from the person to whom the promise was made. This has little to do with whether peas are good or bad for you. If we are to learn to be one with God and establish reliable soul contact through that oneness then we must all learn to honor our word when it is given to another, especially if it would create pain or harm to this trusting person if the word is broken. If we wish to obtain liberation then we must learn to be as the Spirit of God within and keep our word in all matters. When we thus become like the Spirit we commune with the Spirit. Because I understand this principle I have always been very selective about giving my word, for the breaking of it does create definite effect and karmic debt that must be dealt with in a future time. If you have an uncommitted relationship and have sex with another person with the understanding that multiple partners is part of the agreement then you are not responsible for your friend's hurt if he should take offense. But when you make a promise to another soul and that person places trust in you because of that promise then the breaking of that promise can create tremendous pain, pain that would not occur if both parties were true to their word. If you thus betray a loved one through the breaking of your word, the time will come that one with whom you have placed your trust and given your heart will betray you. The pain through the betrayal of a loved one has little to do with attachment. You can be very detached from a spiritual point of view yet suffer pain through the broken word. But do not we suffer pain in relationships because of attachments? Not necessarily. In a romantic relationship there is a bonding through the circulation of energy for the two become one as the scriptures says. Now you may figure that you are not attached to your little finger and could live without it, but this detachment does not spare you any pain if someone were to rip it out of your hand. Similarly in a committed relationship the other person becomes like a extension of your body and this severing of half of that which makes up a greater life is very painful no matter what state of detachment you have reached. The Christ himself, the greatest of us all, formed a greater life out of the twelve disciples and because of the flow of energy and the betrayal by Judas he suffered enormous pain and came close to dying in the garden of Gethsemane as a result. One who is detached as the ancient wisdom teaches can release any person from any relationship and let hem go their way. But he will realize the principles involved and work with the energies so the pain on all sides is at a minimum. Question: Do you think that honesty and the keeping of your word will have a positive effect on health? Why? Chris and others have indicated that we should not put a lot of weight on past writings like the scriptures, Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey. What do you think? If a writing or teaching is confirmed by your soul does the passing of time lessen the value of the teaching? Is Chris right in this statement: "To hold onto these words as the truth rather than as a stepping stone to greater understanding is, IMHO a retrograde step which denies the possibility of greater unfoldment." Copyright 2000 By J.J. Dewey All Rights Reserved Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14293 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: [ OT ? ] Question on another illness An illness not mentioned by JJ is manic depression. Going back to the archives I note JJ said: JJ's post #787 Solar Questions "Date: 22 Feb 2000 12:06:23 -0000 Subject: [keys-l] Solar Questions ... Some of our greatest teachers and leaders on this planet are these entities who are now centered on the Spirit, but are obligated to give a great service before they can obtain liberation. They are not laggards, but advanced souls with a debt to pay. "Abraham Lincoln was one of these." I have read about Abraham Lincoln and many historians now strongly suspect that he suffered from severe manic depression. Any comments JJ (or others) re causes for manic depression? lk Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14294 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: [Rick] Re: AB "Whilst this label is applied, there is the implication of the division between the Church and Science ... with the followers of the Church being the "good guys" and the Scientists the "bad guys" That is not what I was implying at all. Without reading any farther into your letter, let me say that I don't see either as being good or bad. They are merely extremes in views, that need to be brought to a balance. I chose you as the scientist, because much of what you write seems to discount the spiritual side of our nature. I don't think you feel this way, but what you write seems to imply that spirit is nothing more than some sort of electrical emanation, radiated from the DNA molecules. I also called you scientist, based on the resume you posted in one of your posts and the constant referring to the fact that only you can be right because you have 15 years of research to prove it. If you do, in fact, have a balance, it tends to get over shadowed in your writing. I hope that clears up what I said. I have to agree with others, in that 1) talking voice to voice would probably work much better for us and 2) if we want to go any farther with this topic, we should take it off list. Now I'll go and finish reading the rest of your post. Rick -- ICQ # 19753992 visit my web pages at http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ and http://petracity.intercosmos.com/index.html The only really natural diet http://www.neanderthin.com have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14295 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: Emotion and Karma J J Dewey wrote: "Chris and others have indicated that we should not put a lot of weight on past writings like the scriptures, Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey. What do you think? If a writing or teaching is confirmed by your soul does the passing of time lessen the value of the teaching? "Is Chris right in this statement: "To hold onto these words as the truth rather than as a stepping stone to greater understanding is, IMHO a retrograde step which denies the possibility of greater unfoldment." Chris made that statement to me when I quoted Alice Bailey and has said similar things when I and others have quoted scripture to elaborate on a point. I was going to comment at the time but far be it for me to be seen as argumentative :-))) But since JJ has brought it up as a matter for discussion, my belief is that my soul can choose a myriad of ways to teach me truth. One of them is the written word, and in particular, inspired writings. Of course, as JJ has intimated, they have to be run past one's soul for verification. An eye for an eye philosophy may have been OK thousands of years ago in terms of the Law of Moses but it was cancelled out by the Law of Love as taught by the Christ. So everything one reads must be passed by the light of the soul for confirmation (but that does not apply to the written word only but to everything that comes our way so why 'pick' on just the scriptures or Alice Bailey?) I feel it is perfectly valid to use spiritual and other writings to verify and elaborate on the truth . I can honestly say that once the written word comes alive by the power of the Spirit it is as if it becomes my own experience and who is anyone to deny that experience. I have noticed that even Christopher uses the scripture on occasions when making a point. Could anyone reasonably deny him that right or suggest that he is 'holding onto these words' just because he uses them in his writings? I certainly wouldn't. I am perverse enough to end with a scriptural quote on the status of scripture as the Word of God (with a smile to all those who think I'm deluded). It comes from 2 Timothy 3:16 - 'all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work'. I would view other writings that speak to my soul in the same light e.g. the works of Alice Bailey. In my view, these writings assist my 'unfoldment' rather than inhibit it; when the Spirit makes them come alive for me, it is as if the finger of God Himself is writing words of truth directly on my heart. Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- You can always spot a well informed person. Their views are the same as yours. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14296 From: Samu Karlsson Subject: OT - Judes! Dear Folks, please meet Judes and her daughter Caeli! :) http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/KeystersPhotoAlbum.html#Judes Love, Samu _______________ Samu Karlsson eMail: samu3@dlc.fi http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3 Just remember not to forget and you?ll be fine... but you already know this, don?t you? Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14297 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: [JJ Dewey] Emotion and Karma What I write here is from personal experience .. and is a stepping stone from what is written in the scriptures a further "revelation" or "metaphor" (perhaps to support the statement you posed as a question) a greater unfoldment I have experienced because I did not hold onto the text as a truth, but used it as a stepping stone to greater unfoldment within myself ... you wrote: "But do not we suffer pain in relationships because of attachments?" "Not necessarily. In a romantic relationship there is a bonding through the circulation of energy for the two become one as the scriptures says." *** If the parties involved have no attachment to each other, understand the nature of impermanence and live for each moment and die to each moment past to allow it to give birth to a new moment, *** then the energy of circulation is new in each moment. as in the cycle of the breath .... *** If each of the partners is able to stand naked in front of the mirror and accept their own nakedness (and I wrote nakedness not nudity) then there is no need of the other to complete the energy shared because male-female is complete within each, *** and the combined male-female is a power multiplication of "one" by itself in manifestation of form ... a sharing of that realisation of "one" energy between two bodies but not as a supplement or complement ..... *** In this case there is no experience of sense of loss at separation because there is no need for a search for completeness to fill a (consciously or unconsciously) perceived emptiness *** Where this "completeness in nakedness" is not realised within an individual, there is a need from one partner to make the other (repressed or denied aspect of self) a replacement for "that which is perceived as lacking" so that there are in fact two parts needed to make up "one" *** In this case there is a sense of loss at separation at the removal of the energy sought outside as a replacement for that denied. *** There is an even greater evolution which comes from unfolding from the "male-female pair existing within the one body" (androgyne) *** to the consciousness of the merging of male/female within self to what I term an "a-sexual consciousness" where neither male nor female can be identified as a separate aspect of self *** In this consciousness, the energy of self is the energy of "One" but only if there is no obesience to an external "God" *** In this consciousness, the action of form (the mind and the body) totally follows this "unseen hand" and becomes the expression of it. *** For most who have lost or forgotten the experience "One", (childhood innocence is very similar to this state before the child is labeled) *** this is something which is not seen .. or if it is, it invoked the reaction of fear. Usually it is the manifestation in form that is perceived. *** When one has "stood naked in front of the mirror" for long enough, one does see "in a blinding flash of illumination" the revelation of the formless "one" .. which is the "Self" *** "Now you may figure that you are not attached to your little finger and could live without it, but this detachment does not spare you any pain if someone were to rip it out of your hand." These are parts of the one manifestation in form ... and energetically, the missing finger still exists and can be photographed. "Similarly in a committed relationship the other person becomes like a extension of your body and this severing of half of that which makes up a greater life is very painful no matter what state of detachment you have reached." No definitely not. "The Christ himself, the greatest of us all, formed a greater life out of the twelve disciples and because of the flow of energy and the betrayal by Judas he suffered enormous pain and came close to dying in the garden of Gethsemane as a result." *** These are your words as a conceptualisation of the text ... not the absolute truth .. but the truth for you within the limitations of your expression of words in this moment *** There is a greater unfoldment from this imagery if you can allow the possibility within the metaphor ... *** >One who is detached as the ancient wisdom teaches can release any person >from any relationship and let hem go their way. But he will realize the >principles involved and work with the energies so the pain on all sides is >at a minimum. *** Incorrect for the reasons above .... when fully realised in the ancient wisdom, there will be no separation because there will never have been a coming together .. only a sharing of the breath with another form in the moment .. *** and the sharing of form is also the way of the Tao .. the coming together of the inbreath and the outbreath .. in two points of potential .. fullness and emptiness ... Christopher Wynter ps. There may be some who have difficulty in understanding the words I am writing here ... I know what I am saying .. but for me, it is difficult to translate this knowing into words which, in the english language, are very limiting ..... and this is the first time I have had cause to write this experience I share in this depth. This understanding comes from facing, not only the mirror, but also the experience of my death of the physical ... Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14298 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Re: [Rick] Re: AB .. 2 Hello Rick *** I have learned that I can only go as far out as I am prepared to go in I can only go as far up as I am prepared to go down I can only go as far forward as I am prepared to go back. *** The container is washed clean ... *** To return to the inner void allows one to achieve the outer void *** then the inner and the outer become one *** and the outbreath allows one to be truly empty and the inbreath allows one to be truly full *** Then the breath can flow without attachment and the clean tuning fork sings with pure resonance unsullied by impurities in the metal or tarnish on the surface *** of this I am in full consciousness Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14299 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Re: [Lawrence] [ OT ? ] Question on another illness "I have read about Abraham Lincoln and many historians now strongly suspect that he suffered from severe manic depression. Any comments JJ (or others) re causes for manic depression?" Lawrence .. Seeing manic depression was not a "psychosis" definition box about that time, I wonder at this description .. and the qualification of the diagnosis .... earlier I wrote "by being accepted for who they are, the child can move beyond the projections of the adult/peer ... they maintain a faith in themselves ... they explore learning as a means of expression of their inherent knowing ... they have nothing to prove to anyone .... as a side note .. several of the group who suffered dyslexia have been completely cured .. when asked why, they told us this was because "they did not have to translate what they saw into something which was not the way they perceived it in order to conform to what they were taught" They did not have to "tell lies" to themselves in order to survive .. and were able to remember what truth really was ... This from the mouth of a seven year old *** It has been my experience that the symptoms of manic depressive arise perhaps as an evolution from dyslexia where the inner conflict reaches an obsessive state ... or moves beyond the physiological ability of the mind/body to control the emotions trying to be released. *** These emotions can, I have found, usually been traced to a very deep seated grief held in place by a fear .. that the expression of this grief will be made very wrong *** and the resultant outpouring is uncontrollable anger .. which when released leads to depression ... the label placed on the profound exhaustion experienced by the shattering of the control mechanisms .. usually accompanied by remorse at the anger expression *** In many cases I have been able to trace the initial trauma back to before 2 years of age .. and there can be dysfunction in the hypothalamus .. the gland which is (in part responsible) for translating stimulus into action *** Hope this helps in some little way .. it is what I have used to help a number of people .. and has resulted in them being taken off their drugs by the medical profession ... and them able to lead a normal life ... Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14300 From: Brian Weis Subject: Re: Karma and Health Sanna Hanskala writes: "Umm, sorry, it was 42 :) But close =)" YES! A fellow Hitchiker. Thanks for the correction. ~B. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14301 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: Re: [Lawrence] [ OT ? ] Question on another illness Christopher Wynter wrote: "These emotions can, I have found, usually been traced to a very deep seated grief held in place by a fear ..that the expression of this grief will be made very wrong" Manic depression has _two_ extremes, i.e., extreme mania where one often can accomplish a great many things (or think one is), followed by extreme depression where accomplishing even the most trivial thing takes extraordinary effort. As to the diagnosis of Abraham Lincoln, that comes from observing the history of his life, where at times he was able to accomplish a great deal, to other times when he had symptoms that are similar to clinical depression. lk Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14302 From: "Jennifer Hampson" Subject: Re: Grace Thanks to those who responded to my question about saying Grace. I've taken all of what you suggested on board, and our evening on Thursday is going to be enriched by it. And Glenys, thanks for thinking of me. Tho' I'm quiet of late, I continue to enjoy every word that comes out of you onto this list. So often you say it for me. And while I'm handing out the accolades, your cleverness and your cartoon blow me away, Rick. Love Jen "We, though many, are one body in Christ" Romans 12:5 Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14303 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: An open question for JJ Dewey Dear JJ .. I am wondering if you can clarify something for me ... I have been perusing the archives, and I notice that you have different styles of writing to this list depending on the authority you use as your reference. I just opened a book which has been lying gathering dust for about the last 20 years, and I find striking similarities between a lot of what you have written and copyrighted and the contents of this book. This book is entitled "The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch" by JJ Hurtak first published 1973 by the Academy for Future Science Los Gatos, California Would you care to comment before I do a computer analysis of content and literary style? Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14304 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: An open question for JJ Dewey Christopher, I don't mean to be confrontational here, but let's call a spade a spade. I have ready many posts by you to this list, and I have to date seen very little that is original. Having been a Psychologist for many, many years I have seen very little from you, that I haven't dealt with somewhere before. Although we each assimilate, and put all these things together in an order that harmonizes with our own patterns of thinking, which may at times make it appear that we are plagiarizing. This in no reflection on your character. When we work in the same arena, we tend to have the same thoughts. When in the Oneness Principle, twenty four of us will here the same thing, yet perceive it through our individual filters. It is nothing unusual for several people to receive the same thing, at the same time, in distant, or even remote area's of the world, when they are involved in the same type of research. Christopher I'm going to be frank, and once again here on this list, call a spade a spade. Some of your work is very interesting, and even fascinating. Yet your delivery shows something about your character. There has been some terrible trauma in your life, and as much as you try to hide it, it constantly shows through as sarcasm, and a need to defend your position, and above all as a strong insecurity, which you don't think others catch. You try to play word, and mind games, thinking it makes your position stronger, yet in truth it is the weakness in your delivery. I don't think anyone on this list could ever doubt that you have a strong reaction formation to Religion. Until you resolve this within yourself you will never find the peace, knowledge, wisdom, and understanding you try to create the illusion of having. Sometimes Christopher I'm not sure who you're trying to convince more, us, or yourself. Personally I find your post today uncalled for, especially for one claiming to serve Higher Interests. It is the same problem I had with Zia which is a need to come on a list expressly set up to continue the teachings of JJ Dewey and somehow try to subtly insinuate that he is guilty of something, whatever you may choose to make it, when IN TRUTH, any rational person, or even twelve jurors on a Jury would easily come to the conclusion that there was no wrong doing. Neither JJ or I would ever consider coming on your list and doing the same thing to you. It would be beneath our dignity. So in conclusion Christopher, not to mince words, this appears to me, a character problem on your part, a weakness which you need to admit, face, and deal with, to truly practice what you preach, and be in harmony with your own teachings. Somewhere, Someplace, at some point in time Christopher, you are going to have to face the fact that before you can truly heal others, you Christopher, must Truly Heal Yourself. Your attempts at Poetry, Mind Games, and Witticisms, is totally ineffective in convincing anyone of your position, and truly makes you look weak, when some times your words have great sincerity and merit. I have often picked up a bit of MD from you my friend. Christopher these words were not written spitefully, or hatefully. They were intended to call you on something you said that I felt was in itself uncalled for, and to remind you of your own shortcomings. We all have our share, yet the real question as always is, Do we have the courage to face them, and deal with them, without projecting them on someone else. Then and only then, do we Become more than we have ever been before. And furthermore Christopher in you choose to respond to this post, please do so in a normal manner, without poetic license, or double talk. It's the only way we can ever achieve true understanding. Your Friend, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14305 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: [JWK] RE: An open question for JJ Dewey Hello John .. Without commenting on what you have written, I have the whole series of Hurtak's writings .. and I would like to find out for myself that JJ Dewey is not following the agenda to the conclusions that are within Hurtak's writings especially as JJ Dewey says there are a total of 12 books ... *** There was no insinuation on my part in what I wrote ... merely a questioning of origin .. *** and the question was based not only on content but choice of literary style, language, key numbering names and terminology *** including the New Jerusalem Meditation and the Song and the story of Joseph ... *** and yes, there is nothing new under the sun ... *** and I am very aware of the concept of synchronicity and the similarities between channelled material originating from many parts of the world .... *** Now, as for your reaction, *** the answer to my question will either support what JJ Dewey is writing ... or to expose something else .... *** Only JJ Dewey can answer my question Christopher Wynter ps .. my style of writing has been in this manner all of my life ... my school books and University essays all have the same characteristics ... why do you have a problem with it? Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14306 From: Peter Subject: Sv: Re: Karma and Health Yeah. I believe that the answer "49" was the right one in the former universe !! Now it is obvious - 42 !! No doubt. Just look around, right? Mostly Harmless greetings from Peter petersj@wanadoo.dk Sanna writes: "Umm, sorry, it was 42 :) But close =)" "YES! A fellow Hitchiker. Thanks for the correction. ~B." Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14307 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: [JWK] RE: An open question for JJ Dewey Thank you Christopher that was clear, concise, and to the point. In answer to you question the only problem I have with your writing, is sometimes I fell such sincerity, and depth of purpose from you, and then other times I feel that you're in a kind of cocky mood, for lack of a better term, and some of your personal prejudices show through strongly to me. I guess what I'm trying to say Christopher is that if you remove the later, and concentrate on the former your writing, and work should be published so it can do a greater good. It certainly has merit far beyond much I have read, and studied from others. I to have traveled the road of disgust at Religion, and Lies, and had very much the same outlook on them as you do. It's a growth and healing process that I too have worked through. I've found that people are very sensitive to these things, and as I read various authors I pick up on their personal hang-ups and prejudices. It always makes there work somehow less to me, and I've witnessed the same thing in so many others. If they would just say what they mean, and mean what they say, there work would be received much more readily. Christopher some times you say things, and I immediately know that is not what you meant to convey, and if we were face to face, it would quickly come out. I have the benefit of reading many of your posts, so I immediately can reflect back on your prior statements and know your true meaning. In short Christopher I'm saying the true weakness of your presentation is your need to defend something that is quite capable of standing on it's own merit, without any defense. This subconsciously throws up a red flag for the reader, and may well cause some to stop reading, when in truth it would have been beneficial if they had continued. We all have our shortcomings, and pet peeves, but they are the very thing that sabotages the salesman, and costs him the sale, even though he has a great product. So it's not actually the Poetic approach I get a flag on, I understand this is your style, and in many cases is well suited to the material you are presenting. It's something else that comes forth at times that I feel sabotages, an otherwise fine work. I'll cover the Hurkos thing in another post. Thank you , Christopher Your Friend, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14308 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! I would like to take this opportunity to explain something that may help both those on this list, and the Spiritual Forum. I feel the timing is right. Many of you have studied about everything imaginable in Mysticism in one form or another just as I have. Here is some information I'm sure very few know, simply because it has been hidden down through time. In the late 1920's a delegation from the Rosicrucian Order traveled to some of the most Mystical places in the world. This was a time of much misinformation and there was a need among some to set the record straight. This delegation traveled to Egypt, India, and Tibet. They traveled to a secret Monastery and Temple near Kichingargha, called variously by the names of Kichingirgha, Kichi-jirg-jargha, or Parcha-jarg-hatba by the Tibetans, and Sikimese. There they meet with the Master K-H-M (often called "K-H") The Master Kut Hu Mi, Deputy Grand Master of Tibet, (Bod-Yul) Beloved Hierophant of the R.C. (Rosa Crucis) made it possible for the delegation to leave Tibet with copies of many Ancient Manuscripts. This was not an easy feat in itself because before anything could leave Tibet it had to be approved by the Dalia Lama himself. We must take into account here that just because someone wears a Red Robe, or has a Great Title does not make them a part of the Brotherhood. On many occasions there has been a working of crossed purposes, and both Brotherhoods have long worked in Tibet. Now to explain what I'm trying to convey. In Ancient times there were great libraries in Alexandria, and Heliopolis, but for many years even though the White Brotherhood lived among the other Priests they themselves were not in control of these records. At a later time many of them came under their control. Because of wars and the corrupting hand of time prior to the time of Christ many of these manuscripts were moved to the secondary headquarters of which most of you have heard little. This was Mt. Carmel in Ancient Palestine. For hundreds of years Sages came here from India, Tibet, Persia, Egypt, Greece, the far Orient, and the Caspian Sea area. Although at that time the Highest degree work was preformed in Egypt, Mt. Carmel was a close second in Higher Learning. Many of the Biblical characters received there education under the tutelage of the Brotherhood there. Then with the Fall of Jerusalem the Brotherhood once again needed to protect these Ancient Manuscripts so they were moved to the Mountain Fastness of Tibet for their protection. At a later time around 570 AD many of the remaining ones were also moved to the security of the Mountain fastness, Just as in the Vatican today, many of these manuscripts were lost to time in these secret Archives. Very few of the Tibetans themselves had any ability to either translate of read them, so there were securely preserved for a later time. It was some of these that the Master K-H released to the R.C delegation. Some of these manuscripts tell of the Race of Man dating back 800,000 years. They tell of Lemuria, and Atlantis, among many other things that I won't go into at this time. The point I'm making is that these manuscripts were held in secret by the R.C, and the Highest of these were reserved for those who had been carefully prepared to handle this knowledge, only after be prepared, and passing each subsequent degree in the ascent. Some of this information leaked out as no doubt they new it would in time . Many of the Mystical Books published today, and claimed to be channeled are based on nothing more than these manuscripts, or at least the imagination of some people who got only bit, and pieces of them. This morning I heard some of this surface again, with the mention of Peter Hurkos and the Keys of Enoch. I can assure you that this material is not original to Hurkos, and that Hurkos has never been as forthcoming as JJ Dewey in his writings. Some time ago Joseph was asked if he was something special. I really liked his answer. Now let me give you my impression of Who and What I Believe J J Dewey to be. I think it is very befitting, and have held off publishing it in times past, waiting for the right time, which is now. This is the Confirmation I have received from my own Highest Knowing. No one can study any of the great movements which have made history without observing that it had two conditions -- there was the man, and he came at the time. Certain ideas had long been simmering in the popular mind, a train of circumstances had been laid, a multitude was ready to rise; but these were only forerunners, anticipations, auxiliaries. Nothing would have come to pass, and the morning glow would have faded into darkness, had not the secret yearning in many hearts taken shape in a single man. No one could have foretold his origin; no one can take credit for training him; no one can boast afterwards of having been his colleague. From behind the veil he comes--from a palace, or from a cottage, or from a college, or from a desert. Upon him is laid one burden, and he rests not till it be fulfilled; he is incalculable, concentrated, forceful, autocratic. Now he is the idol of the people, now he is their victim: he is ever independent of them, and ever their champion. Your Friend, and Brother in the Light, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14309 From: Deborah Matthies Subject: Re: RE: An open question for JJ Dewey The Book The Keys of Enoch you say? I never heard of it, not surprising though. I have never heard of many of the books or Writings that JJ talks about. But I have heard and read The Immortal and this book opened up a whole new world of knowledge for me that I don't even know where to begin when i feel moved to share with someone i haven't talked to in the past four months. I can say if I saw a book called The book of knowledge: The Keys of Enoch I would have passed right by it. So I am thankful this was here for me. Please before this becomes another heated debate I would like to say this list has lost another member because of the heavy amount of postings and arguments. I feel this loss greatly please keep on topic this time . Love always, Deborah Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14310 From: Deborah Matthies Subject: Re: RE: An open question for JJ Dewey Editor's Note: Repeat post of No. 14309 Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14311 From: Deborah Matthies Subject: Re: RE: An open question for JJ Dewey Editor's Note: Repeat post of No. 14309 Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14312 From: Diane Linen Subject: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! John, What does Peter Hurkos have to do with the Keys of Enoch? He didn't write that book. Diane Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14313 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: Emotion and Karma Is Chris right in this statement: "To hold onto these words as the truth rather than as a stepping stone to greater understanding is, IMHO a retrograde step which denies the possibility of greater unfoldment." Judes: I tend to agree here with Chris...as any writings from someone who is not a MASTER yet[like Jesu, etc.] would be influenced somewhat in the phraseology and timbre by the 'collective consciousness' of the era and time-frame from which it was written. Certain points or truths may not be revealed to the 'writer' [like Bailey or Blavatsky] due to the 'collective consciousness' ability to absorb without groundwork first laid with 'lessor' truths..So trusting past writings that may have a more contemporary purpose would or could even be detrimental. Personally..I intuitively feel this with both of these [AB & Blavatsky] that their writings were ground-breakers for topics such as 'reincarnation'..'astrology'...'karma', etc. and their writings are too dry for me..as I spend most of my time trying to figure out WHAT they are trying to impart as their verbage is too wordy for me. I am also more interested in NEW break-through teachings which JJ..you have promised and are delivering here and in your books. AND there are writings that have withstood the test of time and are 'classics' that hold truth ..which is of a more eternal and lasting quality such as ..Scriptures form the Bible and gnostic writings...or even the Greek philosophers...other contemporary writers and artists. I finally saw Star Wars: First Episode on video..and get as much from that on a soul level as reading AB or B. Awakened artists, poets, film-makers, etc. touch me with knowledge that talks to my soul way more than AB & B. BUT..I do appreciate very much knowing [from you JJ] that they are of the Brotherhood..so that I may be led to some of their writings and appreciate them [like Craig's posting for us] or your references. So..I agree whole- heartedly that they should be used as stepping-stones only. Just my opinion...which agrees with Chris!! Yea! .......a right-on click with Chris.... LOL Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14314 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! John, "What does Peter Hurkos have to do with the Keys of Enoch? He didn't write that book. Diane" Diane I was making reference to Chris's post from this morning, yet what I said applies to both Hurkos, the Keys of Enoch, (the way they are being published today which is in a highly corrupted form,) and much of the so called channeled material which has come out in the past, which is nothing more than a rehash of bits and pieces of some true ancient manuscripts with a lot of illusion and glamour thrown in for added spice. I could name many of these but it would only serve to offend, and cause some to feel the need to defend. The difference in JJ's teachings and those of many others is very simple. Principles which can be demonstrated Vs Illusion, and Glamour. The Rosicrucian Order has longed based its teachings on demonstrable principles. This is the first thing I personally look for in any teachings, or teacher. I was just trying to share that with the list. Your Friend Always, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14315 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: Re: Emotion and Karma Is Chris right in this statement: "To hold onto these words as the truth rather than as a stepping stone to greater understanding is, IMHO a retrograde step which denies the possibility of greater unfoldment." Judes: "I tend to agree here with Chris..." Well Judes I sure wasn't disagreeing with that statement at all. The Truth can not be found in dusty tomes, it can only be found within, yet this is an ambiguous statement in itself. Sterling would be a good example of Chris's statement. This has been the Crux of Religion, and the Beast down through time. The Letter of the Law Imprisons. Books are like anything else, they have both a positive and negative side. As Chris said, they can be either a stepping stone, or a prison. Yet we have both the power of discernment, and decision my friend. Your Friend, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14316 From: Diane Linen Subject: Re: RE: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! I'm going to persist once more. J.J. Hurtak wrote The Keys Of Enoch. Peter Hurkos is a psychic. I must have missed the post where Chris wrote of Peter Hurkos so forgive me. Diane Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14317 From: J J Dewey Subject: Similarities? Chris writes: "I am wondering if you can clarify something for me ..." I have been perusing the archives, and I notice that you have different styles of writing to this list depending on the authority you use as your reference. I just opened a book which has been lying gathering dust for about the last 20 years, and I find striking similarities between a lot of what you have written and copyrighted and the contents of this book. This book is entitled "The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch" by JJ Hurtak *** There was no insinuation on my part in what I wrote ... merely a questioning of origin .. *** and the question was based not only on content but choice of literary style, language, key numbering names and terminology *** including the New Jerusalem Meditation and the Song and the story of Joseph ... *** Of all the books to pick that I may be lifting material from I would say that the Keys of Enoch would be far down the list. *** JJ Response: The first book to use if such an accusation could be attempted would be the Bible. Of all the written word, that has been the strongest influence in my life. Second would be the writings of Alice A. Bailey. There have been times that I have written something that I thought was pretty original and the later found that AAB's writings either spoke about it or hinted at it. Hurtak and I both claim to have keys and that is pretty much where the similarity ends. He writes from a scientific point of view and I do this to an extent, but I write with much more simplicity than he does and do not include a plethora of obscure words to cause the reader to have to constantly have a unabridged dictionary at his side. Both of our names begin with JJ. J J Dewey and J J Hurtak. That is about the most outstanding similarity between us, but I assure you I received my name from my parents and not by imitating Hurtak. You indicate the Song and the New Jerusalem meditation was lifted from or similar to Hurtak. That's outrageous. The Keys of Enoch has nothing like either of these. Do you care to give evidence of this observation? As far as the story of Joseph, I do not know what you are referring to here. I do not recall Hurtak or myself elaborating on a story of Joseph. I have given some details about the life of Joseph Smith, but Hurtak gives no elaboration on him, even though he briefly mentions him. Any two metaphysical writers who write a book will say at least several similar phrases and possibly present some similar ideas in different language, but I challenge you to find anything in my writings that seem to be lifted from his. On the other hand, I think Hurtak lifted his whole basic concept for his book from the Urantia book concept. He just added a much more sophisticated terminology and teachings. Many phrases he uses is borrowed from Urantia however; others are fairly original. As far as you being so detached that the one to whom you may be committed would not bring you any pain even if the relationship should be suddenly shattered by betrayal let me say this. The only way to accomplish this sterile undesirable objective is to not give of your heart, to not let the energies of love flow between the two of you. Once the energies are in circulation there is indeed the possibility of pain if there is sudden interruption through betrayal. He who is not willing to give to another to make himself vulnerable in this way is missing the most wonderful dimension of human existence and until one has this willingness he cannot commune with completeness to the souls of humanity. Just as oxygen does not combine with hydrogen to make oxygen more complete even so in true union of souls the male does not unite with the female for completeness, but for the experience of greater life and livingness. Oxygen remains what it is when water is formed and I still remain what I am in my union with my wife. If she should be severed from me I would still remain complete, but miss the experience of the greater life her presence offers me. Copyright 2000 By J.J. Dewey All Rights Reserved Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14318 From: J J Dewey Subject: Inspiration John, Just a moment to thank you for your inspiring posts today. Much appreciation. JJ Copyright 2000 By J.J. Dewey All Rights Reserved Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14319 From: Lynn Subject: Re: Visitation "What was your capacity at the Sun Dance? Were you dancing or were you a helper or a supporter? Creator does talk to lots of people at Sundance and in many forms. It would be interesting to hear your interpretation of the "vision" you had." I am a Sundancer and have seen many interesting things happen over the years. It feels good to my soul to Sundance. later, Lynn "I had a visitation, but it was from Isis, and she had a message for me, does that count??? I mean one moment i was asleep and the next thing i knew I was astral and there she was with 6 other women waiting for me, and once when i was at sundance Wanka Tanka came and spoke to me, they (Isis and Wankan Tanka) both had the same message for me....." Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14320 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: Emotion and Karma John WK wrote: Well Judes I sure wasn't disagreeing with that statement at all. The Truth can not be found in dusty tomes, it can only be found within, yet this is an ambiguous statement in itself. Sterling would be a good example of Chris's Judes: No..I was saying it CAN be found in the dusty tomes which I respect and am drawn to MORE than AB & B. I find AB & B TOO contemporary for the times in which they were written in[ Victorian-age and Post-Victorian-age]. I like you, John am very intuitive..and I pick up the 'attempt' to affect the consciousness of these eras..so I feel uncomfortable with the 'tone' and the 'attitude' with which their works are displayed. I also FEEL the 'essence' of the author's/authoress' writing and personally..do not care for Blavatsky..who seemed to be too bombastic and Bailey who seemed too withdrawn [can't even pick her up in there]..and Dwaj Khul..is too wordy, esoterical, dry for me...but EVERYHING you wrote about in your post of the ancient texts rang with me and was inspiring even without reading the manuscripts..teehee..just focusing on these 'old manuscripts' can be enlightening if you want it to be..we can pick up things without even having to read them..I enjoyed the story and glad to know that they exist. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14321 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Yea!..JJ That was beautiful and so well-written! Love: Judes P.S You are to me..what AB was to you. From: J J Dewey Subject: [keys-l] Similarities? Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14322 From: Sanna Hanskala Subject: Re: Similarities? you wrote: "The only way to accomplish this sterile undesirable objective is to not give of your heart, to not let the energies of love flow between the two of you. Once the energies are in circulation there is indeed the possibility of pain if there is sudden interruption through betrayal." That is not true. Granted, it is true in a lot of earthly relationships, and probably will remain so as long as people are at all governed by lower consciousness. Any fear, hurt or feeling of loss and/or lack is a result of this which some call "ego" thinking (in this case referring to a sense of self formed by fear, prejudices and in general stuff that most people would rather not have) and have nothing to due with true union, Oneness with the Source, God. Once you are free of any expectations, be there promises or no promises at all, you won't feel loss should the other person choose to severe your contact, but you are nevertheless able to feel the depth of your Love and the perfect closeness with whomever you choose or are led to share it with. Instead, when you have no fear of loss and no expectations one way or another, you are open to go as deep as the current situation and your own personal awareness and that of the other one allow without fear of ever losing it. This is by no means a "sterile" state as you called it. Instead it is a state of pure love with all the negative aspects, as well as any possibility of negativity aspects, removed. I would call it a purification process, if you may, so that the end result is what you have left after you have gone through & learned from all the lower urges and expectations that you have had. ~ Sanna -- Sanna Hanskala sannah @ earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ "Miracles are your birthright. This is what your hope tells you, and your hope is correct." - Emma Curtis Hopkins Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14323 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: Yea!..JJ To be quite truthful, I've never read either Blavatsky, or Bailey. Don't tell! heheehehehe thank you sweet lady! your friend, John "That was beautiful and so well-written! Love: Judes P.S You are to me..what AB was to you." Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14324 From: Sanna Hanskala Subject: Re: Emotion and Karma you wrote: "Thank you Claire and Sanna for clarifying your thoughts. In this case an exchange of thoughts brings us closer to agreement, or at least understanding." I am glad you appreciate it :) I believe the only true barrier to mutual understanding is miscommunication, and thus I see as my greatest challenge "how to find the exact words that convey my exact meaning to people that don't know anything about my mindset and how I perceive my world?". "If you merely have a feeling of attachment toward another a real debt (karma) is not created. Thus you can free yourself of the link instantly at the moment you let go of attachment. This concept is probably why some believe that you can release yourself from karma with a decision - because they have mistakenly called the linkage of attachment a karmic debt. Instead the linkage we have to others because of attachment merely holds a lesson to be learned. "Karma is different. You can learn your lesson, but still owe the debt just as happens in real life. You can run up your credit card balance too high and learn the lesson not to let that happen again, but the sinking in of the lesson does not pay the bank. You often find yourself making payments long after you have learned to not over extend yourself." This is where I don't get inner confirmation about your words. After a few hours of soul searching and even seeking out another's opinion to test whether I'm merely lost in my own little illusion, I feel you are probably mistaken. But I agree to disagree, and will leave it at that :) "The main point I was making was not around sex, but around the subject of honoring your commitments and your word. If a person makes a promise to not eat peas and another is depending on this promise for some reason then he should honor his word. If he does not want to honor it then he should seek a release from the person to whom the promise was made. This has little to do with whether peas are good or bad for you." Yes, actually I understood you were only using it as an example. I suppose I got carried away ;) "But do not we suffer pain in relationships because of attachments?" We suffer because of expectations. "Question: Do you think that honesty and the keeping of your word will have a positive effect on health? Why?" In my life honesty is always good for my health. If I am not honest, I feel really bad, even physically, and it has actually been one of my "issues" lately. Similarly keeping a word happens to be something *I* appreciate, and I want to keep my word, and actually I am a bit like what you said you are - I only want to give my word when I'm sure I can keep it. But I am not like that because I fear Karma's gonna get me, I am like that because I care about the other one and don't want to be rude. "Chris and others have indicated that we should not put a lot of weight on past writings like the scriptures, Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey. What do you think? If a writing or teaching is confirmed by your soul does the passing of time lessen the value of the teaching?" I would say "no". Use what you feel works for you. Also, use it for as long as it works for you, but not any longer. "Is Chris right in this statement: "To hold onto these words as the truth rather than as a stepping stone to greater understanding is, IMHO a retrograde step which denies the possibility of greater unfoldment." I read that to mean what I said above - "Use what you feel works for you. Also, use it for as long as it works for you, but not any longer." So if that's what it meant, yes, I agree. I don't believe any generalizations can be made as to how "long" one should consider a particular book or method as "the right path" because it really varies infinitely. ~ Sanna -- Sanna Hanskala sannah @ earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ "Miracles are your birthright. This is what your hope tells you, and your hope is correct." - Emma Curtis Hopkins Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14325 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Sanna wrote: That is not true. Granted, it is true in a lot of earthly relationships, and probably will remain so as long as people are at all governed by lower consciousness. Any fear, hurt or feeling of loss and/or lack is a result of this which some call "ego" thinking (in this case referring to a sense of self formed by fear, prejudices and in general stuff that most people would rather not have) and have nothing to due with true union, Oneness with the Source, God. Once you are free of any expectations, be there promises or no promises at all, you won't feel loss should the other person choose to severe your contact, but you are nevertheless able to feel the depth of your Judes: I think that on this list it would be helpful to understand that when we are discussing some topics that there are two distinct and many multiple parts of who and what we are. From my experience so far on this list.. I feel JJ speaks largely of the 'part' of ourselves which is the 'soul' part or the 'real' part. If he speaks of other parts..he will clarify with mentioning 'the body'..'the physicality'..'the ego'...'the DNA'...'the personality'..'the conscious part'...'the mind'....'the brain'..and these are all disticnt part of our make-up and are interdependent of each other. What he is saying here may 'shatter' some's belief system..yes...but..it must be spoken about to get to the truth. Yes...the personality attachment..the lower-energy attachment to another can be avoided and probably should be avoided especially in the extreme..as it is unhealthy emotionally anyway. WHAT he is speaking of and about is the 'soul contact' and union that occurs between two or more souls..and the 'loss' of that union will be felt if done abruptly and through betrayal. This is VERY different than simply having an emotional, co-dependent, or pathological attachment to another being..whether it be a lover, a work-partner, or soul-friend[not just an acquaintance]. Jesu was certainly above having needy emotional attachments with his disciples..but still felt the 'wrenching' within his soul when Judas betrayed him and left the union of the 13 souls. I have such a soul-connection with my deceased twin Jane, who is now my baby daughter. Few people understand this soul-bond-union for what it is. I do not expect them to..but Glenys does..and has communicated that to me. Some[I have never had in this life yet] have this type of union with their spouses..sounds like Geoff and JJ have it for sure. I think an artistic representation of what JJ is speaking of is depicted in the movie, "Braveheart"..when Wallace removes the visor of Robert the Bruce on the battlefield and sees that Bruce had conspired to aid the 'other side' in the battle. Wallace falls to the ground in agony..soul-wrenching agony..when not a sword or spear could bring him down..but the anguish of this betrayal of one he trusted and loved had betrayed him. And then I love the part where Robert the Bruce says.."I will NEVER be on the wrong side again!"..That to me was the climactic peak of the movie. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14326 From: "Lawrence Kennon" Subject: Re: Similarities? Sanna Hanskala wrote: "JJ: "The only way to accomplish this sterile undesirable objective is to not give of your heart, to not let the energies of love flow between the two of you. Once the energies are in circulation there is indeed the possibility of pain if there is sudden interruption through betrayal." SH: "That is not true. Granted, it is true in a lot of earthly relationships, ..." LK: Do you have any relationships that are not "earthly relationships", and if not, how do you know this is not true? lk Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14327 From: Sanna Hanskala Subject: Re: Similarities? I would say... yes. I don't mean to say that a relationship with another human here on earth doesn't have the physical aspect, because, you know, they necessarily do :) What I referred to, and was thinking of, that'd make the difference, was the "goal" or the purpose of the relationship, which can either be something very material or instinctive, such as sex or desire to have children or a steady life or..... whatever. Relationships where people mainly come together to fill a "need" or a "desire" or to compensate for a "lack". Or it can be what the book Seat of the Soul calls "spiritual partnership" in which both parties (consciously) come together and stay together for the sole purpose of mutual spiritual growth and their relationship continues for as long or as short a time as the gain is fully maximized. (or it can be anything in between, naturally :) "and if not, how do you know this is not true?" I suppose it was just an inner feeling based on the picture I got from JJ's message, which naturally was filtered down through my own mind and thus is necessarily subjective. But it was my understanding nevertheless. It was also somewhat based on my personal experience, that opposed the picture I got from what JJ said, although I don't claim to have 100% understood his words the way he intended. But I shouldn't worry, I don't think I'm the only one it happens to :) ~ Sanna -- Sanna Hanskala sannah @ earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ "Miracles are your birthright. This is what your hope tells you, and your hope is correct." - Emma Curtis Hopkins Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14328 From: Sanna Hanskala Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Judes: "I think that on this list it would be helpful to understand that when we are discussing some topics that there are two distinct and many multiple parts of who and what we are. From my experience so far on this list.. I feel JJ speaks largely of the 'part' of ourselves which is the 'soul' part or the 'real' part. If he speaks of other parts..he will clarify with mentioning 'the body'..'the physicality'..'the ego'...'the DNA'...'the personality'..'the conscious part'...'the mind'....'the brain'..and these are all disticnt part of our make-up and are interdependent of each other. What he is saying here may 'shatter' some's belief system..yes...but..it must be spoken about to get to the truth. Yes...the personality attachment..the lower-energy attachment to another can be avoided and probably should be avoided especially in the extreme..as it is unhealthy emotionally anyway. WHAT he is speaking of and about is the 'soul contact' and union that occurs between two or more souls..and the 'loss' of that union will be felt if done abruptly and through betrayal. This is VERY different than simply having an emotional, co-dependent, or pathological attachment to another being..whether it be a lover, a work-partner, or soul-friend [not just an acquaintance]." Ok, I see your point. Maybe I somewhat misunderstood him (I usually do that:). However..... IF he meant the soul part.... hmm, I think I still tend to disagree with him. Because once you get to the level of complete Oneness, there IS no separation. There CANNOT be hurt due to separation at that level anymore because separation is IMPOSSIBLE. Provided you have attained that level of awareness and can stay there continually. So... what JJ said wouldn't in fact be at the highest level, but would happen at some lower level where the perception of separation actually still exists. ~ Sanna -- Sanna Hanskala sannah @ earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ "Miracles are your birthright. This is what your hope tells you, and your hope is correct." - Emma Curtis Hopkins Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14329 From: "Anni West" Subject: Re: Emotion and Karma Hi all, JJ wrote: "Chris and others have indicated that we should not put a lot of weight on past writings like the scriptures, Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey. What do you think? If a writing or teaching is confirmed by your soul does the passing of time lessen the value of the teaching?" Anni: No, time does not lessen the value of a true teaching. The truth is always true! It might be clothed in different clothes in different times and cultures - but if the teaching is confirmed by your soul - trust it - new or old. JJ wrote: "Is Chris right in this statement: To hold onto these words as the truth rather than as a stepping stone to greater understanding is, IMHO a retrograde step which denies the possibility of greater unfoldment." Anni: I agree that a truth can be a stepping stone to a higher and greater truth. It might well be that we only see part of the truth at the time and later we learn more and see a bigger picture, but that does not make the first truth wrong - it only expands it. The questions reminded me of the story about Buddha's elephant and the three blind men. Maybe we can only see a leg for a while, then later we might see the tail too, but the leg is still a part of the whole elephant - and we might find more elephant parts later :-)) Love to all Anni Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14330 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Sanna: So... what JJ said wouldn't in fact be at the highest level, but would happen at some lower level where the perception of separation actually still exists. Judes: Giggling..but that 'lower' level you speak of is yep..right here on earth within the resonance of our very souls..and then the pain would be felt [soul-pain]..ouch!..the worst kind..I have felt the difference...actually no..the personality ego-kind can be worse..as it is so pointless, cyclic, frustrating..and non-purposeful..except for gratifying/satiating the ego. Glad you understood somewhat...and BTW[that means 'by the way']..welcome to the list..I saw your pics and web- page. Isn't Samu from Finland too..or is it Denmark? Love: Judes Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14331 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Christopher Wynter wrote: This book is entitled "The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch" by JJ Hurtak first published 1973 by the Academy for Future Science Los Gatos, California "Would you care to comment before I do a computer analysis of content and literary style?" I can't wait to see your computer analysis, Christopher. I have the Keys of Enoch and think you would be hard pressed to come up with any evidence that they're from the same source. I think there's more chance of finding similarities between your writings and Fantasia. Here's some sites that deal with the Keys of Enoch if anyone wants to know more about them. http://www.affs.org/keys.html http://www.eu.spiritweb.org/Spirit/keys-of-enoch.html http://hometown.aol.com/gracewatcher/index.html Short takes: John - I have appreciated your comments especially those on Christopher's writing style and occasional tone which, I think, speak for many of us. I also *loved* you Eulogy and believe those who have ears to hear will be enriched by it. Deborah - I'm really sorry if people are leaving because they are unable to handle lively debate. That is their loss and perhaps they will have to deal with the lesson of Harmony through Conflict another time. We will always have disagreements as we strive to achieve higher truth; it is when those disagreements are reduced to personal attacks that they become undesirable. Fortunately, this doesn't happen very often. But I have to say that if everyone agreed with each other all the time, it would be difficult to achieve true oneness (which includes understanding and accepting different points of view) and growth (which is achieved from expanding our ring pass not). I think most of us would like to strive for a real peace rather than have an illusionary peace for peace's sake which is the path of least resistance and therefore to be avoided. Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- You can always spot a well informed person. Their views are the same as yours. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14332 From: RWBH Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Judy Reese wrote: "Judes:. I have such a soul-connection with my deceased twin Jane, who is now my baby daughter." I'm not saying your deceased twin Jane is not your daughter now....I am curious how and why you deem this to be so? "Braveheart"..when Wallace removes the visor of Robert the Bruce on the battlefield and sees that Bruce had conspired to aid the 'other side' in the battle. Wallace falls to the ground in agony..soul-wrenching agony..when not a sword or spear could bring him down..but the anguish of this betrayal of one he trusted and loved had betrayed him. And then I love the part where Robert the Bruce says.."I will NEVER be on the wrong side again!"..That to me was the climactic peak of the movie. "This is such a poignant example of soul betrayal...at least to me." Yes, Jesu felt the anguish of betrayal when Judas did his thing. And a greater pain still on the Cross when he said: "Father, why hast thou forsaken me?" In the case of Wallace and Robert the Bruce...did Wallace suffer because Robert betrayed him...or was the fault in Braveheart's own inaccurate assessment of the true character of the Bruce? Maybe the usually cunning Wallace should have seen that in spite of his good intentions, the Bruce would fall prey to the manipulative influence of his father; someone who's lack of support Wallace could have foreseen. Do others betray us? Or do we betray ourselves by putting too much hope and trust in the frailty of our fellow humans? Do we have some 'right' to 'expect' a certain level of honor or faithfulness to some values from others? brian Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14333 From: Sanna Hanskala Subject: Re: Emotion and Karma you wrote: "The questions reminded me of the story about Buddha's elephant and the three blind men. Maybe we can only see a leg for a while, then later we might see the tail too, but the leg is still a part of the whole elephant - and we might find more elephant parts later :-))" Hey, this particular story has a sequel ;) (I assume we're talking about the same story) Three blind elephants met a human. The first elephant said, "humans are flat". The other three agreed. (I didn't get it at first - but figured at least *somebody* might laugh :) Worth a try, anyway.) ~ Sanna -- Sanna Hanskala sannah @ earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ "Miracles are your birthright. This is what your hope tells you, and your hope is correct." - Emma Curtis Hopkins Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14334 From: Sanna Hanskala Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Judes: "Giggling..but that 'lower' level you speak of is yep..right here on earth within the resonance of our very souls..and then the pain would be felt [soul-pain]..ouch!..the worst kind..I have felt the difference...actually no..the personality ego-kind can be worse..as it is so pointless, cyclic, frustrating..and non-purposeful..except for gratifying/satiating the ego. Glad you understood somewhat..." Well, I suppose one of the worst type of pains is when you feel you are led by your soul and suddenly something happens and you're left hanging in the air, metaphorically speaking, with no handle anywhere in sight. "and BTW[that means 'by the way']..welcome to the list..I saw your pics and web-page." Actually, I've been here for a while :) I was on digest for a long time and hardly ever wrote anything to the list. I can't remember when I joined, AT LEAST a year or so ago (is there any way I can find out how long I've been here?). "Isn't Samu from Finland too..or is it Denmark?" Finland, yup =) We met a few years ago and will probably get together again now that I'm in Finland after living in the US for 2 years. ~ Sanna -- Sanna Hanskala sannah @ earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ "Miracles are your birthright. This is what your hope tells you, and your hope is correct." - Emma Curtis Hopkins Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14335 From: Brian Weis Subject: Re: Blind elephants "Three blind elephants met a human. The first elephant said, "humans are flat". The other three agreed." I would have to agree as well!! ~B. ...................................... "Do not argue with dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup." Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14336 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna RWBH: ...did Wallace suffer because Robert betrayed him...or was the fault in Braveheart's own inaccurate assessment of the true character of the Bruce? Judes: But he was 'right' in his assessment..as Bruce did have an eventual change of heart and the final battle where Scotland won their freedom was the result. On a soul-level his assessment was correct...which is why he was so hurt by the betrayal ..a union of their souls may have occurred. Actually...we are talking only of a movie-script..which I feel though was divinely inspired..depicted..and produced/directed...so the 'depictions' of these type of soul-truths were inspirational. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/104337 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Glenys wrote: I think most of us would like to strive for a real peace rather than have an illusionary peace for peace's sake which is the path of least resistance and therefore to be avoided. Judes: I am going to start putting some of your 'pearls' at he bottom of MY postings.....with 'Glenys Lowry' under them. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14338 From: Sherry Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Glenys writes: " I'm really sorry if people are leaving because they are unable to handle lively debate. That is their loss and perhaps they will have to deal with the lesson of Harmony through Conflict another time. We will always have disagreements as we strive to achieve higher truth; it is when those disagreements are reduced to personal attacks that they become undesirable. Fortunately, this doesn't happen very often. But I have to say that if everyone agreed with each other all the time, it would be difficult to achieve true oneness (which includes understanding and accepting different points of view) and growth (which is achieved from expanding our ring pass not)." I have found that I leave lists when I realize I am wasting my time and energy with some contributors who will not discuss topics, but insist on dominating lists, and they perhaps even can be considered as having a hidden agenda of destroying lists with their attitudes. I have tried several lists on spiritweb over the last year, and am beginning to see patterns connected with some of the people on the list. It seems to be a very intentional way of communication for some, to go in and start causing a fight on list, and then silencing the lists. Very strange, I don't understand it, myself..why join spiritual mailing lists if the idea is to attack others paths, and to attempt to make others wrong? I did not realize we could expand our ring pass nots..I thought each lifetime our ring pass not was the point at which we could potentially achieve growth, but only through hard work...even this universe has a ring pass not, if I understand that correctly. Can you tell me where alice talks about that? Also, to cut down on posts (such a busy list! now I remember..:-)...JJ..very impressed with the way you handle the insinuation your works and words are not original...and I guess we always need to remember, there is nothing new under the sun...we are only rediscovering what we already learned, and so, perhaps..none of us are as original as we like to think we are..:-). Sherry Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14339 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Hi Sherry, Thanks for your comments on Conflict. I agree, there are some people on various lists who seem to make it their objective to destroy the list. I don't think we have any on this list who set out to do that although from time to time we get people who set out to attempt to destroy JJ's credibility. Sherry wrote: "I did not realize we could expand our ring pass nots..I thought each lifetime our ring pass not was the point at which we could potentially achieve growth, but only through hard work...even this universe has a ring pass not, if I understand that correctly. Can you tell me where alice talks about that?" I have a meeting in about half an hour so do not have the time right now to do a search of ABB's writings for you (although you could do it yourself at www.netnews.org if you wanted). But here are a few of JJ's emails on the ring pass not in the archives if you're interested: Expanding Our Ring pass Not http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives/JJ237.html To Initiate http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives/JJ240.html The Initiate http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives/JJ239.html Initiates Today http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives/JJ243.html I think the bottom line is that all evolution and growth from a cellular to cosmic level and beyond involves the expansion of the ring pass not. Hope this helps. Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Nothing is so strong as gentleness, and nothing is so gentle as real strength. - Ralph W. Sockman Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14340 From: Samu Karlsson Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Sanna wrote: "Actually, I've been here for a while :) I was on digest for a long time and hardly ever wrote anything to the list. I can't remember when I joined, AT LEAST a year or so ago (is there any way I can find out how long I've been here?)." Hi Sanna, :) My Friend, I think you've been here just about since the very beginning! Just checked the Archives and JJ's post #16 "Welcome Sanna" is dated 13 Nov 1998 :) "Isn't Samu from Finland too..or is it Denmark?" "Finland, yup =) We met a few years ago and will probably get together again now that I'm in Finland after living in the US for 2 years." I was gonna reply but you were quicker to say what I would've :) Yep, we'll have to meet up and babble some one day soonly, lots to catch up on! :) Judes, this dude here is as Finnish as could be ;) Besides me and Sanna there's a third Finn on the Keys list, Lars and I have been spreading the word about The Immortal here in Finland, and have been in touch with certain people in order to try and get The Immortal translated into Finnish and published, we are waiting for the conclusive decision. Both Anni and Peter are Danish. Love from Suomi Scandinavia, Samu chasethedogstarovertheseahomewheremytrueloveiswaitingformeropethesouthwind Samu Karlsson samu3@dlc.fi samu.karlsson@norpe.fi http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3 "Just remember not to forget and you'll be fine... but you already know this, don't you?" canvasthestarsharnessthemoonlightsoshecansafelygoroundthecapehorntovalparaiso Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14341 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! "John wrote: "What does Peter Hurkos have to do with the Keys of Enoch? He didn't write that book." Diane" Hmmmmm .. I was going to ask the same question Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14342 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Re: RE: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! Diane wrote: "John, What does Peter Hurkos have to do with the Keys of Enoch? He didn't write that book." "Diane I was making reference to Chris's post from this morning, yet what I said applies to both Hurkos, the Keys of Enoch, (the way they are being published today which is in a highly corrupted form,) and much of the so called channeled material which has come out in the past, which is nothing more than a rehash of bits and pieces of some true ancient manuscripts with a lot of illusion and glamour thrown in for added spice. I could name many of these but it would only serve to offend, and cause some to feel the need to defend." *** This does not answer the question as to the book I referenced ... of which I have an original edition .. *** and can I ask here .. why is there a reaction from you and a need to defend what was from me a simple question. *** now .. what has peter hurkos got to do with JJ hurtak Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14343 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! you wrote: "I'm going to persist once more. J.J. Hurtak wrote The Keys Of Enoch. Peter Hurkos is a psychic. I must have missed the post where Chris wrote of Peter Hurkos so forgive me." never heard of this person .. didn't mention him! Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14344 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: Reply to JJ was Similarities? JJ Response: "The first book to use if such an accusation could be attempted would be the Bible." I used the wording very carefully "open question" .. and in response to JWK clarified the reason behind the question. There are many others on the list who have created a problem for themselves by way of reaction .. and put various perhaps "inflamatory" expressions on what I wrote ... but then, as I said .. only JJ can answer the question ... but still the crossfire persisted .... Why does JJ Dewey need Defending ... or are there a number of JJ Dewey clones on this list .... who can answer for him .... "Of all the written word, that has been the strongest influence in my life. Second would be the writings of Alice A. Bailey. There have been times that I have written something that I thought was pretty original and the later found that AAB's writings either spoke about it or hinted at it." I have no problem with this .. you state your source. "Hurtak and I both claim to have keys and that is pretty much where the similarity ends. He writes from a scientific point of view and I do this to an extent, but I write with much more simplicity than he does and do not include a plethora of obscure words to cause the reader to have to constantly have a unabridged dictionary at his side." In other words .. do I gather from this you have read Hurtak..? and yes, I have also seen the substitution in words ... Because of my background, I did not need a dictionary when I read Hurtak ... and I also saw the Metaphor . "Both of our names begin with JJ. J J Dewey and J J Hurtak. That is about the most outstanding similarity between us, but I assure you I received my name from my parents and not by imitating Hurtak." No problem .. synchronicity is fun isn't it? "You indicate the Song and the New Jerusalem meditation was lifted from or similar to Hurtak. That's outrageous. The Keys of Enoch has nothing like either of these. Do you care to give evidence of this observation?" Similar to .. not necessarily lifted from .. these appeared in his later workbooks .. I'll see if I can find them if you like..... no affront meant .. again, just an open question ... but, do you agree the the "New Jerusalem" is a concept which Hurtak talks at length of .... ? "As far as the story of Joseph, I do not know what you are referring to here. I do not recall Hurtak or myself elaborating on a story of Joseph. I have given some details about the life of Joseph Smith, but Hurtak gives no elaboration on him, even though he briefly mentions him." Thank you ... "Any two metaphysical writers who write a book will say at least several similar phrases and possibly present some similar ideas in different language, but I challenge you to find anything in my writings that seem to be lifted from his." I do not need to .. you have already answered the question to my satisfaction .. As far as I am concerned, this can be the end of the matter. "On the other hand, I think Hurtak lifted his whole basic concept for his book from the Urantia book concept. He just added a much more sophisticated terminology and teachings. Many phrases he uses is borrowed from Urantia however; others are fairly original." I will look up this .. I have not yet read the Urantia book concept .. thank you for the reference As I said above, as far as I am concerned, JJ has answered my question and this for me is the end of the matter If there is anyone else who has a problem with what was a simple question to JJ Dewey .. then that is your problem, your reaction and I do not need to take your problem on as mine .. or defend my position .. as JJ Dewey has, in fact, validated the question Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14345 From: "Craig Tholson" Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Christopher, JJ & All, I have The Book Of Knowledge: The Keys Of Enoch, by the way. When I first came on the list months ago, Sterling, brian & Blayne were taking JJ to task for not being original. JJ countered with asking anyone to show where any of his teachings had been taught before. I found 4 of the 13 claims made by JJ very familiar and listed it here on the Keys (it might have been 4 out of 12 - I can't remember). JJ and I have a trump card that not many of you have - we both are well studied in Mormonism. Many concepts which bear the mark of truth can be found in the "old" teachings of Mormonism. Was JJ dishonest to not disclose all of his "schools" of higher learning? I don't think so, but I do believe he is eclectic. He has spent his life gathering his understanding and now wants to share it with others. I have written two books and I sell them for $30 a piece. Much as JJ, I wrote them to illuminate others (mormons in my case). It is said that those who sell truth for money will inherit the ninth ring of hell. I hope not. I don't find it odd that JJ's beliefs are not new. I have been a student of esoterica for many years and find some of what JJ teaches to be in harmony with what rings true to me, while some is new to me. The thing I do find odd, and certainly bothersome to me, is that JJ copyrights all of his Keys List "stuff" as if truth can be owned, especially when his truths are eclectic. I have been part of a group of fundamentalist mormons who has at its head a man who claims to be God's prophet to the planet. JJ knows of this man. This man is brilliant in some respects, but has one ego-driven weakness: he can't stand to admit that truth exists outside of him, in another man. He is jealous of what he calls his truth. He sells booklets for money, but he would reluctantly sell them to another man such as JJ because JJ makes some "special" claims, at least in his fictional account. Truth is free to all. Books cost money and can be copyrighted. I haven't stopped laughing since internet discussion started being copyrightable a few months ago. Just my thoughts since Christopher brought it up. Love, Craig Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14347 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: Reply to JJ was Similarities? Chris wrote: Why does JJ Dewey need Defending ... or are there a number of JJ Dewey clones on this list .... who can answer for him .... Judes: Do you ask this to elicit a 'response' or a 'reaction'..or both? Or do you really want some list member to say "I am a clone"..and then answer with a reply....? IOW what are your intentions and who do you want to repond..only JJ clones..or anyone? Also..what exactly is a 'JJ clone'..could you define your terms please? Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14348 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Craig Tholson wrote: "I have written two books and I sell them for $30 a piece "The thing I do find odd, and certainly bothersome to me, is that JJ copyrights all of his Keys List "stuff" as if truth can be owned, especially when his truths are eclectic" Judes: Copyrighting what you write..only protects the right from others profiting off of what is written by you..it does not insure profitablity..nor does it say that the person 'owns' the compilation of writings. It just reserves their right to profit on the sell or distribution of the writings. Anyone would be a 'fool' to not copyright their material..especially if it could be altered slightly and then resold. I think JJ would have a tough time in court defending exact quotes from other literatures and that would not be the point of the copyright statement. Personally..I feel he should trademark the NJ meditation..and other techniques that are unique so they are not exploited all over the internet and in the hands of unapprenticed or opposing factions. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14349 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Craig I always enjoy your posts, and especially your humor, and good nature. It never fails to come through. Back in 1977 I was fighting my way through a dark time in my life, and at the same time making contact with something of a deeper nature which at the time I had little explanation for. It was a matter of having something, and not having any idea, what you have. I wanted to be a writer, in fact I was driven by something deep within me, yet I didn't have the language skills to really be successful at it. I was in Law Enforcement at the time, and reading one of my reports would constipate someone. Have you ever read a Police Report. Well, I call them constipated writing. Anyway I was feeling something very strong coming through of a Spiritual Nature, the first of which was the Origin, which I later called Prologue to a Code of Many Colors. I also wrote a piece of accompanying poetry to it, and Lord knows I'm not a Poet by any stretch of the imagination. I allowed several people to read it, but kept it pretty much to my self because most thought anyone with a Mystical Leaning was a bit bent, and I must admit it was on the Neurotic side. My original intent was for it to be a prologue to a book I was attempting to write. Several years later I worked with a lady who belonged to a literary club, and showed it to her. She thought it was great and asked if she could read it before her club and I consented. Truthfully I guess I was just craving any positive feedback. She came back a few days later and told me that a strange woman fell in love with it the night she gave the reading, and a few days later was claiming that she was the author, and was filing for a copyright on it. I had never once thought of copyrighting anything I wrote. The strange thing is that she got a copyright on it, and then claimed I had plagiarized it from her. She worked for a small publishing company, and sunk ten thousand dollars of her own money into it, and it flopped, which in my opinion is a good example of Karma. The problem was that she had blocked me from ever using my own writing and had in the process damaged my reputation with her claims. I even took a Polygraph test to prove I was the author to clear my reputation. I passed with flying colors, and even the Language Department at Washington University analyzed both our writing styles, and said there was no way she could have been the author. On the other hand they concluded that everyone's writing has a specific rhythm over time, and considering my weird archaic choice of words, and rough around the edges method of putting them together, and total lack of syntax concluded that either I, or Jack London was the true author. Go figure! The bottom line is this, as any Law Enforcement Officer learns quickly, and I certainly did. CYA at all times. So in conclusion I support JJ or any other author when they copyright their work for the above reasons which in themselves are ludicrous, but necessary. Hind sight is twenty - twenty. Oh by the way, I finally told her to keep the damn thing, it was neurotic, and she deserved it. LOL Your Friend, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14350 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! Christopher Wynter wrote: "to defend. *** This does not answer the question as to the book I referenced ... of which I have an original edition .. *** and can I ask here .. why is there a reaction from you and a need to defend what was from me a simple question." I think an 'open' letter implies that anyone can comment. If you don't want comments from other people, I think it's a good idea to spell it out and rethink labeling your email as 'open'. So because John refuted your claims, he is automatically labelled as a 'defender of JJ' and later (in another email from you) a 'clone' (that one's been done to death, along with 'parrot', 'sycoophant', 'fawner' and numerous other insulting labels directed at some very freethinking people on this list). Anyway, I fail to see what is wrong with defending someone if it is cased on sound argument and logical thinking - I think you have even done it yourself on occasions, Christopher. Have we become such mamby pamby spiritually correct people that defending others with whom we agree is considered a fault to be avoided at all costs. Spare me from this kind of 'spirituality'! "now .. what has peter hurkos got to do with JJ hurtak" I think it is clear that John made a mistake about the name. So what! Spare me from nitpickers as well! :-)) Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Nothing is so strong as gentleness, and nothing is so gentle as real strength. --Ralph W. Sockman Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14351 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! Damn Dyslexia, see what I mean! Come to think of it JJ weren't you mildly dyslexic as a child. Polly want a cracker! Aaawwkkkk! ROTFLMAO Your Friend, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14352 From: Sherry Subject: Re: An open question for JJ Dewey Judes writes: "Personally..I feel he should trademark the NJ meditation..and other techniques that are unique so they are not exploited all over the internet and in the hands of unapprenticed or opposing factions." I think you are right about trademarking or copyrighting your own words. Sometimes the teachings are interpreted by others for others, and perhaps at a later date the interpreter might want to have credit for his interpretations, for various reasons. A woman I know wrote an excellent book, a minister's guide, for weddings, funerals, etc, and based on many different religious traditions. Her ceremonies were beautiful, but sadly, the woman she copied them from never got any credit for it. The ceremonies were handwritten and given away freely to others to use, but still it was a shame that the person who produced and marketed the book as her own, did not give her teacher proper credit. Perhaps if the teacher had copyrighted her ceremonies, it would not have been a temptation for the writer to pass the writings off as her own. When we acknowledge who we learn from, it is a necessary and positive form of exchanging energy, imho..it keeps the flow going back and forth, most necessary.. ..just as many of you here thank JJ for what he has offered you from his sharings of what he has learned along his path, you have exchanged positively your energies..it is most important to do, I believe. Sherry Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14353 From: Maryellen Subject: Re: Wise guys!! LOL Judes writes: "Maryellen wrote: Perhaps I have passed him and he is stumped as to what to tell me.... Blessings to all. Love, Maryellen" Judes: "I enjoyed the story , Maryellen..I think we have all met people like Mr. X..in our lives..who seem to have all the answers..and want to seem or feel superior to others. I once knew a similar such wise person..who would always say.."Stay conscious!!"..like he was the only one who was..and made those around him feel they were missing it or something. I think it is sort of a 'power trip' for them..hope they do have it all figured out...someone needs too! LOL" Yea, LOL, I am now calling him on his "tidbits" (power trip) and he just doesn't answer. Can you imagine him playing this power game for 30 years and in the end not really having anything wise to say after all!!!! And to top it off, I realize now some of his power plays had to do with his "sexual" desires for me. I was 17, he was 40! I was supposed to see him as some God and then do whatever he wanted!!! Ughhhhhhhhhhh. Sorry this is off the topic. The END Love, Maryellen Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14354 From: Maryellen Subject: Re: Karma and Health Judes writes: "I second the happy birhtday..and there are many of us on the list that are very close in age....around 48-50...interesting. I am 48..so is JWK and Miciella..there were some others..but I do not remember now who..but lots of us at the '49' critical point..sounds like we are soul-searching and getting our acts together before we turn 56 and get crytallized!! LOL or 'wah' ..whichever it is for you." Hey this is pretty funny. I too will be 48 this July!! I guess we all incarnated during this time to shed a little "light!" Love, Maryellen Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14355 From: Sherry Subject: Re: Reply to JJ was Similarities? Hello all, I've decided to post this to the list after all, at first was going to keep it offlist and just to Chris and JJ, but I've changed my mind. thanks sherry Chris wrote: "If there is anyone else who has a problem with what was a simple question to JJ Dewey .. then that is your problem, your reaction and I do not need to take your problem on as mine .. or defend my position .. as JJ Dewey has, in fact, validated the question" I am answering this offlist to avoid more arguments, but feel free to post it in its entirety, if you wish to respond on list. What was the "simple question", Christopher? I am not sure I understood it. Thanks for clarifying your question, and I am sure you will....and as you are on mailing lists I am on, if you think I, or others, have a negative reaction to you and your writings and presentation of your opinions, that is your problem, as you are the one who creates all that comes into your life. You are the one who sees what you want to see. You are the one solely and souly responsible for everything that is within your experience.. if you see reactions as confrontational, take responsibility for that, as a mature seeker of spiritual truths would do. As a man thinketh, so he is..that is one of the great spiritual teachings, as you well know. My problem with you, on a personality level, is that it seems like you are possibly misrepresenting yourself to others, so of course, it comes as no surprise that you would accuse others of that. I find it hard to believe, after seeing you around spiritweb for over a year, that you are really a therapist, that you are really doing any kind of therapeutic work on any level. However, that is just my opinion, and could be wrong. You say you are from Tasmania, Australia...I would be interested to know which medical institute you are affiliated with, and what your title and degree encompasses. sherry Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14356 From: "Craig Tholson" Subject: Re: Sv: Re: Karma and Health Ladies and genatalia, I don't care if one is talking universes or hitchhikers, there is only one number of significance. And no JJ, it's not pi. 69! I'm still working on how it will best work in a molecular relationship. Damn! Love, Craig Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14357 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! Christopher Wynter wrote: "and can I ask here .. why is there a reaction from you and a need to defend what was from me a simple question." Just as an aside Christopher, a couple of days ago, you wrote in an email entitled Passive Aggressive that you write sometimes to cause a reaction. So you can hardly be critical when someone does just that. In fact, maybe you should consider thanking them for helping you create the reality you desire :-) You also said, 'but I do not respond by reacting to the reaction or pursuing the debate'. Well, it seems to me that you do that just as often as many of the rest of us and this is a good example. Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- You can always spot a well informed person. Their views are the same as yours. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14358 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: [Craig] Re: Karma and Health "I'm still working on how it will best work in a molecular relationship. Damn! Love, Craig" 6 + 9 = 15 1 + 5 = 6 6 = 3 x 2 (or 2 x 3) now ... take that where you will or as the bard said .. "as you like it" Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14359 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: The 49rs Hey this is pretty funny. I too will be 48 this July!! I guess we all incarnated during this time to shed a little "light!" Love, Maryellen Judes: The 49rs...we will NOT become crystallized..no way!..Yea!! 50-56ers welcome...still time to not crystallize!! Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14360 From: J J Dewey Subject: Copyrighting Truth Craig Writes: "I don't find it odd that JJ's beliefs are not new. I have been a student of esoterica for many years and find some of what JJ teaches to be in harmony with what rings true to me, while some is new to me. The thing I do find odd, and certainly bothersome to me, is that JJ copyrights all of his Keys List "stuff" as if truth can be owned, especially when his truths are eclectic." First I will again state that a lot of the things I write do not come from any book that I am aware of and Blayne certainly stretched his imagination when he tried to prove that the early Mormon writers have covered my material. Few of them even had an elementary understanding of reincarnation. Contrary to popular belief there are new things under the sun and thank God for this. Who would want to go on a recycling of the past for all eternity? I think I explained this before but the reason I started putting a copyright notice under all that I write is that I noticed on Sterling's list there was a copyright notice at the bottom and it was not from Sterling, but Microsoft Corporation. That could mean that if Sterling posted some of my material and Bill Gates copyrighted it and later decided that he wanted to own it instead of me that he could prevent me from using my own material. Actually a similar experience happened to me as did John W. I one wrote a parable and gave a copy to a friend of mine on the at to California. A couple years later I discovered that the parable was picked up by someone else and published and copyrighted in nationally distributed book. Now I am in danger of being sued if I publish my own material. For this cause, I have not even shared the parable with the group - one of the best I have written. As far as copyrighting truth... I think you know Craig that is not the idea. Did you copyright your own book? Did you see yourself as copyrighting truth??? I don't think so. Copyright 2000 By J.J. Dewey All Rights Reserved Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-28/14361 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: The 49rs Judy Reese wrote: "The 49rs...we will NOT become crystallized..no way!..Yea!! 50-56rs welcome...still time to not crystallize!!" Hey, what about us younger Keysters? Are we still in the chrysalis? :-)) Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Understand what heaven is: It is but the turning in of the will into the Love of God. Wheresoever thou findest God manifesting Himself in love, there thou findest heaven, without traveling for it so much as one foot. - Jacob Boehme 1574-1625 Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14362 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: The 49rs You guys have more TIME than we do..but ..okay you can join the 49rs too! The more the merrier.....Craig can be the 'bleephole' in this club too..if he would like..or the 'penis'..if he would like a promotion. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14363 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: The 49rs Editor's Note: Repeat post of No. 14362 Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14364 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: DNA memory vs Soul memory Maryellen wrote: "Hmmmmmmm there are some on this list?????" Not me. I offered several years ago but no one wanted me :-) Now I just tell all those would-be incarnates to take a hike when they beg for a second chance. LOL Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- I have not lost my mind - it's backed up on disk somewhere. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14365 From: Christopher Wynter Subject: [Maryellan] Re: DNA memory vs Soul memory you wrote: "A walk-in is a fairly enlightened being who is in spirit. When a "physical" being no longer has the desire to live and willingly selects to give up his body to a more advanced soul, he can give it to the one in spirit who is waiting to get into an adult body. This is a walk-in." a walkin can also be a bum ... or the local drunk who got run over and is looking for a new body because his old one got squashed ... this type of character .. and the suicides who left it a little too late to change their minds ... tend to be able to jump in to a body when the back of the third eye attachment point (at the occiput) has been damaged ... or when the auric sheath has been damaged by a state of unconsciousness .. eg surgery .. drug, alcohol, accident induced this is more common than people think .... and accounts for many perceived personality and behavioural changes after such situations there are many types of walkins ... I have found even road accident victims and soldiers in a state of shock have stumbled into a body that is still functioning even though unconscious .... usually because the vibration is familiar Some of them are quite fascinating to talk to! Christopher Wynter Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14366 From: Sherry Subject: Re: [Maryellan] Re: DNA memory vs Soul memory Chris writes: "tend to be able to jump in to a body when the back of the third eye attachment point (at the occiput) has been damaged ... or when the auric sheath has been damaged by a state of unconsciousness .. eg surgery .. drug, alcohol, accident induced this is more common than people think .... and accounts for many perceived personality and behavioural changes after such situations" "there are many types of walkins ..." I would like to know how you know this for a fact Christopher...I have read where alcoholics, drug addicts, those who allow their etheric bodies to be weakened, can easily come under the influence of discarnates who desire to experience the alcohol, drugs, sex, or whatever, by hovering around the weakened humans, but I have never heard of them as being "walk ins", they are discarnates or etheric vampires. Alcholics who have black outs could possibly be under the influence of an alcoholic discarnate, but the soul of the alcoholic is still attached to the body, and there is no transference of the body to a walk-in, imo. I would like to know your sources for your opinions about walk-ins. Sherry Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14367 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: Similarities?: Sanna Sanna says, "Actually, I've been here for a while :) I was on digest for a long time and hardly ever wrote anything to the list. I can't remember when I joined, AT LEAST a year or so ago (is there any way I can find out how long I've been here?)." Yes, You joined the list during the it's month. The first time I posted a list of the members, was 11/25/98. There were 97 members then. Rick -- ICQ # 19753992 visit my web pages at http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ and http://petracity.intercosmos.com/index.html The only really natural diet http://www.neanderthin.com have you read "The Immortal" http://www.freeread.com *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:* I'm only in it for the thrill Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14368 From: Diane Linen Subject: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! John, I thought it was a simple mistake. I just wanted to be sure. It's not as though no one ever made a typo or a mistake. We all do at times. I was not nitpicking, Glenys. Diane John Wayne Kline wrote: "Damn Dyslexia, see what I mean! Come to think of it JJ weren't you mildly dyslexic as a child. Polly want a cracker! Aaawwkkkk! ROTFLMAO" Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14369 From: "Judy Reese" Subject: Re: [Maryellan] Re: DNA memory vs Soul memory Sherry wrote: "I would like to know how you know this for a fact Christopher...I have read where alcoholics, drug addicts, those who allow their etheric bodies to be weakened, can easily come under the influence of discarnates who desire to experience the alcohol, drugs, sex, or whatever, by hovering around the weakened humans, but I have never heard of them as being "walk ins", they are discarnates or etheric vampires. Alcholics who have black outs could possibly be under the influence of an alcoholic discarnate, but the soul of the alcoholic is still attached to the body, and there is no transference of the body to a walk-in, imo." Judes: This is my understanding of 'walk-ins' also..that there must be some form of contactual agreement between the de-parting soul and the soul that is entering the body-vehicle. I know very little about this..even though I read Ruth Montgomery many years ago..so I turned you to the archives, Laurence, when you asked. But..I would not think that an astral or earth-bound spirit could just walk-in to an unoccupied body, as Christopher said..if true..this is quite concerning and scary IMO. I was referring to pre-planned walk-ins that serve a higher purpose. Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14370 From: Sherry Subject: Re: [Maryellan] Re: DNA memory vs Soul memory Judes writes: "This is my understanding of 'walk-ins' also..that there must be some form of contactual agreement between the de-parting soul and the soul that is entering the body-vehicle." to the best of my knowledge, from what I have been taught, the soul must give permission for its vehicle of expression, the physical body, to be used by another soul, and usually that is only done for specific fulfillment of jobs on earth that need to be done. This is a teaching I cannot verify by stating writers, or page numbers, without going through a lot of books, and as I heard much of this in an oral presentation.... but the speaker was quite knowledgeable, with many years of study behind her. I think she was well informed and had done her homework, so to speak. Also, she talked about how there are not many walkins walking around..:-), and that they do not tell others they are walkins, they perform their duties as if it was the person they "replaced" doing the work. Made sense to me. I wouldn't worry about any discarnate taking over your body temporarily unless you are a serious drinker, or drug user, and I am sure you are not. This also ties in with incubus' and succubus, a strange but interesting topic. However, be that as it may, I have just re-signed on to this list as of yesterday, and so wonder, what is the topic for discussion this week? The archives is very long..:-). And Glenys, thanks for the info on Ringpassnot, will look it up...Dion Fortune writes about it as well, and somehow I have in my mind that the ring pass not, cannot be passed..:-).. Sherry Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-17/14371 From: "John Wayne Kline" Subject: RE: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! "John, I thought it was a simple mistake. I just wanted to be sure. It's not as though no one ever made a typo or a mistake. We all do at times. I was not nitpicking, Glenys. Diane" Oh it was, I just transposed Hurkos for Hurtac or whatever the authors name is. Just a simple case of right church, wrong pew. Actually I am really bad about transposing words for one another. It just doesn't register at times, and some times I have to read something several times to make sure I really got the true meaning. Beyond that I was just cutting up, and making fun of the Clone, Parrot thing. LOL I've got this Religious fanatic on one of my forums that goes after me all the time. His last reference was to JW's Mindless Sheep and Bimbo's. Actually the guy is hilarious. He hates the way JJ breaks things down into manageable pieces, and cites definitions from Strongs Concordance because he can't argue with us, which infuriates him. Then he makes the most ridiculous statements. Let me see " The Holy Bible is not to be cut up, and analyzed, it is to be believed in - in Blind Faith. I couldn't have created a fictious character for a short story about right wing fanaticism this good. The man is a natural, and never fails to make a total ass out of himself. Since I won't let him on the Spiritual Forum he haraungs me on the other forums. I built him his own Purely Orthodox Christian Forum and gave it to him, but no one will post there and he ran out of fictious names, and I guess got tired of answering himself. It's great because the people love it, and it makes my numbers go through the roof, when he goes on his tirades against JJ, and me. Usually me lately though, and my mindless Bimbo's at the Kline Kult Compound. ROTFL The gals on the forum came up with the Kline Kult Kompound Kuties, and the Kline Kult Kompound Kutie Klutchers and the Preacher Man went totally ballistic. I think he must be some where around the Mihr Space Station about now, because he sure has been quiet lately. The Gals really miss him, they love to really get him going. Your Friend, John Post No. keys-l: /2000-04-18/14372 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: Question John... (OT) Explanation and Eulogy! Well, I happily apologize, Diane, with a feeling of relief that I misread your comments as not being particularly helpful to John in identifying his error. Two more 'victi