This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Did some research, (I read the whole wikipedia ;)) Now I have a few questions.
What exactly was the state of Elizabeth Clare Prophets mental condition throughout her years as leader of Church Triumphant?
Is it safe to say she compares alot to Charles Manson?
Ergo; Manson had helter skelter, ECP had soviet war & Manson was jesus, ECP was a prophet prophesized from Revelations.
Both had ranches and inner circles, etc.
If you don’t mind me asking, was Mark Prophet just as “zealous”? Or rather is Church Universal his creation also?
How much money did ECP accumulate, personally, over the years?
Did ECP sincerely believe what she was preaching? Or did she make things up for money, fame, etc?
How much of Church Universal doctrine & structure is borrowed from other religions and how much is ECP’s creation?
a, she was very authoritarian, and didn’t know the meaning of the word introspection. I wouldn’t compare her to Charles Manson–she never would have condoned physically hurting anyone. With her, the wounds would have been all emotional and spiritual. But the analogy holds with respect to her surrounding herself with believers to consolidate her power.
My dad was pretty zealous himself. We kept his old staff meeting tapes under lock and key for years because they would have been extremely revealing. He was merciless when dealing with anyone who questioned him. Some of the staff meeting tapes contained “trials” he held to humiliate people who worked for him. I was a little kid when those meetings happened, but I remember the bruising emotional aftermath. Listening to the tapes later was apalling.
My mom did not accumulate any significant personal wealth. She lived well and had a large staff. But she was adamant, and neither her or us children were ever able to take money out of the organization (other than our salaries).
As stated elsewhere, I think my mom was a true believer in what she taught. But she would have probably questioned herself more if she wasn’t surrounded by yes men (and women).
As far as doctrine goes, most of it was borrowed from other religions and philosophies. Then she would add her own spin to it. Often she would contradict the original source who had written the material. Since her ‘truth’ was revealed, she could state anything she wanted, and argue from simple authority. The CUT canon is highly inconsistent. It does not hold up to close scrutiny or analysis.
Sean hi! I have read what you wrotte on Wikipedia about your mother and the church. I think that it is important that you and your sisters tell the whole story as it is about the summit lighthouse, i say all of you because it is hard for people that have followed the doctrines taught by CUT to believe just what one person is saying. I have read many of your mum’s and dad’s books and lately some of the books members have wrotte. I must say i have tremendous admiration for your mother because in some ways she has helped many through her words and i just can not believe that this loving woman with such lovely speech and voice could have lived a life deceiving people from so many countries. As you have said it in your posts, there are many, too many people who believe and follow these teachings, and hold her word as indisputable truth. It would be very ineteresting to see the effect that you ( brothers and sisters) would have if the truth as you state it in here is told and comes out to those who still follow. If the truth is with you, you have a duty to us all.
cheers
Joana
Sean,
For me, meeting Elizabeth Clare Prophet and the times we shared at Camelot, The Ranch, and Stumping America with her were life changing inspiring events. My regrets are i wish i had more time with her and perhaps been able to guide her away from making some of those mistakes (she was human) and i forgive her for that. My perspective is from the outside / in, and yours in inside / out so my overall conclusions about those times are allot different. I don’t think your readers would understand but there was light so bright and so inspiring! I am thankful for your Mother because she inspired me and now i love more, i forgive quicker, i cope with life easier and much more. These qualities i hope to pass on to my children and everyone i can.
she is alive but not fully conscious or able to communicate. I saw her in November, 2007. She wakes up briefly and looks around, but does not seem to have much awareness.
But that’s not what’s important. What’s important is your life, and that you do not spend it following the teachings of the “Ascended Masters.” I can tell you from having followed them for 30 years and been a minister of CUT, they hold nothing for you.
In the comment above Dennis Fisher makes the following claims:
I am thankful for your Mother because she inspired me and now i love more, i forgive quicker, i cope with life easier and much more. These qualities i hope to pass on to my children and everyone i can.
If you want to love more, forgive quicker, etc., you simply need to address your own psychology and get to know yourself better. Then you can make these clear decisions on your own.
Many claim such vague benefits from everything from Tony Robbins to Yoga. Whatever works for you is what you should do. But there’s a big difference between whether a system achieves a desired result and whether it’s true.
The Ascended Masters are a fairy tale, just like the gods of every other religion. Entering into mysticism and belief in non-existent beings is the single most mentally corrupting influence one can suffer in life.
It is absolutely not worth the paltry benefits that are claimed.
I was a student of the teachings from 1984 to 1987. I moved to montana and tried to get on staff at the ranch. As soon as I met the staffers at CUT, instinctively I knew something was very very wrong with what was going on there. I already had a strong faith in God before I studied the CUt materials, and over several months time I began to just KNOW that I needed to leave the organization - just to get away, far away, and not look back. I profoundly began to know that there was something evil about Claire Prophet, not just misguided, or deluded, but genuinely intentionally evil - especially after I met her in person. It was a bizarre meeting and it did not last long. Our reulsion toward one another was mutual, and I left the church, thankfully, shortly after that. That was nearly 22 years ago. Finding this website by her now atheist son just confirms that my instincts were right so many years ago. My own walk with God has only deepened through the years, and I credit my inner relations with Spirit for steering me quickly away from the glossy charade that Claire Prophet was running in Montana for so many years. She ruined many lives, and stole great sums of money from many sincere believers before her health was struck down and she was disabled by her own illnesses. If anything is karma, what happened to Claire Prophet in the end certainly was karma absolute. You will know them by their fruits. Look at the bitter fruit yielded by this woman and the train wreck that her teachings became in the end. The book of Revelations, interestingly, predicted this very phenomena in the last days. It is worth pondering. It’s sad that her son Sean was so scarred by growing up in the bizarre cult of CUT, that he has forsaken all faith in Diety.That is the saddest part in all of the long strange and disgusting story of Claire Prophet and what she has done to thousands of sincere God seeking souls, by exploiting their very real hunger for spiritual truth as a way to aggrandize herself and to privately amass secret fortunes for herself and her own inner circle. I personally knew of dozens of families, entire families, who turned over their entire estates and all their family’s wealth to the church. Well, in truth Claire Prophet was the church at that time. It was criminal what she was doing. She should have been prosecuted for it.
I have not a doubt in my mind that millions are stashed somewhere - I do not believe for one minute that she took little for herself. That is hogwash. The very first thing that an applicand to live on staff had to do in the late 8s was answer a barrage of intimate questions about their own private assets, net worth, real estate holdings and business interests. In fact, that was my first heads up that something was deeply wrong. No one asked me anything about my background, my spiritual beliefs etc… all they wanted to know was - was I rich or not?
During the 8 months I lived close to the ranch, I saw how she lived, what she wore, and the posh posh surrroundings of her personal quarters while staff on the ranch worked 120 hours a week and lived in military-like spartan bunglows. Claire Prophet was a perfect portrait of what a female version of an Antichrist might look like. Study her to learn how to discern the final apostate yet to come. There will be an imposter on the world scene one day who will trump her mask-erade by far. What she pulled off was just the opening salvo to the greater imposter to come. Wake up spiritual seekers. Learn to discern what it actually is that is standing before you claiming to have the solutions to all the worlds problems.
Watch between 2011 and 2017. ECP crossed paths with the world for a reason. It just happens not to have one thing to do with being a real spiritual leader. It has everything to do with being a false apostate in a female form. The male form to come will be much worse. Learn the lesson now, to avoid being pulled in again later in this new millenium.
You seem to come to a lot of conclusions based on your subjective feelings rather than evidence. I normally don’t post comments that are mostly witnessing as yours is. But I wanted to pointedly address a couple of your misconceptions:
I profoundly began to know that there was something evil about Claire Prophet, not just misguided, or deluded, but genuinely intentionally evil - especially after I met her in person.
Many forms of evil are well-intentioned. I agree with you that the effects of my parents teachings are largely negative. But you are incorrect that they were motivated by anything other than true belief. I was around them for 30 years, so I would be in a position to know.
It’s sad that her son Sean was so scarred by growing up in the bizarre cult of CUT, that he has forsaken all faith in Diety.
Sad for who? I feel fine. I don’t need an imaginary friend to make me feel whole. This is the typical hostile and condescending position from believers: expressing their “concern” about how atheists have no hope and must be so “damaged.” You can keep your pity, thanks.
I have not a doubt in my mind that millions are stashed somewhere - I do not believe for one minute that she took little for herself. That is hogwash.
Sorry, wrong again. You give them too much credit. They were not cynical or greedy enough to stash money for themselves. Sure, they got hold of other people’s money, and that was inexcusable. But they spent it on Church projects. The Church bought vast quantities of land. At one point in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s the organization had a net worth of $50 million or more from its land holdings alone. A good deal of that land has now been sold off by CUT’s management to pay expenses. Also, north of $25 million went into CUT’s bomb shelters, food and supplies.
Yes, there were disparities in lifestyles. Big disparities. I am in no way defending the way ECP ran her organization. It was corrupt and whimsical, and capricious, and not spiritual, and ultimately highly unjust. But there is no stash of money, OK? I would know if there was, and would have no problem admitting it. It is just simply untrue.
Watch between 2011 and 2017. ECP crossed paths with the world for a reason. It just happens not to have one thing to do with being a real spiritual leader. It has everything to do with being a false apostate in a female form. The male form to come will be much worse. Learn the lesson now, to avoid being pulled in again later in this new millenium.
This kind of conjectural nonsense is exactly why the whole new age movement is spiritually and intellectually bankrupt. The “everything happens for a reason” mentality, the paranoid predictions of doom (always in the next 5-10 years), all of it concocted out of the whole cloth. An “apostate” is one who has renounced their beliefs. A “false apostate” would be what? You’re not even making sense. Maybe you meant to say “impostor.”
You bash Elizabeth Clare Prophet and then come up with your own equally baseless nonsense. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! I think if you could collect money for your loony prophecies, you’d have no problem doing it yourself. Your accusations against my mom seem to be at their core a projection of your own ambitions. It’s why you need to perpetuate the “god” charade.
My parents were entertainers. They spun a dramatic yarn that got people to pay their attention and money. It was a yarn they believed themselves. Period. We’ve seen it before, and will no doubt see it again. Check out what wacky Tom Cruise is doing right now. Maybe he is your male “apostate.”
The whole of religion and the “new age”–a bunch of witting or unwitting con artists.
In October 2006 I listened to a lecture that was in a Tape Album set named “Family Designs for the Golden Age”, put out by ECP & The Summit Lighthouse in the mid 70’s. At the time I was impressed with this comment by Elizabeth Prophet, and duely copied it out word-for-word. She is discussing marriage and spousal relationships, but my interest is in sharing the point that she is trying to steer her followers away from misguided zeal. It is not my interest to open the door on her personal life, whether or not she “practised what she preached”, or of anyone’s experience of her not practising what she preached, or whether or not there is such a thing a “Teaching,” “Christ,” “Light,” “Ascension,”or “Judgement”, but rather that here below is her clear statement of relative love, tolerance, and espousal of religious - or non-religious - freedom, as it may be - here. Quoting Elizabeth C Prophet:
“….the question is not what your spouse believes - what IS your spouse? A person can be a living example of the Light and not have the Teaching and not have religion……are they living the life of the Christ? - That’s after all what they will be judged on - ACTION, not thoughts, ACTION is what’s going to count in the hour of judgement, right? What did you DO on earth, not what did you believe. Who CARES what you believe? You can ascend if your a Mormon or a Catholic or a Jew or a Mohammedan or What-Have_you. It’s what you DID. What did you do?…….Leave your husbands and wives alone and don’t try to drag them to Church with you….It’s what you are that counts. It’s the light that counts.” end quote.
Well here’s how the founders of two Ascended Master movements treated their own families: Both my dad and his protege Monroe Shearer had five children with their first wives, then left them and paid little or no child support as they went to build their grandiose movements. I have a three hour interview I recently did with Aleyda Shearer–it’s shocking. You should rethink your loyalty to the so-called “Temple of the Presence.” That whole sham was born out of betrayal of Monroe’s own family. He has treated them like dirt. At least my dad sent $100/month to his five kids. From what I understand, Monroe didn’t even do that!
And my mom’s peccadilloes and excesses are legendary. My parents were an example to no one. I cringe when I read or hear their lectures because unlike most naive followers, I understand how inconsistent, baseless and hypocritical they are. None of the “masters’” material would stand up to the most rudimentary academic analysis.
My mom got plenty of people to drag their spouses to church. Or in many cases told them they should divorce non-believers. She used to quote the bible: “Be ye not unequally yoked together.” But she did this selectively to advance her own agenda. Other times she told people to get married when it suited her.
Life is for the here and now, not the eternal. The eternal is nothing. You will have no awareness of it. Your brain is all you are and when it stops, so do you. The sooner you realize that, and what a privilege it is to be alive and have physical conscious awareness, the more value the rest of your own life will have. It may be difficult, but you should do whatever you can to overcome your faith addiction. You will feel much better. The false hopes of the spirit world are as bad or worse for your mind than drugs.
Interesting reading. I know nothing at all about CUT, ECP, or any of the other historical matters discussed here. But all of it reminds me of what my teacher once said. He was asked, “if someone asks us what Buddhists believe in, what should we say?†He answered, “Say that we believe in our own experience.â€That’s pretty much been my guide. I believe in my own experience in preference to what anyone tells me, be they a scientific or a spiritual authority. (Not that I’m not capable of self-delusion. We all are. But it seems to me that in non-trivial matters, we have to wait for our own experience to reveal our self-deception to us. It does no good for someone else to say, “You’re wrong†when it comes to the things that matter most to us - such as faith. People have to be ready to hear and see for themselves that they are wrong.)
I am equally skeptical of the claims of religion and of science to explain everything. Of course, only a fool would reject scientific method as an analytical tool. That’s not what I mean. On the other hand, science does not have the answers to everything, because not every question has yet been asked - perhaps including some of the most important ones.
Here’s one example. It’s a story I tell my own students to illustrate the point that the mind is not identical with the brain. (Neither is the mind different from the brain, but that’s another argument.)
My son lost his cell phone, and his mother and I were were very worried about it. The next day he would be traveling back to boarding school, and without his cell phone, he would have no way to keep in touch with us en route.
That day, we happened to visit our friend S. I could tell you, based on my own experience of S, that she is clairvoyant, but let the facts speak for themselves. On hearing that our son’s cell phone was missing, she thought for a moment, then told him, “It’s in a pocket. It’s slipped down into a narrow space.†I asked, “Like between the cushions of a couch?†She said, “Sort of, but that’s not exactly what I had in mind.â€
You can guess the rest. My son eventually found his cell phone in the pocket of a pair of jeans that had slid down between his bed and the wall.
Mind you, S had never been to our house. She had met our son only a few times, and did not know his habits regarding his clothing or other belongings. She had no way of knowing even that the side of his bed was flush to the wall, or any other details. Neither could she have colluded with my son to hide and then find his cell phone in some pre-arranged manner. But she was right.
I can think of only two explanations for this. Either S guessed where the cell phone was by sheer luck, or she somehow knew where it was by means other than direct sensory perception. The first alternative requires belief in an almost monstrously improbable coincidence. The second explanation is the simpler, and I believe the true one. (It also conforms better with my experience of S, which is that she is indeed clairvoyant.)
Is there any existing scientific theory that can explain this? No. Does that mean it didn’t happen? Not at all. My wife, my son, and I were all witnesses to it. I am not fool enough to believe that if science cannot explain a phenomenon, therefore that phenomenon cannot exist. That would be insulting my own experience, as well as my own intelligence.
Please note that I do not offer this story as proof of anything beyond itself. It just happens to be the most clear-cut instance of clairvoyance I know of. It, and many similar experiences, have convinced me that S is indeed clairvoyant. The corollary to this is that therefore, clairvoyance must be possible.
This is what my own experience and reason tell me. There is no reason for you to believe it. I could be a liar. Or the thing could have been managed by some trickery I could not detect and cannot imagine. But I am satisfied that my own explanation, i.e., clairvoyance, is the simplest and most straightforward. That’s my working hypothesis, until something that makes more sense comes along.
I repeat, I do not offer this incident as proof of anything except that it happened. I have no idea of the underlying principles or mechanisms. Nor do I conclude from it that God, angels, or other supernatural beings exist (although the existence of such beings is one possible explanation of how it happened). I am repeating it here simply to point out that science has not yet explained everything, and that it is a fallacy to believe that just because science has not explained something, that something must not - indeed cannot - exist. That belief is contradicted by experience - mine, anyway.
By the way, my own experience also tells me that people will always look for guidance to those they believe have superior wisdom. And some people do have superior wisdom. But the test of a genuine teacher is that they refuse to take advantage of others’ faith in them for their own gain or gratification.
That’s a tough test. You might say it’s impossible, since power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Still, my experience has been that such teachers do exist. I have had the good fortune to meet more than one such.
Tibetan Buddhism has a simple test for whether a teacher is worth following: (1) do they practice what they themselves teach? and (2) do they have compassion? If the answers are yes and yes, they may be considered trustworthy.
You may argue that “spiritual†teachers are unnecessary, and furthermore, that they invariably will deceive their followers, wittingly or unwittingly. However, I think it is beyond question that the holders of certain “spiritual†traditions have valuable knowledge to impart. In many cases, such knowledge has been passed down from teacher to student for generations.
For example, Buddhist mindfulness practice has been found by Western psychologists to be therapeutic in a number of ways. Cognitive-behavioral therapists are starting to teach it to their patients routinely. Also, the Dalai Lama’s monks (who must be extraordinarily patient) have been wired to monitors of various kinds. Meditation on compassion, for instance, has been shown to alter the structure of the brain itself. (And yes, a cause-effect relationship has been shown. The longer you’ve been doing the meditation, the greater the change.)
You may then argue, “If these techniques have been proven useful, then why not remove them from their ’spiritual’ context? Why not divest them of all the religious claptrap, and just adopt what works?†The answer, of course, is that you can indeed do that. The psychologists I mentioned have done that very thing.
However, there is a fundamental difference in motivation. If you want to meditate in order to learn how to relax, then that is the greatest result you can expect. But if you want to meditate in order to cultivate insight in ways than can transform your life, then a greater commitment is called for. In such a case, I don’t think you can successfully separate the teachings from the tradition that carries them.
You see, the techniques exist in a context of accumulated knowledge and instruction (wisdom, if you like) that is a large part of their effectiveness. I don’t think they are easily separable. In other words, it’s a package deal.
Finally, I don’t think it’s necessary, in the name of reason, to devalue all “spiritual†traditions and teachers. There are a lot of charlatans out there, certainly. But they are imitating something that really exists.
I’ve seen people grow and mature in very beneficial ways as a result of finding and learning from a genuine teacher. The important thing is, at no stage in one’s relationship with such a teacher should one surrender one’s critical intelligence. If a teacher asks you to do so - to take things on faith, in other words - be very, very skeptical.
I believe in my own experience in preference to what anyone tells me, be they a scientific or a spiritual authority.
But our senses lie. That’s where empirical methods confirmed by multiple observers come in. Subjective experience is notoriously unreliable.
The little psychic anecdote about the cell-phone proves nothing at all. It’s classic though that these types of stories are held up as some kind of proof of a supernatural reality. If you want to overturn the entire standard model of physics, you’ve got to do a little better than that! You say you’re not trying to prove the supernatural and then you turn around and claim S is clairvoyant as the “simplest explanation”! You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Notice the words “convinced me that S is clairvoyant.” Notice how that shuts down your critical thinking. And on incredibly weak, circumstantial and anecdotal evidence.
No one has ever claimed “science explains everything.” In fact, science does just the opposite, avoiding jumping to just the type of conclusions you have.
And some people do have superior wisdom. But the test of a genuine teacher is that they refuse to take advantage of others’ faith in them for their own gain or gratification.
Is that the only test for a genuine teacher? How about if they have real knowlege or wisdom? And I mean the kind that can be proven. Not vague aphorisms and feel-good new-age jargon.
Again, you fall back on personal experience, (saying you’ve met such people) which is always fallible. Why should I take your word for anything? Why should you take my word for anything? Empirical methods take both of us out of the equation, and that’s as it should be.
Meditation has never been proved to do anything than cause relaxation and changes in brain-waves. I think it’s beneficial to the brain, the same way exercise is beneficial to the body. But making further “spiritual” claims is a totally subjective and therefore suspect enterprise.
Finally, I don’t think it’s necessary, in the name of reason, to devalue all “spiritual†traditions and teachers. There are a lot of charlatans out there, certainly. But they are imitating something that really exists.
Really exists according to who?
A mentor can be of high value. But in a very limited scope. Acceptance of unconditional and unchecked authority is the first step to domination and loss of self-esteem.
I agree that we should be very, very skeptical. But that seems to contradict everything else that you’re saying in your comment, which involves taking an awful, awful lot on faith.
P.S. Having read this thread over, I suppose I should clarify my own position with regard to atheism.
I am not agnostic, in the sense of doubting whether or not God exists. I am convinced that God - at least the God of the Bible - cannot possibly exist, for a host of perfectly sound, logical reasons.
On the other hand, I don’t consider myself an atheist in the sense of “anti-theist.” I have no a priori position about other spiritual traditions, be they monotheistic, polytheistic, pantheistic, or anything else. As others have said on this site, the only way to evaluate whether a spiritual tradition is beneficial or not is to note its effect on individual followers. Appeals to history only lead to never-ending arguments. Has the Catholic Church done more harm than good since its foundation, or vice versa? I have no idea. I don’t even know how one would would presume to measure such a thing.
If I’m not a theist, an agnostic, or an atheist, what am I? Some Buddhists prefer the term “non-theistic” because it doesn’t imply being for or against anyone. It means exactly what it literally says - that the existence or nonexistence of God (or gods) is just not an issue for us.
As others have said on this site, the only way to evaluate whether a spiritual tradition is beneficial or not is to note its effect on individual followers.
I disagree with this criterion. That would be argument from consequence. The only way to “test” a spiritual tradition would be to see if any of its claims could be proven.
I don’t consider myself an atheist in the sense of “anti-theist.â€
I am an anti-theist only when people’s subjective beliefs get in the way of political freedoms or contradict the discoveries of science. Then I grant religion absolutely no quarter. It must be kept out of the public square.
But if theists can be content to read, study, and worship in private and leave the rest of us alone, then I have no problem with them doing so.
But it’s strictly entertainment. No different than if they were playing Backgammon, Dungeons and Dragons, or Twister.
Oh well. I gave it my best shot. To sum up my own position: no, I don’t believe in God per se. Neither do I believe that all spiritual traditions are without value. As I said above, the only way to evaluate whether a spiritual tradition is beneficial or not is to note its effect on individual followers.
BTW, you neatly sidestepped the question of just how S found the cell phone.
P.S. I can’t agree with you that argument from consequence is invalid. Most of the claims that spiritual traditions made are untestable anyway. But if following one makes someone a better person, good.
BTW, you neatly sidestepped the question of just how S found the cell phone.
No, I didn’t. It doesn’t matter how she found the cell-phone. A lucky guess? Point is, it’s up to you to prove the implications of your story. Carl Sagan would note that it is another version of “counting the hits, ignoring the misses.” You’d have to test S in multiple situations of lost phones, and see how many times she got it right. If she did it better than random chance (50% of the time) then and only then could you conclude that something was going on. At that point, you’d have to determine a method for her insight or “clairvoyance,” which would involve coming up with a working theory.
But don’t bother. Plenty of well-funded experiments have taken place under controlled conditions, and no one has ever come up with better-than-chance results that were statistically significant.
One more thing: Just because you gave it your best shot doesn’t mean your premises are correct. I’m hitting you with a logically valid challenge: hold up your spiritual tradition to scientific scrutiny–and all you can do is repeat the “appeal to consequence.”
P.P.S. I take exception to your characterizing my post this way:
“You say you’re not trying to prove the supernatural and then you turn around and claim S is clairvoyant as the ’simplest explanation’! You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.”
I am not trying to prove the supernatural. There may be a perfectly natural explanation for clairvoyance; I just don’t know what it is.
As for taking exception to the words “I am convinced,” I don’t follow your point. If one observes a particular phenomenon over and over, then one can reasonably say, by inductive reasoning, that one is convinced of its existence.
You say that you don’t accept anecdotal evidence as evidence. I don’t see why not. In some cases - such as this one - anecdotal evidence is the best evidence we have. Even anecdotal evidence must be explained. Of course experimental, verifiable, repeatable evidence would be better, but I don’t know of any.
Meanwhile, another anecdote. A friend of mine was attending a talk by a teacher, L. At a certain point during the talk, my friend thought, “He looks like a frog.” L said, without missing a beat, “…or thinking that someone looks like a frog,” to illustrate the point he was making.
What is the best explanation for that? Dismissing it as an anecdote does not explain it. Nor do I think that illusion or coincidence are convincing explanations.
I hold no brief for the supernatural - none at all. My point, as I stated, is simply that some people hold the belief - in the name of “reason” or “skepticism” - that if existing scientific theory cannot explain a thing, then that thing must not exist. If you don’t think that way, then I congratulate you on your open-mindedness.
A last comment: I do not see the relevance of your point that “the senses lie.” The point is so self-evident as to be trivial. But I do not see how it relates to the subject at hand, unless you are saying that my wife, my son, my friend, and I all perceived things that didn’t exist. That argument is so far-fetched it does not deserve a response.
P.P.S. Of course, you are right. My anecdotes do not prove that clairvoyance exists. They are just very strong (I think) anecdotal evidence that it exists. As such, I would argue that if one denies the simplest, most obvious explanation for them - clairvoyance - then one is obliged to provide an alternative explanation.
As far as I know, you are correct: clairvoyance has never been experimentally proven. All I am saying that it is the simplest explanation for the kinds of phenomena I’ve described. (Occam’s Razor, you know.) You imply that these could be “lucky guesses.” To that, I repeat what I said before: the “lucky guess” explanation requires belief in an almost monstrously improbable coincidence.
P.P.P.S. There is no invisible dragon in my garage. You are mischaracterizing my argument as a belief in something for which there is no evidence. I am speaking of something for which there is some evidence, anecdotal though it be.
A final (?) note: the people I know who are clairvoyant (such as S and L) have absolutely no interest in proving the fact. Maybe that is a precondition of clairvoyance; I don’t know.
But I do not see how it relates to the subject at hand, unless you are saying that my wife, my son, my friend, and I all perceived things that didn’t exist.
That’s argumentum ad populum. It does not matter how many people believe a thing. It doesn’t make it true. At the risk of being pedantic, the earth looks flat, but it’s not. People used to think it was, en masse.
If one observes a particular phenomenon over and over, then one can reasonably say, by inductive reasoning, that one is convinced of its existence.
Clearly you have never read Hume on the problem of induction. Some people have understood Hume to be challenging the efficacy of empiricism. But when applying Karl Popper’s test of falsifiability, this weakness of empirical methods can be largely overcome.
All I am saying that it is the simplest explanation for the kinds of phenomena I’ve described. (Occam’s Razor, you know.)
No. You are misapplying Occam’s Razor. Again, if she was to score above 50% on repeated trials of finding lost objects, then maybe you would be justified in taking note. But that would still leave you to come up with a theory. Otherwise, all you would have is an unknown mental phenomenon. Not “clairvoyance.”
Listen. You need to acquaint yourself with basic critical thinking skills and understand materialist realism. I’m not here to go over the basics every time someone brings them up. These are all questions that have been answered many times over. You need to read at least some of the books on the reading list, like Sagan’s Demon Haunted World, or Blackburn’s Truth: A Guide then we will talk.
RZangpo2: “Most of the claims that spiritual traditions make are untestable anyway.”
BlackSun: “Exactly my point.”
The point being what? The fact that claims based on faith are not provable either way is, again, so self-evident as to be trivial.
We have a fundamental disagreement. You believe that a spiritual tradition can only be valid if it can prove its claims. By that logic, a spiritual tradition can never be valid; neither can any spiritual belief or experience. Q.E.D. But you’ve proven nothing, except the (again) trivial point that faith is not objectively verifiable.
My argument in favor of at least some spiritual traditions, on the other hand, is based on utility. Do the followers of religion X or teacher Y thereby become better people? If the answer is yes, then I would argue that that in itself establishes the validity of the tradition in question.
[Please note, I am not arguing (as some do) that faith is necessary to morality. Any fool can see that it isn't.]
To bring this to a more personal level: you have been hurt, and have seen others hurt, by what I would characterize as blind faith. You know what? So have I. I was educated in the Orthodox Jewish tradition, and couldn’t get away from it fast enough. The people who taught me routinely said one thing and did another, or tried to make me believe “facts” for which there was no evidence at all. At times, their hypocrisy rose to the level of abuse. I do not defend people like this; let them defend themselves if they can.
What I do defend is faith based on evidence. That evidence, to me, is utility. If it works as advertised, it’s fine with me. If it doesn’t, I’ve no use for it.
Such an argument from utility can only apply to concrete cases. The major world religions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism) are so huge that both the best and the worst of human nature can easily be found in them. I would not try to argue for something so broad. On the other hand, genuine teachers (as I’ve defined them above) are to be found within them. Needles in a haystack, I agree. But there are some nonetheless.
By that logic, a spiritual tradition can never be valid; neither can any spiritual belief or experience. Q.E.D. But you’ve proven nothing, except the (again) trivial point that faith is not objectively verifiable.
If not objective, then you are relying on “other ways of knowing.” That puts you really out on a limb.
You want to believe that stuff, go ahead. But don’t pretend you are basing it on anything other than your own desire that it be true.
That’s argumentum ad populum. It does not matter how many people believe a thing. It doesn’t make it true.
I am talking about perception, not belief. But no matter. I agree that we’ve taken this discussion as far as we can.
I don’t have time to read all the books you mention. (I don’t even have time for this discussion; I’m going to be late for dinner as it is.)
Life is short. If we are wise, we determine for ourselves what has value, and pursue it. You have no time to go my way, and I have no time to go yours. We are ships passing in the night, as it were.
It’s not that they can’t be tested, it is that they fail testing repeatedly.
Your friend, who you identify only by initial, didn’t make a claim that had astronomical odds. She said pocket, ‘IN BROAD VAGUE TERMS!’ She didn’t even specify coat, pants or a pocket on a backpack. She also didn’t identify what pair of pants? Jeans (most likely for a youth) Khakis (also a good choice) cords? color? Left pocket? right? etc.
There isn’t really anything astounding about this anecdotal evidence. If you truly believe she is psychic, I would hope someone who claims critical thought would require more evidence.
It is actually easy to set up a test and you could do it yourself. If she passes with better than chance, (chance = she got lucky guessing) then retest. If she can repeat at better than chance, then have her tested independently.
Otherwise, you look like a gullible moron, NOT a critical thinker.
Your friend, who you identify only by initial, didn’t make a claim that had astronomical odds. She said pocket, ‘IN BROAD VAGUE TERMS!’ She didn’t even specify coat, pants or a pocket on a backpack. She also didn’t identify what pair of pants? Jeans (most likely for a youth) Khakis (also a good choice) cords? color? Left pocket? right? etc.
You conveniently overlook the fact that my friend’s statement had two parts: that the phone was (a) in a pocket (b) that had fallen down into a narrow space. Yes, anyone might have guessed that the my son left the phone in his pocket. It’s the combination of “pocket” and “narrow space” that, in my opinion, puts the thing beyond the realm of coincidence.
As to my identifying my friend only by her initial, I don’t see what that has to do with my argument. I did not ask her permission to post her full name here, and I see no need to do so. It’s what she did that matters, not what her full name is.
Finally, I take offense at your using the descriptive phrase “gullible moron.” I see no need to descend to name-calling in this discussion.
wrong.
They just tend to repeatedly fail testing
Again
and again
and again
It’s not that they can’t be tested, it is that they fail testing repeatedly.
Again, you and I disagree. How can anyone test an article of faith, such as whether God exists, whether Jesus died for your sins, whether Mohammed was divinely inspired, or whether the Buddha was truly enlightened? (I don’t believe in the first three; I do believe in the fourth.) These matters of faith are not amenable to the sort of testing I believe you are referring to. Or am I missing something?
Ok my last view of this thread was of a pre-post approved state and it was much smaller…
Anyway.
You conveniently overlook the fact that my friend’s statement had two parts: that the phone was (a) in a pocket (b) that had fallen down into a narrow space. Yes, anyone might have guessed that the my son left the phone in his pocket. It’s the combination of “pocket†and “narrow space†that, in my opinion, puts the thing beyond the realm of coincidence.
I didn’t overlook it. Fallen down a narrow space is still vague. I mean if the bloody thing was right out in the open, chances are it would have been seen. SUH!
If I was to hedge the bet, I would have said something similar… Makes apologetics easier when the details don’t quite match up.
I am still underwhelmed.
Again, you and I disagree. How can anyone test an article of faith, such as whether God exists, whether Jesus died for your sins, whether Mohammed was divinely inspired, or whether the Buddha was truly enlightened? (I don’t believe in the first three; I do believe in the fourth.) These matters of faith are not amenable to the sort of testing I believe you are referring to. Or am I missing something?
I know the above is for the deluded Christian perspective and it is a rather deadpan delivery, but it still makes my point.
As to whether Buddha was enlightened? Excuse me, ‘Truly Enlightened’… that is the claim? As opposed to, erm… ‘Falsely Enlightened?’ or ‘Imitation Enlightened?’ …he had good stage lighting?
You mean Prajna: pure and unqualified knowledge?
Sorry man, I’ll take the qualified knowledge any day over that gobbledygook.
Finally, I take offense at your using the descriptive phrase “gullible moron.†I see no need to descend to name-calling in this discussion.
I waited for Sean to reply before replying to you. Why?
Take a look at the title of the thread genius! You’ve hijacked the thread subject. You opened with the statement:
Interesting reading. I know nothing at all about CUT, ECP, or any of the other historical matters discussed here.
I didn’t initially reply, because I thought there was a good chance Sean might just delete your stuff. Once he replied, then I responded.
So you think I am name calling?
You post something that really doesn’t belong in this thread, present anecdotal evidence as proof, (yes, in your head it is sufficient; to the critical thinker, not so much.)
Your point that I hijacked the thread is well taken. (Still, you could simply have said so, rather than calling me a “gullible moron.”) OTOH, didn’t ECP herself claim clairvoyance? If so, that would make my contributions at least tangentially relevant.
I have one more point to make; then I’ll shut up.
I witnessed the cell phone incident first-hand; the “frog” story (which none of you have addressed) was told to me by a friend I consider trustworthy. I have the following story at third-hand, so take it with as many grains of salt as you like. I offer it not as just another anecdote of claimed clairvoyance, but also to point out the problems with demanding experimental proof of the phenomenon.
My teacher was supposed to be an incarnate lama; that is, someone who incarnates over and over again for the benefit of others. He said that as a child, he sometimes had memories of his previous life; but as he got older, these faded away and became less frequent.
When he was about eight, he and his attendants visited a monastery where he had never been before. (Not in this life anyway; his predecessor had been there.) When he got there, he recognized the place, and was able to recall (without being cued) where everything in the monastery was located, and even who some of the people were. (This is more impressive when one realizes the vast size, innumerable rooms, and quasi-random layout of these places.)
I don’t offer this story so much as proof that it happened, since I can’t personally verify it. But on its face, it implies that clairvoyance happens spontaneously and unpredictably, and cannot be willed to happen by the subject. (This conforms with other accounts I have heard.)
If this is so, it would seem to raise an insuperable obstacle to experimental verification.
Finally - to return to the topic of the thread- it seems quite possible to me that someone might be clairvoyant, and yet be deluded about the meaning of what they perceive. This happens all the time in the case of ordinary sense perceptions. We are mistaken about what we perceive; we misinterpret coincidences; we draw unjustified conclusions; we convince ourselves we have perceived things that never happened. (Consider, for example, the notorious unreliability of eyewitness testimony.)
This being the case, it seems to me possible to reconcile the conflicting accounts given above of ECP. Some say she was inspired (or at least, inspiring) while BlackSun, who has reason to know, says that she was contradictory, deluded, self-serving, and destructive.
I can well imagine that both are true. As another teacher of mine says, it is no big deal to get information about other people through clairvoyance (once you know how to do it). The real challenge is to know how to be helpful by knowing what to say and when to say it. Blurting out everything one knows about a person can do more harm than good, as ordinary experience tells us.
I didn’t overlook it. Fallen down a narrow space is still vague. I mean if the bloody thing was right out in the open, chances are it would have been seen. SUH!
If I was to hedge the bet, I would have said something similar… Makes apologetics easier when the details don’t quite match up.
I am still underwhelmed.
You are still distorting my comments. Of course the cell phone was in a concealed place; otherwise it would not have been lost.
Guessing that my son had left it in a pocket had a pretty reasonable chance of being right just by coincidence. Saying that it had slipped down into a narrow space is not the same as saying it was merely concealed; it is pretty specific, and I would argue that the odds are against such a statement being correct just by chance. However, if you multiply the probability of both statements being correct, you can only conclude is was a “lucky guess” by assuming an almost monstrous degree of coincidence, as I said before.
Since the cell phone could potentially have been in an infinite number of places, and since the statements made by S were descriptive but not exact (in the sense of providing precise coordinates), I suppose it is impossible to calculate the exact probability of either statement on its own being correct, or of both together being correct. “In a pocket” - reasonable possibility of being right by sheer coincidence. “Slipped down into a narrow space” - more specific, and hence less likely to be correct by sheer coincidence. Both statements together - a degree of specificity that is almost impossible to account for by sheer coincidence (without, as I said, assuming an almost monstrous improbability).
I know my son, his habits, how he treats his belongings, etc. Yes, I would have told him to look in his pockets. Yes, I would have asked him whether he had dropped it somewhere. I would not have asked him whether it might be in a pocket that had slipped down and become trapped in a narrow space. That is a degree of specificity that is beyond guesswork, IMO.
As I said before, I know that the incident is not experimental proof of anything. I’m just saying that in my opinion, clairvoyance is the simplest explanation for it. So far, no one in this thread has offered an alternative explanation, except to try to dismiss the story by mocking it, and to say that it can be explained as a “lucky guess” - an explanation that, as I said, I consider to be wildly improbable on its face.
As to whether Buddha was enlightened? Excuse me, ‘Truly Enlightened’… that is the claim? As opposed to, erm… ‘Falsely Enlightened?’ or ‘Imitation Enlightened?’ …he had good stage lighting?
I don’t see how sarcastic and disingenuous comments like this one help your position. You know very well I’m not talking about stage lighting. A quick and dirty definition of enlightenment in the Buddhist sense is “having completely eliminated self-deception, and developed wisdom to its fullest extent.” How can one prove that anyone has attained such a state, much less someone who lived 2,500 years ago? Personally, I rely on my own experience of my teachers and my observation of their students, but let’s not get into that argument again - I think we’ve covered it. (Inductive reasoning and all that.)
Someone once asked the Dalai Lama to explain the teaching of Buddhism in one sentence. He said, “If you can’t help someone, at least don’t hurt them.” That’s a pretty good summation of ethics, in my opinion, whether one subscribes to Buddhism, atheism, or any other “-ism.” At least it beats “if you can’t help someone (or if they refuse your “help”), then beat the crap out of them,” which seems to be the guiding principle of many.
Is that the only test for a genuine teacher? How about if they have real knowlege or wisdom? And I mean the kind that can be proven. Not vague aphorisms and feel-good new-age jargon.
I mentioned two tests of a genuine teacher (the second of which has two branches). To quote my earlier post,
By the way, my own experience also tells me that people will always look for guidance to those they believe have superior wisdom…. But the test of a genuine teacher is that they refuse to take advantage of others’ faith in them for their own gain or gratification….
Tibetan Buddhism has a simple test for whether a teacher is worth following: (1) do they practice what they themselves teach? and (2) do they have compassion? If the answers are yes and yes, they may be considered trustworthy.
Whether or not they have superior wisdom to impart (and I would argue that my own teachers do, in the form of psychological insight, compassion, skillful ways of working with others, etc.), surely you would agree that any teacher who passes the above two tests is at least harmless. (I am using “harmless” here in a limited sense. I do not refer to whether or not the teachings themselves are true - that is for individuals to decide for themselves. I mean that one who passes the above tests is not likely to harm their students either materially or psychologically.)
Judging by what you tell us here, ECP, though she may have had the best of intentions, ultimately failed both of these tests. That is tragic, and I have nothing but compassion for her and for those she may have harmed.
Meditation has never been proved to do anything than cause relaxation and changes in brain-waves. I think it’s beneficial to the brain, the same way exercise is beneficial to the body. But making further “spiritual†claims is a totally subjective and therefore suspect enterprise.
I disagree. As I explain above, meditation on compassion has been shown to cause changes in the architecture of the brain itself. (My source is a recent article in the New York Times. If I find a link, I’ll post it here.)
Has it been experimentally proven that meditation causes insight to increase, self-deception to decrease, psychological resilience and compassion to grow stronger, etc.? Not that I know of. Perhaps that’s because of the difficulty of designing such an experiment (how to measure the above-mentioned qualities, how long to continue the study, etc. On the latter question, I would argue for a period of years - the longer the better - which could make such a study unwieldy). Or perhaps it’s just because no one has gotten around to it yet.
Are you suggesting that I should wait for experimental proof of the above-mentioned benefits before taking up meditation? I hope not. As I said, life is too short. One has to take such evidence as one has - even if it is anecdotal, or the product of inductive reasoning - and use one’s own judgment to evaluate it. Then you decide.
Admittedly, in such a case one cannot reliably predict the outcome of the choice one makes. But life is like that.
In any case, I think the position your words imply is unreasonable. If we waited for experimental verification before we did anything (ate anything, went anywhere, etc.), ordinary life would become impossible. Your position also raises the question of how much evidence is enough - indeed, if any amount of evidence can ever be enough.
As I stated above - and you agreed - not everything in life has yet been tested and proved. People with common sense understand this. They take note of experimental proof where it exists, but do not base their major life decisions on the existence or non-existence of such proof. (For example, could one have proven that I would be happy with my wife? Or for that matter, that I would not have been happier single, or with someone else? There would have to be at least two of me to perform a controlled experiment, and in any case, by the time the results were in, I would be dead.)
The decision whether to follow a particular spiritual tradition or teacher, I would argue, is more in the nature of “whom shall I marry?”, rather than “can its claims be proved?” It also helps to be able to think for oneself, and to decide for oneself whether something is beneficial or harmful. In any particular case, experimental proof of benefit or harm is unlikely to exist. One has to use one’s own judgment to determine that, based on what one has learned and experienced. At the end of the day, that is what we base most of our decisions on.
To cite just one example, you seem to hold the opinion that on balance, ECP did more harm than good. Others who have posted here seem to disagree. Did you conduct a study to decide the question before leaving CUT? Of course not. You looked at your own experience - first-hand as well as that reliably reported by others - and decided for yourself. What else could anyone in your position reasonably have done?
I am an anti-theist only when people’s subjective beliefs get in the way of political freedoms or contradict the discoveries of science. Then I grant religion absolutely no quarter. It must be kept out of the public square.
I am glad that you and I have no disagreement, then. I do not restrict anyone else’s political freedoms. Nor have I contradicted the discoveries of science in this or any other public forum.
I have merely pointed out that some phenomena have not yet been scientifically explained. I have further stated that it is unreasonable to expect science to discover timely answers to certain questions, especially those on which we base our major life decisions.
Finally, I have posited that the value of at least some spiritual traditions, teachings, and teachers can be established by proving their benefits in concrete cases.
I have not contradicted anything that has been proven by scientific experiment to be true. That would be foolish, and I would not presume to do such a thing.
This comment is conversational; unwinding here and thought I might write.
Socially things are a little quieter for me since I relinquished the “Teachings of the Ascended Masters” as taught by Mark L. and Elizabeth Clare Prophet. Things that were once held important no longer are, so therefore I can’t email ‘Masters’ people with this or that anecdote. Which is COOL! Don’t get me wrong, I am not complaining.
It is great to have a convo with someone I meet about the rock concerts they love to go to, without that undercurrent of thought in my head that is judging them or the music!
Socially things were alot worse for me when I left the King James Bible Fundamentalist Christian group ‘Adelaide Revival Centre’ when I was 21, (1984). I had been there for 6 years, and married in it.
I was in an informal Summit Lighthouse group for only 1 year. 2 weeks ago I sold my $450 worth of Summit Uni Press books. The “Masters” can come to me for advice.
It’s an adventure to leave a cult where everything is black and white, ‘Us and Them’, and to go out into the world where it’s all grey, and colours, and it’s up to oneself to work it out. But I would say I was very uninhibited from age 21 on, free, rebellious for sure, self destructive a bit…all the free teen stuff that was effectively postponed by religious and related social containment. There were good things about that particular experience like drama training and singing and creative outlets. But I guess in the face of the blinkered oppression the colours faded.
After I left, perhaps the self destruction lasted a bit too long, a bit too intensely, but that was my choice. Maybe I wanted addiction, religious, love, substance, life risking behavior until one realises life is preferable.
I did not equate my much earlier involvement with the ‘Revival’ group, and the 20 years later involvement with a small ( 6 serious people) local Summit Lighthouse group, until I really looked at some of the things writtern in BSJ (and all that very rude, insulting and dramatic commentary!!!) (hey, chill..let’s face it you probably get a certain percentage of hits, including mine, that are waiting for the next dramatic exchanges to happen in the commentary).
What I mean is, I thought that my involvement in the fundie church was totally separate to the Masters activity involvement, and then I also considered that the 6 week involvement in AA I had before Summit Lighthouse, was also a cult experience. An experience six weeks had tired me of, saying ‘I AM an Alcoholic’ every time, people pressuring you to go to meetings, go to meetings. SO much judgement, self depreciation, fear, control, and if one did not say ‘I am an alcoholic’, or go to meetings, then one was considered to be ‘in denial’.
And the members don’t want to socialise with you unless you are doing and saying what they say.
But that’s cool! “Holier/Smarter than thou” attitude, something any “ist” (scientologist/atheist/communist/chrISTian) is capable of.
So meeting up with the Summit Teachings and saying ‘I AM a being of Violet Fire’ was a better idea at the time, which was October 2006.
I welcome any tonne of intellectual rubble piled apon me by the studious Alumini Atheists (see above statement about drama).
Sean, every now and again I revist the blacksunjournal to catchup on your writings of CUT. with the latest news regarding the YFZ ranch, I’ve found myself in discussions with my family and fellow CUT friends on the subject of cults. My mother told me when the CUT came to Livingston, she remembers the local catholic church saying that its families had opened its door to any CUT youth who wanted to escape it. Not sure if this really happened, or if this is just another embelleshed memory of those days. I am a true CUT baby myself, having recently turned 21. I would say I’m still involved in some capacity, but having moved from MT, I find myself more distant, and yet, I cannot silence the thoughts that were so ingrained in me since I was born, I feel like a sinner when I enjoy any intimate moments, and immediately justify my issue as unresolved karma from my past lives. sigh. I think having a Faith is good for me, but I do realized I say that because I absolutely cannot imagine thinking any different.
As elementary students, we talked about you Sean, like you where a prince.
My youths generation is not farming the Ranch but created the teen retreats; glad to see Merci’s paper up, remember her departure, but mostly remember how much I missed her, our friendship was never the same.
Anyway, I like your site, glad you have it, Ive even checked out hexanet.
ps. on my own website I just made black & red my theme, because i enjoy the design, but havent brought myself to show my parents or still involved CUT friends of mine, because of what they will say about the colors. SIGH. YFZ ranch kids couldnt wear red either, but for a little bit of different reason.
I just figured out that Mother had a face lift. The word from the organization for years was that she had gone on the macrobiotic diet and had miraculously changed her appearance. A bunch of bull probably! I would not be pointing this out if the organization had not been so zealous about the importance of this certain diet and held Mother up as an “example”. I actually dropped macrobiotics in the late 90s for a diet called the Zone and remember how I thought I was going “against” the Messenger.
Nothing seems to be easier than seeing someone whom you can help but not helping.
I suggest we start giving it a try. Give love to the ones that need it.
God will appreciate it.
Why do you think that people will be motivated to help people because this "God" of your will appreciate it? Because we should be scared if we displease him/her/it; because we as a species are so morally bereft of common decency that a railing murderous threatening omnipotent dictator is required to wring it out of us?
Your suggestion that "someone" in need is being ignored is vague, condescending and assumptive. Are you suggesting that ECP is not receiving adequate care?
The best love you could give would be to yourself, by coming out of the poisonous fog of religious confusion.
I recommend clearing out your library for a start and picking up anything by Christopher Hitchens, or anything listed under the Black Sun Bookshelf tab.
I know from experience that religious/new age books, are very limiting, and if you base your mind on their contents, you become a mental and emotional cripple.
I’ve been enjoying your website here. I was a long-time Church member, who was on a face-recognition and exchange-of-greeting level with you and your sisters. (And of course I saw you all when you were up on the stage.) I first met you at S.U. in Winter, 1976 at La Tourelle, and during the 4 months or so of Staff I served after. My brother, Dennis, and his wife, Kathleen, knew you at the Chicago T.C. for a while, later on.
Anyway, despite our very casual encounters, I have always gotten a feeling of core sincerity and integrity from you. Same with Erin. And I’ve never been able to credit anyone who implies or outright charges that either of you would lie or fabricate things about your mother and the Church. And that extends to Tatiana, and I’ve come to realize also to Moira (of course, I was there when Moira was painted red, and got swayed by that for a long time).
[Your site says my comment is too long, so I'll finish it with another post...]
I was wondering if you could expand a little on the subject of the see-through altar photo of Mother in the blue dress. Somewhere on this site you said it was a double-exposure (I can't remember which thread). You stated it as a fact, but didn’t go into it much further. Do you have some further details? For example, did someone in Photography/AV do it and then present it to your mom. Or did she request it. Were you there when it was released. Whatever you can offer that would verify it was indeed manufactured and not a miracle photo. I never felt entirely comfortable with it, even though I was mostly a believer.
I think it’s important to lay the matter to rest as far as possible, since it’s held up as proof positive of your mother’s exalted spiritual attainment. And if it’s a fabrication, then it needs to be removed from any list of such proofs. Let people evaluate her for what she really did, and was, both good and bad—without false props.
dale, thanks for the vote of confidence. None of us has fabricated anything. We may differ in degree or interpretation, but we all experienced the same things.
dale, that photo was created by combination of either Larry Stanley (or whoever was manning the altar camera) or Ken Paolini through a double exposure. Initially I remembered that he talked about it in his book. But I think it was personal correspondence.
My mom kind of let people promote it as miraculous, though I think she also knew at some level it was trick photography. There was a lot of rationalizing "well she has so much light she might as well have been transparent" or "how do we know it wasn't a miracle." It fed so easily into people's wishful thinking they did not question it.
I duplicated the trick in photoshop in about 5 minutes. All you need is a photo taken on a tripod of the empty background, then bring the person into the frame and take another shot. Place the two layers on top of one another and set the transparency to about 50%, voila, instant miracle! With mom's altar photo it either happened in camera (film failed to advance, or double-exposure button pushed [Nikons had those]) or on an enlarger (deliberate).
It's amazing how many people have asked me about that silly photo. Is that really how they think God would prove his messenger, the Vicar of Christ? Through something that could be so easily faked? It's almost as bad as pareidolia (seeing visions of saints/masters in rust stains and on pancakes).
Thanks, Sean! That's about what I thought; and that your mom "let people promote it as miraculous, though I think she also knew at some level it was trick photography" is less culpable than if she had special-ordered it–which some who are quite bitter toward your mom might be quick to automatically believe of her.
I'm looking forward to reading Erin and Tatiana's book of Mother's recollections. I've noticed the Summit Lighthouse just published a similarly-titled book. Know anything about the difference? I expect I'll have to read both before I'm done, though!
Even if the unusual photo was singularly unexplainable, or even a "miracle", it still means nothing about the teachings said from the altar. If she levitated on the stage at each dictation, it STILL means nothing about the quality or supposed "divinity" of the messenger, does not say anything about the morality of anything or the existence of any ascended masters. David Hume puts it very well: "What is more likely? That the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour, and in a way that you approve, or that you've made a mistake?".
As far as miracles go, if being raising up after being dead was such a big deal that ones life should be epitomized, why didn't everyone worship all those whose graves were supposedly opened at the time of the resurrection?
I know I digress, but superstitious beliefs are for babies.
Some african tribes incidentally believe that if the clitoris is left intact that it will kill the mother, the baby, the grandparents, expand like a vine through the head of the woman and kill her..etc etc. Very handy belief to ensure longevity of inhuman ritual.
Trick Photo - accident or not: very handy to keep paying customers cheques in the mail.
So some photo is doubly exposed and now this religion is flawless and divine? I-don't-think-so.
I know everyone has already said the above more or less. Just having my own little morning rant.
Yes I love golfing, actually its very enlightening comparing my life to my game lol. Where abouts in the States are you. Maybe the wife and I will take a road trip this summer and take you out for a round.
Very interesting…. ASCENSION.. so many New Age Channels and guru talk about it.. but to date we have NO ONE who has performed it….. if after 30 years for a lot of these people NO ONE HAS ASCENDED then this subject could be a SCAM… or I know… the STUDENTS did not APPLY the wisdom… that is the fall back place.
Part 2
I was a memeber of one of these types of groups… at the time it did enrich my life…. I divorced becuase hubby would not jump on the band wagon… I spent well over 300K to gain wisdom… funny thing after the late 90's I stopped and had enought… as I look back… what was I thinking. smile. Don't get me wrong … I did learn how to meditate and can I trance channel.. but WHERE IS THAT INFORMATION coming from…. How do I know these things…. I question it all…. The information I think is like a fairy tail…. becuase most of the stuff can not be applied to this life or used in any usable way. I look at it now…. as a way to entertain yourself… I noticed that when you are in a CULT you are SOOOOooooo SPECIAL….. so says the CULT LEADER… but today the many New Age leaders are growing old…. needing face lifts.. over and over…. just like everyone else in the world. They have not MASTERED LIFE or the AGEING Process…. yes.. they all have lived a life with a BIG FAT BANK ACCOUNT but so has others who have good businesses… Now. I belive that ALL New AGE Leaders are just running a business… the ASCENDED MASTER BUSINESS…. and by the way.. it is NOT CHEAP… you must PAY to play. LOL
I would say in the end … perhaps it is a tool to cause you to look more deeply within self when all is said and done. I have no desire to GO AGAIN to these things…. I look at the past web sites.. and see they are SELLING the same WISDOM with new faces…. perhaps it is all just a big game…. I know so many people who destroyed their family life to continue to study,, then years later I found out about the DRUGS… SEX and Rock N ROLL… I never was in that group … but when I found out the LEADER was I became sick… oh they can justify it all… BE ALL YOU CAN BE in the MASTERS GROUP…. that is the message…. SUPER NORMAL POWERS… but not even the leader was able to PROVE the message.
I think for many who belonged to this group… with Elizabeth are coming to some rude awakenings now….. it is a shame that the MYSTERIES…. and MAGICE is simply not probable in this world
Only from October 1st 2009 Tom-Maher.com offers you exchange From Wire to E-gold without comossion!
[quote]The company information that was provided is that they are in Poland:
Address: Majewskiego 14, Warsaw, Poland.
Phone: +48-22-219-5184 or +1-646-419-4127
Fax: (646) 478-9144.
The person, Boris Soroka, had two email addresses: hr@tom-maher.com and tom.maher.inc@gmail.com[/quote]
JohninAspen / September 30th, 2009, 11:12 pm / #63
Sean,
How can I read or hear that interview with Aleyda Shearer?
John, right now it's unpublished. I plan to include portions of it in any documentary I may release. But I also have plans someday to create an online archive of some of the material. Frankly, It's taken me a lot longer to get through the material and make the documentary than what I would have liked.
Hello to All the Guests and Members.
My computer worked slowly, too much errors. Help me, please to fix buggs on my computer.
I used Windows XP.
Thanks,
Loorawalm
With a open mind all things r benefitial. It's when we, as many in history have & it sadly seems it is going to continue in th future, accept idolitry as a part of living. No one has to bow or idolize the super power of life, nature, energy etc. Argue it, challenge it, have a constructive healthy respectful relationship with it but don't idolize it. At the end as much as we might try God , a Supreme Force, Being of inteligence or just plain ol Intelligence of existance is part of many's psychological thinking & can't leave it because the extreme pain it brings & will always find themselves holding on to It. Wether it's because it's what they were given growing up &/or mentaly/neurologicly can't let go. It's part of life & it's here to stay for sometime if not forever…..=(
In history RED has always been a no no. passion, power, an intensity of emotion representation is always assosiated with it ! Sex too…so it's a psychological thing, corrupting one's innocence…this whole red thing isn't new…black too….darkness, evil, fear, scary, power…etc
Comments (71 comments)
a / May 20th, 2006, 11:58 am / #1
Is Elizabeth Clare Prophet your mother?
BlackSun / May 22nd, 2006, 6:35 am / #2
a, yes.
a / May 30th, 2006, 5:14 pm / #3
Gotcha.
Did some research, (I read the whole wikipedia ;)) Now I have a few questions.
What exactly was the state of Elizabeth Clare Prophets mental condition throughout her years as leader of Church Triumphant?
Is it safe to say she compares alot to Charles Manson?
Ergo; Manson had helter skelter, ECP had soviet war & Manson was jesus, ECP was a prophet prophesized from Revelations.
Both had ranches and inner circles, etc.
If you don’t mind me asking, was Mark Prophet just as “zealous”? Or rather is Church Universal his creation also?
How much money did ECP accumulate, personally, over the years?
Did ECP sincerely believe what she was preaching? Or did she make things up for money, fame, etc?
How much of Church Universal doctrine & structure is borrowed from other religions and how much is ECP’s creation?
BlackSun / May 31st, 2006, 10:32 pm / #4
a, she was very authoritarian, and didn’t know the meaning of the word introspection. I wouldn’t compare her to Charles Manson–she never would have condoned physically hurting anyone. With her, the wounds would have been all emotional and spiritual. But the analogy holds with respect to her surrounding herself with believers to consolidate her power.
My dad was pretty zealous himself. We kept his old staff meeting tapes under lock and key for years because they would have been extremely revealing. He was merciless when dealing with anyone who questioned him. Some of the staff meeting tapes contained “trials” he held to humiliate people who worked for him. I was a little kid when those meetings happened, but I remember the bruising emotional aftermath. Listening to the tapes later was apalling.
My mom did not accumulate any significant personal wealth. She lived well and had a large staff. But she was adamant, and neither her or us children were ever able to take money out of the organization (other than our salaries).
As stated elsewhere, I think my mom was a true believer in what she taught. But she would have probably questioned herself more if she wasn’t surrounded by yes men (and women).
As far as doctrine goes, most of it was borrowed from other religions and philosophies. Then she would add her own spin to it. Often she would contradict the original source who had written the material. Since her ‘truth’ was revealed, she could state anything she wanted, and argue from simple authority. The CUT canon is highly inconsistent. It does not hold up to close scrutiny or analysis.
Joana / June 12th, 2006, 7:31 am / #5
Sean hi! I have read what you wrotte on Wikipedia about your mother and the church. I think that it is important that you and your sisters tell the whole story as it is about the summit lighthouse, i say all of you because it is hard for people that have followed the doctrines taught by CUT to believe just what one person is saying. I have read many of your mum’s and dad’s books and lately some of the books members have wrotte. I must say i have tremendous admiration for your mother because in some ways she has helped many through her words and i just can not believe that this loving woman with such lovely speech and voice could have lived a life deceiving people from so many countries. As you have said it in your posts, there are many, too many people who believe and follow these teachings, and hold her word as indisputable truth. It would be very ineteresting to see the effect that you ( brothers and sisters) would have if the truth as you state it in here is told and comes out to those who still follow. If the truth is with you, you have a duty to us all.
cheers
Joana
Dennis Fisher / March 6th, 2007, 5:26 am / #6
Sean,
For me, meeting Elizabeth Clare Prophet and the times we shared at Camelot, The Ranch, and Stumping America with her were life changing inspiring events. My regrets are i wish i had more time with her and perhaps been able to guide her away from making some of those mistakes (she was human) and i forgive her for that. My perspective is from the outside / in, and yours in inside / out so my overall conclusions about those times are allot different. I don’t think your readers would understand but there was light so bright and so inspiring! I am thankful for your Mother because she inspired me and now i love more, i forgive quicker, i cope with life easier and much more. These qualities i hope to pass on to my children and everyone i can.
Judy O'Neill / January 9th, 2008, 11:32 pm / #7
His Elizabeth still alive? My mother in law in Australia is a follower and trying to convert me.
BlackSun / January 19th, 2008, 12:29 pm / #8
Judy O’Neill,
she is alive but not fully conscious or able to communicate. I saw her in November, 2007. She wakes up briefly and looks around, but does not seem to have much awareness.
But that’s not what’s important. What’s important is your life, and that you do not spend it following the teachings of the “Ascended Masters.” I can tell you from having followed them for 30 years and been a minister of CUT, they hold nothing for you.
In the comment above Dennis Fisher makes the following claims:
If you want to love more, forgive quicker, etc., you simply need to address your own psychology and get to know yourself better. Then you can make these clear decisions on your own.
Many claim such vague benefits from everything from Tony Robbins to Yoga. Whatever works for you is what you should do. But there’s a big difference between whether a system achieves a desired result and whether it’s true.
The Ascended Masters are a fairy tale, just like the gods of every other religion. Entering into mysticism and belief in non-existent beings is the single most mentally corrupting influence one can suffer in life.
It is absolutely not worth the paltry benefits that are claimed.
legh w. / January 19th, 2008, 10:08 pm / #9
I was a student of the teachings from 1984 to 1987. I moved to montana and tried to get on staff at the ranch. As soon as I met the staffers at CUT, instinctively I knew something was very very wrong with what was going on there. I already had a strong faith in God before I studied the CUt materials, and over several months time I began to just KNOW that I needed to leave the organization - just to get away, far away, and not look back. I profoundly began to know that there was something evil about Claire Prophet, not just misguided, or deluded, but genuinely intentionally evil - especially after I met her in person. It was a bizarre meeting and it did not last long. Our reulsion toward one another was mutual, and I left the church, thankfully, shortly after that. That was nearly 22 years ago. Finding this website by her now atheist son just confirms that my instincts were right so many years ago. My own walk with God has only deepened through the years, and I credit my inner relations with Spirit for steering me quickly away from the glossy charade that Claire Prophet was running in Montana for so many years. She ruined many lives, and stole great sums of money from many sincere believers before her health was struck down and she was disabled by her own illnesses. If anything is karma, what happened to Claire Prophet in the end certainly was karma absolute. You will know them by their fruits. Look at the bitter fruit yielded by this woman and the train wreck that her teachings became in the end. The book of Revelations, interestingly, predicted this very phenomena in the last days. It is worth pondering. It’s sad that her son Sean was so scarred by growing up in the bizarre cult of CUT, that he has forsaken all faith in Diety.That is the saddest part in all of the long strange and disgusting story of Claire Prophet and what she has done to thousands of sincere God seeking souls, by exploiting their very real hunger for spiritual truth as a way to aggrandize herself and to privately amass secret fortunes for herself and her own inner circle. I personally knew of dozens of families, entire families, who turned over their entire estates and all their family’s wealth to the church. Well, in truth Claire Prophet was the church at that time. It was criminal what she was doing. She should have been prosecuted for it.
I have not a doubt in my mind that millions are stashed somewhere - I do not believe for one minute that she took little for herself. That is hogwash. The very first thing that an applicand to live on staff had to do in the late 8s was answer a barrage of intimate questions about their own private assets, net worth, real estate holdings and business interests. In fact, that was my first heads up that something was deeply wrong. No one asked me anything about my background, my spiritual beliefs etc… all they wanted to know was - was I rich or not?
During the 8 months I lived close to the ranch, I saw how she lived, what she wore, and the posh posh surrroundings of her personal quarters while staff on the ranch worked 120 hours a week and lived in military-like spartan bunglows. Claire Prophet was a perfect portrait of what a female version of an Antichrist might look like. Study her to learn how to discern the final apostate yet to come. There will be an imposter on the world scene one day who will trump her mask-erade by far. What she pulled off was just the opening salvo to the greater imposter to come. Wake up spiritual seekers. Learn to discern what it actually is that is standing before you claiming to have the solutions to all the worlds problems.
Watch between 2011 and 2017. ECP crossed paths with the world for a reason. It just happens not to have one thing to do with being a real spiritual leader. It has everything to do with being a false apostate in a female form. The male form to come will be much worse. Learn the lesson now, to avoid being pulled in again later in this new millenium.
BlackSun / January 20th, 2008, 11:24 am / #10
Legh W.
You seem to come to a lot of conclusions based on your subjective feelings rather than evidence. I normally don’t post comments that are mostly witnessing as yours is. But I wanted to pointedly address a couple of your misconceptions:
Many forms of evil are well-intentioned. I agree with you that the effects of my parents teachings are largely negative. But you are incorrect that they were motivated by anything other than true belief. I was around them for 30 years, so I would be in a position to know.
Sad for who? I feel fine. I don’t need an imaginary friend to make me feel whole. This is the typical hostile and condescending position from believers: expressing their “concern” about how atheists have no hope and must be so “damaged.” You can keep your pity, thanks.
Sorry, wrong again. You give them too much credit. They were not cynical or greedy enough to stash money for themselves. Sure, they got hold of other people’s money, and that was inexcusable. But they spent it on Church projects. The Church bought vast quantities of land. At one point in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s the organization had a net worth of $50 million or more from its land holdings alone. A good deal of that land has now been sold off by CUT’s management to pay expenses. Also, north of $25 million went into CUT’s bomb shelters, food and supplies.
Yes, there were disparities in lifestyles. Big disparities. I am in no way defending the way ECP ran her organization. It was corrupt and whimsical, and capricious, and not spiritual, and ultimately highly unjust. But there is no stash of money, OK? I would know if there was, and would have no problem admitting it. It is just simply untrue.
This kind of conjectural nonsense is exactly why the whole new age movement is spiritually and intellectually bankrupt. The “everything happens for a reason” mentality, the paranoid predictions of doom (always in the next 5-10 years), all of it concocted out of the whole cloth. An “apostate” is one who has renounced their beliefs. A “false apostate” would be what? You’re not even making sense. Maybe you meant to say “impostor.”
You bash Elizabeth Clare Prophet and then come up with your own equally baseless nonsense. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! I think if you could collect money for your loony prophecies, you’d have no problem doing it yourself. Your accusations against my mom seem to be at their core a projection of your own ambitions. It’s why you need to perpetuate the “god” charade.
My parents were entertainers. They spun a dramatic yarn that got people to pay their attention and money. It was a yarn they believed themselves. Period. We’ve seen it before, and will no doubt see it again. Check out what wacky Tom Cruise is doing right now. Maybe he is your male “apostate.”
The whole of religion and the “new age”–a bunch of witting or unwitting con artists.
Annette C. / February 12th, 2008, 6:44 pm / #11
In October 2006 I listened to a lecture that was in a Tape Album set named “Family Designs for the Golden Age”, put out by ECP & The Summit Lighthouse in the mid 70’s. At the time I was impressed with this comment by Elizabeth Prophet, and duely copied it out word-for-word. She is discussing marriage and spousal relationships, but my interest is in sharing the point that she is trying to steer her followers away from misguided zeal. It is not my interest to open the door on her personal life, whether or not she “practised what she preached”, or of anyone’s experience of her not practising what she preached, or whether or not there is such a thing a “Teaching,” “Christ,” “Light,” “Ascension,”or “Judgement”, but rather that here below is her clear statement of relative love, tolerance, and espousal of religious - or non-religious - freedom, as it may be - here. Quoting Elizabeth C Prophet:
“….the question is not what your spouse believes - what IS your spouse? A person can be a living example of the Light and not have the Teaching and not have religion……are they living the life of the Christ? - That’s after all what they will be judged on - ACTION, not thoughts, ACTION is what’s going to count in the hour of judgement, right? What did you DO on earth, not what did you believe. Who CARES what you believe? You can ascend if your a Mormon or a Catholic or a Jew or a Mohammedan or What-Have_you. It’s what you DID. What did you do?…….Leave your husbands and wives alone and don’t try to drag them to Church with you….It’s what you are that counts. It’s the light that counts.” end quote.
Thanks.
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 10:49 am / #12
Annette,
Hmm. It’s what you do that’s important. Right?
Well here’s how the founders of two Ascended Master movements treated their own families: Both my dad and his protege Monroe Shearer had five children with their first wives, then left them and paid little or no child support as they went to build their grandiose movements. I have a three hour interview I recently did with Aleyda Shearer–it’s shocking. You should rethink your loyalty to the so-called “Temple of the Presence.” That whole sham was born out of betrayal of Monroe’s own family. He has treated them like dirt. At least my dad sent $100/month to his five kids. From what I understand, Monroe didn’t even do that!
And my mom’s peccadilloes and excesses are legendary. My parents were an example to no one. I cringe when I read or hear their lectures because unlike most naive followers, I understand how inconsistent, baseless and hypocritical they are. None of the “masters’” material would stand up to the most rudimentary academic analysis.
My mom got plenty of people to drag their spouses to church. Or in many cases told them they should divorce non-believers. She used to quote the bible: “Be ye not unequally yoked together.” But she did this selectively to advance her own agenda. Other times she told people to get married when it suited her.
Life is for the here and now, not the eternal. The eternal is nothing. You will have no awareness of it. Your brain is all you are and when it stops, so do you. The sooner you realize that, and what a privilege it is to be alive and have physical conscious awareness, the more value the rest of your own life will have. It may be difficult, but you should do whatever you can to overcome your faith addiction. You will feel much better. The false hopes of the spirit world are as bad or worse for your mind than drugs.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 1:57 pm / #13
Interesting reading. I know nothing at all about CUT, ECP, or any of the other historical matters discussed here. But all of it reminds me of what my teacher once said. He was asked, “if someone asks us what Buddhists believe in, what should we say?†He answered, “Say that we believe in our own experience.â€That’s pretty much been my guide. I believe in my own experience in preference to what anyone tells me, be they a scientific or a spiritual authority. (Not that I’m not capable of self-delusion. We all are. But it seems to me that in non-trivial matters, we have to wait for our own experience to reveal our self-deception to us. It does no good for someone else to say, “You’re wrong†when it comes to the things that matter most to us - such as faith. People have to be ready to hear and see for themselves that they are wrong.)
I am equally skeptical of the claims of religion and of science to explain everything. Of course, only a fool would reject scientific method as an analytical tool. That’s not what I mean. On the other hand, science does not have the answers to everything, because not every question has yet been asked - perhaps including some of the most important ones.
Here’s one example. It’s a story I tell my own students to illustrate the point that the mind is not identical with the brain. (Neither is the mind different from the brain, but that’s another argument.)
My son lost his cell phone, and his mother and I were were very worried about it. The next day he would be traveling back to boarding school, and without his cell phone, he would have no way to keep in touch with us en route.
That day, we happened to visit our friend S. I could tell you, based on my own experience of S, that she is clairvoyant, but let the facts speak for themselves. On hearing that our son’s cell phone was missing, she thought for a moment, then told him, “It’s in a pocket. It’s slipped down into a narrow space.†I asked, “Like between the cushions of a couch?†She said, “Sort of, but that’s not exactly what I had in mind.â€
You can guess the rest. My son eventually found his cell phone in the pocket of a pair of jeans that had slid down between his bed and the wall.
Mind you, S had never been to our house. She had met our son only a few times, and did not know his habits regarding his clothing or other belongings. She had no way of knowing even that the side of his bed was flush to the wall, or any other details. Neither could she have colluded with my son to hide and then find his cell phone in some pre-arranged manner. But she was right.
I can think of only two explanations for this. Either S guessed where the cell phone was by sheer luck, or she somehow knew where it was by means other than direct sensory perception. The first alternative requires belief in an almost monstrously improbable coincidence. The second explanation is the simpler, and I believe the true one. (It also conforms better with my experience of S, which is that she is indeed clairvoyant.)
Is there any existing scientific theory that can explain this? No. Does that mean it didn’t happen? Not at all. My wife, my son, and I were all witnesses to it. I am not fool enough to believe that if science cannot explain a phenomenon, therefore that phenomenon cannot exist. That would be insulting my own experience, as well as my own intelligence.
Please note that I do not offer this story as proof of anything beyond itself. It just happens to be the most clear-cut instance of clairvoyance I know of. It, and many similar experiences, have convinced me that S is indeed clairvoyant. The corollary to this is that therefore, clairvoyance must be possible.
This is what my own experience and reason tell me. There is no reason for you to believe it. I could be a liar. Or the thing could have been managed by some trickery I could not detect and cannot imagine. But I am satisfied that my own explanation, i.e., clairvoyance, is the simplest and most straightforward. That’s my working hypothesis, until something that makes more sense comes along.
I repeat, I do not offer this incident as proof of anything except that it happened. I have no idea of the underlying principles or mechanisms. Nor do I conclude from it that God, angels, or other supernatural beings exist (although the existence of such beings is one possible explanation of how it happened). I am repeating it here simply to point out that science has not yet explained everything, and that it is a fallacy to believe that just because science has not explained something, that something must not - indeed cannot - exist. That belief is contradicted by experience - mine, anyway.
By the way, my own experience also tells me that people will always look for guidance to those they believe have superior wisdom. And some people do have superior wisdom. But the test of a genuine teacher is that they refuse to take advantage of others’ faith in them for their own gain or gratification.
That’s a tough test. You might say it’s impossible, since power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Still, my experience has been that such teachers do exist. I have had the good fortune to meet more than one such.
Tibetan Buddhism has a simple test for whether a teacher is worth following: (1) do they practice what they themselves teach? and (2) do they have compassion? If the answers are yes and yes, they may be considered trustworthy.
You may argue that “spiritual†teachers are unnecessary, and furthermore, that they invariably will deceive their followers, wittingly or unwittingly. However, I think it is beyond question that the holders of certain “spiritual†traditions have valuable knowledge to impart. In many cases, such knowledge has been passed down from teacher to student for generations.
For example, Buddhist mindfulness practice has been found by Western psychologists to be therapeutic in a number of ways. Cognitive-behavioral therapists are starting to teach it to their patients routinely. Also, the Dalai Lama’s monks (who must be extraordinarily patient) have been wired to monitors of various kinds. Meditation on compassion, for instance, has been shown to alter the structure of the brain itself. (And yes, a cause-effect relationship has been shown. The longer you’ve been doing the meditation, the greater the change.)
You may then argue, “If these techniques have been proven useful, then why not remove them from their ’spiritual’ context? Why not divest them of all the religious claptrap, and just adopt what works?†The answer, of course, is that you can indeed do that. The psychologists I mentioned have done that very thing.
However, there is a fundamental difference in motivation. If you want to meditate in order to learn how to relax, then that is the greatest result you can expect. But if you want to meditate in order to cultivate insight in ways than can transform your life, then a greater commitment is called for. In such a case, I don’t think you can successfully separate the teachings from the tradition that carries them.
You see, the techniques exist in a context of accumulated knowledge and instruction (wisdom, if you like) that is a large part of their effectiveness. I don’t think they are easily separable. In other words, it’s a package deal.
Finally, I don’t think it’s necessary, in the name of reason, to devalue all “spiritual†traditions and teachers. There are a lot of charlatans out there, certainly. But they are imitating something that really exists.
I’ve seen people grow and mature in very beneficial ways as a result of finding and learning from a genuine teacher. The important thing is, at no stage in one’s relationship with such a teacher should one surrender one’s critical intelligence. If a teacher asks you to do so - to take things on faith, in other words - be very, very skeptical.
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 2:32 pm / #14
Rzangpo2,
But our senses lie. That’s where empirical methods confirmed by multiple observers come in. Subjective experience is notoriously unreliable.
The little psychic anecdote about the cell-phone proves nothing at all. It’s classic though that these types of stories are held up as some kind of proof of a supernatural reality. If you want to overturn the entire standard model of physics, you’ve got to do a little better than that! You say you’re not trying to prove the supernatural and then you turn around and claim S is clairvoyant as the “simplest explanation”! You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Notice the words “convinced me that S is clairvoyant.” Notice how that shuts down your critical thinking. And on incredibly weak, circumstantial and anecdotal evidence.
No one has ever claimed “science explains everything.” In fact, science does just the opposite, avoiding jumping to just the type of conclusions you have.
For more on this, please read Atheist Metaphysics and Religious Equivocation
Is that the only test for a genuine teacher? How about if they have real knowlege or wisdom? And I mean the kind that can be proven. Not vague aphorisms and feel-good new-age jargon.
Again, you fall back on personal experience, (saying you’ve met such people) which is always fallible. Why should I take your word for anything? Why should you take my word for anything? Empirical methods take both of us out of the equation, and that’s as it should be.
Meditation has never been proved to do anything than cause relaxation and changes in brain-waves. I think it’s beneficial to the brain, the same way exercise is beneficial to the body. But making further “spiritual” claims is a totally subjective and therefore suspect enterprise.
Really exists according to who?
A mentor can be of high value. But in a very limited scope. Acceptance of unconditional and unchecked authority is the first step to domination and loss of self-esteem.
I agree that we should be very, very skeptical. But that seems to contradict everything else that you’re saying in your comment, which involves taking an awful, awful lot on faith.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 2:38 pm / #15
P.S. Having read this thread over, I suppose I should clarify my own position with regard to atheism.
I am not agnostic, in the sense of doubting whether or not God exists. I am convinced that God - at least the God of the Bible - cannot possibly exist, for a host of perfectly sound, logical reasons.
On the other hand, I don’t consider myself an atheist in the sense of “anti-theist.” I have no a priori position about other spiritual traditions, be they monotheistic, polytheistic, pantheistic, or anything else. As others have said on this site, the only way to evaluate whether a spiritual tradition is beneficial or not is to note its effect on individual followers. Appeals to history only lead to never-ending arguments. Has the Catholic Church done more harm than good since its foundation, or vice versa? I have no idea. I don’t even know how one would would presume to measure such a thing.
If I’m not a theist, an agnostic, or an atheist, what am I? Some Buddhists prefer the term “non-theistic” because it doesn’t imply being for or against anyone. It means exactly what it literally says - that the existence or nonexistence of God (or gods) is just not an issue for us.
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 2:44 pm / #16
I disagree with this criterion. That would be argument from consequence. The only way to “test” a spiritual tradition would be to see if any of its claims could be proven.
I am an anti-theist only when people’s subjective beliefs get in the way of political freedoms or contradict the discoveries of science. Then I grant religion absolutely no quarter. It must be kept out of the public square.
But if theists can be content to read, study, and worship in private and leave the rest of us alone, then I have no problem with them doing so.
But it’s strictly entertainment. No different than if they were playing Backgammon, Dungeons and Dragons, or Twister.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 2:55 pm / #17
BlackSun,
Oh well. I gave it my best shot. To sum up my own position: no, I don’t believe in God per se. Neither do I believe that all spiritual traditions are without value. As I said above, the only way to evaluate whether a spiritual tradition is beneficial or not is to note its effect on individual followers.
BTW, you neatly sidestepped the question of just how S found the cell phone.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 2:58 pm / #18
P.S. I can’t agree with you that argument from consequence is invalid. Most of the claims that spiritual traditions made are untestable anyway. But if following one makes someone a better person, good.
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 3:03 pm / #19
RZangpo2,
No, I didn’t. It doesn’t matter how she found the cell-phone. A lucky guess? Point is, it’s up to you to prove the implications of your story. Carl Sagan would note that it is another version of “counting the hits, ignoring the misses.” You’d have to test S in multiple situations of lost phones, and see how many times she got it right. If she did it better than random chance (50% of the time) then and only then could you conclude that something was going on. At that point, you’d have to determine a method for her insight or “clairvoyance,” which would involve coming up with a working theory.
But don’t bother. Plenty of well-funded experiments have taken place under controlled conditions, and no one has ever come up with better-than-chance results that were statistically significant.
One more thing: Just because you gave it your best shot doesn’t mean your premises are correct. I’m hitting you with a logically valid challenge: hold up your spiritual tradition to scientific scrutiny–and all you can do is repeat the “appeal to consequence.”
Just sayin’
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 3:07 pm / #20
Exactly my point. And so begins all the mischief. The invisible dragon in your garage is different from no dragon in your garage exactly how??
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 3:19 pm / #21
P.P.S. I take exception to your characterizing my post this way:
“You say you’re not trying to prove the supernatural and then you turn around and claim S is clairvoyant as the ’simplest explanation’! You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.”
I am not trying to prove the supernatural. There may be a perfectly natural explanation for clairvoyance; I just don’t know what it is.
As for taking exception to the words “I am convinced,” I don’t follow your point. If one observes a particular phenomenon over and over, then one can reasonably say, by inductive reasoning, that one is convinced of its existence.
You say that you don’t accept anecdotal evidence as evidence. I don’t see why not. In some cases - such as this one - anecdotal evidence is the best evidence we have. Even anecdotal evidence must be explained. Of course experimental, verifiable, repeatable evidence would be better, but I don’t know of any.
Meanwhile, another anecdote. A friend of mine was attending a talk by a teacher, L. At a certain point during the talk, my friend thought, “He looks like a frog.” L said, without missing a beat, “…or thinking that someone looks like a frog,” to illustrate the point he was making.
What is the best explanation for that? Dismissing it as an anecdote does not explain it. Nor do I think that illusion or coincidence are convincing explanations.
I hold no brief for the supernatural - none at all. My point, as I stated, is simply that some people hold the belief - in the name of “reason” or “skepticism” - that if existing scientific theory cannot explain a thing, then that thing must not exist. If you don’t think that way, then I congratulate you on your open-mindedness.
A last comment: I do not see the relevance of your point that “the senses lie.” The point is so self-evident as to be trivial. But I do not see how it relates to the subject at hand, unless you are saying that my wife, my son, my friend, and I all perceived things that didn’t exist. That argument is so far-fetched it does not deserve a response.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 3:30 pm / #22
P.P.S. Of course, you are right. My anecdotes do not prove that clairvoyance exists. They are just very strong (I think) anecdotal evidence that it exists. As such, I would argue that if one denies the simplest, most obvious explanation for them - clairvoyance - then one is obliged to provide an alternative explanation.
As far as I know, you are correct: clairvoyance has never been experimentally proven. All I am saying that it is the simplest explanation for the kinds of phenomena I’ve described. (Occam’s Razor, you know.) You imply that these could be “lucky guesses.” To that, I repeat what I said before: the “lucky guess” explanation requires belief in an almost monstrously improbable coincidence.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 3:35 pm / #23
P.P.P.S. There is no invisible dragon in my garage. You are mischaracterizing my argument as a belief in something for which there is no evidence. I am speaking of something for which there is some evidence, anecdotal though it be.
A final (?) note: the people I know who are clairvoyant (such as S and L) have absolutely no interest in proving the fact. Maybe that is a precondition of clairvoyance; I don’t know.
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 3:51 pm / #24
RZangpo2,
That’s argumentum ad populum. It does not matter how many people believe a thing. It doesn’t make it true. At the risk of being pedantic, the earth looks flat, but it’s not. People used to think it was, en masse.
Clearly you have never read Hume on the problem of induction. Some people have understood Hume to be challenging the efficacy of empiricism. But when applying Karl Popper’s test of falsifiability, this weakness of empirical methods can be largely overcome.
No. You are misapplying Occam’s Razor. Again, if she was to score above 50% on repeated trials of finding lost objects, then maybe you would be justified in taking note. But that would still leave you to come up with a theory. Otherwise, all you would have is an unknown mental phenomenon. Not “clairvoyance.”
Listen. You need to acquaint yourself with basic critical thinking skills and understand materialist realism. I’m not here to go over the basics every time someone brings them up. These are all questions that have been answered many times over. You need to read at least some of the books on the reading list, like Sagan’s Demon Haunted World, or Blackburn’s Truth: A Guide then we will talk.
Peace.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 4:01 pm / #25
RZangpo2: “Most of the claims that spiritual traditions make are untestable anyway.”
BlackSun: “Exactly my point.”
The point being what? The fact that claims based on faith are not provable either way is, again, so self-evident as to be trivial.
We have a fundamental disagreement. You believe that a spiritual tradition can only be valid if it can prove its claims. By that logic, a spiritual tradition can never be valid; neither can any spiritual belief or experience. Q.E.D. But you’ve proven nothing, except the (again) trivial point that faith is not objectively verifiable.
My argument in favor of at least some spiritual traditions, on the other hand, is based on utility. Do the followers of religion X or teacher Y thereby become better people? If the answer is yes, then I would argue that that in itself establishes the validity of the tradition in question.
[Please note, I am not arguing (as some do) that faith is necessary to morality. Any fool can see that it isn't.]
To bring this to a more personal level: you have been hurt, and have seen others hurt, by what I would characterize as blind faith. You know what? So have I. I was educated in the Orthodox Jewish tradition, and couldn’t get away from it fast enough. The people who taught me routinely said one thing and did another, or tried to make me believe “facts” for which there was no evidence at all. At times, their hypocrisy rose to the level of abuse. I do not defend people like this; let them defend themselves if they can.
What I do defend is faith based on evidence. That evidence, to me, is utility. If it works as advertised, it’s fine with me. If it doesn’t, I’ve no use for it.
Such an argument from utility can only apply to concrete cases. The major world religions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism) are so huge that both the best and the worst of human nature can easily be found in them. I would not try to argue for something so broad. On the other hand, genuine teachers (as I’ve defined them above) are to be found within them. Needles in a haystack, I agree. But there are some nonetheless.
BlackSun / February 13th, 2008, 4:06 pm / #26
If not objective, then you are relying on “other ways of knowing.” That puts you really out on a limb.
You want to believe that stuff, go ahead. But don’t pretend you are basing it on anything other than your own desire that it be true.
RZangpo2 / February 13th, 2008, 4:15 pm / #27
I am talking about perception, not belief. But no matter. I agree that we’ve taken this discussion as far as we can.
I don’t have time to read all the books you mention. (I don’t even have time for this discussion; I’m going to be late for dinner as it is.)
Life is short. If we are wise, we determine for ourselves what has value, and pursue it. You have no time to go my way, and I have no time to go yours. We are ships passing in the night, as it were.
Nevertheless, I wish you only the best.
Louis / February 13th, 2008, 10:37 pm / #28
wrong.
They just tend to repeatedly fail testing
Again
and again
and again
It’s not that they can’t be tested, it is that they fail testing repeatedly.
Your friend, who you identify only by initial, didn’t make a claim that had astronomical odds. She said pocket, ‘IN BROAD VAGUE TERMS!’ She didn’t even specify coat, pants or a pocket on a backpack. She also didn’t identify what pair of pants? Jeans (most likely for a youth) Khakis (also a good choice) cords? color? Left pocket? right? etc.
There isn’t really anything astounding about this anecdotal evidence. If you truly believe she is psychic, I would hope someone who claims critical thought would require more evidence.
It is actually easy to set up a test and you could do it yourself. If she passes with better than chance, (chance = she got lucky guessing) then retest. If she can repeat at better than chance, then have her tested independently.
Otherwise, you look like a gullible moron, NOT a critical thinker.
RZangpo2 / February 14th, 2008, 8:41 pm / #29
Louis,
You conveniently overlook the fact that my friend’s statement had two parts: that the phone was (a) in a pocket (b) that had fallen down into a narrow space. Yes, anyone might have guessed that the my son left the phone in his pocket. It’s the combination of “pocket” and “narrow space” that, in my opinion, puts the thing beyond the realm of coincidence.
As to my identifying my friend only by her initial, I don’t see what that has to do with my argument. I did not ask her permission to post her full name here, and I see no need to do so. It’s what she did that matters, not what her full name is.
Finally, I take offense at your using the descriptive phrase “gullible moron.” I see no need to descend to name-calling in this discussion.
RZangpo2 / February 14th, 2008, 8:49 pm / #30
wrong.
They just tend to repeatedly fail testing
Again
and again
and again
It’s not that they can’t be tested, it is that they fail testing repeatedly.
Again, you and I disagree. How can anyone test an article of faith, such as whether God exists, whether Jesus died for your sins, whether Mohammed was divinely inspired, or whether the Buddha was truly enlightened? (I don’t believe in the first three; I do believe in the fourth.) These matters of faith are not amenable to the sort of testing I believe you are referring to. Or am I missing something?
Louis / February 15th, 2008, 12:52 am / #31
Ok my last view of this thread was of a pre-post approved state and it was much smaller…
Anyway.
I didn’t overlook it. Fallen down a narrow space is still vague. I mean if the bloody thing was right out in the open, chances are it would have been seen. SUH!
If I was to hedge the bet, I would have said something similar… Makes apologetics easier when the details don’t quite match up.
I am still underwhelmed.
Here is one test.
I know the above is for the deluded Christian perspective and it is a rather deadpan delivery, but it still makes my point.
As to whether Buddha was enlightened? Excuse me, ‘Truly Enlightened’… that is the claim? As opposed to, erm… ‘Falsely Enlightened?’ or ‘Imitation Enlightened?’ …he had good stage lighting?
You mean Prajna: pure and unqualified knowledge?
Sorry man, I’ll take the qualified knowledge any day over that gobbledygook.
I waited for Sean to reply before replying to you. Why?
Take a look at the title of the thread genius! You’ve hijacked the thread subject. You opened with the statement:
I didn’t initially reply, because I thought there was a good chance Sean might just delete your stuff. Once he replied, then I responded.
So you think I am name calling?
You post something that really doesn’t belong in this thread, present anecdotal evidence as proof, (yes, in your head it is sufficient; to the critical thinker, not so much.)
Have you even read the rules for submissions?
HERE
Not legitimately testing your friend, before convincing yourself of something when the evidence is VERY weak… and then claim critical thought…
Yeah, you do seem like a gullible moron. If I stop there, I have let you off easy.
Annette C. / February 15th, 2008, 1:11 am / #32
It’s still name calling, more suited to a “Jerry Springer Show” type site. Maybe you should have a “Mud Wrestling Thread”.
RZangpo2 / February 15th, 2008, 6:23 am / #33
Louis,
Your point that I hijacked the thread is well taken. (Still, you could simply have said so, rather than calling me a “gullible moron.”) OTOH, didn’t ECP herself claim clairvoyance? If so, that would make my contributions at least tangentially relevant.
I have one more point to make; then I’ll shut up.
I witnessed the cell phone incident first-hand; the “frog” story (which none of you have addressed) was told to me by a friend I consider trustworthy. I have the following story at third-hand, so take it with as many grains of salt as you like. I offer it not as just another anecdote of claimed clairvoyance, but also to point out the problems with demanding experimental proof of the phenomenon.
My teacher was supposed to be an incarnate lama; that is, someone who incarnates over and over again for the benefit of others. He said that as a child, he sometimes had memories of his previous life; but as he got older, these faded away and became less frequent.
When he was about eight, he and his attendants visited a monastery where he had never been before. (Not in this life anyway; his predecessor had been there.) When he got there, he recognized the place, and was able to recall (without being cued) where everything in the monastery was located, and even who some of the people were. (This is more impressive when one realizes the vast size, innumerable rooms, and quasi-random layout of these places.)
I don’t offer this story so much as proof that it happened, since I can’t personally verify it. But on its face, it implies that clairvoyance happens spontaneously and unpredictably, and cannot be willed to happen by the subject. (This conforms with other accounts I have heard.)
If this is so, it would seem to raise an insuperable obstacle to experimental verification.
Finally - to return to the topic of the thread- it seems quite possible to me that someone might be clairvoyant, and yet be deluded about the meaning of what they perceive. This happens all the time in the case of ordinary sense perceptions. We are mistaken about what we perceive; we misinterpret coincidences; we draw unjustified conclusions; we convince ourselves we have perceived things that never happened. (Consider, for example, the notorious unreliability of eyewitness testimony.)
This being the case, it seems to me possible to reconcile the conflicting accounts given above of ECP. Some say she was inspired (or at least, inspiring) while BlackSun, who has reason to know, says that she was contradictory, deluded, self-serving, and destructive.
I can well imagine that both are true. As another teacher of mine says, it is no big deal to get information about other people through clairvoyance (once you know how to do it). The real challenge is to know how to be helpful by knowing what to say and when to say it. Blurting out everything one knows about a person can do more harm than good, as ordinary experience tells us.
Gullible Moron signing off.
RZangpo2 / February 15th, 2008, 7:52 am / #34
You are still distorting my comments. Of course the cell phone was in a concealed place; otherwise it would not have been lost.
Guessing that my son had left it in a pocket had a pretty reasonable chance of being right just by coincidence. Saying that it had slipped down into a narrow space is not the same as saying it was merely concealed; it is pretty specific, and I would argue that the odds are against such a statement being correct just by chance. However, if you multiply the probability of both statements being correct, you can only conclude is was a “lucky guess” by assuming an almost monstrous degree of coincidence, as I said before.
Since the cell phone could potentially have been in an infinite number of places, and since the statements made by S were descriptive but not exact (in the sense of providing precise coordinates), I suppose it is impossible to calculate the exact probability of either statement on its own being correct, or of both together being correct. “In a pocket” - reasonable possibility of being right by sheer coincidence. “Slipped down into a narrow space” - more specific, and hence less likely to be correct by sheer coincidence. Both statements together - a degree of specificity that is almost impossible to account for by sheer coincidence (without, as I said, assuming an almost monstrous improbability).
I know my son, his habits, how he treats his belongings, etc. Yes, I would have told him to look in his pockets. Yes, I would have asked him whether he had dropped it somewhere. I would not have asked him whether it might be in a pocket that had slipped down and become trapped in a narrow space. That is a degree of specificity that is beyond guesswork, IMO.
As I said before, I know that the incident is not experimental proof of anything. I’m just saying that in my opinion, clairvoyance is the simplest explanation for it. So far, no one in this thread has offered an alternative explanation, except to try to dismiss the story by mocking it, and to say that it can be explained as a “lucky guess” - an explanation that, as I said, I consider to be wildly improbable on its face.
I don’t see how sarcastic and disingenuous comments like this one help your position. You know very well I’m not talking about stage lighting. A quick and dirty definition of enlightenment in the Buddhist sense is “having completely eliminated self-deception, and developed wisdom to its fullest extent.” How can one prove that anyone has attained such a state, much less someone who lived 2,500 years ago? Personally, I rely on my own experience of my teachers and my observation of their students, but let’s not get into that argument again - I think we’ve covered it. (Inductive reasoning and all that.)
Someone once asked the Dalai Lama to explain the teaching of Buddhism in one sentence. He said, “If you can’t help someone, at least don’t hurt them.” That’s a pretty good summation of ethics, in my opinion, whether one subscribes to Buddhism, atheism, or any other “-ism.” At least it beats “if you can’t help someone (or if they refuse your “help”), then beat the crap out of them,” which seems to be the guiding principle of many.
RZangpo2 / February 15th, 2008, 10:45 am / #35
I mentioned two tests of a genuine teacher (the second of which has two branches). To quote my earlier post,
Whether or not they have superior wisdom to impart (and I would argue that my own teachers do, in the form of psychological insight, compassion, skillful ways of working with others, etc.), surely you would agree that any teacher who passes the above two tests is at least harmless. (I am using “harmless” here in a limited sense. I do not refer to whether or not the teachings themselves are true - that is for individuals to decide for themselves. I mean that one who passes the above tests is not likely to harm their students either materially or psychologically.)
Judging by what you tell us here, ECP, though she may have had the best of intentions, ultimately failed both of these tests. That is tragic, and I have nothing but compassion for her and for those she may have harmed.
I disagree. As I explain above, meditation on compassion has been shown to cause changes in the architecture of the brain itself. (My source is a recent article in the New York Times. If I find a link, I’ll post it here.)
Has it been experimentally proven that meditation causes insight to increase, self-deception to decrease, psychological resilience and compassion to grow stronger, etc.? Not that I know of. Perhaps that’s because of the difficulty of designing such an experiment (how to measure the above-mentioned qualities, how long to continue the study, etc. On the latter question, I would argue for a period of years - the longer the better - which could make such a study unwieldy). Or perhaps it’s just because no one has gotten around to it yet.
Are you suggesting that I should wait for experimental proof of the above-mentioned benefits before taking up meditation? I hope not. As I said, life is too short. One has to take such evidence as one has - even if it is anecdotal, or the product of inductive reasoning - and use one’s own judgment to evaluate it. Then you decide.
Admittedly, in such a case one cannot reliably predict the outcome of the choice one makes. But life is like that.
In any case, I think the position your words imply is unreasonable. If we waited for experimental verification before we did anything (ate anything, went anywhere, etc.), ordinary life would become impossible. Your position also raises the question of how much evidence is enough - indeed, if any amount of evidence can ever be enough.
As I stated above - and you agreed - not everything in life has yet been tested and proved. People with common sense understand this. They take note of experimental proof where it exists, but do not base their major life decisions on the existence or non-existence of such proof. (For example, could one have proven that I would be happy with my wife? Or for that matter, that I would not have been happier single, or with someone else? There would have to be at least two of me to perform a controlled experiment, and in any case, by the time the results were in, I would be dead.)
The decision whether to follow a particular spiritual tradition or teacher, I would argue, is more in the nature of “whom shall I marry?”, rather than “can its claims be proved?” It also helps to be able to think for oneself, and to decide for oneself whether something is beneficial or harmful. In any particular case, experimental proof of benefit or harm is unlikely to exist. One has to use one’s own judgment to determine that, based on what one has learned and experienced. At the end of the day, that is what we base most of our decisions on.
To cite just one example, you seem to hold the opinion that on balance, ECP did more harm than good. Others who have posted here seem to disagree. Did you conduct a study to decide the question before leaving CUT? Of course not. You looked at your own experience - first-hand as well as that reliably reported by others - and decided for yourself. What else could anyone in your position reasonably have done?
RZangpo2 / February 15th, 2008, 11:18 am / #36
I am glad that you and I have no disagreement, then. I do not restrict anyone else’s political freedoms. Nor have I contradicted the discoveries of science in this or any other public forum.
I have merely pointed out that some phenomena have not yet been scientifically explained. I have further stated that it is unreasonable to expect science to discover timely answers to certain questions, especially those on which we base our major life decisions.
Finally, I have posited that the value of at least some spiritual traditions, teachings, and teachers can be established by proving their benefits in concrete cases.
I have not contradicted anything that has been proven by scientific experiment to be true. That would be foolish, and I would not presume to do such a thing.
Signed,
Gullible Moron
Annette C. / February 15th, 2008, 2:44 pm / #37
RZangpo2, - I really enjoyed your entries on this post.
Signed,
“Faith Addict”.
Louis / February 15th, 2008, 7:38 pm / #38
…
RZangpo2 / February 16th, 2008, 1:53 pm / #39
I’m glad you liked them - thanks!
GM
Danielle / March 2nd, 2008, 6:57 pm / #40
is sean really on here or am i really delirious right now and i just wasted 20 minutes of my time.
BlackSun / March 2nd, 2008, 7:07 pm / #41
Danielle,
Yes, this is my site. I comment here often using the handle BlackSun.
Annette C. / March 28th, 2008, 3:25 am / #42
This comment is conversational; unwinding here and thought I might write.
Socially things are a little quieter for me since I relinquished the “Teachings of the Ascended Masters” as taught by Mark L. and Elizabeth Clare Prophet. Things that were once held important no longer are, so therefore I can’t email ‘Masters’ people with this or that anecdote. Which is COOL! Don’t get me wrong, I am not complaining.
It is great to have a convo with someone I meet about the rock concerts they love to go to, without that undercurrent of thought in my head that is judging them or the music!
Socially things were alot worse for me when I left the King James Bible Fundamentalist Christian group ‘Adelaide Revival Centre’ when I was 21, (1984). I had been there for 6 years, and married in it.
I was in an informal Summit Lighthouse group for only 1 year. 2 weeks ago I sold my $450 worth of Summit Uni Press books. The “Masters” can come to me for advice.
It’s an adventure to leave a cult where everything is black and white, ‘Us and Them’, and to go out into the world where it’s all grey, and colours, and it’s up to oneself to work it out. But I would say I was very uninhibited from age 21 on, free, rebellious for sure, self destructive a bit…all the free teen stuff that was effectively postponed by religious and related social containment. There were good things about that particular experience like drama training and singing and creative outlets. But I guess in the face of the blinkered oppression the colours faded.
After I left, perhaps the self destruction lasted a bit too long, a bit too intensely, but that was my choice. Maybe I wanted addiction, religious, love, substance, life risking behavior until one realises life is preferable.
I did not equate my much earlier involvement with the ‘Revival’ group, and the 20 years later involvement with a small ( 6 serious people) local Summit Lighthouse group, until I really looked at some of the things writtern in BSJ (and all that very rude, insulting and dramatic commentary!!!) (hey, chill..let’s face it you probably get a certain percentage of hits, including mine, that are waiting for the next dramatic exchanges to happen in the commentary).
What I mean is, I thought that my involvement in the fundie church was totally separate to the Masters activity involvement, and then I also considered that the 6 week involvement in AA I had before Summit Lighthouse, was also a cult experience. An experience six weeks had tired me of, saying ‘I AM an Alcoholic’ every time, people pressuring you to go to meetings, go to meetings. SO much judgement, self depreciation, fear, control, and if one did not say ‘I am an alcoholic’, or go to meetings, then one was considered to be ‘in denial’.
And the members don’t want to socialise with you unless you are doing and saying what they say.
But that’s cool! “Holier/Smarter than thou” attitude, something any “ist” (scientologist/atheist/communist/chrISTian) is capable of.
So meeting up with the Summit Teachings and saying ‘I AM a being of Violet Fire’ was a better idea at the time, which was October 2006.
I welcome any tonne of intellectual rubble piled apon me by the studious Alumini Atheists (see above statement about drama).
That’s entertainment.
Cannot Say / April 22nd, 2008, 7:59 am / #43
Sean, every now and again I revist the blacksunjournal to catchup on your writings of CUT. with the latest news regarding the YFZ ranch, I’ve found myself in discussions with my family and fellow CUT friends on the subject of cults. My mother told me when the CUT came to Livingston, she remembers the local catholic church saying that its families had opened its door to any CUT youth who wanted to escape it. Not sure if this really happened, or if this is just another embelleshed memory of those days. I am a true CUT baby myself, having recently turned 21. I would say I’m still involved in some capacity, but having moved from MT, I find myself more distant, and yet, I cannot silence the thoughts that were so ingrained in me since I was born, I feel like a sinner when I enjoy any intimate moments, and immediately justify my issue as unresolved karma from my past lives. sigh. I think having a Faith is good for me, but I do realized I say that because I absolutely cannot imagine thinking any different.
As elementary students, we talked about you Sean, like you where a prince.
My youths generation is not farming the Ranch but created the teen retreats; glad to see Merci’s paper up, remember her departure, but mostly remember how much I missed her, our friendship was never the same.
Anyway, I like your site, glad you have it, Ive even checked out hexanet.
ps. on my own website I just made black & red my theme, because i enjoy the design, but havent brought myself to show my parents or still involved CUT friends of mine, because of what they will say about the colors. SIGH. YFZ ranch kids couldnt wear red either, but for a little bit of different reason.
cathy / September 30th, 2008, 1:36 am / #44
I just figured out that Mother had a face lift. The word from the organization for years was that she had gone on the macrobiotic diet and had miraculously changed her appearance. A bunch of bull probably! I would not be pointing this out if the organization had not been so zealous about the importance of this certain diet and held Mother up as an “example”. I actually dropped macrobiotics in the late 90s for a diet called the Zone and remember how I thought I was going “against” the Messenger.
Rilioffipsy / January 21st, 2009, 7:56 pm / #45
Nothing seems to be easier than seeing someone whom you can help but not helping.
I suggest we start giving it a try. Give love to the ones that need it.
God will appreciate it.
Amaterasu / January 22nd, 2009, 11:02 am / #46
Why do you think that people will be motivated to help people because this "God" of your will appreciate it? Because we should be scared if we displease him/her/it; because we as a species are so morally bereft of common decency that a railing murderous threatening omnipotent dictator is required to wring it out of us?
Your suggestion that "someone" in need is being ignored is vague, condescending and assumptive. Are you suggesting that ECP is not receiving adequate care?
The best love you could give would be to yourself, by coming out of the poisonous fog of religious confusion.
I recommend clearing out your library for a start and picking up anything by Christopher Hitchens, or anything listed under the Black Sun Bookshelf tab.
I know from experience that religious/new age books, are very limiting, and if you base your mind on their contents, you become a mental and emotional cripple.
AmenASHnandF / January 23rd, 2009, 8:30 pm / #47
We all need to love for loves sake, not because it'll make some power happy. Just a thought.
dale / January 29th, 2009, 9:01 pm / #48
Hi Sean,
I’ve been enjoying your website here. I was a long-time Church member, who was on a face-recognition and exchange-of-greeting level with you and your sisters. (And of course I saw you all when you were up on the stage.) I first met you at S.U. in Winter, 1976 at La Tourelle, and during the 4 months or so of Staff I served after. My brother, Dennis, and his wife, Kathleen, knew you at the Chicago T.C. for a while, later on.
Anyway, despite our very casual encounters, I have always gotten a feeling of core sincerity and integrity from you. Same with Erin. And I’ve never been able to credit anyone who implies or outright charges that either of you would lie or fabricate things about your mother and the Church. And that extends to Tatiana, and I’ve come to realize also to Moira (of course, I was there when Moira was painted red, and got swayed by that for a long time).
[Your site says my comment is too long, so I'll finish it with another post...]
Dale
dale / January 29th, 2009, 9:03 pm / #49
I was wondering if you could expand a little on the subject of the see-through altar photo of Mother in the blue dress. Somewhere on this site you said it was a double-exposure (I can't remember which thread). You stated it as a fact, but didn’t go into it much further. Do you have some further details? For example, did someone in Photography/AV do it and then present it to your mom. Or did she request it. Were you there when it was released. Whatever you can offer that would verify it was indeed manufactured and not a miracle photo. I never felt entirely comfortable with it, even though I was mostly a believer.
I think it’s important to lay the matter to rest as far as possible, since it’s held up as proof positive of your mother’s exalted spiritual attainment. And if it’s a fabrication, then it needs to be removed from any list of such proofs. Let people evaluate her for what she really did, and was, both good and bad—without false props.
Thanks a lot, Sean. All the best to you!
Dale
BlackSun / January 30th, 2009, 5:39 am / #50
dale, thanks for the vote of confidence. None of us has fabricated anything. We may differ in degree or interpretation, but we all experienced the same things.
BlackSun / January 30th, 2009, 5:49 am / #51
dale, that photo was created by combination of either Larry Stanley (or whoever was manning the altar camera) or Ken Paolini through a double exposure. Initially I remembered that he talked about it in his book. But I think it was personal correspondence.
My mom kind of let people promote it as miraculous, though I think she also knew at some level it was trick photography. There was a lot of rationalizing "well she has so much light she might as well have been transparent" or "how do we know it wasn't a miracle." It fed so easily into people's wishful thinking they did not question it.
I duplicated the trick in photoshop in about 5 minutes. All you need is a photo taken on a tripod of the empty background, then bring the person into the frame and take another shot. Place the two layers on top of one another and set the transparency to about 50%, voila, instant miracle! With mom's altar photo it either happened in camera (film failed to advance, or double-exposure button pushed [Nikons had those]) or on an enlarger (deliberate).
It's amazing how many people have asked me about that silly photo. Is that really how they think God would prove his messenger, the Vicar of Christ? Through something that could be so easily faked? It's almost as bad as pareidolia (seeing visions of saints/masters in rust stains and on pancakes).
dale / January 30th, 2009, 7:55 am / #52
Thanks, Sean! That's about what I thought; and that your mom "let people promote it as miraculous, though I think she also knew at some level it was trick photography" is less culpable than if she had special-ordered it–which some who are quite bitter toward your mom might be quick to automatically believe of her.
I'm looking forward to reading Erin and Tatiana's book of Mother's recollections. I've noticed the Summit Lighthouse just published a similarly-titled book. Know anything about the difference? I expect I'll have to read both before I'm done, though!
Kind regards,
Dale
Amaterasu / January 30th, 2009, 9:16 pm / #53
Even if the unusual photo was singularly unexplainable, or even a "miracle", it still means nothing about the teachings said from the altar. If she levitated on the stage at each dictation, it STILL means nothing about the quality or supposed "divinity" of the messenger, does not say anything about the morality of anything or the existence of any ascended masters. David Hume puts it very well: "What is more likely? That the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour, and in a way that you approve, or that you've made a mistake?".
As far as miracles go, if being raising up after being dead was such a big deal that ones life should be epitomized, why didn't everyone worship all those whose graves were supposedly opened at the time of the resurrection?
I know I digress, but superstitious beliefs are for babies.
Some african tribes incidentally believe that if the clitoris is left intact that it will kill the mother, the baby, the grandparents, expand like a vine through the head of the woman and kill her..etc etc. Very handy belief to ensure longevity of inhuman ritual.
Trick Photo - accident or not: very handy to keep paying customers cheques in the mail.
So some photo is doubly exposed and now this religion is flawless and divine? I-don't-think-so.
I know everyone has already said the above more or less. Just having my own little morning rant.
TitforTat / January 31st, 2009, 2:29 am / #54
Blacksun
Seems like youve had a pretty interesting existence so far. Im curious, do you golf?
BlackSun / January 31st, 2009, 2:38 am / #55
TitforTat,
I have played, but not for years. I enjoy it. Have to dig out the old clubs though, I'm left-handed. You?
TitforTat / January 31st, 2009, 3:05 am / #56
Yes I love golfing, actually its very enlightening comparing my life to my game lol. Where abouts in the States are you. Maybe the wife and I will take a road trip this summer and take you out for a round.
John
BlackSun / January 31st, 2009, 3:12 am / #57
TitforTat,
Los Angeles, CA. I'd love to if you're in the area. Cheers.
Peace / May 10th, 2009, 10:54 pm / #58
Very interesting…. ASCENSION.. so many New Age Channels and guru talk about it.. but to date we have NO ONE who has performed it….. if after 30 years for a lot of these people NO ONE HAS ASCENDED then this subject could be a SCAM… or I know… the STUDENTS did not APPLY the wisdom… that is the fall back place.
Peace / May 10th, 2009, 10:54 pm / #59
Part 2
I was a memeber of one of these types of groups… at the time it did enrich my life…. I divorced becuase hubby would not jump on the band wagon… I spent well over 300K to gain wisdom… funny thing after the late 90's I stopped and had enought… as I look back… what was I thinking. smile. Don't get me wrong … I did learn how to meditate and can I trance channel.. but WHERE IS THAT INFORMATION coming from…. How do I know these things…. I question it all…. The information I think is like a fairy tail…. becuase most of the stuff can not be applied to this life or used in any usable way. I look at it now…. as a way to entertain yourself… I noticed that when you are in a CULT you are SOOOOooooo SPECIAL….. so says the CULT LEADER… but today the many New Age leaders are growing old…. needing face lifts.. over and over…. just like everyone else in the world. They have not MASTERED LIFE or the AGEING Process…. yes.. they all have lived a life with a BIG FAT BANK ACCOUNT but so has others who have good businesses… Now. I belive that ALL New AGE Leaders are just running a business… the ASCENDED MASTER BUSINESS…. and by the way.. it is NOT CHEAP… you must PAY to play. LOL
Peace / May 10th, 2009, 11:01 pm / #60
I would say in the end … perhaps it is a tool to cause you to look more deeply within self when all is said and done. I have no desire to GO AGAIN to these things…. I look at the past web sites.. and see they are SELLING the same WISDOM with new faces…. perhaps it is all just a big game…. I know so many people who destroyed their family life to continue to study,, then years later I found out about the DRUGS… SEX and Rock N ROLL… I never was in that group … but when I found out the LEADER was I became sick… oh they can justify it all… BE ALL YOU CAN BE in the MASTERS GROUP…. that is the message…. SUPER NORMAL POWERS… but not even the leader was able to PROVE the message.
I think for many who belonged to this group… with Elizabeth are coming to some rude awakenings now….. it is a shame that the MYSTERIES…. and MAGICE is simply not probable in this world
vip-telefon.su / September 24th, 2009, 11:30 pm / #61
Iphone 3GS 32Gb оптом и в розницу.
До 10шт. 28000р.
До 30шт. 27000р.
До 50шт. 26500р.
Свыше 50шт. цена договорнаÑ.
ÐаходимÑÑ Ð¼Ñ‹ в РоÑÑии г. Калининград
100% предоплата. ДоÑтавка макÑимум 15 дней. Перевод денег через любые ÑпоÑобы переводов.
Возможен Ñамовывоз из г. Калининград, без оÑущеÑÑ‚Ð²Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð¿Ñ€ÐµÐ´Ð¾Ð¿Ð»Ð°Ñ‚Ñ‹.
ICQ 356391652
моб. 891114622668
Boris.Soroka / September 25th, 2009, 2:31 pm / #62
Only from October 1st 2009 Tom-Maher.com offers you exchange From Wire to E-gold without comossion!
[quote]The company information that was provided is that they are in Poland:
Address: Majewskiego 14, Warsaw, Poland.
Phone: +48-22-219-5184 or +1-646-419-4127
Fax: (646) 478-9144.
The person, Boris Soroka, had two email addresses: hr@tom-maher.com and tom.maher.inc@gmail.com[/quote]
JohninAspen / September 30th, 2009, 11:12 pm / #63
Sean,
How can I read or hear that interview with Aleyda Shearer?
BlackSun / October 3rd, 2009, 3:16 am / #64
John, right now it's unpublished. I plan to include portions of it in any documentary I may release. But I also have plans someday to create an online archive of some of the material. Frankly, It's taken me a lot longer to get through the material and make the documentary than what I would have liked.
Loorawalm / November 9th, 2009, 2:47 am / #65
Hello to All the Guests and Members.
My computer worked slowly, too much errors. Help me, please to fix buggs on my computer.
I used Windows XP.
Thanks,
Loorawalm
Cattluflaxy / November 25th, 2009, 7:02 am / #66
http://noblis.net/webcam/
Виртуальный ÑÐµÐºÑ Ð¿Ð¾ вебкамере.
http://www.ukraine-bride.com/webcam/
СÑылки на вебкам порно чаты.
Love Poems & Quotes / January 30th, 2010, 10:34 pm / #67
Very awesome blog, and plan to post your own stories…..thanks for the opportunity!
AmenASHandF / February 3rd, 2010, 5:22 pm / #68
With a open mind all things r benefitial. It's when we, as many in history have & it sadly seems it is going to continue in th future, accept idolitry as a part of living. No one has to bow or idolize the super power of life, nature, energy etc. Argue it, challenge it, have a constructive healthy respectful relationship with it but don't idolize it. At the end as much as we might try God , a Supreme Force, Being of inteligence or just plain ol Intelligence of existance is part of many's psychological thinking & can't leave it because the extreme pain it brings & will always find themselves holding on to It. Wether it's because it's what they were given growing up &/or mentaly/neurologicly can't let go. It's part of life & it's here to stay for sometime if not forever…..=(
AmenASandH / February 3rd, 2010, 5:30 pm / #69
In history RED has always been a no no. passion, power, an intensity of emotion representation is always assosiated with it ! Sex too…so it's a psychological thing, corrupting one's innocence…this whole red thing isn't new…black too….darkness, evil, fear, scary, power…etc
actuacert / July 18th, 2010, 9:31 pm / #70
[color=red][url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9]!!! PORNO !!![/url][/color]
[url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an199.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an141.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an130.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an158.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an9.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an178.jpg[/img][/url]
[color=red][url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9]!!! ENTER !!![/url][/color]
ôîòî ïîäáîðêà òèòåê
ïîðíî ôîòî çàìóæíèõ
ñåêñ ïîðíî ýðîòèêà êëèçìû
ñåêñ òðóò êëèòîð
ñåêñ ðîññèÿ
ïèçäàòûå ãîëûå ò¸ëêè
êëèïû ñåêñ
ãèáêèå ò¸ëêè
ïîðíî äàì
ãðóäàñòîå ïîðíî
[url=http://www.video-nezry.co.cc/yjicv-yazyk-dushi.html]ßçûê äóøè[/url]
[url=http://551-mtj.video-nezry.co.cc/pzx-uvelicheniya-huya.html]Óâåëè÷åíèÿ õóÿ[/url]
[url=http://shorter-shorter.video-nezry.co.cc/wlpcj-piski-onlain.html]Ïèñüêè îíëàéí[/url]
[url=http://wgnz.video-nezry.co.cc/]Ñêà÷àòü ïîðíî ðîëèê 320[/url]
[url=http://vxuip-495.video-nezry.co.cc/mdu-www-porno-saity-com.html]Www ïîðíî ñàéòû com[/url]
[url=http://school-oso.video-nezry.co.cc/tw-masturbaciya-opasna.html]Ìàñòóðáàöèÿ îïàñíà[/url]
[url=http://232-turn.video-nezry.co.cc/untio-more-pornuhi.html]Ìîðå ïîðíóõè[/url]
[url=http://rftr-able.video-nezry.co.cc/ndfbd-skachat-seks-video-podrostkov.html]Ñêà÷àòü ñåêñ âèäåî ïîäðîñòêîâ[/url]
[url=http://left-vpilf.video-nezry.co.cc/tl-porno-zrelye-staruhi.html]Ïîðíî çðåëûå ñòàðóõè[/url]
[url=http://finger.video-nezry.co.cc/ytkv-eroticheskoe-lesbiyanki-smotret-onlain.html]Ýðîòè÷åñêîå ëåñáèÿíêè ñìîòðåòü îíëàéí[/url]
[url=http://145-cpedy.video-nezry.co.cc/lub-zayac-pop-shou.html]Çàÿö ïîï øîó[/url]
[url=http://have-qaucq.video-nezry.co.cc/gtt-seks-mnenie-jenscin.html]Ñåêñ ìíåíèå æåíùèí[/url]
[url=http://night-zso.video-nezry.co.cc/wcy-phorum-gei-porno.html]Phorum ãåé ïîðíî[/url]
[url=http://would-szwphj.video-nezry.co.cc/ussqy-zoo-porno-seks.html]Çîî ïîðíî ñåêñ[/url]
[url=http://adult-mtupt.video-nezry.co.cc/bkovq-porno-seks-vecherinki.html]Ïîðíî ñåêñ âå÷åðèíêè[/url]
[url=http://more-more.video-nezry.co.cc/nh-golye-popki-foto-comment.html]Ãîëûå ïîïêè ôîòî comment[/url]
[url=http://snzk-bb.video-nezry.co.cc/ma-golyh-podrostkov.html]Ãîëûõ ïîäðîñòêîâ[/url]
[url=http://ghgkn-feet.video-nezry.co.cc/kct-knigi-pro-onanizm.html]Êíèãè ïðî îíàíèçì[/url]
[url=http://bxqrb-274.video-nezry.co.cc/oc-korotkoe-porno-comment.html]Êîðîòêîå ïîðíî comment[/url]
[url=http://vmc-day.video-nezry.co.cc/gk-video-seks-igry.html]Âèäåî ñåêñ èãðû[/url]
[url=http://run-785.video-nezry.co.cc/juqz-hentai-igry-onlain.html]Õåíòàé èãðû îíëàéí[/url]
[url=http://541-cmvqm.video-nezry.co.cc/nwjx-orgiya-diskoteka.html]Îðãèÿ äèñêîòåêà[/url]
[url=http://carrie-522.video-nezry.co.cc/sp-seks-foto-lesbi-krasivye-samye.html]Ñåêñ ôîòî ëåñáè êðàñèâûå ñàìûå[/url]
[url=http://safe-bqe.video-nezry.co.cc/lzf-lesbi-knigi.html]Ëåñáè êíèãè[/url]
[url=http://again-971.video-nezry.co.cc/onqux-video-golye-prikoly.html]Âèäåî ãîëûå ïðèêîëû[/url]
[url=http://set-set.video-nezry.co.cc/uxyp-golaya-chehova.html]Ãîëàÿ ÷åõîâà[/url]
[url=http://sight-sight.video-nezry.co.cc/vvph-video-filmy-porno-onlain.html]Âèäåî ôèëüìû ïîðíî îíëàéí[/url]
[url=http://codui.video-nezry.co.cc/esq-kartinki-studentok.html]Êàðòèíêè ñòóäåíòîê[/url]
[url=http://drink.video-nezry.co.cc/rhop-zvezda-pervoi-velichiny-seks.html]Çâåçäà ïåðâîé âåëè÷èíû ñåêñ[/url]
[url=http://porn-porn.video-nezry.co.cc/ygoz-orgazm-bystro.html]Îðãàçì áûñòðî[/url]
[url=http://phpbb-phpbb.video-nezry.co.cc/ru-eroticheskoe-seks-video.html]Ýðîòè÷åñêîå ñåêñ âèäåî[/url]
[url=http://ready-232.video-nezry.co.cc/xgbgd-domen-pro.html]Äîìåí pro[/url]
[url=http://ndpqd.video-nezry.co.cc/oevjg-pornuha-bez-registracii-sms.html]Ïîðíóõà áåç ðåãèñòðàöèè ñìñ[/url]
[url=http://now-now.video-nezry.co.cc/]Ñìîòðåòü ñåêñ âèäåî ðîëèêè[/url]
[url=http://49-more.video-nezry.co.cc/el-malenkii-anus-new-topic.html]Ìàëåíüêèé àíóñ new topic[/url]
[url=http://smile.video-nezry.co.cc/otkff-porno-saity-jest.html]Ïîðíî ñàéòû æåñòü[/url]
[url=http://another.video-pmrjp.co.cc/yg-porno-video-klipy-bolshie-phpbb.html]Ïîðíî âèäåî êëèïû áîëüøèå phpbb[/url]
[url=http://349-lxwlli.video-pmrjp.co.cc/snmd-golaya-boyarskaya-video.html]Ãîëàÿ áîÿðñêàÿ âèäåî[/url]
[url=http://ryemby-long.video-pmrjp.co.cc/tegqu-anus-forum-sozdat-topik.html]Àíóñ ôîðóì ñîçäàòü òîïèê[/url]
[url=http://www.video-bbfqo.co.cc/ehrxn-porno-foto-molodenkih-russkih-devochek.html]Ïîðíî ôîòî ìîëîäåíüêèõ ðóññêèõ äåâî÷åê[/url]
[url=http://932-itlgy.video-bbfqo.co.cc/rdyuu-babushki-lesbiyanki-porno-video.html]Áàáóøêè ëåñáèÿíêè ïîðíî âèäåî[/url]
[url=http://win.video-bbfqo.co.cc/sjybh-pesni-devushek.html]Ïåñíè äåâóøåê[/url]
[url=http://voc-57.video-bbfqo.co.cc/zorx-porno-video-hentai.html]Ïîðíî âèäåî õýíòàé[/url]
[url=http://txhe-813.video-bbfqo.co.cc/cz-seks-gei-parni.html]Ñåêñ ãåé ïàðíè[/url]
[url=http://sight.video-bbfqo.co.cc/ozrq-porno-roliki-detei.html]Ïîðíî ðîëèêè äåòåé[/url]
[url=http://best-pmlcuz.video-bbfqo.co.cc/mt-sposoby-jenskoi-masturbacii.html]Ñïîñîáû æåíñêîé ìàñòóðáàöèè[/url]
[url=http://portal-fpbk.video-bbfqo.co.cc/vs-popova-23.html]Ïîïîâà 23[/url]
[url=http://836-hnalq.video-bbfqo.co.cc/jcjz-zhestkoe-porno-doktorov.html]Ƹñòêîå ïîðíî äîêòîðîâ[/url]
[url=http://sit.video-bbfqo.co.cc/qpwj-skachat-maloletnee-porno.html]Ñêà÷àòü ìàëîëåòíåå ïîðíî[/url]
[url=http://rmzzcd-186.video-bbfqo.co.cc/kbn-porno-video-aziatki-ipb.html]Ïîðíî âèäåî àçèàòêè ipb[/url]
[url=http://blondes-329.video-bbfqo.co.cc/zzo-nemeckoi-porno-geev.html]Íåìåöêîé ïîðíî ãååâ[/url]
[url=http://hotter.video-bbfqo.co.cc/oo-kody-prosmotra-porno.html]Êîäû ïðîñìîòðà ïîðíî[/url]
[url=http://fwfbd-60.video-bbfqo.co.cc/ofr-strapon-mujskogo-anusa.html]Ñòðàïîí ìóæñêîãî àíóñà[/url]
[url=http://mind-815.video-bbfqo.co.cc/ww-pornuha-video-roliki.html]Ïîðíóõà âèäåî ðîëèêè[/url]
[url=http://797-dgoujc.video-bbfqo.co.cc/jzsph-trahat-anal.html]Òðàõàòü àíàë[/url]
[url=http://391-tywwgh.video-bbfqo.co.cc/qmyro-zrelye-jensciny-porno-galereya.html]Çðåëûå æåíùèíû ïîðíî ãàëåðåÿ[/url]
[url=http://372-brat.video-bbfqo.co.cc/qj-razvratnaya-jenscina.html]Ðàçâðàòíàÿ æåíùèíà[/url]
[url=http://damn.video-bbfqo.co.cc/pzrkn-golye-podrostki-15-let.html]Ãîëûå ïîäðîñòêè 15 ëåò[/url]
[url=http://moment.video-bbfqo.co.cc/pjx-svyazannye-bdsm.html]Ñâÿçàííûå áäñì[/url]
ñåêñ ñî ñòþàðäåññîé ôîòêè
ïîñìîòðåòü ïîðíî ìóëüòôèëüìû
åáàë êîçó âèäåî
àíàëèç ïîðíî
ñàìîå êðóòîå ïîðíî
ñòðèïòèç äîìàøíèå âèäåî
ïîïêè ãàëëåðåÿ
êëóá ëþáèòåëåé ñòðàïîí ñåêñà
ñåêñ ãðóäü
porno virgins
ïîðíî ôîòî àíèìå õåíòàé
ïîðíî ñåêñ ãîëûå äåâóøêè
ïîðíî ñàéò åëåíû
î÷åíü ïîðíîãðàôèÿ
ñåêñ íàäîì
ñåêñ ïîðíî ìàëîëåòíèõ
ýðîòèêà 60õ
äæèëèàí àíäåðñåí ïîðíî
ïîðíî âèäåî çâåçä
penthouse pets
ïîðíî íàñèëèå íàä æåíùèíîé
ïîä÷èíåíèå ïîðíî
êëóáíîå ïîðíî
actuacert / August 16th, 2010, 11:10 pm / #71
[color=red][url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9]!!! PORNO !!![/url][/color]
[url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an57.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an64.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an45.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an102.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an85.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9][img]http://harizzzma.com/pornpics/an76.jpg[/img][/url]
[color=red][url=http://www.000site.ru/go.php?sid=9]!!! ENTER !!![/url][/color]
????? ????? ??????????
???????? ????? ????
????????? ???? ????? ????? ?????????
??????? ????
??????? ???????? ????
older ????? ????
paris hilton porn video
????????????? ??????
???????? ???? ????? ?????
???? ??? ??????
[url=http://278-gag-n-gape.online-meghz.co.cc/8_hentai-porno.html]?????? ????? ????? ???????[/url]
[url=http://my-803.online-meghz.co.cc/rr-video-porno-anny-minibb.html]????? ????? ???? minibb[/url]
[url=http://946-rest.online-meghz.co.cc/7-pizda-planom-comment.html]????? ?????? comment[/url]
[url=http://rczp.online-meghz.co.cc/5-seks-porno.html]???? ????? ???? ?????[/url]
[url=http://xheqby-232.online-meghz.co.cc/10-posmotret-pro-porno.html]?????????? ??? ?????[/url]
[url=http://voice-178.online-meghz.co.cc/]?????? ?????????????[/url]
[url=http://cnk.online-meghz.co.cc/11_video-porno.html]????? ????? ??????? posts[/url]
[url=http://finally-690.online-meghz.co.cc/8_golaya-kiska.html]????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://power-power.online-meghz.co.cc/]??????? ????????[/url]
[url=http://state-state.online-meghz.co.cc/rkj_golaya-dashei.html]????? ????? ???????????[/url]
[url=http://894-okay.online-meghz.co.cc/gba_gde-skachat-porno-roliki.html]??? ??????? ????? ??????[/url]
[url=http://tag-tag.online-meghz.co.cc/dqg-zoofiliya-porno-roliki.html]???????? ????? ??????[/url]
[url=http://him-891.online-meghz.co.cc/5-konchauscie-vaginy.html]????????? ??????[/url]
[url=http://even.online-meghz.co.cc/11-roliki-pro.html]?????? ??? ???? comment[/url]
[url=http://www.online-cwsve.co.cc/]????? 24[/url]
[url=http://365-lxi.online-cwsve.co.cc/2-foto-obnajennyh.html]???? ?????????? ???????[/url]
[url=http://pmrj-121.online-cwsve.co.cc/7_porno-devstvennic.html]????? ??????????? ???? ???? blog[/url]
[url=http://19-19.online-cwsve.co.cc/2_zhestkii-seks.html]??????? ???? ????[/url]
[url=http://vvyvua.online-cwsve.co.cc/4_krasivye-golye.html]???????? ????? ??????? ? ??????[/url]
[url=http://otzw-967.online-cwsve.co.cc/aj-icq-pishem.html]Icq ?????[/url]
[url=http://hand-hand.online-cwsve.co.cc/4-kuplu-porno.html]????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://two-byu.online-cwsve.co.cc/11_porno-trah.html]????? ????[/url]
[url=http://get.online-cwsve.co.cc/11-super-porno-hhh.html]????? ????? ???[/url]
[url=http://every.online-cwsve.co.cc/cmf-pravilno-pisat.html]????????? ?????? ?????????[/url]
[url=http://short-wnpgw.online-cwsve.co.cc/gm-skachat-porno-roliki.html]??????? ????? ??????[/url]
[url=http://move-gha.online-cwsve.co.cc/9_soski-uli.html]????? ???[/url]
[url=http://popochki-popochki.online-cwsve.co.cc/4-porno-video-shkolnicy.html]????? ????? ?????????[/url]
[url=http://fdd.online-cwsve.co.cc/3-seks-3d.html]???? 3d ?????[/url]
[url=http://mature-fvlxp.online-cwsve.co.cc/9-golye-devochki.html]????? ??????? ??????? ??????[/url]
[url=http://www.online-qhqdd.co.cc/sap-vladimir-popov.html]???????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://blogs-735.online-qhqdd.co.cc/aca_hochu-porno-video.html]???? ????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://drive-drive.online-qhqdd.co.cc/6-zhestkoe-porno-maloletnih.html]??????? ????? ??????????[/url]
[url=http://472-phone.online-qhqdd.co.cc/mz-realnoe-domashnee.html]???????? ???????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://minet-390.online-qhqdd.co.cc/ys_aziatka-trahaetsya.html]??????? ?????????[/url]
[url=http://920-oqm.online-qhqdd.co.cc/3-dostavit-devushke.html]????????? ??????? ????????????[/url]
[url=http://if-838.online-qhqdd.co.cc/10_anime-erotika.html]????? ??????? ????? ??????[/url]
[url=http://khobd.online-qhqdd.co.cc/3_seks-podrostkov.html]???? ?????????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://kmamn.online-qhqdd.co.cc/xjb_zhestkoe-porno.html]??????? ????? ??? ???????????[/url]
[url=http://worry-mna.online-qhqdd.co.cc/3_video-seks-iznutri.html]????? ???? ???????[/url]
[url=http://celki-utkzd.online-qhqdd.co.cc/ow_sozdat-topik.html]??????? ????? ??????? ?????? ?????[/url]
[url=http://full-jxzy.online-qhqdd.co.cc/cgi_lubitelskie-foto-lesbiyanok.html]???????????? ???? ?????????[/url]
[url=http://sound.online-qhqdd.co.cc/jaj_dom-2-porno-posmotret.html]??? 2 ????? ??????????[/url]
[url=http://yes-yes.online-yairt.co.cc/2-porno-video-bez-sms.html]????? ????? ??? ???[/url]
[url=http://remember-remember.online-yairt.co.cc/xm_detskaya-pornografiya.html]??????? ??????????? ????[/url]
[url=http://college-lkqdlo.online-yairt.co.cc/pxa_golaya-pizda-journal.html]????? ????? journal[/url]
[url=http://popochka-256.online-yairt.co.cc/5-foto-yaponskih-golyh-devushek.html]???? ???????? ????? ???????[/url]
[url=http://326-mab.online-qhqdd.co.cc/9_masturbaciya-gruppovaya.html]??????????? ?????????[/url]
[url=http://589-xrxar.online-qhqdd.co.cc/eqf-porno-gruppovuha.html]????? ??????????[/url]
[url=http://www.online-yairt.co.cc/oq-molodye-negrityanki.html]??????? ?????????? ????? ????[/url]
[url=http://828-dot.online-yairt.co.cc/qk_porno-seks.html]????? ???? ?? ??????? ?????????[/url]
[url=http://584-that.online-yairt.co.cc/imh-seks-porno-sobaka-foto.html]???? ????? ?????? ????[/url]
[url=http://fyrn.online-yairt.co.cc/10_luchshie-porno.html]?????? ????? ???????? ???????[/url]
[url=http://movies-movies.online-yairt.co.cc/cl-skachat-seks-onlain.html]??????? ???? ??????[/url]
[url=http://gnjyk-626.online-yairt.co.cc/ky-porno-foto.html]????? ???? ?????? ?????????[/url]
???? ??????? ??????????
????? ???????
???? ????? ?? ?????????
??????? ????? ??????
???? ??????
???? ???????
????? ?????? ????????????
???? ?????? ?????
????? ???? ?????
???? ??????? ???????
ero nsk
??????????????? ????
???? mp3
????? ???? ????? ????? ?????
?????????? ?????
????? ?????? ??????????
?????? ??????? ????? ????
???? webcamera
????? ?????
????? ?????????
?????????? ?????? ?????
????? ????????
????? ??????? ??????
Post a comment