For months, I have been sorting through all the years of my witnessing inconsistencies surrounding Lazaris and C:S which I had put down to my own ignorance in the past, but which, after Penny's death, and thus more intense questioning, became clearer to me as irrefutable evidence that Jack Pursell initially set out to deceive his wife, Penny and eventually, everyone else who came to think of themselves as "mapmakers," most likely never forseeing the extent to which his deceit would reach.

Firstly, it just has never made sense to me after all the years of being a FOL (friend of Lazaris) that Lazaris could claim to never interfere, but would also call Michael Prestini on the phone and bring him to move in with Penny, thus separating her from her husband and making the husband be a sort of servant to him, not even referring to him by name because, he claimed, it was too difficult to say, despite his ability to say many other alliterative words.

Plus, after watching the terrible TNT "Mists of Avalon" mini-series this summer where the goddess was so clearly a manipulating, conniving, self-involved and wreckless woman who did everything in the name of a "greater good", I was reminded of the tale we have been told by Concept:Synergy to believe since day one: that because of the greater good of Lazaris coming to reach mankind because we "asked, as a humanity, for that help," he had been spending lifetimes "nudging" Jack and Penny closer together, making sure that they would not make any choices which might have had them not be present at this, the most "monumental" time in human history, but would instead be together for helping "birth the new world."

Furthermore, we are told that "Peny was the one we came to touch, we love you [Peny]." This was also the sort of mantle Morgan Le Fay had to wear in the story--to her great things were given (power) and so great things were then expected (sacrifice). Morgan Le Fay ends up having to sleep with and bear the child of her half brother in order to unite the two worlds of Faery and Human and keep Avalon, though hidden, still powerful and the countryside peaceable.

So, if what Lazaris says is true, then because the world needs saving, and Faery and Human need to be reconciled (as is the premise of the Faery workshops, which I have attended), then it was necessary for Penny and Jack to have to sacrifice their marriage and perhaps any other lessons they might otherwise have chosen in other lifetimes when Lazaris was there doing his "nudging."

That would make Jack and Penny martyrs.

That would mean they had been denied full responsibility for their choices, that they were having their lives meddled with by something other than God/Goddess, which is a questionable comparison anyway since we are also told by Lazaris that God and Goddess do not meddle in our lives, but always, only say "yes".

It would mean that Jack and Penny were chosen and clearly implies that they are somehow elevated in their sense of enlightenment and bear the responsibility of helping to enlighten others.

Now, martyrhood wouldn't be much to fret over except that a basic tenent of what Lazaris teaches is that martyrhood is an absolute robbing of one's power and that it makes one abusive in the name of love. He tells us that martyrhood is like pregnancy: you are either in martyr or you are not and that when you are in a martyred state of being, you absolutely, positively are not also be in a state of loving. They "cannot coexist." He says so over and over on his tapes, particularly the one on Martyrhood.

To take this to its natural conclusion then, following my premise that this is all contrivance, then Jack and Penny are incapable of truly loving anyone because they are too busy saving and manipulating people from...what? From not waking up to becoming the mapmaker they are, presumably.

In Jack's case, perhaps, from Penny to actually seeing through Jack's game.

A long time ago, I met some people who were "kinda" into Lazaris but were also busy working with a channeled entity of their own. I asked them why they bothered to do this and they thought "why not?" Besides, Lazaris was not for everyone, and not everyone liked to be around the Concept:Synergy people anyway. I asked them what they thought of Lazaris and about the troika. They said that Lazaris was sometimes interesting, sometimes not--I was shocked! How could Lazaris ever be uninteresting? But, that is part and parcel of what happens when you stop considering outside sources...what happens when you think you have found a safe, irrefutable source of all the mysteries and answers which otherwise might bedevil you into fears and paralysis.

That is what happens when you cease to keep thinking and evaluating because your "source" keeps telling you that they will never take your power away and because now that they have entered your life, you will "never be alone again." Why muck about with doubt when all this is at your disposal?

The other thing they said which always stuck with me was that the reason Jack divorced Penny was that she was too intense and he could barely take the pressure of being with her all the time. So, it was a sort of relief when Michael showed up, suitcases in hand, on the Pursells' doorstep, as directed by Lazaris, and had come to marry Penny.

But, I wonder if that is true, or if it is only somewhat true. Maybe Jack was not able to ever please Penny, afterall, we have been told by everyone including Lazaris that Jack is a three enneagram type, which would predispose him to being motivated to always win mommy's praise, or whomever else's praise he projected mommy onto. Could it be possible that Jack, in the guise of what even he convinced himself was some "objective channelled entity", called Michael himself and said it was time for him to come and be with Penny?

Perhaps Jack really was tiring under the strain of Penny's abuse and harshness--and for anyone who says this must have been the way she ended up in later in life, there are reams of very credible stories of how Penny was never anything other than monsterously intense (read: rude) to people around her--and needed to find another way to please her without also having to sleep with her.

Perhaps she was telling him he was a loser and was threatening to divorce him and he would rather be in her life as a servant than not be in her life at all.

If it seems farfetched, I suggest considering the obsession Penny had with the Clintons. This is not meant at all to become a discussion about the rights and wrongs of the Clintons, nor a political diatribe by me, and thus I plead, please don't let it to be one for anyone else, but I do think it is evident that Bill Clinton, whom I would concur with Lazaris is a three enneagram type, was willing to do whatever was expedient to be able to continue getting whatever he wanted, regardless of the effect on others.

I wonder if Penny's obssession with them was due to a low-grade energy that she knew somehow, that this energy was very present in her life already.

If the Clinton example annoys you and gets in the way of following along, perhaps consider her also strangely obssessive but celebrated (!) need to watch shows such as Big Brother and Survivor, which emphasize doing what is expedient in order to triumph, regardless of what that might mean to fellow travellers on the path.

The Sopranos, her other favorite show, might also be another example, but at least in that show, there still remains a committment to a code of honor, depite a ruthlessness which pulses below it all.

All this, while, if what we are told to belive is true, would indicate that the most enlightened among us is more interested in cheering for the most ruthless rather than extending kindness to people who might need it most.

I will go to another post and continue so this isn't excessivley long...

Pippa

Well, but Lazaris can see us in all our humanity, he can see us in the range of emotions and choices we might make, you might argue. That is why Penny's apparent lack of discerment with how to spend her time acting as one of the most enlightened mapmakers, if not THE most enlightened mapmakers, on earth would not concern Lazaris.

Well, since I can't take Lazaris on in an argument here since he won't show up, I will tell you that when I try to swallow that along with the sentence I clearly heard him say, as did many others I have talked to, that we, as mapmakers, "know more about spirituality than anyone else on the planet" and then chase it with a shot of how I witnessed Penny and Jack both act towards not only me, but others, when they had no reason to be anything other than pleasant, I have to say it doen't digest. I can't swallow it because it is utter shit.

Forget about then serving me the sentence straight out of the Interview books where Lazaris says that "other times we work with Peny and her process and her programmings, though those times are less and less necessary."

How on earth could this be possible when she was publically threatening to slap people with whom she didn't agree, when she was trumpeting that she was seeking to postpone menopause and ended up post-poning life? How could this be so when she was very clearly codependent with a very nasty, Proustian bitch of a man who shares perhaps Penny's only true legacy--that of ruining people's hearts and reputations for sheer sport borne of insecurities and arrogance towards those not as clever as they felt themselves to be?

To claim she was only human would be a much easier sale if she wasn't also being touted as above the basic processing necessary to maintain human decency and kindness.

In his eulogy speech on the "Read Only" thread memorializing Penny, Eagle Man notes that people often thought Penny was being unfair or unkind, but that they just didn't understand. Also, that she had a wicked sense of humor. Perhaps that is code for: Penny was a martyr who liked to make fun of people.

There are plenty of posts in here documenting Penny's special bent for tormenting people whom she ostensibly cared about. I have written some here and in the other Lazaris discussion group, and others have also detailed their experiences. I also know that it wouldn't take long if you just approached people in a random fashion at any seminar and asked them if they had ever witnessed strange behavior by the most enlightened woman, and you would quickly find yourselves to the gills with information. Decide from it what you will, but be intellectually honest and ask if she acted like a woman whom you would like to emulate.

As to the arguement that it is impossible for a single person, Jack Pursell, to have accomplished all this unless he was in fact channelling, I do think he is channeling. There is no way he isn't channeling.

But, as anyone reading along who has ever done body work, Tarot readings, or any other sort of energy work can most likely attest, tapping into the source which IS isn't that difficult and is in fact each and every one of our right to do. And, once tapped into that source, many things can come to light which otherise might be obscured.

Add to that the experience I had while studying briefly with a Voodoo priest: first of all, if you don't believe it, then it just isn't going to affect you nearly as much as if you do. That is why if a person clearly was determined that Voodoo was not going to harm them and was very clear on that, then most likely, any voodoo for good or ill was going to just whiz by that person and they would be unaffected.

Secondly, if you let yourself open up enough, you can start to let many truths form and take shape. I used this technique in bodywork I did at that time, and I also would use voodoo sorts of techniques to meditate and lo and behold! I am a channel! I would do basic massage work for people and be able to start telling them things about themselves which they thought were amazing, but were probably, as Katie points out, them filling in some of the blanks without even realizing I wasn't necessarily reading the whole picture; and were also my clearer ability to tap psychically into their energy force.

The more you believe you can access this information, then the more I believe you will be able to do this. And, whether the negative ego exists or not, I am not even sure at this point, but there is definetly the opportunity to abuse the information once you receive it.

As an example, I read recently about a priest who was intended to work in a Bronx parish but was sent to Puerto Rico first because he needed immersion in Spanish. He didn't speak it well and he, frankly, hated that he had to do this at all. Why not just speak English?

After a little learning of the Spanish language, just a few weeks on the island, he miraculously gives an entire mass in Spanish. Much to his dismay and still his dislike, he decides he can't deny the gift he has obviously been given to tap into this so, he goes back to the Bronx and ministers to the Spanish community.

The story is in the Wall Street Journal about two weeks ago, on the front page, under a title indicating a clash between Mexicans and Dominicans, if you're interested.

So, he tapped in and got the information he didn't have until he needed it for the sake of spiritual enoightenment, and because he felt responsible to his parrishoners. I don't think he abused the power to tap the current, but I think Jack is abusing his "tap", and I also think that Jach feels he must continue his "ministry" since he obviously has this "gift" and because I think he got trapped by it.

More in Post 3

Pippa

But it is just as easy for me to imagine that she was in on creating "Lazaris" for profit and power from the beginning. "We came to touch Peny", she was so narcissistic, this claim could easily have been her idea.

I think Jach is slicker than meets the eye, not just a Peny pleaser.

quote:

---

That is what happens when you cease to keep thinking and evaluating because your "source" keeps telling you that they will never take your power away..."

---

Have you seen the latest "Miss Cleo" commercial? "Take Bahck Year Power, Call Meh Now." A more sophisticated version of this sentiment permeates the Orb's material.

Looking forward to reading your next post. There is so much to wade through, but getting a clear picture sure is worth it.

Jade

This is why I say that Lazaris is not who he says he is, and not that he is a fraud entirely.

I think that the initial beginnings were contrivance. I don't think there was any talk in the beginning about any of us being map makers. I think that came later after the initial useful information about psychology and structures for deprogramming harmful patterns in ourselves were exhausted and then the "real adventure" began with us going/coming home and saving the planet, all because most of the more useful information had run its course.

So, if Jack really is channeling, then why am I saying this is not all it is cracked up to be? Because the initial premise, I belive wholly, was to manipulate Penny, to keep her in his life and to make her happy, but not by honest means. Therefore, whatever the affect Lazaris has had in our lives, the origin is not clean.

At this point, at the point where it became about going home/coming home, I suspect that Jack was trapped into the game, that Penny's MONSTEROUS ego, like the plant in the Little Shop of Horrors, was busy breathing down Jack's neck "Feed me, feed me!" and he was stuck with it.

Plus, as example, look at another Enneagram 3, as Lazaris claims him to be, OJ Simpson. This man, to most, is a murderer. But in his own mind, he has decided he is innocent and unjustly pursued. Hitler thought the same thing. Hitler is also the one who said that if you tell yourself a lie long enough, you will believe it is the truth.

I think Jack has very ably tapped into the energy available to us all, and has gotten better and clearer over time. But, the information itself has been less useful to people in their practical lives and necessarily separates us from the "consensus of which [we] are still a part" because you can't know more than anyone else on the planet about spirituality, be here making maps for their safety and homecoming and not start becoming a tad more special than the rest of the unwashed masses. It reminds me of that bumper sticker: "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven."

You could argue that is a very loving thing that Christianity does for its followers, not demanding perfection, but it also, gives them license to do whatever they want and still not have to answer to anyone else's code of conduct. Read: be better than!

Recall how Penny remarked that she didn't like being in public because the resonance was too low. How much disdain she had for the unwashed she was busy saving with her maps of unheretofore seen humanity.

You can also argue that every thing I am using to deconstruct Lazaris he himself has said is true. He has reminded us that we are a part of the consensus, as I referenced above, but why would he have to keep telling us that unless maybe to remind us so we would stop questioning it and go on thinking that because Lazaris said we are a part of the rest of the world, it is okay to save it from itself and thus, be more enlightened than it.

It is absolutely fair to say that anyone who spends time working on spirituality, an initiate so to speak, is going to know more about spirituality than others, but only in the sense that they know what Penny herself called the "long division" of it, the mechanics of it. That is no guaruntee that they know the practical living of it. Look at the number of priests who are "subhuman" in their actions, again to borrow from Lazaris who probably borrowed from someone else. Look at Penny's life itself.

So, Jack channels great information, but he also "borrows" it and recycles it. I won't say he plaigerizes it, because how does one plagiarize spirituality? But, a big fat clue as to what is really going on is this: the name itself "Concept: Synergy." They take various concepts and they synregize them as their own.

Have you read the Celestine Prophecy? The Four Agreements? Shirely MacLaine's The Camino? Have you read any of Seth? This information is out there. That Lazaris synthesizes it so briliiantly is interesting, is perhaps even convenient, but it is still artifice.

And, artifice which greatly benefits Concept:Synergy in that it has the nerve to not only ask for payment for the information, an arugable point which many can successfully contend isn't such a problem, but then confer the specialness of the information onto asking for upwards of twenty thousand dollars for crystals which one can purchase elsewhere for two or three thousand.

If this is still too far fetched, I suggest this: Lazaris says often that one needn't use him as the ultimate source for information, that he does in fact borrow from many sources out there. Well, then I ask, why, if the information is out there elsewhere, are we some set of special "mapmakers"? What about the people using the material they find elsewhere, but which is also the very same that Lazaris uses? They don't know as much about spirituality as we do because they got their information for $20 at Borders Books instead of at a $600 intensive sponsored by Concept: Synergy?

And, the suggestion on-line to Penny that crystals could be purchased for less elsewhere was met with anger and derision of the other crystal retailers and the thread disappearing almost immediately off the Forum.

Isn't it possible that Jack, apparently, as Lazaris says, a celibate now that Penny has Michael, and thus relieved of any obligations to a relationship, sexual or otherwise, uses all his free time to cull what he likes out of all the available information out there, combines it with the true energy he is channeling, and lets it rip?

No, no, no!! If that is what you are thinking, I thought that, too, but then I started to at least consider that maybe it was a terrific performance. That my initial belief that Jack Pursell is just no way near smart enough to have ever pulled this off was premature.

Why isn't it possible like already discussed on this site by Jade that when enough people show up with all these wonderful expectations and open, honest hearts expecting to have healings and changes and expecting to save the world with meditation, and expecitng Lazaris to be fabulous, why isn't it possible that he is fabulous?

If our energy can affect the world and save it from destruction and Orion invaders--and maybe that has been truly happening, but in churches they get that privellege of affecting the world energetically with prayer for FREE, not
$600--why can't it also make Jack a great performer? Why can't he just tap into the flow of our positive love and expectations and support for him and let it rip?

Was the priest who claimed he gave the mass entirely in Spanish a liar, or did he benefit from the love and energy of the parrishoners and thus sail on smartly in Spanish, touching each of their hearts with perfectly conjugated verbs and properly cased nouns?

More in Post 4

Pippa

Then, if all this started as a way to keep Penny cosseted in her ego and Jack attached to her through his, then not only have so many of us been snookered, but Penny was the biggest loser of all. She is dead and isn't going to get a second chance, not in this lifetime anyway.

But, as Lazaris says, Oh, well..there are other life times. Not if Penny was correct though in that she said it was her last lifetime, not if Lazaris was correct and she had no more processing to do.

She lost out on the chance to know the truth and to really get her act together. It is intellectually dishonest to say that Penny Prestini (Peny North) died having left a beautiful spiritual legacy. Read the reams of information here and on the other Lazaris website, and perhaps think of your own experiences and witnessing on the Jach and Lazaris Room. How can this woman be said to have elevated above the need to work through even the most basic of constricting emotions, like anger?

If I am correct, then Jack tricked her for his own means. He robbed her of the chance to grow. And, Michael Prestini, too. Penny was greedy and self absorbed enough to go for it, and perhaps Michael was too. But they are dead, Penny is the only one being eulogized, Michael is a foot note in the annals of Concept: Synergy, and Jack is left alone with his cool millions and his particualr legacy of deceit.

We, however, are still here, we have the chance to walk away, or even to remain in the fold of Lazarisites. But, no one can say that we didn't get the opportunity in the year of mystery to see the prison which was once our freedom, heal it magically, recovering the steps of our legacy of the ancients, protected by the the tradtion of our heritage, on our pathway home to the Goddess.

Good riddance to the map making I have known.

Pippa

quote:

---

But, as anyone reading along who has ever done body work, Tarot readings, or any other sort of energy work can most likely attest, tapping into the source which IS isn't that difficult and is in fact each and every one of our right to do. And, once tapped into that source, many things can come to light which otherise might be obscured.

---

I know there are many ways to tap into universal intelligence. Last year I had a moving, insightful shiatsu session. A month later, the same practitioner was so far off base I resolved not to return. There is so much channelled material and IMO most of it is hogwash. Not all of it, but I sure do wonder exactly what people are supposedly "tapping" into sometimes.

I have expressed the problems I have believing that Jach is channelling in other posts. If he is, I'm wonder what his "source" could be, because IMO, it's not The source.

Bottom line is that whether or not Jach is channelling is not as important as what he is saying in the "Lazaris" mode. Either way, IMO his greatest source of inspiration is in a wallet.

Jade

I've read your all your very well thought out posts, thank you for all the work.

I'm glad you didn't make it a DE-CAF..heh.heh

Well, it does provoke me to think more about the Jachass Peny relationship, but as I had no real dealings directly with them, it will remain theory for me.
It is good to hear stuff from one who obviously knew them better, or spent alot of time on the forum...I feel for you in that I know you must have endured more hell than I.

As for Penny being in on it, I have no idea to what extent. But, I do think that it is very likely she really did believe that she was somehow an annointed one and that her remonstrations about how she would go into crisis over wondering how she ever got to be so lucky, how did she ever come to deserve this fortune, blah, blah, blah, were sincere.

I think what you say is possible, but I think Jack is a very conniving man and that he was quite capable of devising a scheme to make Penny feel even specialer and make her re-look him if she was in fact ready to toss him over for Michael Prestini.

I do think that Penny was into making the whole "show" more theatrical, though, so she might have wanted some creative influence.

I heard those "Peny and Lazaris" tapes about ten years ago and I almost balied on the whole thing but for the need to work out more stuff. Damn. But, she was so obnoxious it was incredible. Many people I have talked to who have been around a while, since the beginning, say she was unbelievably narcissistic and trashy and MEAN. One person speculated that the reason she stopped coming to events altogether was because she just offended too many people and it jeopordized business.

I do think she believed the whole scheme, though. But, who knows, Jade: you might be right. It might be a case where the two of them told themselves the lie long enough and both of them came to believe it.

There are many things which came together and made me feel quite certain that this is all a hoax after all these months of questioning, one of them was the fact that her illness was concealed and that Lazaris wouldn't address it at the seminar (BTW, I heard from a reliable source that there were around 450-500 people there, not 200).

I wonder if the reason they didn't want to address it publically is because it might mean, even if one didn't automatically assume then that the person closest to Lazaris was not able to get help enough to heal, and therefore Lazaris must be a fake, but that Penny had some unfinished business to do. I think Penny had some judgements about when people created illness or anything else untowards, and that if she were ill it would indicate that she was not all knowing and perfect.

The word might get out that she had cancer and that might indicate, if you happen to look at illness as metaphor, that, horrors! Penny has some anger work to be done. After all, it was Lazaris over and over for years who used to say that cancer was related to unprocessed anger. She did look very pink at the Millennium Event.

Another thing among the many which really hit home was the letter which went out saying that if you had a private reading scheduled with Lazaris, sorry dear one, but you are out of luck. Lazaris came to touch Penny only and thus, to honor it, we cannot allow anymore private readings.

Well, follow that to its natural conclusion and suddenly Lazaris doesn't have a need anymore to talk to anyone at seminars, now does he?

[[[Have you seen the latest "Miss Cleo" commercial? "Take Bahck Year Power, Call Meh Now." A more sophisticated version of this sentiment permeates the Orb's material.]]]

LOL! Yeah, she is a riot with her Brooklyn calypso accent. She knows all!-- except how people from Trinidad really talk. She has a radio show now, too. What is sad, is that it is so easy to see through her cheesy approach, but it took me so long to figure Jack out.

Pippa

Thanks for the very interesting posts. I really appreciate the time you obviously spent putting your thoughts together. I don't have the time to reply to all of the points I would like to, but let me at least touch on some.

You said: I asked them what they thought of Lazaris and about the troika. They said that Lazaris was sometimes interesting, sometimes not--I was shocked! How could Lazaris ever be uninteresting? But, that is part and parcel of what happens when you stop considering outside sources...what happens when you think you have found a safe, irrefutable source of all the mysteries and answers which otherwise might bedevil you into fears and paralysis.

I remember in my early Lazaris days feeling how lucky I was to have stumbled across "a safe, irrefutable source of all the mysteries". Lazaris might explain it as such: The negative ego becomes ecstatic once someone has such a feeling. Imagine the weight lifted from the negative ego. It now can rely on Lazaris to make all of the arguments of how the person is "better than". Truly, what a friend the ego has been found in Lazaris. Naturally, the negative ego will pull out all the stops if someone questions Lazaris as the negative ego feels the threat for its livelihood. What will happen, after all, if they start thinking for themselves again?

You said: The other thing they said which always stuck with me was that the resaon Jack divorced Penny was that she was too intense and he could barely take the pressure of being with her all the time. So, it was a sort of relief when Michael showed up, suitcases in hand, on the Pursells doorstep, as directed by Lazaris, and had come to marry Penny.

Some of your musings about other explanations sound more realistic to me than the "official" story. I have found Peny and Jach to be masters of spin (even at the expense of their integrity). I would be hard pressed to believe ANY of their stories without a lot of independent confirmation.

You said: Well, but Lazaris can see us in all our humanity, he can see us in the range of emotions and choices we might make, you might argue. That is why Penny's apparent lack of discernment with how to spend her time acting as one of the most enlightened mapmakers, if not THE most enlightened mapmakers, on earth would not concern Lazaris.

Given such lack of concern on Lazaris's behalf, could we not conclude that we mere humans are totally inadequate judges of character? Maybe Hitler wasn't such a bad guy after all! He too may have been on the fast track to higher planes.

This is related to another thought. Let's assume Lazaris is 100% real and that his information is 100% accurate from his perspective. That in no way implies that what he tells us may have an ounce of usefulness for us while we are at this lowly level of existence. Back to the human realm, an analogy might be that an adult's perspective on abandonment may totally lack any practical use for a small child. The fact that the adult is correct may be of little benefit to the child. Of course, I don't believe Lazaris is 100% real and I KNOW that he is not 100% accurate.

You said: I clearly heard him say, as did many others I have talked to, that we, as mapmakers, "know more about spirituality than anyone else on the planet"

Oh, what marvelous fodder for the ego!

You said: As to the arguement that it is impossible for a single person, Jack Pursell, to have accomplished all this unless he was in fact channelling, I do think he is channeling. There is no way he isn't channeling.

I think we have to be a little careful about the definition of channeling. Yes, I agree he appears to be channeling. But what if there is indeed no Lazaris other than a neat little imagining of Jach's not-conscious mind? Even if he is taping into some mystical source to get some of his information, that does not mean he is channeling. It may mean he is putting on a convenient act (even though not consciously) to facilitate communication of information. For me, the jury is still out if ANY channeling has ever happened with ANY entity. Note that if I am correct, this does not necessarily diminish a lot of what has been said by the "channel". It only underscores the already blatant need for discernment.

The biggest problem I have with the "channeling" is that it describes a process that lends itself to the dropping of skepticism just because there is some supposedly more intelligent entity behind the information. If there's really not an entity behind the source, then other descriptions should be used.

You said: But, a big fat clue as to what is really going on is this: the name itself "Concept: Synergy." They take various concepts and they synregize them as their own.

We have been blessed by an abundance of clues. I love the one you mention!

You said: Hitler is also the one who said that if you tell yourself a lie long enough, you will believe it is the truth.

I recently read that Hitler had heard his share of voices that he felt were very helpful. Unfortunately, what I was reading did not go into much more detail than that. It raises the issue of the future direction of Lazaris. I have read account after account where someone touches some special knowledge that is initially fantastic and empowering. However, over time some force such as power, money, and/or fame, takes its inevitable toll as the material and its followers take an unexpected detour South. It doesn't happen with everyone, but it sure as hell is a possibility.

Pippa, thanks for taking the time to put your thoughts out in such a clear manner. You have come to the same fundamental conclusions as I regarding the raison d'etre of Lazaris. Whether Peny was a conscious conspirator or not is pretty much irrelevant to me, although very interesting nevertheless. I believe that her paranoia, and the inherent paranoia within the organization to be indicative of some sense she had that there was much to hide. Even if Jach, as I believe, concocted this entity on his own, I find it impossible to believe that neither Peny or any of the Gangsters ever once questioned the veracity of it's existance. Somewhere inside all of their twisted little minds lives the truth.

As interesting and important as it is to deconstruct the existance of this Lazaris creature, I believe it is far more important to deconstruct the teachings and information themselves.

There seems to be a strong desire for most of us to continue to lend credibility to those teachings which over the years we have embraced and incorporated into our belief systems and behavior patterns. For me, it is now essential to view them with as much suspicion as I do any information which has come out of Con:Sin.

The analogy I made yesterday in conversation with Ted is that if you have a ball of tangled yarn, it makes no sense whatsoever to begin knitting with it until all the knots and tangles are out. As Ted suggested, maybe it's better to just get a new ball of yarn and start fresh.

As they say, if you throw enough mud at a wall some of it will stick. I'm sure that in all that body of information there are some bits that are keepers. But, how do we know unless we place each of them under the same microscope that we are using to evaluate the organization itself?

It is a matter of concern to me that throughout all this doubting there is still little acknowledgement that the materials themselves might not be any more valid than the claims "Lazaris" makes about Peny.

I agree that Jach very well may be channelling, but with the disclaimer that I believe we all channel on a regular basis. There seems to be a state of mind that allows for the flow of information or even energy to come through. I know this very well as a cook, that in the process of preparing a dish there sometimes comes an almost indescribable moment of "clarity", in which I am enlightened as to just what little tweak or twist will take this recipe from good, or even very good, to stellar. Whenever I get that little "rush" I know I have a winner.

Many writers have spoken also of this energy. At a writers conference many years ago Kurt Vonnegut gave a talk on this phenomena to a group of fellow authors. He stated that any honest writer would have to admit that most of the words that are attributed to them do not in fact come from the writer themselves, but from an undefinable voice, one that is outside of their own mind and experience.

I met Marion Zimmer Bradley (Mists of Avalon) back in the 80's and while she was screaming on about the stupidity of the new age concepts, channeling, etc. , she also said that "any author knows that a good book is not written but "heard". She suggested that writers learn to "listen" for their stories rather than try to just go through the drill of technique. She also stated when asked if she had ever dreamed of her characters that the Free Amazons from her Darkover series, very familiar to those of us who have followed her work, were dreamt of, and that she had great regrets for having given them voice in her books.

Marilyn Monroe also spoke of a strange shifting of consciousness when she was who she called "Marilyn".
It was an energy she could call on which would dramatically change her, with no need for make-up or costuming. She was once walking in Manhattan with a friend, dressed in a trenchcoat, scarf, and sunglasses. No one took any notice of these two ordinary looking women until Marilyn turned to her friend and said "do you want to see me be "her"? Suddenly a subtle but dramatic change came over her and she was instantly recognized and barraged with adoring fans. She had done nothing detectable to her friends eye, but the change was irrefutable.

I believe these all to be examples of channelling. Again, I believe we all have those flashing moments, or even extended sessions of becoming a vehicle for some energy outside of ourselves.

But, that still begs the question; what and who is being channelled? In all of these example the "subject" is reaching for something specific . For me, it's a perfect synergy of ingredients, timing, temperature, etc.
For writers it's a story line, or character. For Marilyn it was a persona. However, in none of these examples is anyone actually achieving enlightenment, or invoking some ultimate truth or incandescent wisdom. Each of us getting something directly related to our desires and intentions.

So, what is it that Jach is receiving in these channellings? Is it wisdom and truth, or is it a persona that like Marilyn's has enormous appeal?

This post is much longer than I intended, , I was only going to post a few lines, but the topic is so fascinating to me, that I feel somehow compelled and inspired to forge on.

Anyway, I really have to take off, but wanted to offer these thoughts, because I still feel a lot of concern that while we are placing the Jach show under intense scrutiny, we might not be doing the same with the materials. Ultimately it is the materials themselves which have influenced us, most especially those key issues like "negative-ego", martyr, victim, etc. which have seeped into our belief systems and influenced our thinking, behavior, and relationships. As Ted pointed out this morning, the Orb even offers up definitions for concepts such as fear and trust which have become operating principles for many of us.

I think we need to look as carefully at all of that as we do at the issues of how or why Jach is presenting this Lazaris extravaganza. There's a whole lot more to it than just a "pretty in purple" side-show.

Jade has written many great posts on this topic, as have several others here.

More later when I have the time. We're still "otherwise involved", and will be until after next week.

Pippa, would you mind sending me a quick e-mail to katie@cosmicfool.com so I can get your return address? I don't have access to it right now, but wanted to send you an e-mail.

Katie

Thanks for writing despite your being "otherwise involved".

I enjoyed your examples of others "channeling" information. I have had similar experiences, mostly around work. I often am amazed when some solution to a very complex problem just comes to me and I say to myself "where the hell did that come from?". I also have had many periods where I go into the "zone" and produce an incredible amount of high quality work in a short period of time. During such times, I can easily produce 10 times as much output as I normally would and it is of a much higher caliber. If I could only find a way to turn that capability on demand! However, equally important would be the capability to turn if off. When I am in such periods, what I am working on generally becomes the only focus of my life and I might find myself having difficulty getting a full night's sleep.

I prefer to have a stricter definition of "channeling" than I think is generally in use. I would prefer to see channeling defined as the phenomena that occurs when a totally separate entity unrelated to any subpersonality of the channel hijacks the communications of the channel. Under this definition, I would not include the Marilyn example unless it was clear that the "Marilyn" that takes over was not a part of herself. I would not include any reception of psychic information or "taping" of mystical knowledge, even if the person happened to tap into, for example, the genius of Einstein from the collective unconscious. I find it is easier to think about channeling when the definition does not include the "treasure chest" of other related phenomena. Excuse me for hopping on a little soapbox. I must have been channeling...

You said: Anyway, I really have to take off, but wanted to offer these thoughts, because I still feel a lot of concern that while we are placing the Jach show under intense scrutiny, we might not be doing the same with the materials. Ultimately it is the materials themselves which have influenced us, most especially those key issues like "negative-ego", martyr, victim, etc. which have seeped into our belief systems and influenced our thinking, behavior, and relationships. As Ted pointed out this morning, the Orb even offers up definitions for concepts such as fear and trust which have become operating principles for many of us.

I agree that both the scrutiny of the show and the scrutiny of the material are critical. I think they both have their place. Some may be only interested in one aspect. Others will be interested in both. I think that the scrutiny of the show is important because it opens for many people what may be the otherwise locked door into the scrutiny of the material. I see it as a one-two punch.

I hope to write a post or two about some of the material and would love to see others do the same.

You said: The analogy I made yesterday in conversation with Ted is that if you have a ball of tangled yarn, it makes no sense whatsoever to begin knitting with it until all the knots and tangles are out. As Ted suggested, maybe it's better to just get a new ball of yarn and start fresh.

I wish it were so easy as staring with a new ball of yarn. However, let's not forget (as Ted also pointed out about fear and trust) that there may be many operating principles under which we operate. I think it is important to spend a fair amount of time evaluating the material if for no other reason than to be sure you really are operating under those principles that you want to be.

I enjoyed you post and thought you made many excellent points. I am really thinking about the material and what, if any, holds as true. With the many revelations, post Peny's death, there is too much not to seriously consider all as up for rethinking. That depresses the shit out of me, but I would rather wake up and move forward. Lazaris owes us, big time, explanations around this weird, codependent, sick troika.

"As interesting and important as it is to deconstruct the existence of this Lazaris creature, I believe it is far more important to deconstruct the teachings and information themselves."

That is where I am coming out right now, too. My relationship with Lazaris seemed so real, and I certainly gave power away to him and PMJ and C:S. So be it. I was stupid.

But now, is there anything of value there at all? If so what? It would seem without a clear statement from Lazaris himself, I have to throw it all out. How can I say, "Oh the stuff on child and adolescent (or pain, freedom, shame, fear, LOVE, for christ's sake, how can that be OK but the Lemurian stuff, Arthurian, whatever, be bogus?

I had a friend, now deceased, Barbara Bowers, who read auras and wrote a couple books on it, who led me to Lazaris in a time a crisis. She told me that L has the "psychological structure" for spirituality and he won't take your power. (now in question, certainly). At the time, I asked her what she thought of the PMJ and she said they were weird, she didn't know what was going on with them. Telling, all these years later.

"There seems to be a strong desire for most of us to continue to lend credibility to those teachings which over the years we have embraced and incorporated into our belief systems and behavior patterns. For me, it is now essential to view them with as much suspicion as I do any information which has come out of Con:Sin."

I couldn't agree more. You have to hold it all as questionable. I certainly felt I had some wonderful, miraculous successes using the techniques, but I felt that, although very grateful to Lazaris, I did it. But now I have to question, would these have happened anyway?

"It is a matter of concern to me that throughout all this doubting there is still little acknowledgement that the materials themselves might not be any more valid than the claims "Lazaris" makes about Peny."

Absolutely. While there may be truth to the fact that the church members don't necessarily represent the best of the church, PMJ and C:S really have no basic understanding of what Lazaris about love. Also they run their business out of a sense of entitlement, all because Lazaris is the highest authority. I digress.

Anyway, this is clearly a topic for discussion. I am pissed at myself, pissed at what I thought to be a being called Lazaris and have to suspend all that I held as true.

Amaryllis

Katie said,

quote:

---

"As interesting and important as it is to deconstruct the existence of this Lazaris creature, I believe it is far more important to deconstruct the teachings and information themselves.

---

There are three areas to deconstruct:
JMP and C:S, "Lazaris", the material. All important, but the material is what infiltrates and permeates the mind. So taking back one's mindis the task at hand, a lengthly searching process -- but highly rewarding.

quote:

---

How can I say, "Oh the stuff on child and adolescent(or pain, freedom, shame, fear, LOVE, for christ's sake, how can that be OK but the Lemurian stuff, Arthurian, whatever, be bogus?

---

I agree, all of it has to be fully reconsidered. "Shame" for instance. I tend to think that J/L made it even weightier than it is -- 4 tapes (you can't "lift" it by yourself) worth. And of course when initially waking up out of the "Lazaris" daze, "adult shame" for being duped is part of the mix.

quote:

---

I am pissed at myself, pissed at what I thought to be a being called Lazaris and have to suspend all that I held as true.

---

I know the feeling well, but think it's a healthy reaction on the road to Self recovery and freedom. I've been sorting through, processing, and re-evaluating for eight months now. The blurry picture about the truth of J/L, C:S and Sparky is becoming more and more sharply focused. And so is my relationship with my Self and my growth.

Hope to hear more from you.

Jade

Have I thought of posting this somewhere else? Actually, yes, on the J&L Room--LOL!!!

Yes, I think I will put it on the other discussion board when I am not so worn out. So, tomorrow, I guess.

[[[I know there are many ways to tap into universal intelligence. Last year I had a moving, insightful shiatsu session. A month later, the same practitioner was so far off base I resolved not to return. There is so much channelled material and IMO most of it is hogwash. Not all of it, but I sure do wonder exactly what people are supposedly "tapping" into sometimes.]]]

I have been thinking about this that you say Jade, and Katie, your anecdote about Marilyn Monroe is quite amazing.

It reminded me of three things. First, that Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Christian Science Church, was able to just receive all this unbelievable information--reams and reams. Enough to start a whole Church, in fact. But, there is a lot which her recent biographer was apparently the first to ever see. It would seem Mrs. Eddy also "channelled" a lot of information which the church didn't approve of, but I haven't read the bio so I am not sure what was the biographer's exact scoop.

The point is that MBE did "channel" a lot of stuff which the church rejected in its collections of her works which now provide the basis for the CS Church--that is Christian Sciance, not Con:Sin by the way. Why did the Church reject it? I am sure the Church had many reasons why, but I wonder if some of what MBE said was just too weird and flaky, too out there to be trusted even by people who were willing to trust the rest of what she evidently sucked out of the Higher Realms.

It calls Craig's point to the forefront, just what is the definition of channelling?

Second, as to Marilyn Monroe, when we were still very young (s), a friend of mine and I used to pretend we were French and just for our own amusement, we would go around town speaking in French and when we were forced to speak English, we did so with French accents. If people spoke French to us, we spoke back, and it seemed they were none the wiser. People noticed us and tried to help us as though we might be lost in an American city.

It was funny, but the point is that we were playing around, but we did it so well, people responded. And *I* responded. It was like I was dropped into another person and I even began to to think in French, and think as though I were French. Kinda freaky, actually. I should note, though, that each of us had a basic knowledge of the language, so it was not like some miraculous French popped into our heads to conveniently help us accessorize the afternoon's fun and games.

And, I guess it would be useful to note that we never took advantage of anyone financially when we did it, and we certainly didn't practice therapy on others *without* a license (unlike Jack), albeit we spoke *with* a bogus accent (like Jack).

The third thing it reminded me of, Katie, when you mention Marion Zimmer Bradley, is Karen Blixen, aka Isak Denisen. Her biographies tell how she was able to take any little snippet her dinner guests could give her and right there on the spot, spin stories that would enthrall for HOURS at a time. She would just go into the "story zone" and mesmerize her guests with her tales. Sounds an awful lot like Jack.

So many other thoughts, but I need to sign off soon.

[[Well, it does provoke me to think more about the Jachass Peny relationship, but as I had no real dealings directly with them, it will remain theory for me.
It is good to hear stuff from one who obviously knew them better, or spent alot of time on the forum...I feel for you in that I know you must have endured more hell than I.]]

If it weren't for the way people I know personally were betrayed and deceived by Penny, and to some extent Jack (that is outside of the grandest betrayal of all, that being the Orb scam I have paid into for over the last many years), I would be a longer time into understanding the depths of depravity that is at the heart of Concept: Synergy. Witnessing the Forum was just gravy.

[[[Your overview of penny fits pretty well with the others here, and yet the Jach being a grand manipulator of her seems far-fetched, but is that just cuz jachass appears so mild mannered....looks will decieve that's for sure...]]]

Throughout the day, I thought about the posts in here, like yours and Jade's, pointing out Penny fits the more likely profile of being if not *the* mastermind, then at least a co-conspirator. And, while I guess I am more inclined to agree with Katie that Penny's role is irrelevant, I am still curious how much she had to do with it. I think Jack truly did do this to fawn over her.

I still think he was into "giving" her Lazaris, as I think IMO was the one to already point out. But, I do wonder now more at Penny's part. For one thing, I heard Lazaris myself say once that Penny loved to buy scores of books at a time, prehaps not reading them for months, but because she liked to have them around while they were still on the shelves...

--let me interrupt myself to just say it sounds like she was so goddamned greedy that she had to have every book she saw--

and she would talk about how she loved to read all these metaphysical books. So, what was her role, to study what Jack should include in the next tape or seminar?

[[I remember in my early Lazaris days feeling how lucky I was to have stumbled across "a safe, irrefutable source of all the mysteries". ]]]

This is one of those TAKE BACK YOUR MIND flags which came up for me over and over these past months as I questioned. I was talking about it with another FOL recently who suggested that the better-than I refer to when we have all the answers is just a product of still being immature with the material and projecting parent onto Lazaris.

I like my friend (s), and I also believe my friend is sincere, so I am not willing to crucify over this point, but I don't agree. I can't. It just doesn't hold up when you put it the very way you did, Craig:

[[Lazaris might explain it as such: The negative ego becomes ecstatic once someone has such a feeling. Imagine the weight lifted from the negative ego. It now can rely on Lazaris to make all of the arguments of how the person is "better than". Truly, what a friend the ego has been found in Lazaris. Naturally, the negative ego will pull out all the stops if someone questions Lazaris as the negative ego feels the threat for its livelihood. What will happen, after all, if they start thinking for themselves again?]]]

What is more, and one of my hugest regrets among several pretty heavy regrets at having been so sucked in to this bullshit, is that prior to Lazaris, I filled many notebooks with my thoughts and insights about metaphysics which would come to me from various sources and at various times in my act of living life as a curious explorer (not the "explorer of the Mysts, as Lazaris claims about Lemuria). But as soon as I "found" Lazaris, I stopped. I used to talk myself out of writing all the time, telling myself that there was no point in the discovery any more since Lazaris always seemed to know it and tell us anyway. Plus, maybe they knew more than I did and if I just waited long enough, they would tell me and I would not only have answers, but THE answers.

I robbed myself of the chance to discover for myself. And Jack got the loot.

[[[You said: The other thing they said which always stuck with me was that the reason Jack divorced Penny was that she was too intense and he could barely take the pressure of being with her all the time. So, it was a sort of relief when Michael showed up, suitcases in hand, on the Pursells doorstep, as directed by Lazaris, and had come to marry Penny.]]]

Rereading this bit about her "intensity" reminded me of the "Penny and Lazaris" tape where she and Lazaris talk about how Jack had to take her license away because she would space out while she was driving. First of all, if she was spacing out while she was driving I don't think it is as quaint as Lazaris seemed to think it was on the tape, and second, I wonder if it had more to do with her particular brand of "intense" which probably translated into severe road rage. I wonder if she had to have her license "revoked" before she ended up in jail.

[[[The biggest problem I have with the "channeling" is that it describes a process that lends itself to the dropping of skepticism just because there is some supposedly more intelligent entity behind the information. If there's really not an entity behind the source, then other descriptions should be used.]]]

Yes. But, I am of the opinion now that the original intention was to deceive. So, why would they take responsibilty? I still wonder though if along the way, among several things which might have happened, Jack got really blown away with the power and so got into "being" Lazaris. I just love Katie's anecdote about Marilyn Monroe. Can't you just see MM get into character and then the masses flock to her? It must have been a very powerful drug to put down, all that adoration.

Well, I think this is what happened to Jack. He got really blown away by the fact that "GODDAMN, this channelling shit works!" So, even though it wasn't for the purest of reasons, I think this Lazaris persona which Jack created and the adulation and following it engendered caused him to let his "Other" self live up to the expectations placed upon it. Just like Marilyn Monroe, when she wanted to.

The Lazaris part of Jack (which would mean Lazaris is beholden to also being a Three enneagram) is pretty interested in making people happy with him, so of course the Lazaris part will try to entertain, to please, to be insightful, and to "love". But, it is still a fake.

There are so many instances where Jack acting as Lazaris carried out the ultimate goal of Jack, that of never letting Penny down in her thirst for praise and simpering kowtowing. He never ever once said anything other than indulging things about Penny, right down to never mentioning what her actual cause of death was.

Seth was able to help Jane Roberts write a whole damn book about her death and dying. And, btw, he never required her to divorce her husband as part of the gig.

[[[[I recently read that Hitler had heard his share of voices that he felt were very helpful. Unfortunately, what I was reading did not go into much more detail than that. It raises the issue of the future direction of Lazaris. I have read account after account where someone touches some special knowledge that is initially fantastic and empowering. However, over time some force such as power, money, and/or fame, takes its inevitable toll as the material and its followers take an unexpected detour South. It doesn't happen with everyone, but it sure as hell is a possibility.]]]

Wow. Think of that. You know, it does make one wonder. I know that recently on the Forum, there was all this sort of talk by some of the Gang about how happy we all are and finished with our life lessons other than to heal all the broken alliances for the fun of it and how "now that we all know the truth about what death is really like" or something pretty damn near close to that, intoning that death is not such a bad thing and that we could all hang out in the Wonderful overlooking the sea of possiblity like Penny and Michael are now, happier than they ever were here...

Well, I could not help but wonder if C:S will figure that suicide isn't so martyred after all, even if Lazaris apparently said Michael was a martyr for having taken his own life (NO DUH!!!!). They might ALL drink the Kool Aid. It really unnerved me when I thought about that.

[[[But now, is there anything of value there at all? If so what? It would seem without a clear statement from Lazaris himself, I have to throw it all out. How can I say, "Oh the stuff on child and adolescent (or pain, freedom, shame, fear, LOVE, for christ's sake, how can that be OK but the Lemurian stuff, Arthurian, whatever, be bogus?]]]

Just a note: on one of the Penny and Lazaris tapes, Miss Giggles goes on about how she and her posse see Faeries all the time at their house in Palm Beach. How the cook (Jennifer) sees them all the time in the garden and by the pool and how Michael sees them and uses them to help fix the stereo. Penny G (for Giggles) also warns us to be ready for the day when we see our "first eighteen-incher...giggle, giggle, giggle." And Lazaris blabs on, "oh, certainly so," in that particular regard, oh yeah, baby, Pennykins our Sweet, whatever...the point is he AGREES with her.

But, then in all the Faery workshops, Lazaris gets very grave and reminds us that Faeries are not to be infantillized into silly little leaf-clad people or short, cute naked women with wings. He reminds us that they are as different from one another as are we humans, and that they RESENT being so categorized as little winged things since they are not that. Then, we get all this admonishing and warning that if we insist upon seeing Faerie as such, then we have to understand that they will "roll" us and take advantage of us, and make fools of us for fun. Not all faeries, but some.

Does anyone have different notes? Please, I invite you to share what yours might say. These are what mine say and I wrote it all while breathlessly awaiting the unimpeachable wisdom of Lazaris' own experience with Faerie, not ever holding it to any skepticism. Why should I do that? He also gives us tons of notes as to why this would prohibit us from exploring it deeper, how it would indicate we were not magical enough to get past the logic and reason.

My own verdict is still pending on what to belive regarding all these "other" beings, but already there is this inconsistency with Lazaris.

So, as to your question, maybe not believing anything Lazaris says is a good place to start. The hard part is then deconstructing what is actually your own system of beliefs and upon what it is that YOU stand for. I am realizing that it is going to take time.

Pippa

I don't have much time to respond right now, but I wanted to tell you how much I appreciate your clear and cogent posts. It's inspiring to read of your journey.

Thanks for taking the time to delineate all this out. I am not sure where I stand totally on the authenticity of Lazaris but I am sure that there is, minimally, highly codependent behavior and cuddling up to Peny, which brings down the bar in my opinion.

I do feel a certain relief that I can go back to some paths I was exploring before Lazaris....I do think it will be hard to de-program, as Jade has pointed out.

Having returned from vacation, I now have the time to give your posts the attention they deserve.

You wrote:

quote:

---

... it was necessary for
Penny and Jack to have to sacrifice their marriage and perhaps any other lessons they might otherwise have chosen in other lifetimes when Lazaris was there doing his "nudging." That would make Jack and Penny martyrs.

---

It would also make Lazaris a liar, since they have repeatedly said they would not force themselves on anyone. How could Jach have given permission to Lazaris to come through before he actually did come through? How could Lazaris presume to come through without explicit permission?

You wrote:

quote:

---

Now, martyrhood wouldn't be much to fret over except that a basic tenent of what Lazaris teaches is that martyrhood is an absolute robbing of one's power and that it makes one abusive in the name of love. He tells us that martyrhood is like pregnancy: you are either in martyr or you are not and that when you are in a martyred state of being, you absolutely, positively are not also be in a state of loving....To take this to its natural conclusion then, following my premise that this is all contrivance, then Jack and Penny are incapable of truly loving anyone ...

---

Well, it's not hard to believe that Jach and Peny are not capable of loving Of course, if Lazaris' description of martyrhood is accurate, then very few of us are capable of loving, most of the time - because most of us are constantly in martyr. Yet aliens monitor us to see how we can be so loving(?).

I never did get that "all or none" stuff about martyrhood. If one cannot be loving whilst in martyr, then what motivation does one have to get out of it?

You wrote:

quote:

---

I wonder if Penny's obssession with them (the Clintons) was due to a low-grade energy that she knew somehow, that this energy was very present in her life already.

---

I agree there are many similarities between J &P and the Clintons. I wrote about this in a thread called A Tale of Two Codependencies

You wrote:

quote:

---

In his eulogy speech on the "Read Only" thread memorializing Penny, Eagle Man notes that people often thought Penny was being unfair or unkind, but that they just didn't understand.

---

Calling this manipulative, cruel, egotistical worm, "Eagle Man", is too kind for my taste. I prefer the moniker, "Michaelevelli" Yes, Peny was misunderstood - I've heard that about the Gang. Of course, that makes them martyrs, according to the Grand Orb. They were misunderstood all right - some misunderstood them to be responsible human beings.

You wrote:

quote:

---

Recall how Penny remarked that she didn't like being in public because the resonance was too low. How much
disdain she had for the unwashed she was busy saving with her maps of unheretofore seen humanity.

---

In other words, she couldn't exercize the same control over the masses that she exercized over the FOLs. Why didn't she simply maintain her high resonance, which would cause the other resonance to either raise or go away?

You wrote:

quote:

---

So, Jack channels great information, but he also "borrows" it and recycles it. I won't say he plaigerizes it,
because how does one plagiarize spirituality?

---

One can't plagiarize spirituality because one cannot own it to the exclusion of others. Yet C:S copyrights the Lazaris Material as if they do own it.

You wrote:

quote:

---

Well, then I ask, why, if the information is out there elsewhere, are we some set of special "mapmakers"? What about the people using the material they find elsewhere, but which is also the very same that Lazaris uses? They don't know as
much about spirituality as we do because they got their information for $20 at Borders Books instead of at a $600 intensive sponsored by Concept: Synergy?

---

Or how about someone who "channeled" it themselves? Or thought about it themselves via deep questioning? What makes FOLs mapmakers? The unwillingness or inability to stand up to the Gang's slaughter of innocents? The unwillingness or inability to make a descision without relying on a tape by a dubious entity? The willingness to defer to said dubious entity? The willingness and ability to fork over $285 for a weekend for re-cycled psycho-babble? Yeah, that's it! This mapmaker nonsense is true ego-fodder.

You wrote:

quote:

---

Isn't it possible that Jack, apparently, as Lazaris says, a celibate now that Penny has Michael, and thus relieved of any obligations to a relationship, sexual or otherwise, uses all his free time to cull what he likes out of all the available information out there, combines it with the true energy he is channeling, and lets it
rip?

---

We know that Michaell asked questions on websites about Tesla coils and other super-scientific phenomena. We know that Peny read many meta-physical books. (Why, if she had access to the best meta-physical information available did she read so many books about it?) Perhaps they sat around the dinner table discussing this stuff without ever breathing a word about Lazaris being a sham. What a coincidence that Lazaris' next seminar had to do with the latest meta-physical or science fiction book Peny had read! She must have been in tune with the Zeitgeist!

You wrote:

quote:

---

Then, if all this started as a way to keep Penny cosseted in her ego and Jack attached to her through his, then not only have so many of us been snookered, but Penny was the biggest loser of all.

---

As "Lazaris" would say, "eaten alive by her negative ego". An ego that was fed by Jach until it exploded. Peny liver pate, anyone? Not very loving, is it?

You wrote:

quote:

---

Oh, well..there are other life times. Not if Penny was correct though in that she said it was her last lifetime, not if Lazaris was correct and she had no more processing to do.

---

Why does it matter whether or not she has more processing to do? Didn't Lazaris say that we choose whether to come back again, and it has nothing to do with karma? Except when not coming back can be used as an indicator of Peny's spiritual superiority - that she's an avatar. She should have quit while she was ahead. I hope she didn't come back on my account, because I don't appreciate it.

You wrote:

quote:

---

Good riddance to the map making I have known.

---

Yes, good riddance to Jach's map, a map of deception, manipulation, greed and contempt. Not a new map at all. The old map of self-respect, introspection, honesty, courage and descernment leads one away from Jach's road to hell.

A warm and belated welcome to you

You wrote:

quote:

---

But now, is there anything of value there at all? If so what?

---

Out of all the stuff that Lazaris has said, I think we can be sure that some has value. However, given that I think the whole thing is a fraud, I would say that some information has value in spite of Lazaris having said it, never because of.

So if we are to believe that the whole thing is a fraud, or even that Lazaris is a seperate being, but from the Lower Realms or that Jach is an imperfect channel, our task is to learn everything fresh, since we can't trust Lazaris. If we learn fresh and it happens to jibe with Lazaris, so what? Everybody's right once in a while.

The only way to accept the Lazaris Material without question is to accept the initial premise put forth by Lazaris that they are a seperate entity, from the Higher realms, with no ego issues, and their words are channeled verbatim by Jach - that Jach is an "objective, full-trance channel". How likely is that? I don't think anyone on this board or the Lazaris Lite board believes that premise. Without that premise, the whole Lazaris canon is suspect.

That's just my opinion - I could be in negative ego

You wrote:

quote:

---

I agree, all of it has to be fully reconsidered. "Shame" for instance. I tend to think that J/L made it even weightier than it is -- 4 tapes (you can't "lift" it by yourself) worth.

---

"You can't lift it by yourself". Says who? Lazaris says we create our own reality - all of it. But someone else makes the rules? "They" say the Karma Lords don't dictate whether or not we come back in another lifetime. But some "Lords" dictate how we release our shame? If we truly create all of our reality, then we can make our own rules as to how to release shame, how to love ourselves more, how to manifest abundance. In other words, we can make our own maps without the guidance of hundreds of Lazaris tapes.

Perhaps it's time to create a new thread detailing all the inconsistencies in the material that so many deem to be consistent. I suspect they say it's consistent because "Lazaris" says it's consistent.

Welcome home!

You said to Amaryllis: The only way to accept the Lazaris Material without question is to accept the initial premise put forth by Lazaris that they are a seperate entity, from the Higher realms, with no ego issues, and their words are channeled verbatim by Jach - that Jach is an "objective, full-trance channel". How likely is that? I don't think anyone on this board or the Lazaris Lite board believes that premise. Without that premise, the whole Lazaris canon is suspect.

One way I try to understand the refusal of some FOLs to even question the material is to look at the analogy of someone deeply in love with another person. I'm sure we all have known someone who was head-over-heels in love with someone who was clearly giving off warning signs about a tendency for, say, abuse. The lover will argue how ridiculous you are being in your concern. They will not and can not see it at the time. Why should things be different for those who fall in love with a non-physical entity? The mind has a marvelous ability to rationalize.

You said to Jade: "You can't lift it by yourself". Says who? Lazaris says we create our own reality - all of it. But someone else makes the rules? "They" say the Karma Lords don't dictate whether or not we come back in another lifetime. But some "Lords" dictate how we release our shame? If we truly create all of our reality, then we can make our own rules as to how to release shame, how to love ourselves more, how to manifest abundance. In other words, we can make our own maps without the guidance of hundreds of Lazaris tapes.

Great point!

You said to Jade: Perhaps it's time to create a new thread detailing all the inconsistencies in the material that so many deem to be consistent. I suspect they say it's consistent because "Lazaris" says it's consistent.

I think this is a good idea for our own process. However, as I indicated earlier in this post, I sincerely doubt many hard-core FOLs will be phased.

Cheers, Craig

Thanks for the welcome

You wrote:

quote:

---

I think this is a good idea for our own process. However, as I indicated earlier in this post, I sincerely doubt many
hard-core FOLs will be phased.

---

I think I was a hard-core FOL not too long ago. There are many straws which may break the camel's back. You never know which one it will be.

Cheers, Ted

quote:

---

I think I was a hard-core FOL not too long ago. There are many straws which may break the camel's back. You never know which one it will be

---

Good point Ted. The right "straw" at the right time, because as we know an individual has to be at a point of willingness within his/her self to under go a powerful internal upheaval -- compelled to dismantle and scrutinize the internalized "Lazaris" world view.

Jade

Gee whiz, in reading back through this thread I realized that I never even said hello to you!

Hello and Welcome!!

There was a lot of cool posting going on during our vacation, and it was frustratingly hard to keep up.

quote:

---

While there may be truth to the fact that the church members don't necessarily represent the best of the church, PMJ and C:S really have no basic understanding of what Lazaris about love. Also they run their business out of a sense of entitlement, all because Lazaris is the highest authority. I digress.

---

As I re-read this thread this line jumped out at me, because I have been thinking a lot about entitlement these days. It's one of those issues that I think doesn't get enough light shone on it. I wonder if you or anyone else is up for a discussion about it.

Where the hell does this entitled sense come from anyway? Is this something that is natural to humans, or is it cultivated? If so, by who, and why?

It's really a nasty thing, IMO.

Ted and I know this man who is in all honesty, a rather unpleasant and unattractive older fellow, with lots of annoying personality traits and really poor personal hygeine. (Yechh)

This guy is very bitter and upset with life because it has not delivered him the beautiful 19 year old free-love hippy chick he's been desiring for years now. He's mad at all the hippy chicks who aren't conceding to his fantasies, and all the rest of the women in the world who aren't the hippy chick he desires. He's a very punishing kind of fellow actually, especially if you happen to be a woman.

Once I asked him where he got his nerve, and why he felt that any pretty young woman would be interested in a dirty punishing unattractive old goat like him.

His answer was to tell me that he is "entitled to have what he wants". When I asked him on what basis did he believe that, he just got really pissed off, but just for a split second before the "anger defense" cut in, I think I did detect a flash of doubt. Is it possible that it never occurred to him to question his sense of entitlement?

Is this an issue that gets discussed a lot outside of the Lazaris mind maze?

Yes, inspite of all the L teachings on the topic, Peny, Jach, et.al. are most definitely operating from a place of incredible entitlement.

I've noticed that also in the complaints and criticisms of me and this message board. It's as though there is some unquestioned sense that something is owed to people who come here to read, and if it isn't delivered, there is further entitlement to slash, burn, and punish.

All of a sudden, it hit me during a very sickening exchange with someone whose anger caught me by surprise, I got it that the anger was all about entitlement. This person evidently feels entitled to a lot of things, like my respect, friendship, admiration, and to behave and think in a way that fits his view of what kind of a person I should be.

Sorry for turning this around to a personal issue, but lately it has become one for me.

I'm seeing that a sense of entitlement also brings with it a huge agenda to punish, punish, punish.

So, my question is, where the hell does this entitlement come from in the first place?

Katie

I see what you mean, but I think you can take the argument too far. Of course, no one is entitled to anyone else's (sexual) love.

At the same time I feel "entitled" to be treated with respect by people that I meet. I believe that I am entitled to a certain amount of respect just by virtue of being human.

Of course as these people get to know me better, they may come to respect me for something more than that. (Alternatively they may decide that I am so uncaring that I am not even entitled to the baseline respect, but hopefully that doesn't happen too often!)

Certainly I agree with you that all humans are due a level of respect. I'm not even sure I would consider an expectation of that to be an entitlement.

If you came into my home I'm sure you would expect to be greeted, introduced around, made comfortable, offered some refreshment, etc. But, would you expect and demand that all conversation should be conducted by your rules, or expect to be hugged and told that you are loved? If I gave you a glass of water would you sulk and demand a glass of wine? If I asked you to refrain from discussing a particular topic and you did anyway, or you called me a bitch and a liar, would I owe you anything, would I be wrong to ask you to leave?

I mean, come on Pete, this is what I'm talking about.

You know that I'm versed well enough in the basics of human interaction. I think we left you well respected, entertained, and appreciated, as you did us, in spite of our varied perspectives. Am I correct?

I'm talking about a whole other ballgame here, where we have had visitors who seem to come in with a sense of being deserving of some undefined but demanded and expected form of treatment which they view as "respect".

There is a line Pete, I'm sure you agree.

How's that concussion by the way?

Katie

Entitlement appears to have much to do with people who fall for destructive cult$ural lies -- ie:

-- "Drop acid and you'll be permanently more intuitive and socially capable than those who have not dropped acid."

-- "Be a long-suffering conscienceless yuppie hack and you'll attract all the lasting intimacy and community respect you've ever longed for."

-- "Become a master at XYZ live-in-your-head spiritual discipline -- completely against your sense of fun and better judgement -- and needy people will let you control them totally."

When instead folks end up: discernment damaged / socially over-vulnerable / perpetually tricked, closeness / belonging starved, and totally humiliated respectively -- they're loaded with toxic anger and boy can they punish with it.

Steve

Yes I was looked after very well thank you. I couldn't have found a person who it was more fun to disagree with.

And ever so fucking sorry that you failed.

From Pete:

quote:

---

(Alternatively they may decide that I am so uncaring that I am not even entitled to the baseline respect, but hopefully that doesn't happen too often!

---

Often enough for you yet? If not, we'll have to try a bit harder then.

Katie

------------------
After crosses and losses, men grow humbler and wiser. (Ben Franklin)

I thought Mists of Avalon was a good mini-series.

I remember being turned off to that series pretty early on, but can't remember much about it, so I don't have any comments.

Sorry about that flu!! Pump the Vitamin C!!

Hope you feel better soon, but in the meantime enjoy your hallucinations and let us know the details of any really good ones!!

I'd send you healing energy but I've been a bit nervous about doing that after seeing what it did for Peny.