Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
xythos
()
Date: December 04, 2008 01:02AM
Thank you corboy & I agree with what you say (surprise!). However, as I have mentioned in my previous post
Yes, it is very powerful stuff, which is why I mentioned the above statement & also why I re-emphasise it my reply. I have also (& this is fully my fault for not having brought it up when I meant to) advised anybody who has asked me the very same question, the crucial need to take these highly significant & very personal aspects (dependant on a case-by-case situation) into consideration that I have mentioned here. It also is of paramount importance to be aware that it is not for the weak of heart (or, in common terminology, the fearful without meaning to come across in any way as flippantly derogatory or disrespectful) but even more so, it isn't everybody's "cup of tea" (literally!).
Rightfully so. One should never ever do this 'on a whim'. And, I am glad that you have done your research in order to protect your friend from getting into something that she might not have been able to cope with, much less away from her familiar surroundings. It but underlines what I have said in my post - that one has to be in sound health, mentally, emotionally as well as physically.
Absolutely. But ethical organisers inform those that want to do this about the precautions involved. Anti-depressants are a no-no. For at least 6, better yet, 8 weeks. A friend of mine wanted to go on a journey & I did tell her that if she wanted to do so, that she needed to stop her medication within the time frame given. I also told her about the diet (as mentioned in your post). That is why I say that this is not an appropriate path to 'explore' with the "quick & easy" mentality that so many other 'avenues' propose today. It is also, as I have mentioned in my post, a matter of proper preparation as well as intention.
If one looks for a "quick & easy" way for solutions, or, one is out just for the 'kick' of it, rather than the process proper, it will lead to a very difficult endeavour. A trained as well as ethical curandero is vital to ensure they know what to do when one hits a difficult, challenging phase during the journey. But the most important part is the prepatory stage, really turning inward & do some genuine soulsearching as to why one wants to do this. Because it is not necessarily a 'pleasant' experience - on a lot of different levels.
That is why it's a no-no with the wrong mindset. I'm the first to admit that I didn't feel ready to do this in the jungle. Much less with people I didn't fully master the language of (I manage Spanish well enough but it isn't anywhere close to my English - which is also not my mother tongue - oh well...!)
For one, the aya forum is an excellent place to navigate & steer you in the right direction, again provided the 'seeker' is willing enough to take the responsibility to do their part and - here we are at the crux of the matter. For in the end it comes down as much to the individual doing his homework, gathering thorough information that will safeguard him/her from jumping on the next available 'sojourn' that is being offered while at the same time taking into account their own medical background, any aspects that would spell 'trouble' (even without going down to the Amazon), and - I cannot emphasise this enough, one's intention as well as 'motive' or, if I were to speak in "new agey" babble (apologies to you Judy), one's "agenda" for even wanting to explore such an avenue.
There is one guy who is very selective in who he chooses to even invite to a Shipibo stay. He's very clear in that he doesn't "prettify" what it will be like - no comfort, very down-to-earth & yes, indeed quite challenging. He also does not accept those who do not bring the right attitude towards the whole sojourn & the experience. So for those who are not ready to "get their hands dirty" (metaphorically as well as literally) they will, almost without exception, stay away.
Of course, the risk with going on such an excursion is that a lot of people simply overestimate themselves. But, that is unfortunately not limited to ayahuasca, it is found in as 'mundane' areas as mountaineering (yes I am aware it may seem farfetched, but I do think there are some parallels here) or any other sports verging on the extreme (skiing, anyone out for an adrenaline rush). I feel the biggest difference between those that go out on a limb - no matter what they decide to do - and those being aware & conscious of themselves, finding out as much as they can prior to undertaking such a venture, and thereby knowing at least to a certain degree what is involved, is taking a calculated risk, rather than just a blind-faith kind of risk.
Although it certainly takes a lot more time & energy to find ethical curanderos, they are still around. Word of mouth is still the bottom line, whether it is a doctor (credentials aside, how does this person resonate with you? How does it feel? If it feels bad, it's a no-no) or a curandero. The best ayahuasceros are not always the most 'visible' or "known". Often, it is rather the opposite.
As this has been the overriding theme in terms of mumbo jumbo, it comes back down to one's own 'backyard' so-to-speak. Taking responsibility for the choices we make, doing the best we can to cover our tracks & only when it still feels right (timely, emotionally, etc...) to prepare accordingly & keep paying attention as we go along. A well-trained shaman & curandero will not put any pressure on you to drink anything if you do not feel ready. Nor will they make a move on you.
As one of my 'spiritual influences' (odd terminology here, but I feel it is fitting within the context of the topic here) used to say: "When in doubt, do naught." Another old English saying from up north, that can be translated as 'When not sure, wait & don't take any rash decision/action just because you either feel pressured or somebody is pushing you.'
I hope that clears up some of the confusion that was inadvertently created.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/2008 01:16AM by xythos.
Quote
other [times] where it would be the worst possible time to 'tap' into this because it further destabilises an already fragile state of beingness (be that spiritual, emotional, psychological, mental or physical).
Yes, it is very powerful stuff, which is why I mentioned the above statement & also why I re-emphasise it my reply. I have also (& this is fully my fault for not having brought it up when I meant to) advised anybody who has asked me the very same question, the crucial need to take these highly significant & very personal aspects (dependant on a case-by-case situation) into consideration that I have mentioned here. It also is of paramount importance to be aware that it is not for the weak of heart (or, in common terminology, the fearful without meaning to come across in any way as flippantly derogatory or disrespectful) but even more so, it isn't everybody's "cup of tea" (literally!).
Quote
what you say about ayahuasca is scary. A rather fragile friend said she wanted to go to Peru and do it and I did some background research and was alarmed.
Rightfully so. One should never ever do this 'on a whim'. And, I am glad that you have done your research in order to protect your friend from getting into something that she might not have been able to cope with, much less away from her familiar surroundings. It but underlines what I have said in my post - that one has to be in sound health, mentally, emotionally as well as physically.
Quote
If my sources are accurate, ayahuasca is powerful stuff.
1) It interacts with most and perhaps all antidepressants and psychotropic drugs because one of the herbs used in the ayahuasca preparation is, pharmacologically a Mono Amine Oxidase Inhibitor, which also interacts with common food items that contain tyramine, such as fermented products, red wine, figs, chocolate, blue cheese and red wine.
Absolutely. But ethical organisers inform those that want to do this about the precautions involved. Anti-depressants are a no-no. For at least 6, better yet, 8 weeks. A friend of mine wanted to go on a journey & I did tell her that if she wanted to do so, that she needed to stop her medication within the time frame given. I also told her about the diet (as mentioned in your post). That is why I say that this is not an appropriate path to 'explore' with the "quick & easy" mentality that so many other 'avenues' propose today. It is also, as I have mentioned in my post, a matter of proper preparation as well as intention.
If one looks for a "quick & easy" way for solutions, or, one is out just for the 'kick' of it, rather than the process proper, it will lead to a very difficult endeavour. A trained as well as ethical curandero is vital to ensure they know what to do when one hits a difficult, challenging phase during the journey. But the most important part is the prepatory stage, really turning inward & do some genuine soulsearching as to why one wants to do this. Because it is not necessarily a 'pleasant' experience - on a lot of different levels.
Quote
So anyone taking (say) an antidepressant would have to wean themselves completely before taking ayahuasca otherwise they could risk a catastrophic rise in blood pressure and other problems--a bad deal if you're in the jungle.
That is why it's a no-no with the wrong mindset. I'm the first to admit that I didn't feel ready to do this in the jungle. Much less with people I didn't fully master the language of (I manage Spanish well enough but it isn't anywhere close to my English - which is also not my mother tongue - oh well...!)
Quote
Given that the profit motive is strong, what are the odds that persons into Ayahuasca tourism would have the knowledge and incentive to quiz people about their health and drug histories and know which persons to advise against it?
For one, the aya forum is an excellent place to navigate & steer you in the right direction, again provided the 'seeker' is willing enough to take the responsibility to do their part and - here we are at the crux of the matter. For in the end it comes down as much to the individual doing his homework, gathering thorough information that will safeguard him/her from jumping on the next available 'sojourn' that is being offered while at the same time taking into account their own medical background, any aspects that would spell 'trouble' (even without going down to the Amazon), and - I cannot emphasise this enough, one's intention as well as 'motive' or, if I were to speak in "new agey" babble (apologies to you Judy), one's "agenda" for even wanting to explore such an avenue.
Quote
To say, "You are not at this time in any condition to take a trip to South America and do ayahuasca" would mean turning down a couple thousand bucks. How many of us are ethical enough to do that...?
There is one guy who is very selective in who he chooses to even invite to a Shipibo stay. He's very clear in that he doesn't "prettify" what it will be like - no comfort, very down-to-earth & yes, indeed quite challenging. He also does not accept those who do not bring the right attitude towards the whole sojourn & the experience. So for those who are not ready to "get their hands dirty" (metaphorically as well as literally) they will, almost without exception, stay away.
Of course, the risk with going on such an excursion is that a lot of people simply overestimate themselves. But, that is unfortunately not limited to ayahuasca, it is found in as 'mundane' areas as mountaineering (yes I am aware it may seem farfetched, but I do think there are some parallels here) or any other sports verging on the extreme (skiing, anyone out for an adrenaline rush). I feel the biggest difference between those that go out on a limb - no matter what they decide to do - and those being aware & conscious of themselves, finding out as much as they can prior to undertaking such a venture, and thereby knowing at least to a certain degree what is involved, is taking a calculated risk, rather than just a blind-faith kind of risk.
Although it certainly takes a lot more time & energy to find ethical curanderos, they are still around. Word of mouth is still the bottom line, whether it is a doctor (credentials aside, how does this person resonate with you? How does it feel? If it feels bad, it's a no-no) or a curandero. The best ayahuasceros are not always the most 'visible' or "known". Often, it is rather the opposite.
As this has been the overriding theme in terms of mumbo jumbo, it comes back down to one's own 'backyard' so-to-speak. Taking responsibility for the choices we make, doing the best we can to cover our tracks & only when it still feels right (timely, emotionally, etc...) to prepare accordingly & keep paying attention as we go along. A well-trained shaman & curandero will not put any pressure on you to drink anything if you do not feel ready. Nor will they make a move on you.
As one of my 'spiritual influences' (odd terminology here, but I feel it is fitting within the context of the topic here) used to say: "When in doubt, do naught." Another old English saying from up north, that can be translated as 'When not sure, wait & don't take any rash decision/action just because you either feel pressured or somebody is pushing you.'
I hope that clears up some of the confusion that was inadvertently created.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/2008 01:16AM by xythos.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 04, 2008 02:37AM
Dear x; Nope, this wasnt confusing and confirms my hunches. And...am glad to report my friend did not go tripping.
In a way, doing ayahuasca sounds sounds like doing the Ironman triathlon...one has to be in top condition and mental and physical strength are needed.
And even a triathlon or marathon are not risk free---and one wouldnt do either one on a whim, either.
Im not against psychedelics, even though Ive ruled out using them for personal reasons. I get enough employment just by observing and pondering the dream material I get at night. Psychedelics would probably innundate me, so all the way back in high school, I ruled out using them and dont feel Ive missed anything. As you put it, its case by case.
I think the old hands like Albert Hoffman and Aldous Huxley had the right idea....they worried about the implications of psychedelics being made available too readily and of people using the stuff whose minds and bodies were not fully mature and who were not sufficiently grounded and prepared by life experience.
In a way, doing ayahuasca sounds sounds like doing the Ironman triathlon...one has to be in top condition and mental and physical strength are needed.
And even a triathlon or marathon are not risk free---and one wouldnt do either one on a whim, either.
Im not against psychedelics, even though Ive ruled out using them for personal reasons. I get enough employment just by observing and pondering the dream material I get at night. Psychedelics would probably innundate me, so all the way back in high school, I ruled out using them and dont feel Ive missed anything. As you put it, its case by case.
I think the old hands like Albert Hoffman and Aldous Huxley had the right idea....they worried about the implications of psychedelics being made available too readily and of people using the stuff whose minds and bodies were not fully mature and who were not sufficiently grounded and prepared by life experience.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
xythos
()
Date: December 04, 2008 04:43AM
Quote
am glad to report my friend did not go tripping.
I figured as much, reading between the lines. You are indeed a real friend, and that in itself is always laudable! I would have done the same if I would have been in your position... It's one thing to do it 'locally' & maybe just once, or have to go through the strain & expense of travelling all the way down on your own & having to come back, too!
Quote
In a way, doing ayahuasca sounds sounds like doing the Ironman triathlon...one has to be in top condition and mental and physical strength are needed. And even a triathlon or marathon are not risk free---and one wouldnt do either one on a whim, either.
Yes & no...again, as we have come to agree, it's a very individual thing, one cannot put it into a 'box'. There have certainly been times where I was anything but and yet...oh well...
Quote
Im not against psychedelics, even though Ive ruled out using them for personal reasons. I get enough employment just by observing and pondering the dream material I get at night. Psychedelics would probably innundate me, so all the way back in high school, I ruled out using them and dont feel Ive missed anything. As you put it, its case by case.
You know what's curious? I used to have the precise same kind of attitude & if you would've asked me five years ago if I would ever do something like this, I would have said "you're crazy" for even suggesting it. Maybe that is what has kept me from getting 'hooked' on the journeying rather than do it out of a genuine intention & desire to 'see' myself & look at my history in a different fashion. Like you, I have always had a very vivid 'dream-life'.
What I feel to be significantly different, certainly as I have experienced it, is that I have never felt a 'dependency' issue with this, simply because I am, by nature, neither physically nor consciously (i.e., mentally/emotionally) someone who is into anything remotely 'drug-like', much less tuned into substance abuse. My father was enough to put me off alcohol for good, my mum & her girlfriends (all divorced & single!) were enough to put me off smoking from childhood onwards.
Also, biochemically, Asians have a different make-up as to how they digest alcohol. They lack a stomach enzyme that (in Caucasians' bodies) slows down the alcohol getting into the blood stream which makes for 'cheap dates' (metaphorically) with Asians because they can get drunk on one glass of wine or even just a half glass of cidre.
Aside from that, the (ayahuasca) brew tastes so foul & revolting (to me anyway!) that I wouldn't be able to down this stuff on a 'regular' basis if you'd pay me...!
Quote
I think the old hands like Albert Hoffman and Aldous Huxley had the right idea....they worried about the implications of psychedelics being made available too readily and of people using the stuff whose minds and bodies were not fully mature and who were not sufficiently grounded and prepared by life experience.
The difference (& I apologise if I go on about this, I will stop though! Promise!) between Albert Hoffmann's LSD & the plant brew is that one is chemically created (LSD) while the other is purely plant based (from two different plants) & that is what makes the difference from simply going off on a 'trip/getting into altered states of consciousness' (which can be 'achieved' via lucid dreaming or meditation, too) & the guidance & healing that comes with a plant based concoction under the watchful eye of a sound & experienced healer (curandero).
Again there are differences.
I would, funny as it may seem, never touch cacti or salvia. And I also am proud (if I may be so ashamedly boastful here!) to say that I have never ever done anything else, nor would I dream (literally!) of doing LSD precisely because it lacks the healing element, which is really the only reason I ever even considered 'going there' & doing ayahuasca in the first place.
I'm not that keen on "going off me trolley" (English for going bonkers) & being kind of 'out of myself'... Journeys are way too hard (on me anyway) to do this for a prolonged period of time. I'm kinda a stereotypical Asian...(huh!). It is also the only reason I would suggest it to someone who seeks the healing of severe trauma (as was mentioned in my previous post) with all the necessary caution & awareness for an interested person to make an informed & conscious decision & choice.
As is, I have, for the very reason of it taking on an increasingly cult-like energy, pointed out these very concerns to the key organiser I have mentioned here in the video link.
All I felt I could do, is at least make him aware that I feel they're going off in the wrong direction. The other is to no longer 'endorse' where this is going by pulling back from something I feel is unethical & has gotten out of hand. That he was annoyed at my bringing it up, says, I think, more about them as it does about my once a year ayahuasca journey. I actually sent him a link from this website with re to cult-like movements/sects.
Mind you, I am rather realistic in expecting much change of direction, which is a shame, really.
Ultimately, I neither need ayahuasca that desperately (or at all) nor do I feel restricted in finding other meaningful ways to 'put myself back together' or explore my consciousness all the while being fully awake, aware & there.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/2008 04:50AM by xythos.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
Ex-NewRager
()
Date: December 06, 2008 10:37AM
Sorry to pull the thread back off the shaman topic. This is just another general one about generic new age. One thing I have noticed very prevalent in new age circles and practitioners is the heightened level of anxiety new age produces. The constant drumming into your head that everything is significant and has meaning or lessons encourages the development of obsessive thought.
Just log onto any new age discussion board for evidence. You'll see everyone asking for prayers or healing over very minor things that your garden variety human wouldn't give 2 seconds of thought to. Stuff like emails being received, headaches, stubbed toes, a cat with a furball. It seems that new age practitioners can't get on with their day without the constant support and encouragement of their "group". They also seem to suffer in highly disproportionate numbers (to the rest of the population) from allergies and sensitivity issues. They cannot tolerate certain foods, noise, people who don't believe what they believe, bad energy (which by the way exists in anything they don't agree with), dust, cities, office environments etc.
All of this is a symptom of the highly circular and obsessive thinking encouraged in new age tenets. The idea that the world is basically toxic because they are highly evolved and sensitive beings. That everything which happens in their day is either a lesson or a sign. That the appearance of someone or something which irritates them is a message that they have issues to work on. With this kind of thinking I don't think I could get on with my day without a support group either.
Which proves my point that new age is dangerous not because of any dark spirits or what-not but because it destabilises the human mind to the point of mental illness. It ascribes significance to insignificant events and the individual loses their perspective and ability to see the world in a rational way. Part of what gives us our ability to bounce back from tragedy or setback is the belief we have that "this doesn't really matter", "we can overcome it". But when you have the mindset that it does matter, then suddenly problems are exponentially big. A credit card debt is no longer just something you have to pay off, it's a sign you are not worthy of abundance. It says something about your soul and destines you to never being able to be better off financially because this is a soul lesson. Isn't this the very definition of disempowerment?
Just log onto any new age discussion board for evidence. You'll see everyone asking for prayers or healing over very minor things that your garden variety human wouldn't give 2 seconds of thought to. Stuff like emails being received, headaches, stubbed toes, a cat with a furball. It seems that new age practitioners can't get on with their day without the constant support and encouragement of their "group". They also seem to suffer in highly disproportionate numbers (to the rest of the population) from allergies and sensitivity issues. They cannot tolerate certain foods, noise, people who don't believe what they believe, bad energy (which by the way exists in anything they don't agree with), dust, cities, office environments etc.
All of this is a symptom of the highly circular and obsessive thinking encouraged in new age tenets. The idea that the world is basically toxic because they are highly evolved and sensitive beings. That everything which happens in their day is either a lesson or a sign. That the appearance of someone or something which irritates them is a message that they have issues to work on. With this kind of thinking I don't think I could get on with my day without a support group either.
Which proves my point that new age is dangerous not because of any dark spirits or what-not but because it destabilises the human mind to the point of mental illness. It ascribes significance to insignificant events and the individual loses their perspective and ability to see the world in a rational way. Part of what gives us our ability to bounce back from tragedy or setback is the belief we have that "this doesn't really matter", "we can overcome it". But when you have the mindset that it does matter, then suddenly problems are exponentially big. A credit card debt is no longer just something you have to pay off, it's a sign you are not worthy of abundance. It says something about your soul and destines you to never being able to be better off financially because this is a soul lesson. Isn't this the very definition of disempowerment?
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 06, 2008 11:22PM
Quote
The idea that the world is basically toxic because they are highly evolved and sensitive beings.
Seems to me that if something or someone is highly evolved, that should make for a degree of robustness, not increased delicacy/fragility..?
This article gives some food for thought
[www.cracked.com], by David Wong.
(please dont be content with this quoted morsel. The entire thing is excellent with well chosen photos to liven things up. In fact, Cracked.com is full of terrific stuff to read. It will be hard to tear yourself away from the computer long enough to get out of the house and meet some annoying people. In fact, RR.com serves a radical function. It provides information that legions of people disagree with--to the point where many dont even want RR.com to exist. C)
Quote
#1. We don't have enough annoying strangers in our lives.
That's not sarcasm. Annoyance is something you build up a tolerance to, like alcohol or a bad smell. The more we're able to edit the annoyance out of our lives, the less we're able to handle it.
The problem is we've built an awesome, sprawling web of technology meant purely to let us avoid annoying people. Do all your Christmas shopping online and avoid the fat lady ramming her cart into you at Target. Spend $5,000 on a home theater system so you can see movies on a big screen without a toddler kicking the back of your seat. Hell, rent the DVD's from Netflix and you don't even have to spend the 30 seconds with the confused kid working the register at Blockbuster.
Get stuck in the waiting room at the doctor? No way we're striking up a conversation with the smelly old man in the next seat. We'll plug the iPod into our ears and have a text conversation with a friend or play our DS. Filter that annoyance right out of our world.
Now that would be awesome if it were actually possible to keep all of the irritating shit out of your life. But, it's not. It never will be. As long as you have needs, you'll have to deal with people you can't stand from time to time. We're losing that skill, the one that lets us deal with strangers and tolerate their shrill voices and clunky senses of humor and body odor and squeaky shoes. So, what encounters you do have with the outside world, the world you can't control, make you want to go on a screaming crotch-punching spree.
#2. We don't have enough annoying friends, either.
Lots of us were born into towns full of people we couldn't stand. As a kid, maybe you found yourself in an elementary school classroom, packed in with two dozen kids you did not choose and who shared none of your tastes or interests. Maybe you got beat up a lot.
But, you've grown up. And if you're, say, a huge DragonForce fan, you can go find their forum and meet a dozen people just like you. Or even better, start a private room with your favorite few and lock everybody else out. Say goodbye to the tedious, awkward, painful process of dealing with somebody who's truly different. That's another Old World inconvenience, like having to wash your clothes in a creek or wait for a raccoon to wander by the outhouse so you can wipe your ass with it.
The problem is that peacefully dealing with incompatible people is crucial to living in a society. In fact, if you think about it, peacefully dealing with people you can't stand is society. (Corboy italics) (Society is)Just people with opposite tastes and conflicting personalities sharing space and cooperating, often through gritted teeth.
Fifty years ago, you had to sit in a crowded room to see a movie. You didn't get to choose; you either did that or you missed the movie. When you got a new car, everyone on the block came and stood in your yard to look it over. You can bet that some of those people were assholes.
Yet, on the whole, people back then were apparently happier in their jobs and more satisfied with their lives. And get this: They had more friends.
That's right. Even though they had almost no ability to filter their peers according to common interests (hell, often you were just friends with the guy who happened to live next door), they still came up with more close friends than we have now-people they could trust.
It turns out, apparently, that after you get over that first irritation, after you shed your shell of "they listen to different music because they wouldn't understand mine" superiority, there's a sort of comfort in needing other people and being needed on a level beyond common interests. It turns out humans are social animals after all. And that ability to suffer fools, to tolerate annoyance, that's literally the one single thing that allows you to function in a world populated by other people who aren't you. (Corboy italics)Otherwise, you turn emo. Science has proven it.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/06/2008 11:28PM by corboy.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
xythos
()
Date: December 07, 2008 01:33AM
Excellent corboy...! So true & of course, the contradiction, certainly as it seems to me, lies within the awareness that we need other people around us while at the same time respecting our boundaries that protect us from being too 'exposed' & 'accessible' to these very same folks getting up our nose one time too many...! From my own experience I can but say that since I have learned to not only establish my own boundaries (& thus, become less susceptible to 'annoying' people "getting" to me), I am also better able to keep my own 'nastiness' in check so as to, in turn, be less of an annoyance to my peers around me... As things go, it is always an exchange, whether it is money, time, energy, knowledge or experience.
Within that context then, it leads to a natural context within which 'new age mumbo jumbo' is approached with a more detached perception. Again, ironic as it may appear, it comes back to respecting & maintaining our own boundaries whereby, instead of getting 'worked up' about a premeditated vocabulary, we can just 'listen' to it without it necessarily causing us to 're-'act with a kind of knee-jerk reaction, akin to rolling our eyes, or 'switching off' mentally, but to 'listen to it' without it triggering any reaction whatsoever. Naturally, this does not include those that have been subject to serious brainwashing, deep cult programming or such like. If anything, this in particular is something that is only possible after having gotten the worst (and then some) out of the way.
Re-action, as I mentioned already, is not 'acting out' from a deliberate sense of consciousness & awareness, but rather from a trigger that stems more often than not, from a deep-seated often unconscious emotional pattern interwoven with our belief system, our life experience & a.s.f. Rather, as if by some invisible force (& sorry ExRager if that now triggers you in turn...) we are in passive 'response' mode.
Whereas if, as mentioned above, our own boundaries are clearly defined (which at the same time, bears the risk of stiltifying our worldview or a wooden reactionary module), we are much less prone to 'fall' into a premeditated reaction pattern.
New age lingo (as I feel this to be a more appropriate term here) has been around much longer than what might be commonly been 'believed' up until recently. Thank God, I do not live in the US (sorry folks, no offense intended here, but I prefer 'watching from afar'...) & I don't feel quite as 'washed over' with the seemingly endless same linguistic "mumbo jumbo" that I have come to known so well when I lived there.
What I mean to say with this, is that language as a 'means & tool of communication' keeps changing. It is in & of itself, a living, breathing & everchanging tool of conveying the same message in an 'up-to-date' format, "adjusted" to the "new age" of an evolutionary developmental process. The linguistic terminology that is referred to here as "mumbo jumbo" is but a continutation of what started back in the early to mid 60s & has but been 'updated' to the "audience" of the 21st century.
The terminology might change but the underlying meaning has, overall, remained the same throughout. Like any living entity, language is destined to bring in new ways of interpretation, perception &/or understanding as we go along, in line with our own ever-changing evolutionary process.
Much like 30 years ago, language did not have any expressions or words for computers, or if say, in 1970, you would have talked to someone about "cds, dvds, internet, www" or such like, they most likely would have given you a blank stare, shook their head in bewilderment & walked off, wondering, if maybe, you just escaped from the asylum down the road (or wherever you happen to find yourself).
Within that context then, new words & ways of expressing ourselves, or conveying different messages on the outward are constantly changing as we as a people evolve & change. If someone were to read old English literature, I bet my bottom dollar that a lot of 'average' College kids wouldn't understand the words.
This is also why, as I commented in the BK/ET thread, the impression of 'same old, same old' - or, in other words - my increasing fatigue with apparent 'new' "teachers/new age gurus" churning out the very same old 'message' of "renewal" when it is but the 'packaging', presentation & style that may change whereas the message in & of itself (how to align more with who you want/choose/desire to be as well as an seemingly endless 'garden variety' of "how to-s" towards 'liberation, self-empowerment, self-realisation" blah, blah, ad infinitum) is but 'updated' with whatever new 'fad' happens to come along & offer itself for convenient (ab-)use of the shyster in question.
Which brings me to the very essence of this thread - namely, the words may change, the style may change, the person, the name, the dvds, cds, books, tapes, seminars, etc. & whatnot. Naturally with the focus on technology being a blessing & curse depending on who uses it for what purpose & intent, it then brings with it an increased potential to be abused by ill-intended, devious individuals (such as the 'new age discussion board' mentioned by Ex NewRager)...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2008 01:38AM by xythos.
Within that context then, it leads to a natural context within which 'new age mumbo jumbo' is approached with a more detached perception. Again, ironic as it may appear, it comes back to respecting & maintaining our own boundaries whereby, instead of getting 'worked up' about a premeditated vocabulary, we can just 'listen' to it without it necessarily causing us to 're-'act with a kind of knee-jerk reaction, akin to rolling our eyes, or 'switching off' mentally, but to 'listen to it' without it triggering any reaction whatsoever. Naturally, this does not include those that have been subject to serious brainwashing, deep cult programming or such like. If anything, this in particular is something that is only possible after having gotten the worst (and then some) out of the way.
Re-action, as I mentioned already, is not 'acting out' from a deliberate sense of consciousness & awareness, but rather from a trigger that stems more often than not, from a deep-seated often unconscious emotional pattern interwoven with our belief system, our life experience & a.s.f. Rather, as if by some invisible force (& sorry ExRager if that now triggers you in turn...) we are in passive 'response' mode.
Whereas if, as mentioned above, our own boundaries are clearly defined (which at the same time, bears the risk of stiltifying our worldview or a wooden reactionary module), we are much less prone to 'fall' into a premeditated reaction pattern.
New age lingo (as I feel this to be a more appropriate term here) has been around much longer than what might be commonly been 'believed' up until recently. Thank God, I do not live in the US (sorry folks, no offense intended here, but I prefer 'watching from afar'...) & I don't feel quite as 'washed over' with the seemingly endless same linguistic "mumbo jumbo" that I have come to known so well when I lived there.
What I mean to say with this, is that language as a 'means & tool of communication' keeps changing. It is in & of itself, a living, breathing & everchanging tool of conveying the same message in an 'up-to-date' format, "adjusted" to the "new age" of an evolutionary developmental process. The linguistic terminology that is referred to here as "mumbo jumbo" is but a continutation of what started back in the early to mid 60s & has but been 'updated' to the "audience" of the 21st century.
The terminology might change but the underlying meaning has, overall, remained the same throughout. Like any living entity, language is destined to bring in new ways of interpretation, perception &/or understanding as we go along, in line with our own ever-changing evolutionary process.
Much like 30 years ago, language did not have any expressions or words for computers, or if say, in 1970, you would have talked to someone about "cds, dvds, internet, www" or such like, they most likely would have given you a blank stare, shook their head in bewilderment & walked off, wondering, if maybe, you just escaped from the asylum down the road (or wherever you happen to find yourself).
Within that context then, new words & ways of expressing ourselves, or conveying different messages on the outward are constantly changing as we as a people evolve & change. If someone were to read old English literature, I bet my bottom dollar that a lot of 'average' College kids wouldn't understand the words.
This is also why, as I commented in the BK/ET thread, the impression of 'same old, same old' - or, in other words - my increasing fatigue with apparent 'new' "teachers/new age gurus" churning out the very same old 'message' of "renewal" when it is but the 'packaging', presentation & style that may change whereas the message in & of itself (how to align more with who you want/choose/desire to be as well as an seemingly endless 'garden variety' of "how to-s" towards 'liberation, self-empowerment, self-realisation" blah, blah, ad infinitum) is but 'updated' with whatever new 'fad' happens to come along & offer itself for convenient (ab-)use of the shyster in question.
Which brings me to the very essence of this thread - namely, the words may change, the style may change, the person, the name, the dvds, cds, books, tapes, seminars, etc. & whatnot. Naturally with the focus on technology being a blessing & curse depending on who uses it for what purpose & intent, it then brings with it an increased potential to be abused by ill-intended, devious individuals (such as the 'new age discussion board' mentioned by Ex NewRager)...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2008 01:38AM by xythos.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
xythos
()
Date: December 07, 2008 02:16AM
I wanted to respond to ENR separately
Ex-NewRager wrote:
Hm... I'd be very cautious to apply this to solely new age circles &/or practitioners.... Anxiety is a very common & I feel, over the last few decades, has become an increasing sign of the general populace's discomfort with what is happening around them. To restrict this only to these "circles" would be misleading & also, not doing justice to other areas of the population suffering from anxiety... This is not even mentioning 'anxiety disorders' - it is purely & simply listening to more than one 'segment' of the population - whether they be old people, Wall Street traders, people that have lost their jobs... Seriously, that is looking at the topic proper from a peephole perception...
It depends where you look... Seems to me that you have zeroed in on the 'desperados' of the new ageys...
Hm... Pardon me for pointing out the...uh...'obvious', but, what websites do you go to? Can you name a few the you mention here in a kind of 'they're all the same'?
Well, to take up a point here, unfortunately with technology & science having moved on to a much more advanced level of intruding our atmosphere as well as our personal sphere, breathing a much more 'loaded' (polluted) air than our ancestors ever did. The overuse of 'remedies' for every little ailment that seems to be 'promoted as dangerous' by the media outlets, thus unnecessarily 'alarming' people have, almost as if through an adverse affect of overusing a 'remedy fix for everything' a not really surprising 'aftereffect' of allergies & henceforth unkonwn illnesses on the rise.
These 'over-the-counter', readily availbale pills pushed, without remorse by the pharmaceutical mafia, GM food which actually negatively affects your body's natural biology by the likes of Monsanto only add to a weaker overall immune system. And unfortunately,what with the tampering food (additives R' us), it is really not that surprising that people become sick & as a result, are therefore more 'sensitive' to foods than they used to be...
The contaminated milk scandal in China is an excellent example of what I mean. But, it is most decidedly not limited to China...
Most tapwater in the US, as an example, is not safe to drink. Unless one can truly trace the source (literally as well metaphorically), it is better to use a water purifier. Even bottled water isn't a safeguard. Asbestos is not an 'exaggerated' allergy reaction.
Noise does have a negative affect on your overall well-beingness... (example, your neighbour who is reguarly drumming up the volume heavy-metal style at all hours of night & day, airports or plant noise are known to affect people living in these areas to a considerable degree in their ability to relax & switch off & get much needed rest).
This is not in any way restricted to 'new age practitioners' it's much more a consequence of industrialised nations being exposed, to a degree of 'onslaught' from the outside on the individual from a variety of sources, from breathing in more exhaust fumes, fumes from chemical plants, bug sprays, accidents of nuclear reactors, big fires (the CA fires come to mind here) etc. than our grandparents ever imagined.
The application of & resulting exposure to these 'factors' have not been as present & a 'part of our daily life' to this degree previously. To simply 'blame' practitioners for having allergies (granted, they may 'twist it' to "apply" it within their own methodology) is a bit simplistic.
It is a scientifically proven fact, that because of an overapplication of vaccination at too early an age, the body has no chance to develop its own natural immune system, which leads to a higher degree of being susceptible to allergies & sicknesses.
So, all 'new age scares' aside, this is just a very real factor modern societies have to deal with in our day & age.
Well, I wouldn't be so generous as in giving new age that much credit. Sorry, if that may come across somewhat 'sarcastic' but I think you're giving new ageys way too much importance & 'weight'... Energy, yes - there's the word! - is very neutral in & of itself... It is intention that changes its 'colour'...i.e., Einstein never recovered from having been (unknowingly & unwittingly) instrumental in 'co-'creating the atomic bomb.
It is only when the nucelar energy that was discovered, was turned into a devestating, ferocious means of destruction that nuclear energy became synonomous with 'bad', 'terrible' & 'destructive'.
There is negative energy. To deny this would be to 'cultivate' a one-sided perceptiopn, such as insisting that there is only "sun" or only "rain", when it is neither. Too much sun burns you up & dries out the landscape, too much cold, freezes & kills you if you're exposed to it too long.
If one chooses, on the balance to appreciate two sides of the same coin, then you realise that one cannot exist without the other, provided neither side takes over to the detriment of the other. That doesn't work. So 'dark forces' do exist & they need to be looked at rather than denied (this is actually one of the reasons I believe this website is here in the first place! And, please correct me I'm wrong....!)
"Tragedy or setback" as you refer to it, is a very individual thing... It's never as 'easy peesy, lemon squeezy' as you would like to believe... Say, if you or someone close to you would suffer from a terminal illness (& I mean the real deal here, not some new agey "fancy" illusory illness), to then walk around & quip "this doesn't really matter, we can overcome it" would, I think, be rather flippant.
Crises' as 9/11 has proven, do have an enormous impact - they do affect you & somebody who has their whole life turned upside down, loses all that they ever held dear within one single day, or just disappear (as lot of children are abducted to sects or for other devious agendas) - I assure you, they won't just "skip it off their shoulder" as hapharzardly...
People that return from war (& there are plenty of Vets out there, it's an ideal place to re-adjust your perception of "nothing is that serious to make such a big deal of it") are seriously damaged people. Not necessarily 'just' physically. Damaged beyond repair.
To put all the teachings in the "forget it - it only disempowers you" pot, is missing some truths that are up to the individual to come up on. It disempowers you if are not selective. Distinguishing the gems from the rubbish is what makes all the difference, and then some... It can teach you more than you ever thought possible, but the weeding out process is your 'job', your responsibility.
There are degrees/levels (not in a cult-fashion)...that is the learning that is there for the taking. Subtlety, finetuning & filtering out are important. The rest, as they say, is up to you.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2008 02:26AM by xythos.
Ex-NewRager wrote:
Quote
One thing I have noticed very prevalent in new age circles and practitioners is the heightened level of anxiety new age produces. The constant drumming into your head that everything is significant and has meaning or lessons encourages the development of obsessive thought.
Hm... I'd be very cautious to apply this to solely new age circles &/or practitioners.... Anxiety is a very common & I feel, over the last few decades, has become an increasing sign of the general populace's discomfort with what is happening around them. To restrict this only to these "circles" would be misleading & also, not doing justice to other areas of the population suffering from anxiety... This is not even mentioning 'anxiety disorders' - it is purely & simply listening to more than one 'segment' of the population - whether they be old people, Wall Street traders, people that have lost their jobs... Seriously, that is looking at the topic proper from a peephole perception...
Quote
Just log onto any new age discussion board for evidence. You'll see everyone asking for prayers or healing over very minor things that your garden variety human wouldn't give 2 seconds of thought to.
It depends where you look... Seems to me that you have zeroed in on the 'desperados' of the new ageys...
Quote
It seems that new age practitioners can't get on with their day without the constant support and encouragement of their "group". They also seem to suffer in highly disproportionate numbers (to the rest of the population) from allergies and sensitivity issues. They cannot tolerate certain foods, noise, people who don't believe what they believe, bad energy (which by the way exists in anything they don't agree with), dust, cities, office environments etc.
Hm... Pardon me for pointing out the...uh...'obvious', but, what websites do you go to? Can you name a few the you mention here in a kind of 'they're all the same'?
Quote
All of this is a symptom of the highly circular and obsessive thinking encouraged in new age tenets. The idea that the world is basically toxic because they are highly evolved and sensitive beings. That everything which happens in their day is either a lesson or a sign. That the appearance of someone or something which irritates them is a message that they have issues to work on. With this kind of thinking I don't think I could get on with my day without a support group either.
Well, to take up a point here, unfortunately with technology & science having moved on to a much more advanced level of intruding our atmosphere as well as our personal sphere, breathing a much more 'loaded' (polluted) air than our ancestors ever did. The overuse of 'remedies' for every little ailment that seems to be 'promoted as dangerous' by the media outlets, thus unnecessarily 'alarming' people have, almost as if through an adverse affect of overusing a 'remedy fix for everything' a not really surprising 'aftereffect' of allergies & henceforth unkonwn illnesses on the rise.
These 'over-the-counter', readily availbale pills pushed, without remorse by the pharmaceutical mafia, GM food which actually negatively affects your body's natural biology by the likes of Monsanto only add to a weaker overall immune system. And unfortunately,what with the tampering food (additives R' us), it is really not that surprising that people become sick & as a result, are therefore more 'sensitive' to foods than they used to be...
The contaminated milk scandal in China is an excellent example of what I mean. But, it is most decidedly not limited to China...
Most tapwater in the US, as an example, is not safe to drink. Unless one can truly trace the source (literally as well metaphorically), it is better to use a water purifier. Even bottled water isn't a safeguard. Asbestos is not an 'exaggerated' allergy reaction.
Noise does have a negative affect on your overall well-beingness... (example, your neighbour who is reguarly drumming up the volume heavy-metal style at all hours of night & day, airports or plant noise are known to affect people living in these areas to a considerable degree in their ability to relax & switch off & get much needed rest).
This is not in any way restricted to 'new age practitioners' it's much more a consequence of industrialised nations being exposed, to a degree of 'onslaught' from the outside on the individual from a variety of sources, from breathing in more exhaust fumes, fumes from chemical plants, bug sprays, accidents of nuclear reactors, big fires (the CA fires come to mind here) etc. than our grandparents ever imagined.
The application of & resulting exposure to these 'factors' have not been as present & a 'part of our daily life' to this degree previously. To simply 'blame' practitioners for having allergies (granted, they may 'twist it' to "apply" it within their own methodology) is a bit simplistic.
It is a scientifically proven fact, that because of an overapplication of vaccination at too early an age, the body has no chance to develop its own natural immune system, which leads to a higher degree of being susceptible to allergies & sicknesses.
So, all 'new age scares' aside, this is just a very real factor modern societies have to deal with in our day & age.
Quote
Which proves my point that new age is dangerous not because of any dark spirits or what-not but because it destabilises the human mind to the point of mental illness.
Well, I wouldn't be so generous as in giving new age that much credit. Sorry, if that may come across somewhat 'sarcastic' but I think you're giving new ageys way too much importance & 'weight'... Energy, yes - there's the word! - is very neutral in & of itself... It is intention that changes its 'colour'...i.e., Einstein never recovered from having been (unknowingly & unwittingly) instrumental in 'co-'creating the atomic bomb.
It is only when the nucelar energy that was discovered, was turned into a devestating, ferocious means of destruction that nuclear energy became synonomous with 'bad', 'terrible' & 'destructive'.
There is negative energy. To deny this would be to 'cultivate' a one-sided perceptiopn, such as insisting that there is only "sun" or only "rain", when it is neither. Too much sun burns you up & dries out the landscape, too much cold, freezes & kills you if you're exposed to it too long.
If one chooses, on the balance to appreciate two sides of the same coin, then you realise that one cannot exist without the other, provided neither side takes over to the detriment of the other. That doesn't work. So 'dark forces' do exist & they need to be looked at rather than denied (this is actually one of the reasons I believe this website is here in the first place! And, please correct me I'm wrong....!)
Quote
Ex-NewRager
It ascribes significance to insignificant events and the individual loses their perspective and ability to see the world in a rational way. Part of what gives us our ability to bounce back from tragedy or setback is the belief we have that "this doesn't really matter", "we can overcome it". But when you have the mindset that it does matter, then suddenly problems are exponentially big. A credit card debt is no longer just something you have to pay off, it's a sign you are not worthy of abundance. It says something about your soul and destines you to never being able to be better off financially because this is a soul lesson. Isn't this the very definition of disempowerment?
"Tragedy or setback" as you refer to it, is a very individual thing... It's never as 'easy peesy, lemon squeezy' as you would like to believe... Say, if you or someone close to you would suffer from a terminal illness (& I mean the real deal here, not some new agey "fancy" illusory illness), to then walk around & quip "this doesn't really matter, we can overcome it" would, I think, be rather flippant.
Crises' as 9/11 has proven, do have an enormous impact - they do affect you & somebody who has their whole life turned upside down, loses all that they ever held dear within one single day, or just disappear (as lot of children are abducted to sects or for other devious agendas) - I assure you, they won't just "skip it off their shoulder" as hapharzardly...
People that return from war (& there are plenty of Vets out there, it's an ideal place to re-adjust your perception of "nothing is that serious to make such a big deal of it") are seriously damaged people. Not necessarily 'just' physically. Damaged beyond repair.
To put all the teachings in the "forget it - it only disempowers you" pot, is missing some truths that are up to the individual to come up on. It disempowers you if are not selective. Distinguishing the gems from the rubbish is what makes all the difference, and then some... It can teach you more than you ever thought possible, but the weeding out process is your 'job', your responsibility.
There are degrees/levels (not in a cult-fashion)...that is the learning that is there for the taking. Subtlety, finetuning & filtering out are important. The rest, as they say, is up to you.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2008 02:26AM by xythos.
Values are in the eye of the beholder...
Posted by:
Rangdrol
()
Date: December 07, 2008 07:13AM
Ex-NewRager said:
"My issue with new age isn't whether or not it's real but the fact that 99% of it offers absolutely nothing of value to anyone."
I agree with some of your comments about "new age" movement, but it helps to identify the particular group or leaders we are talking about, when we sharing our negative experiences.
My I fear is far too many people seem to think that new age experiences are not worthy, or that everything that is in any way even the slightest bit different from the Judeo-Christian beliefs and values are inherently negative and destructive.
I find, for myself, that it is important to deal with each issue separately. For example, my experience with abuse in the Catholic church does not prevent me from practicing Buddhism in the Tibetan school. It does, however, make me more sensitive to the issues of potential abuse .
It is true that there are a lot of charlatans, out there, and if we have some interest in "new-age" or philosophical ideas, or if we believe we are on a spiritual path, or quest, we will have to go out into the world and actually step into the water. I think that many people who find themselves here on this forum are people who were and are on a quest. Unfortunately, some of us got burned, but at the end of the day, we helped our selves heal. And we continue.
There are many who have questionable tactics, and often they are purely financial. Or are they? "The Secret" for example. The fact is that "the Universe" is not something we can put on a microscope slide, but the so called Law of Attraction they promote is no law at all.
Likewise, Wayne Dwyer (sp?) is making tons of money espousing the Tao and the teachings of the Buddha—both of which are free at any local center. But what I realize is that the older I get the more I realize that we don't all come to the source on the same path. I, personally, have learned a lot by taking the path I took. For example, I was raised in the Catholic church and that is one of the largest cults in the world. I was able to say NO and extract myself, at an early age, but I was not always able to see the con jobs ahead, just around the corner. Still, I know that I have lived, and that I took risks, and it could not have been any other way, for me.
If someone people had a negative experience and they continue to blame the group, failing, at some point, to ask themselves how they handed their personal power over to that group or leader, then that person probably still has work to do. I have learned that as an adult, I made decisions and am responsible, in part, for what happened to me.
If I think of a woman like Louise Hay, for example. I think that she is a really wonderful person who has helped a lot of people with her simple encouragement. Unfortunately, those simple principles were not available to the general public, thus there was a real need for these teachings. Her values are just one of many that are offered to us. These values are mostly new ways of thinking, and, I would add, IMPROVED and healthier ways of being.
Louise is totally what I would call new-age, but in a very positive way. When churches and clinics were closing their doors to men in the gay community in the early 80s, she was helping and empowering gay men. She has been around for many years, and if you ever listened to her, you would see that she is a power of example.
The problem is some people want to make money and control people. One woman I know, claims to be a psychic and does that work. In her day to day life, she shames her girlfriends into submission and lies. It's pretty clear to me that the woman has some serious psychological problems. Who is to blame? Is it her? Is it the people who go to her? Unfortunately, I don't know what goes on in her mind, and neither does my friend, but we all have to learn not to set ourselves up. The woman behind the curtain, the psychic, (sorry, i couldn't resist that visual) she may just be trying to do the best she can. The people who go see her, however, must learn to be more observant.
I think that there are very wonderful "new-age" people out there—psychics, channelers, mediums—a few are friends—many are very gifted people. I don't think we can deny the fact that there are scammers out there, but we can't deny that there are people who actually care about others and want to help them. Most live by strict codes of conduct. Maybe that's what we have to notice, we have to learn to identify the real from the shams—much like when we go to car dealerships.
"My issue with new age isn't whether or not it's real but the fact that 99% of it offers absolutely nothing of value to anyone."
I agree with some of your comments about "new age" movement, but it helps to identify the particular group or leaders we are talking about, when we sharing our negative experiences.
My I fear is far too many people seem to think that new age experiences are not worthy, or that everything that is in any way even the slightest bit different from the Judeo-Christian beliefs and values are inherently negative and destructive.
I find, for myself, that it is important to deal with each issue separately. For example, my experience with abuse in the Catholic church does not prevent me from practicing Buddhism in the Tibetan school. It does, however, make me more sensitive to the issues of potential abuse .
It is true that there are a lot of charlatans, out there, and if we have some interest in "new-age" or philosophical ideas, or if we believe we are on a spiritual path, or quest, we will have to go out into the world and actually step into the water. I think that many people who find themselves here on this forum are people who were and are on a quest. Unfortunately, some of us got burned, but at the end of the day, we helped our selves heal. And we continue.
There are many who have questionable tactics, and often they are purely financial. Or are they? "The Secret" for example. The fact is that "the Universe" is not something we can put on a microscope slide, but the so called Law of Attraction they promote is no law at all.
Likewise, Wayne Dwyer (sp?) is making tons of money espousing the Tao and the teachings of the Buddha—both of which are free at any local center. But what I realize is that the older I get the more I realize that we don't all come to the source on the same path. I, personally, have learned a lot by taking the path I took. For example, I was raised in the Catholic church and that is one of the largest cults in the world. I was able to say NO and extract myself, at an early age, but I was not always able to see the con jobs ahead, just around the corner. Still, I know that I have lived, and that I took risks, and it could not have been any other way, for me.
If someone people had a negative experience and they continue to blame the group, failing, at some point, to ask themselves how they handed their personal power over to that group or leader, then that person probably still has work to do. I have learned that as an adult, I made decisions and am responsible, in part, for what happened to me.
If I think of a woman like Louise Hay, for example. I think that she is a really wonderful person who has helped a lot of people with her simple encouragement. Unfortunately, those simple principles were not available to the general public, thus there was a real need for these teachings. Her values are just one of many that are offered to us. These values are mostly new ways of thinking, and, I would add, IMPROVED and healthier ways of being.
Louise is totally what I would call new-age, but in a very positive way. When churches and clinics were closing their doors to men in the gay community in the early 80s, she was helping and empowering gay men. She has been around for many years, and if you ever listened to her, you would see that she is a power of example.
The problem is some people want to make money and control people. One woman I know, claims to be a psychic and does that work. In her day to day life, she shames her girlfriends into submission and lies. It's pretty clear to me that the woman has some serious psychological problems. Who is to blame? Is it her? Is it the people who go to her? Unfortunately, I don't know what goes on in her mind, and neither does my friend, but we all have to learn not to set ourselves up. The woman behind the curtain, the psychic, (sorry, i couldn't resist that visual) she may just be trying to do the best she can. The people who go see her, however, must learn to be more observant.
I think that there are very wonderful "new-age" people out there—psychics, channelers, mediums—a few are friends—many are very gifted people. I don't think we can deny the fact that there are scammers out there, but we can't deny that there are people who actually care about others and want to help them. Most live by strict codes of conduct. Maybe that's what we have to notice, we have to learn to identify the real from the shams—much like when we go to car dealerships.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
newagesurvivor
()
Date: December 07, 2008 11:59PM
Quote
Judy
The idea that people are responsible for everything that happens to them makes no sense and easily results in blame and self-centeredness. The world doesn't revolve around any one person and going back to the mail carrier example, if the mail is lost, is it because of my "faulty" thinking or anyone else involved, including the sender of the mail (who maybe didn't want me to receive it) and everyone working at the post office (especially people who hate their jobs)? This kind of thinking defies logic!
So, you didn’t get the letter, and what they (new age parrots) are saying is that that was somehow your own doing, your own fault. According to them there is absolutely nothing in your reality that wouldn’t be your doing. So I look at my reality and what do I see: I see my own hands typing the message, I see my body, I see other people, I see my home, I look out of the window and I see trees, birds and squirrels, houses, cars, people. How on earth could I have done all that and when did I do that. Surreal? I look at my own life history and everything I have known or believed to be true (like history of humankind, whole of evolution), and all the atrocities in it – and what they are saying is that that is my fault, my doing. Really? And it gets worse. According to them everything that can be seen is mere illusion, it is not real. Yes, they do seem to get everything upside down: for instance being awake is not real at all, and when one is asleep and dreaming so that is somehow more real, closer to what they call ‘ultimate reality’, or ‘ultimate truth’.
No, I haven’t got this, either. It makes me feel very stupid. At the same time there are thousands of these mostly white Americans who claim to have that ‘ultimate truth of ultimate reality’, who claim to have the knowledge of such things, because they are enlightened or have received that from God itself. Then they claim that man is that god. No, they claim ‘you are god’, for whoever who happens to be so misfortunate as to read their messages. And since I’m the one doing the reading, when I’m doing it, the message seems to be directed at me. And it gets worse. Everything in this known universe is ‘just a figment of your imagination’, ‘your sun is just a figment of your imagination’, ‘universe is just a giant hologram’, etc. Finally nothing but some thought (in God’s head, that god being them, you, I, who? that remains unclear as so many other things there as well) is real, according to them. So finally there is no-one left, a human being is left totally alone. They advise people (or the reader) to look at other people and tell themselves: ‘you are not real, you are just some reflection of my thoughts, I created you’. Everything in this world is just a play, or a movie, according to them. How does this help anyone? How is this going to make the world a better place? How is this showing any compassion, any intellect, anything good?
There are so many contradictions in this babble. Is there anything but contradictions in this babble? One thing I don’t get, why is it that these almost illiterate Americans seem to know so much about everything, and I do not. These uneducated folks talk about quantum mechanics and metaphysics and what not, and claim to have a deep understanding about those matters. Then why is it so difficult for them to write their own language and not make an incomprehensible amount of typos in their god-given messages? In my country (I live in Europe and I have to state here that English is not my mother tongue) there are actually people who do know something about cosmological matters, quantum physics, and stuff, and they do not make any such claims; they do not claim to have any ‘ultimate proof’ of the ‘ultimate reality’, and they do not deny the existence of the universe, or the existence of anything in it, be it material or something that cannot be seen. So these university professors know nothing, and these lower class American single mothers or whoever know it all – really?
They say they know the truth, or The Truth, and all I can see is a bunch of unexplained arguments; they say they are here to teach me, and all I get is confusion and Great Doubt; they say they represent Love, and all I can see is hate, some kind of megalomaniac insanity, arrogance. New Age as a whole is said to represent some new kind of liberal, tolerant, unifying thought; it is said to represent all kinds of things towards equality and freedom. What I have seen there is American political conservatism, sexism, racism, hatred against humanity as a whole. And what this feels like is something so terrible that I cannot find words to describe it: it feels they are either trying to make me insane or make me kill myself; no, I haven’t felt love there. Their next argument is, of course, that what I think and feel is wrong, since they have the knowledge of God, life and everything, and I obviously don’t, since I don’t get theirs. Now, obviously there must be something wrong here. Who do I trust? I would like to be able to trust myself, but since I cannot make the statement that I know the ultimate truth or anything of the sort, how can I know that what they say wouldn’t be the ultimate truth. Their version of ultimate truth just makes everything extremely confusing, it leaves me empty, it sucks all meaning of life itself. So where’s that Good that they claim to represent?
I have been struggling with these thoughts for two years. I was never interested in any new age stuff, since I have a more scientific interest in things. But then something happened to me, which was so unexplainable, and just kept on happening (still is, actually) that the only conclusion that I could come up with was that there must be God. For someone who has been an atheist all her life that was big enough issue to deal with. In the beginning I did think I was really losing my mind, becoming insane. Well, I did not. I survived. I can only say that God helped me, through working directly with me and through me, including my material body. And the world was still there; nothing unexplainable had happened in this world in the meantime.
The trouble, however, was that at the time I was given the divine guidance to step into the new age teachings. And in the name of truth I must say that there has been messages that have served my searching for knowledge, there has been some information that has been useful for me. But as someone on this thread stated, ’99 per cent of it is BS’: well, I don’t know if it’s 99 or 90 something per cent, but yes, most of the new age has been either totally useless or harmful for my wellbeing, or for my relationship with that God that I have had contact with. So who do I trust? Whose god is right? What is this shit essentially, anyway, and after all? The evil that I see in New Age teachings or their beliefs seems to be contradicting my own belief in goodness. And if the ultimate reality or truth is something utterly evil, what’s the point in anything? What’s the point in anything that is in this world, and what’s the point in anything that I, as one human being, am or can be aware of, especially concerning these very serious matters and questions like ‘who am I’, ‘what does this mean’, ‘where is this going to’.
I have cried for help for so long, and I am tired. Why isn’t God helping me to solve these things out? Why was I given guidance to read e.g. Neale Donald Walsch’s books, which infuriated me with their notions of a universe that to me seems like some kind of evil mechanical machinery, with so many secret and unknowable rules, where there’s no sense, no compassion for human suffering, nor answers to my questions. One of those books even claimed that I, as a reader, was the creator of that stupid book. That really hasn’t helped me at all – quite the contrary. So I’m being led to question everything that has been or is good in my life, or in the things that I can see or know of. Is my God the evil force behind all that I can see in those certain new age teachings and beliefs? Why should I then trust anything that this divine force in me is trying to tell me, teach me, give guidance for? Who to trust, then?
For two years I have done nothing but thinking, googleing, trying to make some sense on these matters. New Age has given me confusion and distrust; it is draining me off hope, belief, and love, if there is any left. So it seems to be doing exactly the opposite than what they are claiming their intentions are. And I’ve been raving at the universe, at God, raging myself out, over and over again. I can honestly say that I have found more sense, more goodness, more intelligence in nearly all kinds of sceptical or atheist sites and texts than in those soooo deeply spiritual new age or other babblings. There certainly isn’t much sound criticism against the woo stuff, and hardly any that would come from the spiritual standpoint.
I don’t know any newagers personally. I don’t live in the USA. I have no-one to turn to. I haven’t gone to any groups or cults (thank God for that!), but I haven’t been able to avoid them on the internet or books.
I thank you on this site and on this thread for sound information. You give me hope that not everyone on this planet (or in the United States) is either a nutcase or malevolent. Especially I wish to express my gratitude and deep sympathy for Judy.
Dear Judy, I truly thank you for raising this issue up, and yes, your messages make sense to me, they really do. As another human being and one that has also gone through years of being ill without the official medicine being able to help, I would say this: You do not have to doubt your self or your intellect, I wish there were more people like you on this planet, with a sound mind and humane perspective. As for health issues, you already know that self-blaming isn’t helpful. What could be helpful is taking care of yourself, doing whatever that is good or helpful – you, or your body, does know what is helpful and what is not. Maybe you can try and find out if there is something in the environment that is making you ill. No, I am not talking about frequencies or vibrations – I don’t know what that babble is about – I’m talking about scientific facts, like for instance if there is something toxic in the workplace or home that is causing the symptoms. If you can relate the symptoms into something, then it’s worth looking into and finding more information (avoid the new age and other religious stuff, though :). But since very many people are experiencing unexplainable symptoms and we don’t know what is causing all that, just trying to ease the symptoms is good enough. Get rest, do whatever gives you joy and pleasure, whatever is making you feel less ill. Be gentle and kind to yourself, listen to what it is that your body needs, whatever that may be; don’t count on what others tell you to do, to eat, to drink, to avoid, whatever. So many newagers are out there giving their own advice, but I think they are acting prematurely and if the advice has been good for them there is no evidence that that would be good for anyone else.
Re: Recovering from New Age Mumbo Jumbo
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 08, 2008 11:55PM
Rangdrol wrote:
This is true, but only up to a point.
A person states that if you start to believe in unconventional ideas and are persuaded that conventional ethics and boundaries are not needed or actually impede the spiritual quest, one may start out feeling liberated and empowered and not at first realize you have actually lost the protection of those same conventional ideas, ethical guidelines and boundaries.
A person who had been in what some have termed a psychotherapy cult said something that ties in with our concerns about some aspects of New Age conventions--that seemingly 'limiting' conventional ideas about boundaries and ethics actually give us a way to evaluate and without them, we are like travellers whose compass has become demagnetized.
We can lose the awareness needed to prevent ourselves from giving our power away.
Repeat, without certain conventional ideas and guidelines, we lose a capacity for self reflection and awareness and become people who can, without awareness give our power away.
This is the hazard of buying into the 'crazy wisdom' alibi. I for one, do not buy it at all.
In the Stanford Prison Experiment, Professor Philip Zimbardo recruited subjects (screened to exclude those with mental illness) and randomly assigned them to the roles of prisoner and guard. they were told beforehand that they were free to leave at any time.
But as the days went on, the 'guards' became more and more brutal and the 'prisoners' became more and more submissive and tolerant of bad treatment and this pattern increased as the days went on.
THEY ALL FORGOT THEY WERE FREE TO LEAVE
To use the language of Mahayana Buddhism the social isolation, insulation from outside scrutiny and the scripted roles and power imbalance between guards and prisoners created a chain of afflictive emotion/cause and effect that led to constriction of mind and emotion and impaired empathy and insight, leading these Stanford University students to forget they were free to leave.
Zimbardo admits that he was affected too. He could not see how bad things were getting until one of his graduate students came in to visit him, saw how extreme things were and said, from her outsiders perspective 'This has to stop.'
So they ended the experiment earlier than scheduled.
This Stanford Prison Experiment tends to be ignored by those who cherish the notion that there is some inherantly existing incorrutible and autonomous self that can never be affected by social conditions.
But Zimbardos work has shown how very easily and without conscious awareness even adult, intelligent and sane (by conventional sense) human beings can 'give their power away' without even being aware of it if a social set up is full of cues that trigger this.
One person on this board reported that her husband was being pressured by his boss to participate in an LGAT with the threat of losing his job if he didnt go. Her husband had been at that job for years and was scared to lose it. And even though the wife reported that she worked, they did not have the money to hire an attorney.
[forum.culteducation.com]
Remember what a sitting duck is. She is a mother, sitting on a nest of eggs and she is programmed by her maternal instinct to stay in that place and protect her brood. She is not free to leave if she sees a hunter approach. For this reason, it is totally against hunting ethics ever to kill a mother bird on a nest. When we are persuaded to relinquish conventional ideas about ethics, guidelines by people who peddle the crazy wise alibi, then our instincts become disabled, especially if we are from families of origin where we learned, when pre-verbal and too young to think consciously, to rationalize and ignore abusive or degrading behavior from our adult caregivers.
Those who champion the idea of inherantly separately existing, incorruptible human autonomy, fail to see how influenceable we are and how we can be socialized to give our power away.
This socialization is not done suddenly. It often happens slowly, just the way orthodontics reposition teeth over a period of years. You dont feel it but your teeth are radically repositioned.
This can be done to the mind.
That is what makes it possible to educate human beings--for good, to become Buddhisattvas or just plain good citizens, or to become thugs, or terrorists who with good intentions spread grief, or financiers who turned loans into speculative packages.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/09/2017 07:47PM by rrmoderator.
Quote
If someone people had a negative experience and they continue to blame the group, failing, at some point, to ask themselves how they handed their personal power over to that group or leader, then that person probably still has work to do. I have learned that as an adult, I made decisions and am responsible, in part, for what happened to me.
This is true, but only up to a point.
A person states that if you start to believe in unconventional ideas and are persuaded that conventional ethics and boundaries are not needed or actually impede the spiritual quest, one may start out feeling liberated and empowered and not at first realize you have actually lost the protection of those same conventional ideas, ethical guidelines and boundaries.
A person who had been in what some have termed a psychotherapy cult said something that ties in with our concerns about some aspects of New Age conventions--that seemingly 'limiting' conventional ideas about boundaries and ethics actually give us a way to evaluate and without them, we are like travellers whose compass has become demagnetized.
We can lose the awareness needed to prevent ourselves from giving our power away.
Repeat, without certain conventional ideas and guidelines, we lose a capacity for self reflection and awareness and become people who can, without awareness give our power away.
This is the hazard of buying into the 'crazy wisdom' alibi. I for one, do not buy it at all.
In the Stanford Prison Experiment, Professor Philip Zimbardo recruited subjects (screened to exclude those with mental illness) and randomly assigned them to the roles of prisoner and guard. they were told beforehand that they were free to leave at any time.
But as the days went on, the 'guards' became more and more brutal and the 'prisoners' became more and more submissive and tolerant of bad treatment and this pattern increased as the days went on.
THEY ALL FORGOT THEY WERE FREE TO LEAVE
To use the language of Mahayana Buddhism the social isolation, insulation from outside scrutiny and the scripted roles and power imbalance between guards and prisoners created a chain of afflictive emotion/cause and effect that led to constriction of mind and emotion and impaired empathy and insight, leading these Stanford University students to forget they were free to leave.
Zimbardo admits that he was affected too. He could not see how bad things were getting until one of his graduate students came in to visit him, saw how extreme things were and said, from her outsiders perspective 'This has to stop.'
So they ended the experiment earlier than scheduled.
This Stanford Prison Experiment tends to be ignored by those who cherish the notion that there is some inherantly existing incorrutible and autonomous self that can never be affected by social conditions.
But Zimbardos work has shown how very easily and without conscious awareness even adult, intelligent and sane (by conventional sense) human beings can 'give their power away' without even being aware of it if a social set up is full of cues that trigger this.
One person on this board reported that her husband was being pressured by his boss to participate in an LGAT with the threat of losing his job if he didnt go. Her husband had been at that job for years and was scared to lose it. And even though the wife reported that she worked, they did not have the money to hire an attorney.
[forum.culteducation.com]
Remember what a sitting duck is. She is a mother, sitting on a nest of eggs and she is programmed by her maternal instinct to stay in that place and protect her brood. She is not free to leave if she sees a hunter approach. For this reason, it is totally against hunting ethics ever to kill a mother bird on a nest. When we are persuaded to relinquish conventional ideas about ethics, guidelines by people who peddle the crazy wise alibi, then our instincts become disabled, especially if we are from families of origin where we learned, when pre-verbal and too young to think consciously, to rationalize and ignore abusive or degrading behavior from our adult caregivers.
Those who champion the idea of inherantly separately existing, incorruptible human autonomy, fail to see how influenceable we are and how we can be socialized to give our power away.
This socialization is not done suddenly. It often happens slowly, just the way orthodontics reposition teeth over a period of years. You dont feel it but your teeth are radically repositioned.
This can be done to the mind.
That is what makes it possible to educate human beings--for good, to become Buddhisattvas or just plain good citizens, or to become thugs, or terrorists who with good intentions spread grief, or financiers who turned loans into speculative packages.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/09/2017 07:47PM by rrmoderator.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.