Conference hydra::dejavu

    Well , did you watch it ?
    
    What happened ????????
    

    Thanks for the inquiry!.....
    
    Yes I did watch it and also taped the show....it was excellant.....
    there was so-o much said in such a short time I was a little
    overwhelmed .... can't imagine how a person without any knowledge
    of T.M. could absorb/comprehend/accept all that was put out....
    
    They did have two men demonstrate the "flying" technique...and Yes
    Phil Donohue did "Fly"...he made about 3 hops! and fell into
    exhaustion...
    
    If you didn't see the show I'd be glad to let you borrow the tape...
    either send me a note over the system or give me a call...I'm in
    Stow,MA  @OGO  DTN276-8591
    

    I think someone who understands (practices) the Yogic Flying Technique
    should respond to note 160.  The account(s) of legal activity don't
    begin to explain the nature or purpose of the technique.
    
    Practitioners who understand the technique realize that its function
    for the individual is to develop increased coordination between
    the mind and body, consciousness and creation.  
    
    The begining stage of yogic flying is "hopping" because there is
    not enough coordination the sustain flying.  This stage is not unlike
    the first stage of walking...which could be characterized as "standing
    up and falling down."  I hope children who are learning to walk
    never band together to sue their parents because the technique of
    walking involves some preliminary stages.
     
    
    

RE: .3
    
    With all due respect, your analogy is flawed.  No one doubts that
    people can walk and that specifically most of the childrens parents
    can do so, and furthermore have attained that through that same
    process of "standing up and falling down".
    
    The generally available evidence is weak for human levitation, even
    weaker for human levitation at will, and, as far as I know, consists
    only of unsupported statements for levitation through TM training.
    
    What has been demonstrated -- which is indistinguishable from a
    purely physical skill -- does not provide very convincing evidence
    for the ability to teach levitation.
    
    I am not denying the possibility -- I am only stating that there
    has been nothing presented publicly which should convince people
    of the truth of the claims.  The people who do not accept the claims
    are acting quite rationally.
    
    I could, to use an example, claim to be able to teach a technique
    of psychic death-dealing.  I could give people bows and arrows and
    teach them to use them.  I could justify this as a preliminary
    stage, and point to their increassing success in target practice
    and hunting as proof that they are progressing -- that a beginner's
    lack of ability is due principally to their undeveloped whammy skill
    supplementing the bows purely physical ability to kill.  Eventually,
    I could, say, they'll get good enough that they can do without the
    bow and arrow.
    
    Is my analogy applicable?  I think it is -- note that I have not
    said that my claims are untrue.  But until someone learns the whammy
    its existence is legitimately in question.  Until I can reliably
    turn out many people who have learned, my teaching methods are suspect,
    even granting the existence of the skill.
    
    Many people make claims -- they are frequently good and even wise
    people; but that doesn't mean that they are right.
    
    					Topher

    But the purpose of DEJAVU isn't to convert or to convince is it?
    Its to discuss... with like minded people right?  And its true that
    all skill sets have to be developed and one does not become adept
    at anything when one first begins the learning process.

    I don't know about levitation but flying through the air is real.
    
    Can it be demonstrated? I don't think so; most psychic phenomena
    depend on belief and high levels of discipline at the level
    conciousness, both individual and collective.
    
    Is what Maharishi's people do flying or levitation? I don't know
    and if they can demonstrate this they must be highly evolved or	
    chasing a red herring.
    
    I have no doubts about this phenomena but it appears to be present
    at birth in some very evolved but very unfortunate people. That's
    all I shall say for now. My spiritual energy runs down for some
    reason if I talk about it; perhaps someone can explain it.
    
    Perwesh 

    re: .6
     
         There are some interesting points in what you wrote.  One
    being that the level of belief precedes (or supports) an
    experience.  i believe that (and therefore I experience this) :-)
         The other point has to do with energy.  It has been hit on
    in other parts of this conference before (what comes readily to
    mind is some discussion concerning energy to move from one plane
    to another, although that is not what I wish to address here.)
    What I have to say has to do with what happens to our energy when
    we attempt to demonstrate, convey, re-tell, etc. to others.
    I believe that experiences happen four ways (on the physical plane.)
    One is bodily, another is intellectually, a third is emotionally
    and the fourth is intuitively (or psychically.)  We are limited
    in our normal human communications by our words, especially in 
    something like this "computer communication."  We cannot touch
    others (physically) nor can we make faces (to show emotions) and
    we haven't got too much of handle on what to do psychically (speaking
    for myself.)  So, what happens is that we cannot adequately convey
    three of the four possible experiences we have.  Trying to express
    feelings in words is extremely limiting and difficult.  Telling
    someone what a body "feeling" is is pathetically futile.  Relating
    a psychic experience only informs others of the content...it does
    absolutely nothing to relate the context or the form (with precision.)
    This is why so many things have to be *EXPERIENCED* and not just
    talked about.  Think, yes, but also FEEL.  I will never be able
    to express to anyone exactly what I feel when I do a blending
    with Lazaris...and I really won't try.  Why not?  Because it can
    only serve to dilute the experience.  How?  Because most likely
    someone will either hurt me (by invalidating my experience) or
    I will hurt them (by making them feel that their experience is
    caca compared to mine.) I don't wish to do that to either one of
    us.  So, whether it comes to relating UFO incidences or meditations
    or ancient rituals or a relationship or whatever it may be, recognize
    that there is a risk in doing so.  Lessen the risk of vulnerablility
    by knowing when you can trust yourself (and others, in that process.)
    Limit the retelling to content only (at least until you can determine
    that there is safety in telling more) and do not allow others to
    deny you your experience, no matter what.  Own your experience,
    make it yours and recognize that no one else can completely share
    it.  This is, after all, what separates us all (our uniqueness.)
    Also, it may be appropriate to determine ahead of time whether to
    situation you wish to convey is one of the four I mentioned above
    and what the limitations of that experience are...to prepare yourself
    for understanding the limits.
         The last thing has to do with beliefs.  If you believe that
    others will "weaken" you, you will experience that.  If you honestly
    believe that others can help you and can strenthen you, you
    can experience that.  Change your beliefs and you change your
    experience.
    
         Over a year ago I alienated one noter with the following but
    I will say it again anyway.  Why fly when you can soar?
    
    
    Frederick
    

    I've seen films of "Yogic Flying".  Not special effects, no wires,
    and no flying really.  What it is is essentially leaping about from
    the lotus position.  Now, while this hardly fits my criteria for
    unaided flight, it is in and of itself *fascinating* to watch, in
    the same way that gymnastics or ice-dancing or pole-vaulting is.
    
    - Dan
    

    RE: .6
    
    Well, if it cannot be demonstrated, on what do you base your statement
    "flying through the air is real?"
    
    John M. 

    re: .9
    
    Let me answer that with a question.
    
    Can we *REALLY* demonstrate a shooting star, an earthquake, a deluge
    or any of the nature's peculiarities?     
    
    Sometimes, if we are lucky, unlucky or priviledged enough we may
    witness it. Reply .7 has given me some of my answers, so I think
    until I am ready I shall be content 

    re: .9
    
    Let me answer that with a question.
    
    Can we *REALLY* demonstrate a shooting star, an earthquake, a deluge
    or any of the nature's peculiarities?     
    
    Sometimes, if we are lucky, unlucky or priviledged enough we may
    witness it. Reply .7 has given me some of my answers, so I think
    until I am ready I shall be content with staying in ignorance.
    
    Perwesh ------- Sorry, in .10 I had finger problem
    

    
    
    RE: .9 and .10 (double vision?)
    
    "Can we *REALLY* demonstrate a shooting star,..."
    
    Well SKYLAB was about as close as a "shooting star" as one can get!
    
    Craig,  :-)

re: all previous

For a pure body and a well trained mind which is capable of maintaining 
an awareness of pure consciousness, levitation (or any other sutra) 
requires only the focussed intention of the mind... not heavy duty 
concentration, but mere intention. 

The physical body (and the subtler bodies as well) can respond to a 
command only to the degree that it is pure enough to "understand" and 
carry out that command.  The hopping is the body's most capable response 
to a mind which is using a technique that is beyond its current capacity 
to facilitate.  The hopping, as crude as it may look, is not a muscular 
activity.  No physical energy is required.  It is simply performing the 
task set forth by the mind as closely as it can.

If the body and the consciousness of the person were pure, levitation 
would naturally result. Levitation is the "walking" before "running" or 
flying.  However, if one is pure enough to fly, flight becomes unneces-
sary.  There are other sutras and techniques for accomplishing the 
getting-from-here-to-there without the cumbersome need for flight.

However, the process of going through the motions (i.e. purifying mind 
and body as much as possible and applying a technique) does, to a 
degree, facilitate the process of purifying mind and body and getting to 
the point where the true intention can be satisfied... levitation in 
this case.

The practice of the technique provides a *very real* natural mental high 
which is very difficult to describe.  It is stretching the capacity of 
the awareness and allows the practitioner to experience more of the pure 
state of the mind than is usually experienced in regular daily 
activities.

Jeff
(Been there... but now I'm intentionally grounded...)

>For a pure body and a well trained mind which is capable of maintaining  
>an awareness of pure consciousness, levitation (or any other sutra) 
>requires only the focussed intention of the mind... not heavy duty 
>concentration, but mere intention.         
                                                                          
    re: .13
    
    Jeff,
    
    When I started TM in late seventies, I realised that this is what
    is required and it is still my assertion as well, but how does one
    acquire this.
    
    I meditate for a length of time then I come to a block and any
    continuation for going any further results in physical discomfort
    esp. in lower legs which feel very painful (unbearable). I have
    been for various checkups and all my checker would say is that 
    it is just tension untangling. So I stop meditating for a while
    and then start again but I never appear to go past this stage.
    
    Can you or anyone help or comment upon this.
    
    Perwesh.
    
    ps: all you guys appear to be from the US, do I take it that there
        is very little of this activity in the UK. I would like to get
        in touch with like minded local people as well esp for psychic
        readings.

    Oh, so if you're pure enough to be able to levitate, then you don't
    need to!  What a cop out!  Isn't that kind of like me saying, "I
    am powerful enough to cause your house to collapse with but single
    mental command, but because with great power comes great
    responsibility and my power is tempered with mercy and compassion,
    I shall spare your humble dwelling".  It seems like a pretty easy
    way to skirt the issue of *actual* soaring about,which is what I
    want to do.                                                     
    
    Every time I am called upon to make a wish, you know birthday candles,
    shooting stars, etc.  I *always* wish for the ability to fly unaided.
     I've been wishing it for about 15 years, and I have no compunctions
    about telling people the wish, on the chance that they might help
    me achieve it!
    
    Granted, I'm not taking this discussion very seriously, but if a
    belief system makes the claim that it can cause one to fly unaided,
    I want to see it!
    
    - Dan

re: .15 

    Maybe this doesn't apply, but...  Personally I believe these things
    are possible by some people but to expend a lot of effort in search
    of the ability to do it, I think is counter productive.  A Bhuddist
    saying says it all.

	A young student came up and exclaimed to Bhudda, "Master, I have 
	been meditating for 20 years and not I can levitate across the river!"
	Bhudda repied, "For ten cents you could have taken the boat."

    Terry

    Well, to my knowledge, in all the demonstrated cases of TM "flying"
    the subjects were simply suspending themselves using their arms.

    The day people levitate is the day pigs fly.
    
    John M.

    re: < Note 467.17 by DECWET::MITCHELL "The Cosmic Anchovy" >
�          -< I myself can walk on water but would not deign to do so >-
 
    How right you are!

�    The day people levitate is the day pigs fly.
    
    
    Practicing precognition, John???
    
    		bruce

    
    	There are a lot of recorded cases of levitation.   Certainly
    there is a common, almost archetypal desire to fly.   The other
    day at dinner, we discussed flying dreams and all four of us
    regularly dream of flying.   Some soar, while others float or
    flap in their dreams.
    
    	I never was conviced by the TM claims.   I had a friend who
    obviously pulled a muscle while trying to "fly" the TM way.
    Most meditation teachers warn against trying to seek 'powers',
    because, it seems there are some dangers involved in seeking the
    types of powers that would inflate the ego.
    
    	It is very hard to form a clear unbending intent.   If one
    intends to fly, is this just for the flight, or is it to
    impress or entertain?   The intent to impress may not be the same
    as the intent to fly...   The conscious mind may wish to fly,
    but the subconscious mind may have objections, if so, then
    the subconscious may resist letting you display such powers.

	I like to think it's possible to fly (for everyone but John
    M. of course.  ;^)     My mother once seemed to fly, to catch
    my brother as he fell from the porch on his tricycle.   It was
    not repeatable, however, but for that moment she may have found
    the unbending intent needed for such 'miracles'.   Similar in
    a way to the way people can lift cars in some emergency situations.

	It's all too easy to deny the reality of something you
    haven't seen, that is also rare.   Consider the so called "scientists"
    who denied the reality of the Duck Billed Platypus, because they
    believed such a creature was not possible.   They were wrong.

    					Alan.
    
    PS.  John, I've never heard of pigs flying, but if they do, just
    think of all those other things that weren't going to happen "until
    pigs fly"!   Snowballs in hell, Jimmy Carter gets reelected,
    McDonald's goes vegetarian....     (I like to keep an open mind,
    but watch those windows, or the pigs will fly in...)

    I didn't really believe it (levitation) was possible, until
    one of m
    
    I had a DEC colleague who used to talk to me about his
    concerns about his son, a medicin student who got very
    involved in TM.  My colleague was very concerned because
    he would see his son getting more distant of "down-to-earth"
    things (including his studies) every day.  The main thing
    in his son's life became TM.
    
    So, one day my colleague came to me, totally upset, telling
    me: "I've *seen* my son levitating".  He could'nt get over that,
    as he didn't think it was actually possible.
    
    Just looking at his face, I knew he didn't make the story up !
    Since that day, I believe levitating IS possible, although I
    haven't seen it myself.  
    I have seen the show mentioned in .0 on TV, and it left me a 
    bit sceptical - to me it looked as if
    it could be some kind sportive performance (ie. possible with
    some physical training).
                             
    As I've changed department since a couple of years, I haven't
    talked with that colleague.  But whenever I meet him again,
    I'll certainly recommend this notes-file to him.
    
    Ines ABEYA @GEO

I recommend the movie _The Boy Who Could Fly_ (in Video tape).  It certainly 
pertains to this topic.  I won't tell you what it's about, although the title 
kinda gives it away (or does it??).  Very good movie.  Left with a wonderful
feeling.

Just to comment on the past few.  I've never seen anyone fly, although my
aunt (now 63) says she could levitate as a child.  But I, for one, like to
keep an open mind and, although, science scoffs at the idea, they've been
known to scoff at other things that are now accepted.

A parachute, just like a mind, hast to be open to work.

Terry

I believe that in the vastness of reality *anything* is possible.

		Dave

re: .14

Perwesh,

<...I realised that this is what is required... but how does one acquire 
this.>

Perserverance!  It isn't so important what specific meditation technique 
is used, but it is important to stick with one technique that you are 
comfortable with (not so much physically, but ideologically).  If there 
is physical discomfort, then that needs to be addressed... there are 
many possible causes for the discomfort.

Your particular problem could be as simple as position/posture, or as 
complicated as mental attitudes, blocks, etc.  A notes file (or any 
other open forum), however, is not an appropriate place for specific 
personal discussions about meditation techniques and problems.

I am not a TMer, but I do have some measure of understanding about 
meditation, including the TM technique.  If you want, I will be glad to 
assist you in resolving the problem "off-line" from the notes 
conference.  I can be reached through VAXmail at ATLAST::LACKEY.

Jeff

re: .15

Dan, Dan, Dan,

The *desire* for these things is one of the very keys to why we have 
trouble achieving them!  ...but that could be a unique topic itself.

If someone were to have a genuine interest in trying it, then, like 
anything else, it would be accomplished by *practice*, not *wishing*.
Sorry... don't mean to be a bubble burster!

I liked your analogy, by the way.

Jeff

    re: Jeff, Jeff, Jeff.
    
        Desire is an integral part of reality creation.  If there is
    trouble in manifestation, desire is not the "culprit".  As 
    "the Big L" [since I would like to avoid always using his name...;-)]
    has advised us, there are three tools to reality creation:
    desire, imagination and expectation.  No one has fewer tools,
    no one has more.  Also remember that it takes both masculine
    energy and feminine energy to have a "whole".  The imagination
    is feminine, the "doing" is masculine.  To admonish someone
    for "doing" is negating a significant portion of the whole.
    
    Frederick
    

re: (whoever)

I think the problem with this and other things like walking through walls, 
swimming in dirt, walking on water, etc., is in our belief system which I 
believe forms our perception or reality.  Try this.  Tell yourself that 
as you take your next step your foot will contact the ground and the earth
will hold your weight.  Pay attention to how you *believe* this is going to 
happen; you have no doubts and you *know* it will happen like it does every 
other time you do it.  Now, tell your self that as you take your next step 
the ground is going to turn to water under your feet and you will fall in.  
Try to convince yourself that you *believe* this will happen, really *believe* 
it.  My guess is that no matter how hard you try you can't make yourself 
*believe* it, therefore, it won't happen.  Since you can't believe it, it is 
impossible to test what would happen if you did *beleive* it.  It seems 
reasonable to me that for those who have claimed to do any of these 
'impossible' things, they **really believe it**.  

This ability to believe takes years of intense concentration and effort (ie,
TM or some other form of inward introspection).  Since my belief system
won't allow me to test the hypothesis, I can't rule out the possibility.

Terry

    Hi Frederick!
    
    Of course desire has its place.  I would never suggest otherwise.
    The desire preceeds the action, and should provide the motivation
    to pursue the action.  Stopping at desire only serves to leave one
    with an unfulfilled desire.  We should each strive to maintain the
    balance and not solely one side of the energy, i.e. masculine/feminine,
    positive/negative, etc...  don't you think?
    
    Yours truly,
    
    Jeff, Jeff, Jeff

    re: 3 Jeffs and a guy
    
         YES!  and YES! to .26 also!!  That is precisely it!
    
    Frederick
    

    
    *Anybody* can walk on water....
    
    ...when it's frozen.  (;^)
    
    Cindy

    re: .29
    
    Yes, Cindy, but can you swim through ice???
    
    Jeff

    Belief is not enough to make things work.  Virtually everyone who
    walks into a dark room and throws a light switch does so in perfect
    faith that the bulb will light.  As we all know, that is not always
    the case.  But if total belief were all it took to make something
    happen, lights would NEVER burn out.  Never.
    
    Wishin' and hopin' and prayin' and schemin' 
    Plannin' and dreamin' each night of his chaaaaaaarms
    Won't get you into his arrrrrrrrms....
    
    John M.

    all you can say John, is that YOUR faith isn't enough...
    
    	:-)/bruce

    
    RE: .32
    
    	Hey Bruce!   Does this mean your light bulbs never burn out?
    
    					Alan.

re: .31 (John)

	By using your belief system that *knows* light bulbs don't
	last forever, can you, when you walk into a room and throw the
	switch, say that you really *believe* the light will go on
	every time, no exception?

	I don't think so.  Your mind won't let you believe it in
	the same way it *believes* that when you hit the light
	switch you hand won't pass through the wall as if it weren't
	there.

	When you can successfully test the hypothesis by *believing*
	at all levels of your consciousness that the light will go
	on every time, try the experiment and let me know how it turns 
	out.

	Terry (who-maintains-if-you-can't-believe-it-you-can't-test-it)

    RE: .34(Terry)
    
    When I turn on a light switch, I expect the bulb to go on.  Every
    time.
    
    John M.

re: 35 (John)
   
    Believing and expecting aren't the same here, are they?
    I expect it to go on too, but I don't *believe* it always
    will because by belief system tells me the little tungsten
    wire may snap - and without it it won't work.  If my belief
    system told me that the wire had nothing to do with it and
    the light came from me, I wonder what would happen then?
    Again, because of my belief system, I'll never be able to
    test it that way.

    Our belief systems tell us we can't fly and that to fly
    certain things are required, lift and air speed.  Maybe
    belief can cause it to work without out those factors, but
    we simply can't perform the test, we can't prove it. 

    Terry

    
    	Aren't we forgetting something here?   I mean, what about what
    the light bulb believes?   Maybe *it* believes it's going to burn
    out regardless of what we believe.    (and the bulb is creating it's
    own reality, right?)
    
    	And besides, I bet you can't make your bulbs last forever, cause
    John is busy believing that EVERY BULB IN THE WORLD is going to
    burn out.   And by now, we all know how passionatly he is believing
    in this or that...   You not only have to believe your bulbs will
    last, you have to believe it *stronger* than all those skeptics,
    who by now are undoubtedly responsible for a *lot* of burnt bulbs!
    
    					Alan.

    Could it be that we are starting to intellectualize this into the
    grave???  ...No not us, we would never do that!
    
    Seems to me that we've worn this one out... no? ...well perhaps
    not, but it looks to me like we're headded for an endless loop.
    
    Jeff[ 

    jeff, don't you believe in NEXT UNSEEN???
    
    	bruce

    By all means, lets have it!
    
    Jeff

    I think several bulbs have already burn out on this topic!
    

    
    We could turn this note into lightbulb jokes.
    
    JUSTATHOUGHT.
    
    Cindy

re: .42 (Cindy)

	What a *bright* idea *<:-)))

	Terry

>A notes file (or any 
>other open forum), however, is not an appropriate place for specific 
>personal discussions about meditation techniques and problems.

Why not?

    SET MODE=SKEPTICAL
        
    You can levitate?  I'll watch and be ever so quiet.
                                        
    Communicate with "spirits" who make things fly thru the air?  I'll
    bring the wine.
    
    You can walk on water (the wet kind I have in my swimming pool on a
    bright July day)?  I'll buy the beer.
    
    Raise the dead?  I'll be there.
    
    Teleport?  Love to see it.
    
    SET MODE=SPECULATION
                                   
    So I guess you could say the Book of the Dead was written
    posthumously, like Mission Earth.  :-)
    
    					Don (who hopes he never forgets
                                            the applicable :-) )

    
    re: .45
    
         A few days ago I went and saw "The Last Temptation of Christ"
    and you sort of reminded me of that.  There are a couple of scenes
    in the movie in which Jesus goes in and "resurrects" LazarUs.  A
    few scenes later LazarUs gets killed again.  Why? Because the "bad
    guys" couldn't have proof of Jesus' miracles around...bad press
    for the Mt. Olympus types, or something like that.  :-)
    
          No sooner would one "miracle" be performed than requests for
    zillions more would come in.  This is great for people who like
    to do nothing all day but sit in judgement (of who should go to
    hell or who should go to heaven) but frankly, I think I would get
    bored really quickly if all I got to do was "perform" for others.
    Hopefully, you can read something between the lines here.  Basically,
    what I am saying is that I prefer to be a participant than an
    observer.  Let go of the part of you that wants to watch and 
    take on the other part that can "do" it and then compare the results.
    
    Frederick
    

re: .44

Actually, there are numerous reasons.  Did you ever go to a dozen 
physicians and announce that you had a pain in your back?  No?  Well, 
you can imagine the result.  Ever go to a dozen therapists and tell 
them you had a very odd dream and what do they think it means?  No? 
Well, you can imagine the result.  Similar examples could be listed  
ad infinitem.

Too many "expert" opinions, no matter how well meaning, only serve to 
add confusion to the one who is seeking assistance.  The more successful 
approach is to seek out someone who would seem to be most appropriate to 
address the problem.  If the person seeking the help is dissatisfied 
with the results, then they always have the option of seeking out another 
solution.

The other reason is that meditation is a very private practice and 
experience.  Some teachers offer generic techniques to anyone and 
everyone, and often to groups rather than individually.  Some teachers 
offer close students very personal and individual meditations.  The 
majority of "public domain" techniques lie somewhere between the two. 
But regardless of the technique and the source of it, different 
individuals will have different experiences with the same technique.  
Without proper guidance, someone who is doing perfectly fine may begin 
having problems simply as a result of hearing of someone else's 
experiences.  I've seen this happen numerous times.  One of the most 
common concerns of meditators is the question of whether or not they are 
doing it correctly.  Many who think they are doing it correctly can 
easily be shaken from that possition... all of which is very natural.  
However, it serves no purpose to subject someone to such a situation 
unnecessarily. 

The real *cause* of a problem is rarely what we *think* it is.  The 
personality is far more willing to concede and face a weakness in 
private rather than in an open forum... the threat to the ego seems 
less.

In the case of Perwesh and her questions, much of my reason for 
suggesting "off-line" discussions was simply to offer her the privacy, 
since she has no idea what I might say.  If there are discussions of 
this nature and, after they are resolved (or not), and the person 
chooses to make that information public, then that is fine as long as 
both parties agree.
 
This is a vast and clear subject in my mind and I'm trying to 
abbreviate it as much as possible and still provide an adequate under-
standing... unsuccessfully, I think.  To me this barely scratches the 
surface, but perhaps there will be a response which will draw out more 
clarification if it is needed.

... If all else fails, we have managed to keep this notes file active 
for another session...

By the way folks, I'm new (2 months) at Digital and I have not quite 
figured out what all the (;^) stuff is about.  Does this require a 
secret initiation?  Cindy is usually kind enough to explain what hers 
mean... but are there standards???????

Jeff (a man without a symbol)

re: .47

    :-)  ;')  ->  Happy faces.  Use when you don't want to be taken 
                  seriously.  Often needed here...

    :-(  :=(  ->  Sad faces.  To be used when you tell about when
                  someone ran over your dog.

    :-}  :-/  ->  What do you think?

    Terry         ;->    

        re: -.1
      
      I didn't figure it out for a long time myself...a few months
    ago someone pointed out that if you turn the screen "sideways"
    then you can read the symbols and see them as charicatures (sp?)
    : = eyes  - = nose  ) = mouth.   See?
    
    Frederick
    

    It's all sounds like someone is trying to become a frog.
    
    Watch this headline..."Human being is evolving into a frog!"
    
    If you can call frog jumping as flying, you must be a frog live
    in the bottom of a well - the size of the sky is the size of a
    moon.

    I wish next time someone can suggest the demo at Pisa Tower. Everyone
    in this world should see Yogi Marishi flying from the height.  That
    would be a real sight.
    

    re: .46
    
    You missed the point.  This conference, while helping analyse peoples
    experiences & concerns, and answer TONS of questions, has not dealt
    with facing the reality of claims of supernatural occurances.
    Supposedly, these events occur all the time, but are subject to
    randomness and not too many witnesses.  Either that or its an internal 
    mental thing, which only the person experiencing it is privy to (which 
    is, of course, unarguable).                               
    
    Example:  Of all the UFO sightings, ignoring what has been "covered
    up" (a great selling point, BTW) by the government, why has there
    been no public showing of an artifact?  (In short, proof.)
    
    Example:  Levitation/teleportation--if it can be done, and proven,
              there'd be millions paying big bucks to learn.
                            
    Example: Communicating with the dead.  What a wealth of knowledge.
             Why are people who can "do it" sitting on it?
    
    Example:  Witches can't use their powers for their own personal
              gain. (This may be a fallacy, I'm not up on witchcraft.)
              Seems so, or there'd be a lot of rich & powerful ones.
              Certainly a great comeback for the question: "Then why
              aren't you rich?"
                 
    I do, however, see a lot of people make a fine living giving lectures
    and seminars on the above & related subjects.  (No problem; free
    enterprise.)  I just do not like to see people put their faith in
    it and be disappointed.  Or hurt. So I'd like to have "proof" some 
    of these things exist, then maybe I'll try one; just like I want to 
    know if that rickety old bridge is safe before I drive over it,
    or that used color TV works before I take it home.  That's 
    why I'm in this conference: there may be a better way.  Arguments?:
    No pain, no gain; don't know 'til you try; can't make an omelet
    w/o breaking eggs.
                                                         
    As for "watching" vs. "doing"; my choice.  I'd not want to dive
    on the Titanic, but I watch the specials.  I'll watch a skydiver,
    but I have no wish to jump out of a perfectly good airplane.  On
    the other hand, I'd rather take my own photographs than buy
    someone else's, and visit "scenic wonders" rather than buy a
    video of it, and I'd sooner see for mysef than to take someone
    else's word for it.
    
    As you've seen by some of my replies in the "phenomena" notes,
    my position has been "ensure the occurance wasn't due to natural
    causes, explore the possoble before looking at the 'impossible'".
    I've learned that its very easy for people to believe in the 
    supernatural, but difficult to put a finger on it.
    
    Wanna see my fast draw?
    
    
    
    
    
    Wanna see it again?
                 
    						Don

    re: .51
     
        Good points and well stated.  
     
        As I read your reply, Lemuria popped into my head.  Lemuria
    (I wrote about it some in some other note--358 probably) consisted
    of a continent-sized land mass which, among many other features,
    had "crystal cities".  These crystal cities were located on top
    of pillars that extended several hundred feet above the landscape.
    How did people get up or down?  Teleportation.  How is/was 
    teleportation possible?  Only when one is in dominion over the
    physical plane is teleportation (along with many other "psychic
    phenomena") possible.  What does it take to have dominion?  Mastery.
    Of what?  Ego.  Specifically, making the negative ego revert back
    to its original size--positive ego, in other words.  How do we do
    that?  Many ways...one is by self-realization which is the synergy
    of self-awareness, self-worth, self-confidence, self-love, self-
    esteem and self-respect.  The result of that is a synergy known
    as unconditional love.  It is the point at which we as physical
    beings will come the closest to merging with our Higher Self.  
    
    You see, it all has to do with love and ego, not magic and science.
    Where there any guards watching over the inhabitants of the crystal
    cities?  No.  Why not?  Because if you could get there, you belonged
    there.  Think about that.  Only beings who had that amount of self-love
    could take dominion to the extent that they could teleport.  Why
    don't they show you how?  Because ego would get in the way.  Theirs
    or yours.  Why don't aliens show themselves?  Could it be because
    they don't wish to cause mass panic?  Maybe it's an act of caring
    on their part.  I agree with you in that I'd like proof but just
    maybe I disagree with you in regards to either recognizing it or
    in my reasons for having it.
    
    Frederick