To encourage the exchange of thoughts about Deepak Chopra and his work, we will post your comments, inquiries, and opinions. Please feel free to respond to someone else's comments or questions, or simply post your own. Post a Message | Read the Forum | Sign the Guestbook Please Post Your Comments Name: Email Address: Comments:

Anne

Your post from Zukav was helpful to me...like Dick, I get a bit tired of hearing about the mirroring analogy because it seemed to imply that if you ever had a problem with someone's behavior or words that it was your "fault" and had nothing to do with how they were being--seemed a perfect way to take no responsibility ;-) But, as I read what you posted it made a bit more sense....it wasn't saying that the other person didn't actually have a "negative" behavior, but that for it to irk you so, there was something of yourself in that (not necessarily to the same extent etc...)...THIS I see as a useful thing :-)

Thanks! And your kid post was very cute :-)

Cathy

Halloween Carols

Obviously I have WAY too much time on my hands this morning. I just couldn't resist posting these 'funny things kids say. :)

Democracy is a beautiful thing, except for that part about letting just any ol' person vote. --Age 10

Home is where the house is. --Age 6

For centuries, people thought the moon was made of green cheese. Then the astronauts found that the moon is really a big hard rock. That's what happens to cheese when you leave it out. --Age 6

My younger brother asked me what happens after we die. I told him we get buried under a bunch of dirt and worms eat our bodies. I guess I should have told him the truth--that most of us go to hell and burn eternally-- but I didn't want to upset him. --Age 10

I gaze at the brilliant full moon. The same one, I think to myself, at which Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato gazed. Suddenly, I imagine they appear beside me. I tell Socrates about the national debate over one's right to die and wonder at the constancy of the human condition. I tell Plato that I live in the country that has come the closest to Utopia, and I show him a copy of the Constitution. I tell Aristotle that we have found many more than four basic elements and I show him a periodic table. I get a box of kitchen matches and strike one. They gasp with wonder. We spend the rest of the night burping. --Age 15

When I go to heaven, I want to see my grandpa again. But he better have lost the nose hair and the old-man smell. --Age 5

I once heard the voice of God. It said "Vrrrrmmmmm." Unless it was just a lawn mower. --Age 11

I don't know about you, but I enjoy watching paint dry. I imagine that the wet paint is a big fresh water lake that is the only source of water for some tiny cities by the lake. As the lake gets drier, the population gets more desperate, and sometimes there are water riots. Once there was a big fire and everyone died. --Age 13

As you make your way through this hectic world of ours, set aside a few minutes each day. At the end of the year, you'll have a couple of days saved up. --Age 7

:)

i find the overused mirror analogy irritating.

i also disagree with that line "all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception". golly, that just makes me want to speculate all the more!

Thanks, Ulisse. I will check it out. Welcome to the Forum.

Here's an interesting question and answer I found at www.zukav.com

DO PEOPLE WHO IRRITATE ME REFLECT A PART OF ME?

Yes. Your clue that there is something that you can learn about yourself from an interaction with another person is your emotional response to the interaction. When you do not want to see something about yourself, you will be irritated when you see it in others. This is "mirroring." For example, if you are irritated when you see someone whom you think is selfish, conceited, and callous, look inside yourself for a part of you that is selfish, conceited, and callous. Try to remember a time when you spoke or acted in the same way. If you cannot remember such a time, keep looking.

When Linda and I were first together, I noticed that I became irritated when I felt she whined. I could not imagine myself as a whiner. I, who rode motorcycles, jumped out of airplanes, was a combat veteran and a former Green Beret officer, could not be a whiner. Nonetheless, I continued to watch myself for whining. Speaking with Linda one day I heard myself whine! It was startling, but unmistakable. I didn't like what she was saying, and I was whining about it, rather than telling her what I was feeling. From that moment onward, I felt less and less irritated when it seemed to me that Linda was whining.

Becoming irritated when you see someone doing something that you do -- but don't know that you are doing -- is a well-known phenomenon. Psychologists call it "projection." You intensely dislike in others what you don't recognize, and don't want to recognize, in yourself. Finding in yourself the very behavior that you dislike in others is called "projection recall." When you do that, you bring your attention home. You see where the behavior that you find so objectionable really is. It is in you. Then the behavior no longer creates an emotional reaction in you when you encounter it in others. If you are with a selfish, conceited, and callous person, for example, you will simply act accordingly.

Paying attention to "mirroring" is an important part of spiritual growth. It requires becoming aware of everything that you are feeling, and learning about yourself from what you feel.

Good Morning All,

On the whole subject of trying to 'persuade' others to a different point of view, here is something I found the other day. I like what it says in the final paragraph about 'no apologies' and 'pass on the rest'.

It's a piece by Ivan Whittle

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to offer information to the seeker after the truth. It is hoped that this information will assist researchers in their study of the UFO phenomenon. This phenomenon can not be studied in isolation, I believe we have to go back to the very beginning of life to try and understand this mystery, which has caused so much controversy and debate in our present time.

This concise and elementary paper on the Secret Doctrine teachings, is intended only as an imperfect sketch on creation and the evolution of mankind. My knowledge and understanding of these teachings is that of a student, and I accept full responsibility for any inaccuracies or shortcomings. The words in italics are from the Sanskrit.

The Doctrine teaches three fundamental propositions:

A) An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless and Immutable (constant, fixed) Principle on which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception. It is beyond the range and reach of thought - unthinkable and unspeakable. To make it clearer to the general reader, let him understand that there is one absolute reality which is the infinite and eternal cause regular is the rootless root of all that was, or is, or ever shall be. It is devoid of all attributes and is without any relation to manifested finite being. It is beyond all thought or speculation.

The Buddhists maintained that there is no Creator, but an infinitude of creative powers, which collectively form the one eternal substance, the essence of which is inscrutable regular hence not a subject for speculation.

B) The Cosmos is an infinite plane of numberless universes constantly manifesting and disappearing. The appearance and disappearance of worlds is like a regular tidal ebb and flow. This day and night, life and death, is one of the absolutely fundamental laws of the universe.

C) The obligatory pilgrimage for every soul through the cycle of Incarnation (necessity) in accordance with cyclic and karmic law. The divine soul must:

(a) have passed through every elemental form of the phenomenal world:

(b) have acquired individuality by its personal, self-devised efforts through all the degrees of intelligence from the lowest to the highest, from mineral, plant, animal, to the Dkvani Buddha (Archangel).

The Universe with everything in it is said to be Maya (illusion, transitory states) because all is temporary therein, from the life of an insect to the Sun. Yet the Universe is real enough to the conscious beings in it, which are as unreal as it is itself. We can experience and acknowledge the exoteric world of effects, but have little understanding of the esoteric world of causes. The Secret Doctrine teaches the progressive development of everything, worlds as well as atoms, and this stupendous development has neither conceivable beginning nor imaginable end. Our Universe is only one of an infinite number of Universes, all of them linked in a great Cosmic chain of Universes, each one standing in the relation of an effect as regards its predecessor, and being a cause as regards its successor. The present, an effect of the past, a cause of the future.

{Huge chunk of text removed}

SUMMARY

These teachings are not the legacy of any particular race or creed, but can be found in the theology and traditions of the World. To those readers who may find it absurd or incomprehensible I can offer no apology, accept what you can and pass on the rest. The intention is to inform and contemplate the arcane teachings of creation and evolution. But if we analyse the perplexity of extraterrestrial life in the light of these teachings, then we must concede to the unity of all existence, we are not alone. Humankind is but one of numerous other cosmic species inhabiting countless other worlds, manifesting to the laws of the one absolute reality. All creation is evolving in a vortex of infinite rounds of birth and death.

I have put on the WEB page HTTP://WELCOME.TO/SYNTROPY, the book Syntropy which I wrote in 1996 and have now translated into English. Syntropy is a work of fiction which tells about the birth of a new vision of life, in which science and religion, the material and the spiritual worlds are unified.

Happy Halloween all you ghosties,
goblins and ghoulies!!!!!!!

Happy Halloween back atcha! Fun fun with the wee ones :-)

Cathy

Happy Birthday "Ghost".

BTW

BOO!

Dave, that link looks like it took some time----thanks for your efforts.

Dave.........got it, and thank you.

Namaskar

Use this link to see where the "actual post numbers" (those with the first post counted as #1 instead of the latest post) of selected check points occur.

Subtract the post number you want from the latest message count (as of this post it's close to 54,615) to see where that post is relative to "now."

Divide that number by your choice of "messages per page" and plug the answer into "page=" and your "messages per page" choice into that part of the URL.

Once you're in the ballpark of your selected post number, you can use the little numbers below "Refresh Page" to maneuver around that point in time.

Your browser, Netscape or IE or whatever, should be independent of the techniques for searching the archives.

Any questions?

Terry, the thing to remember about archive searches is that Message #1 is the latest message, which puts the "real" Message #1 (the first post to the forum) at whatever the latest message count is. You're always counting back from now, which means a calculator helps a bunch.

If you click on the little numbers right below the "Refresh Page" button you'll see in your "address window" something like http://www.randomhouse.com/features/chopra/forums.cgi?page=1&messages_per_page=30 in the URL slot.

You can overtype both the "page=" and "messages_per_page=" numbers to be whatever you want. I usually go with 200 messages per page and use the browser's "Find" option to locate specific keywords in the text on that "page."

I'll put a link to that index I did a while back. It's not been updated since July last year, because I was getting too much flak for the whole idea. But it ought to help with things older than last year. I'll put that link in my next post.

Carol that "pffffffft" was supposed to be like that sound Lily Tomlin used to make after she made her "that's the truth" statement.

Hard to talk on this medium.

Namaste'

Dave I use Netscape, and I was wondering if you need another program of some kind to search the archives. For instance, going to post number 54390, OR, searching for a date, OR, searching for a word, etc.

As usual, the info is probably right in front of me, BUT....

Thanks.

What Cathy said.

Welcome, Traci. It's a roller coaster.

Traci

Welcome! So...you read the old posts and you still want to talk with us? I like you already ;-) I'm just playing, but it is nice to see that unrest, or conflict or disagreement or whatever you want to call it doesn't put you off...you are a brave soul, and I extend a warm welcome to you, and hope you enjoy your time here as I do :-)

Blessings! Cathy

I love Deepak Chopra and am amazed every time I read his work,I spent a while tonight reading all the postings in the forum,and would like to say hi to everyone and I look forward to dialoging with all of you in the future.God Bless

Geoff, If you're still out there, here's a link you might like to add to your Native Wisdom page -

www.lone-eagles.com/native.htm

how sweet IT is......
to be loved by you.....

hi again, Peggy, i can't speak for Hadi, but in my opinion, the beautiful pieces placed here speaks for all of us, as i see us as One. it is only when i see you as you and me as me and them as them does it become difficult for me. as long as i remember our Oneness, love is effortless....

Namaste'

Peggy, I enjoyed your post on irony. I often have a little chuckle to myself when scanning through the forum messages when I think that one of Deepak's 'Laws' is the Law of defencelessness. 'I relinquish all desire to defend my point of view'. It rolls easilt off the tongue but sticking to it is another matter entirely. :)

It remains an excellent principle though - if you look around you, people do expend a huge amount of energy defending and re-inforcing and voicing their opinions. Thanks to the 1 who posted the Nun's prayer - "Keep me from the fatal habit of thinking I must say something on every subject and on every occasion."

The other aspect, I suppose of not spending time/energy defending one's point of view is it frees the mind up to ponder just what is the 'origin' of anyone's point of view. I often ask myself, where a particular idea or point of view originated. It's one more method of stepping into the shoes of the 'observer'.

Namaste

Beautiful piece, Hadi. I have read that the woman who wrote that is from La Jolla. Pleasant coincidence.

It is important for me to know: Does the poem speak for you? I acknowledge your right to leave that question unanswered. But it makes a difference to me.

A FABLE

Once upon a time there was a man whose hobby was canning and preserving. He was a generous man and his fine fruits and vegetables were enjoyed by many of his neighbors and friends.

One day while he was canning green beans, he was a little careless and grabbed the wrong label for one jar. So instead of reading "GREEN BEANS" the label said "PINEAPPLE."

Now the glass container used for the green beans was perfectly transparent. But the man was very certain that he had placed the correct label on all of the jars. After all, he had done this for years and was very experienced. Also, he had read a lot of cookbooks on preserving and canning.

Then one day he was in the mood for a little bit of pineapple with his supper cake. He reached for the jar that said "PINEAPPLE." Ignoring the shape and color of the contents, he piled the green beans on top of his cake and took a big bite.

Immediately he yelped and spat them out. "What horrible pineapple!" he said. And he dumped all of the green beans into the garbage disposal. He then rang his neighbors and friends and told them to avoid eating the pineapple at all cost.

Some of his neighbors were puzzled. The succulent pineapple that he had sent to them was very tasty as were the perfectly seasoned green beans. Other neighbors blindly followed the cooks directive and threw out the jars containing pineapple.

The moral to this story is

a. The man might read more carefully.
b. The man might use more caution when labelling.
c. The man might look at the contents instead of the label.
d. The man might enjoy the green beans for what they are.
e. The neighbors might judge for themselves.
f. The man wasted the green beans.
g. It's not easy being green.
h. Everyone makes mistakes.
i. All of the above.

From Fables for Dummies by Sally Baker Lodge

So long, Geoff. You'll be back if/when the spirit moves you. :)

Thanks for your recent posts and links - I love the 'starseed' link. People are always telling me I'm from another planet. I take it as a compliment, when one looks at what all the 'normal, rational' inhabitants of this particular planet are doing to each other. :)

Here's a little tidbit I found at Geoff's site -

"Intelligent practice always deal with just one thing: the fear at the base of human existence, the fear that I am not. And of course I am not, but the last thing I want to know is that. I am impermanence itself in a rapidly changing human form that appears solid. I fear to see what I am: an ever-changing energy field. I don't want to be that. So good practice is about fear. Fear takes the form of constantly thinking, speculating, analyzing, fantasizing. With all that activity we create a cloud cover to keep ourselves safe in make-believe practice. True practice is not safe; it's anything but safe. But we don't like that, so we obsess with our feverish efforts to achieve our verison of the personal dream. Such obsessive practice is itself just another cloud between ourselves and reality. The only thing that matters is seeing with an impersonal searchlight: seeing things as they are. When the personal barrier drops away, why do we have to call it anything? We just live our lives. And when we die, we just die. No problem anywhere."

Charlotte Joko Beck, Everyday Zen

Let's remind ourselves what Namaste truly means ...

Thanks for the clarification Dave. It sounds like you are a lot like me. It's been quite a ride for me the past year. My straightjacket is on good and tight but at least now I know I'm wearing one! And all this time I just thought I was crazy… Now if I can just loosen this buckle! :-)

The Nun's Prayer

LORD Thou knowest better than I know myself that I am growing older and will some day be old. Keep me from the fatal habit of thinking I must say something on every subject and on every occasion. Release me from craving to straighten out everybody's affairs. Make me thoughtful but not moody: helpful but not bossy. With my vast store of wisdom, it seem a pity not to use it all, but thou knowest Lord that I want a few friends at the end.
Keep my mind free from the recital of endless details; give me wings to get to the point. Seal my lips on my aches and my pains. They are increasing, and love of rehearsing them is becoming sweeter as the years go by. I dare not ask for Grace enough to enjoy the tales of others' pains, but help me to endure them with patience.
I dare not ask for improved memory, but for a growing humility and a lessing cocksureness when my memory seems to clash with the memories of others. Teach me the glorious lesson that occasionally I may be mistaken.
Keep me reasonably sweet; I do not want to be a Saint - some of them are so hard to live with - but a sour old person is one of the crowning works of the Devil. Give me the ability to see good things in unexpected places, and talents in unexpected people. And, give me, O Lord, the grace to tell them so.

AMEN.

Nicely said, Chris!

A correction for posterity: I am not "all in agreement" with Dave. That matters little. What matters more, to me, is that I do choose my own path and that no one else's perceptions or interpretations limit who I am or how I walk that path. We may limit ourselves in one way or another. That's just the way IT is.

Hi, Chris. Your own contributions have been well selected and expressed here lately. Much to think about.

I would like to separate myself a little further from your dad in that my interest in these topics is a little more than just academic. I have been a doubter/skeptic/agnostic for all of my adult life and as far back as high school. Some of that time has even been as a cynic. But, all along, it has been an area of thought that has puzzled me and worried me.

If it were simply an academic thing, I could have contented myself with reading. But the exchange of ideas has more to it than just curiosity, and I hope I don't come across as just poking fun and saying "I doubt it" as some sort of game.

My parents were serious about their church-going and their version of religion, and in my youngest days I followed their guidance and thought I was doing my part to believe as they did. As soon as I began to question my own thoughts I realized theirs was not my answer, and I began reading and discussing these topics with anybody who would sit still for it. I even wrote a high school paper on the defense of atheism, modeled on a similar idea that the poet Shelley had expressed in his own youth.

But this is not just an academic topic for me. It matters to me, and I will probably be asking the questions and debating the answers (at least to myself) until I draw that last breath that Terry alludes to. If my track record is anything to go by, that's where I'd place my bets.

Wow! What an active couple of days. Peggy I like what you said about whether anyone can really point the way for someone else's path. Everyone has to walk their own path. When the student is ready the teacher will appear.

I liked your imagery Hadi about how we all operate within a "straightjacket of ideas". I do, you do, Dave does, Geoff does, Terry does, everyone reading this does. I believe we are doing extremely well if we are able to recognize this fact let alone transcend it. I guess turning to face this fact is the first step to transcending it.

Terry I love that Herbert Spencer quote. We all investigate different things and topics at our own rate and based on our own interests. My dad for instance wouldn't even consider looking into these spiritual matters as they simply don't interest him. He is on his own path, and to keep the peace I avoid any discussions related to spiritual matters. I don't see Dave in the same category as my dad as he does seem interested in these things even if it is only from an academic perspective. That's totally fine I think, and so is my dad's path. Who am I to suggest my path would be better for them?

There's a neat website called Puzzability where you can get a good assortment of word puzzles to tantalize your idle mind or divert you from something you'd rather not be doing. They have a weekly puzzle that consists of a quotation by some notable person, and you have to rearrange the letters in the quote to figure out what it is.

This week's was especially significant, so if you haven't worked it for yourself, I'm sorry, but it says:

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he doesn't become a monster."
------ Friedrich Nietzsche

to, was that pffffffft like a poof? ;)

thank you, Peggy, for me, you are here and that's the way it will always be. being "there" so to speak is not so important, imo. :)

I love the way that you keep your sense of humor through all of this!

Hadi, do you believe that you or anyone else can really point the way for someone's path or should we just try to equip them for the journey? Is there a difference?

Since there seems to be some confusion about my beliefs and positions, I would to reemphasize a couple of things.

(1)I am skeptical about some things and not about others.

(2)I have mixed feelings about Deepak Chopra. My thoughts about him are neither black nor white, but shades of gray. I am aware that some here appear to have trouble understanding the concept of "shades of gray."

(3) My most profound learning has come through my own experience and not from the words of others. My experience came without any preparation on my part -- no reading of the mystics, etc. That may be necessary for some and helpful to others but it wasn't a requirement for me.

(4) Although I think of it as the only real "knowing" in my life, I am also aware that brain chemistry can completely alter our ability to judge what is happening in our brains. So I have to trust that my perceptions were real and not just a short circuit in my wiring or some damage done to the brain. One of the things that makes me believe that the experience was sound is that it was so profoundly different from anything I could have imagined.

Namaste'

Personalities aside, well said Hadi.

An oft repeated quote in circles I travel in is:

"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep man in everlasting ignorance--that principal is contempt prior to investigation."

........................................Herbert Spencer

What I know, is that the "truth" will be "experienced" in that last out-breath, and "that's the truth".........pfffffffffffft!

Carol, I can see your compassion and love in everything that you write. You are setting a beautiful example but I am just not there at the moment as you may have noticed. :-)Maybe someday, I will be coming from that place again.

Hadi, there is a lot of meat in your posts to Dave. But like Dave, I had to make myself go back and read because for me your barbs got in the way of your message. I think that was the point that I was trying to make to you two or three weeks ago. You have much to offer but the words that you choose get in the way, in my opinion.

I, too, would appreciate it if you didn't refer to me as "Dave's wife." I love that part of my life but I belong with Dave and not to him.

Normally, I'm not too sensitive about being described as his wife, but you often seem to have difficulty seeing me as a separate person and I don't want that line of thinking encouraged in others.

I have often wondered why you bring Dave into the conversation when you are addressing comments to me and bring me into the conversation when you are addresing Dave. It seems mostly to happen when you and I are angry with each other or appear to be angry.

Doing that may promote the idea that Dave and I hold the same beliefs about skepticism and the value of personal experience.

Click

hi! it is interesting to witness people trying to come to terms with their feelings/emotions. i feel honored to be privy to the conversations. it helps me to remember my own human nature and brings to my attention questions to ask myself. and yes, some of it is very laughable but i try to remember, what may seem very funny to me may be hurting another, very much. in the last few days i have witnessed that hurt through several of the posts, so for me personally, i'll reserve my laughing until i see that the wounds are not so deep. some of the posts are directed towards deepening wounds and that is the posters choice, but it always causes me to wonder what does it profit one to hurt anyone? mystery to me? i always feel great when i have seen that my actions has brought a smile to someone's face. and i always feel sad when my actions bring a frown or a tear. so, truly, what can the benefit be to hurt another? i am not being facicious (sp?) here, really hoping for others to share their viewpoints about this. Namasté

Kereyra, the show was Laugh In

I don't remember if I have told you before, but I really like the pieces that you write which describe your experiences with your senses. Have you read A NATURAL HISTORY OF THE SENSES by Diane Ackerman? The book is far more absorbing than the title would imply. I think you might like it.

Where's the guy on the tricycle? :-)

"Laugh-in," if I recall correctly, kereyra.

Now I remember where my family got that line, "veddy inderesting...but not funny." We say it all the time and we'd completely forgotten that show. What was it, "Hogan's Heroes?"

Carol

Enjoyed your post about the different things we each bring to this forum...for me, Love is the ultimate "way"...thanks for bringing that here (not to imply that others don't, of course :-))

Hadi

I wanted to mention that, while I still feel you can be hard to dialogue with--my own personal perception :-)--I do see that you are trying to share what you feel you have to share...and I applaud your persistence in coming back here amidst feelings of what you have felt/called an "undercurrent of hostility" (tho, personally, I don't feel hostile toward you, just frustrated when I try to talk with you ;-))...I especially enjoyed that you and Dave were able to joke finally in the most recent posts...that's such a good thing to do--laughter!

Dave Sorry, I have no new word choices other than "we" and/or "I" :-) But I think, insertions of qualifiers like "as I see it" etc... are helpful throughout a post. And I also think we might each assume that a speaker is speaking only for him or her self when they post and not attribute more to them than is there--unless, of course, they specify that "I am sure I speak for all of you when I say..." ;-)

As I see it, anyway....;-)

Have a fun day! Cathy

good for you, Dave, i sense a reaching out in all of yours and Hadi's post. Be Kind, loves, its EZ! :)

Hadi, in case it may be of comfort to you, and I sincerely hope it might, I gave read your longish posts that came after your weekend. I can sense your genuine attempt to reach me with some words I do need to hear. After the heat was off (relating to my trying to speak for others here) I could see that you were really trying to communicate.

I hope you can accept the apology that I got "heated up" by things that stung in what you said about the us-them issue, and didn't really read with due care the rest of your long posts. I'm glad that I didn't ignore your long posts. There's much good in them.

Thanks

Veddy interdesting.

(laugh track fades into silence)

Guilty as charged ;)

Me, too! It's good for "bad blood" to bleed a little. May your day be exciting!

The court is adjourned and will reconvene (sp?) after life.

Good one! Yes, I do return from many of those excursions into areas of curiosity. I could list many, but boredaom would follow.

By the way, are you willing to accept roughly 50% ownership of the last 100 or so posts?

I'll agree with that, Dave. Many happy returns to you.

I just don't happen to like your map, Hadi. I'm not headed in that direction. Thanks, though. When I do decide to travel to where your map works, I'll come back here and retrieve it. One good thing about the archives here: there's good stuff in them as well as the crap.

I can make all sorts of declarations, dave, but I can't necessarily prove them. What I try to do is invite you or whoever to prove them for themselves. I'll just provide a map.

Objection sustained.

My way of experimenting, Hadi, just happens to differ from yours. Otherwise, I can accept your point.

Argumentative. Move to strike.

There's a story told about Isaac Newton. It turns out that Isaac newton was in the lab testing his theories with "experiments". he did one experiment after another, after another, and another and another. Eventually his friends and colleagues said, "You've done more than a hundred experiments and your theory is not proved. What do you hope to learn by doing any more?" An Newton responded, "I have learned one hundred ways which are false and don't work, eventually I will find the one which is true".

The moral here is that to know anything in life, to really know that it is True, one needs to experiment. One needs to test the theory. Not with the intellect, not through reason and logic, not in theory, but in "practice". This was the main point I have been struggling to put over about Truth. I can't give it to you, words and books can't give it to you. You have to do the practical application and see for yourself. I mean, I could read books about car engines or computers or flying, but none of the reading will give me the Reality of actually getting my hands greasy and black and knowing the engine, or sitting in the cockpit and flying the plane or buying a computer and "booting up". Whivch translates as computer mumbo-jumbo until we actuall get hands onwith the "interface", etc. etc. etc.

Your subject, by your choice, is truth. Can you make a declarative sentence containing the word "truth"?

The post below that starts with "My God..." is a case where you made up something I might do, and then prepared yourself for how you'd deal with it by referring back to the responses to your 16 questions. It's like I'm on trial and being held to some questionnaire as a limit of what I can say or feel.

She talks about me when I'm not here. And she really does make stuff up which if I can be bothered, I will demonstrate.

Can you please quit talking about Peggy when you're talking to me. Peggy is asleep, not here, not in the way of my telling you what I think. I do have my own thoughts and opinions and beliefs and they are what I will discuss. One on one, sir. One on one.

What did I make up, Dave? Example.

I haven't lost my sense of humour through all the back stabbing, Dave. Not by you, I might add. You've been pretty fair and recognised the odd misunderstanding for what it is, in my opinion. But I've had to work hard against the undercurrent of hostility which is always there between us. As I said a while ago, I've left mine just outside my office door.

So make some statement about truth, and I'll tell you whether I agree or not. If I don't, we can discuss it.

You've just hit on your biggest problem, Hadi. You make stuff up, then show how wrong it is, then attribute it to somebody specific. Straw man tactics.

So what, so what, Dave. You asked why I hadn't addressed your sixteen points. I just explained why. They were intentended to clarify your beliefs not to be discussed in themselves point by point. I didn't want to judge your beliefs point by point Dave. I wanted to discuss the topic of truth which had been discussed earlier when I had not been posting, and I wanted some clarifications of your posts so that I could be fair and not accuse you of saying things or believing things that you don't believe or haven't said. Something of which your wife appears to have made a sport.

My phone number? Surely you jest!

My God, it's only one post back and you're still not reading it right. I said "you'd have trouble saying that's not what you said." In other words, let me spell it out. You "would" have difficulty, later in this discussion denying your skeptical views as presented in point one and two of the questions asked, because I would be able to refer to your answers which say things like "I think his message is too simplistic for skeptiks to take seriously". If you were to contend that you don't feel skeptical I could point to that sentence and others in the list. Do you understand what I am saying? This seems very difficult. Give me your phone number.

Maybe we should play chess, Hadi. I know some things you don't about that. Would that prove anything?

So I clarified my beliefs. So what?

Here's what I actually said, Dave, after I had chosen the pssages you insisted I retrieve which were things you had actually said? Remember that? You wouldn't accept my assessment so you asked me to find your actual words, and then to be completely fair to you I suggested,

"Obviously these are sections I have lifted from a range of posts and it may be argued that they are out of context. In the interest of fairness I invite you to clarify your own beliefs and it might be helpful to do so by answering a few questions which I have listed below. "

I wish you would try to be as fair with me.

Here's a challenge for you, Hadi. Find the post -- the post -- where I said I wasn't skeptical of Deepak. When you show me that one, I'll be prepared to discuss quibbling on that point, or waffling, or speaking out of both sides of my mouth.

Has this helped you to define what your beef is with me?

Make sense of you? I can't make sense of our cat -- and I try. Peggy's still sleeping. Maybe she'll play with you later.

Hi, Dave. this is "live". "alive".

I never said we should stick to those sixteen points, Dave. really I didn't. Check the archives. I just asked you to answer the questions so that I could have some clarification about exactly how you felt about the issues I was going to cover. That way you couldn't quibble too much or "lie to yourself" about it. It was a template for your beliefs in this area. What I asked was that you keep the debate between the two of us so that we could establish a stream of consciousness. The sixteen points were there so that I could qualify my statements. Things like your skepticism of Deepak are now plain to see and you'd have trouble saying that's not what you said, which often happens here, irony of ironies, that's what I'm doing right this moment.

I think you are missing the point a bit there, Dave. My point was that I am ordinary and I know some stuff you don't. You just think I'm lying. Making it up. Only the masters are capable of such stuff, right/ And I keep saying, the masters were ordinary too. That's why the Gift is also available to you. But instead you think I am trying to claim to be in some elite group of Masters. You jus can't make sense of me, can you? Your intellect keeps getting in the way. Well, enough, for now. I want to play with Peggy for a while.

I responded to 16 questions and they haven't been addressed -- at all. It was you who suggested we stick to those questions to develop, what was it, a "stream of consciousness"? Get real, Hadi. Or would like to analyze this post? It's real short. That shouldn't take a weekend.

Yes, Hadi, I'm playing "my wife's" (her name is Peggy in case you forget) "game" by having you be accountable for what you post. I suspect you go into auto-type mode and have no ownership of what tumbles off your keyboard. In that sense, any response at all is liking responding to some AI program.

As for responding to questions, I did. What did that get me? I don't play by your rules in the "game," Hadi. Deal with it.

I made three points. 1) as a skeptic I think your advice to newcomers in the "Chopra" forum is unwise. 2) Ithink you dismiss our experiences without ever having tested them thoroughly for yourself. 3) I tried to identify the reaons for your failure to grasp the spiritual teachings. i.e. your current belief systems. If you don't agree just say so. Don't insult me with more projected slander. It just makes you look bad at the end of the day.

As for why Deepak doesn't post here. Who could blame him with some of the ego crap that goes down here? Stuart Wilde tried and had to abandon participation of his own site because of the abuse thrown at him by people who ultimately were unable to debate intelligently.

Thanks again, Cathy. It seems I'm thanking you a lot, doesn't it? :-)

We have had discussion before about "in my opinion" and "as I see it" and other such qualifiers of statements that extend beyond the simple "I" when making comments here. It's sort of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" environment. Use "I" too much and you're an ego-maniac, ego-centered, ego-driven, ego-obsessed, ego-starved, ego-this, ego-that, to the point of being ashamed you even have an ego. Use "we" and suddenly you're including the world in your viewpoints. How do we play in this "game" when the rules keep changing?

Reminds of a game they played in a baseball movie with Robert DeNiro many years ago. I forget the movie's name and don't feel like looking it up on IMDB, but they had this card game called TEGWAR which turned out to be "The Exciting Game Without Any Rules" and Phil Foster (I think it was) was a master at it, won almost every game by inserting a new rule just as somebody was about to score with the old ones.

Maybe we can persuade Random House to change the name of this place to TEGWAR.

Anyway, thanks for clarifying your reading of those statements. They were pretty close to how you described them. I feel comfortable using "we" to talk about Peg and me, when it's something we did together, but I don't even mean "we" in her case when "I" talk about my beliefs or opinions. Peg and I disagree on many things and for either of us to say "we" in discussing matters of opinion would just be wrong.

Any suggestions for a word better than "we" to substitute for "I"?

Dave, you're playing your wife's game. You're judging me again. Why don't you address the points I made instead of just throwing empty stones. I don't want anyone to follow me. Least of all you.

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, DaveR (To ( | ))@209.86.54.11 said:

Thanks for the advice, ( | ).

I have been pondering Hadi's extended commentary and have decided, as you appear to, that that is all Hadi really wants and needs here: to be regarded by all who post here as the rightful spiritual master and leader, in Deepak's absence.

I have noticed how Deepak's choice not even to post here, much less participate in meaningful discussion of his own writings, leaves this "forum" of "his" wide open to wannabe disciples, or even supplanters. They come here quite often. They take many forms. It would be easy to repost hundreds of posts, under dozens of names, to demonstrate this phenomenon.

But there have been (what seems to me) many others who have no such desire, who have come here to participate as themselves and to speak only for their own personal understandings and beliefs. Hadi has no right to their leadership, guruship, mastery, or whatever. Leave Hadi alone and he will flood your computer screen with achingly self-serving distortions and interpretations that defy logic and common sense. He seems to subscribe to the idea that "more is better" by inundating this forum space with his own view of the Universe, whether asked to or not, whether asked not to, or not.

Hadi is, like several others who have passed this way, needing the endorsement of essentially all who read here. You can see it in his appeal to be counted in with so many others. He wants not just to participate, but to rule.

One of the advantages for me, in continuing to participate, is that I can test for myself just how much I'm willing to admit how that's true for me as well. I'm trying to decide how big a lie it is to myself to pretend that other people are interested in what I have to say. I don't want followers as much as I want the assurance that people can relate (whether they believe it or not) to what I have to say.

So, in this particular area, that of "leadership" (or whatever term you think really applies), I'm prepared to engage Hadi in his points -- when and if they make sense -- just to see how much effort either of us may be putting in to trying to sway others to our own personal ways of thinking and/or believing.

This is (as I have said before) not a very large pond to be the Big Fish in. I have tried to estimate the total number of actual people who have participated here since February, 1996, not counting aliases and alter-egos. I would take a stab at a number less than 500, perhaps significantly less. That's a fairly small world to have posted over 50,000 posts in coming up five years time. To be lord and master of less than 500 people (even if all of the past participants were here today -- which they most assuredly are not -- we have at most thirty these days who post more than "hello, goodbye" or just "hello" posts) is a far cry from being ruler of Andorra or Monaco or Liechtenstein.

Hadi is not my master, my teacher, my guru, my sensei, or my friend. Hadi is just a guy who likes to type a lot. My calling him anything but just another human being with an opinion, would be a lie to both of us.

So, thanks, ( | ), for the advice (and yes, I could have sent this in e-mail if you'd have left your name and e-mail address). But I prefer just to fill up a screen with some of my own thoughts since I have plenty of time to do that.

It is to laugh, isn't it! :-)

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, carol ()@38.37.124.167 said:

hi Hadi! find myself stepping on your lines again! just let me say good morning and i enjoyed reading your posts, much wisdom in them.

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, carol (Good Morning!)@38.37.124.167 said:

i do love Deepak and his teachings, but i also love Dave, Peggy, Hadi, Kate, to, Cathy, Denis, Chris, Karen, Tom, Silvia, oh my! well, you know, i love you all, and i love all that you say. too easy for me, when i see you all, as mystics, heh! to be really honest i feel like Dave, Peggy, and Hadi are intellectual giants compared to me, no way i could compete. love is My Way. be kind to each other, beloveds, it is also The Way! and i do feel that leaving is NOT the answer, post all you wish, here, otherwise go if you must. but for me i love playing here with all of you and hope that you stay and help each other understand, Your Way!

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, Hadi (01@onetel.net uk.)@212.67.105.27 said:

Geoff: Well said about it being a game. It's easy to lose sight of that when we take ourselves so easily.

Cathy I never said you were a skeptic. It's okay to be skeptical anyway. I said "you didn't wholly agree with" Dave. That's not the same is it. Dave does make alot of sense and I do agree with much of his reasoning, I just find he has created a glass ceiling for himself that prevents or stifles his ever getting anything out of IT.

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, ( | ) ( | )@216.34.244.150 said:

these oversensitive pussy weenies and their "it's time for a break" drama just make me laugh

dave, why waste your time with this hadi jerkoff. just agree, call him master and maybe he'll go away. he can't speak clearly for himself, how can he speak on behalf of others.

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, Cathy (catcta@aol.com)@152.163.207.197 said:

Geoff

Hope you'll be back later? Your presence will be missed, I know...you brought me many smiles and things to ponder...Ciao!

Peggy You're welcome :-)

Cathy

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, Geoff ()@203.12.152.23 said:

I don't know, you try to make a joke to lighten the atmosphere ...

I think it is time for a break anyway, but maybe that's just me.

Have fun, people. And remember all of this is just a game, so play nice, if you can.

J 

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, DaveR (Hadi)@209.86.48.60 said:

Thanks for your response, Hadi. I'll read it as I find time and perhaps respond to the parts that make sense. You can have whatever role you want, and that others will support. As for me, I have no interest in following you -- across the street, into Valhalla, or into the nearest rest room. You're on your own, as far as I can tell. Others may choose to follow, but that's for them to decide.

And 203.12.152.23, I thought it was pretty low of you to speak for Deepak. It hasn't worked in the past, and I doubt it will this time.

And by the way, Hadi, what was the point of all the questions? Did you even read my responses? Do you ever listen to anybody but your blessed mirror?

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, Peggy ()@209.86.48.60 said:

Cathy, I posted before reading your responses. Your way of looking at what happened seems much kinder and more loving than my own. Thanks for that!

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, Peggy ()@209.86.48.60 said:

For anyone who might wonder why I repost Hadi's exact words, I wish to explain that often in the past, Hadi has said that I have misinterpreted or misrepresented what he said. Although it is possible that I have misinterpreted, at least the readers can know the exact words I am referring to.

---

On Monday, October 30, 2000, Cathy (catcta@aol.com)@64.12.104.167 said:

P.S.

I did not take Dave's use of "we" and "us" to include me or the members of the forum...I guess because it started out

" I'm content to leave things essentially where you did, with the understanding that some of us...

I took "some of us" to mean that he was talking about himself and others like him...again, funny how different people read the same thing different ways, eh? :-)

Peace!Cathy

---

Crown/Harmony Books

Comments by users are not endorsed by Random House. The Deepak Chopra Forum is intended to provide a place for the exchange of information, opinions, and comments. Random House does not necessarily endorse, support, sanction, encourage, verify, or agree with the comments, opinions, or statements posted in the Forum. Any information or material placed online, including advice and opinions, are the views of those who post the statements, and does not necessarily represent the views of Random House. Privacy Policy

web hosting • domain names
web design • online games