feeding the moon

[Kila]

So I am reading this article on the Cass site - food for the moon http://www.cassiopedia.org/glossary/Food_for_the_Moon

It has this to say:

We'll take Barbara Marciniak's Bringers of the Dawn as an example:

"Consciousness vibrates, or can be led to vibrate, at certain electromagnetic frequencies. Electromagnetic energies of consciousness can be influenced to vibrate in a certain way to create a source of food. Just as apples can he prepared and eaten in a variety of ways, consciousness can be prepared and ingested in a variety of ways. Some entities, in the process of their own evolution, began to discover that as they created life and put consciousness into things through modulating the frequencies of forms of consciousness, they could feed themselves; they could keep themselves in charge. They began to Figure out that this is how Prime Creator nourished itself. Prime Creator sends out others to create an electromagnetic frequency of consciousness as a food source for itself. The new owners of this planet had a different appetite and different preferences than the former owners. They nourished themselves with chaos and fear. These things fed them, stimulated them, and kept them in power. These new owners who came here 300,000 years ago are the magnificent beings spoken of in your Bible, in the Babylonian and Sumerian tablets, and in texts all over the world. They came to Earth and rearranged the native human species. They rearranged your DNA in order to have you broadcast within a certain limited frequency band whose frequency could feed them and keep them in power."

I have spent the l last 15 years studying anthropology and one of the things that has always struck me was that the 'gods' of civilization were not very nice individuals and obviously did not have a humans best interests in mind. I'll tell you my first inkling of this was the way people are referred to as sheep in the Bible. Even as a kid I kept thinking, sheep? Really? Why not the sheep dog? I mean that's a relationship that obviously isn't equal but your dog is your helper, your companion.. you don't eat your dog. You don't steal his wool and eat his babies and drink the milk that was made for them.

Which leads me to the whole concept of agriculture. I've lived on farms and I'll tell you the relationship you have with an animal you 'farmed' and an animal you hunt is very different, and drinking milk ..well now that is a very intimate form of enslavement.

Even the land is different, it goes under the plow, it can be owned, it too is made a slave. Now I started to think about and follow the thread backwards where did this all start, I've read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond and Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches by Marvin Harris both of which espouse cultural materialism as a primary structure for understanding cultural development based on environmental constraints. This makes sense up to a point. But at times it requires a leap of logic(e.g. the development of emmer wheat by cross fertilization and selective breeding). So for some time it kept sitting in the back of my mind that the gods are real, but not real in the way we think. I also remember thinking as a kid what if God(yahweh) is actually the devil, every tree by it's fruit and all that. When I didn't die by lightening strike I continued to consider that possibility. I then read most of Sitchins stuff and Gods of Eden and From the Ashes of Angels.. more pieces to the puzzle, oh and just for giggles When God was a Woman. So all that said, though, I keep finding one persistent assumption. This linear progression proceeding from 'primitive' society to horticulturist to agriculturalist. Kind of like it's tied very intimately to progression through the various densities, you know animals are 2nd and we're 3rd. Still getting a linear picture and not so much like the spherical imagery I got when the C's were describing the various densities. So I keep thinking what if it isn't so? What if understanding and knowledge are not always arrived at in this fashion? What if there isn't any kind of linear progression? What if this is just a very comfortable illusion? I mean the C's, they're us right? Right now this moment they're us?

I can buy the idea that 300k ( by our measurement) years ago some not so selfless dudes showed up and corrupted some humans, bred some cattle so to speak, and started a few feed lots(cities, civilizations) But what about the feral humans running around outside the city gates. What about that wild man companion of Gilgalmesh that had to be tamed my a sexy courtesan to take up civilized ways. So some of the stories I know talk about how there have been these other worlds or Suns ( hey isn't the sun a window? I seem to remember something about that?) So, according to the stories they occur because the people become essentially STS and a cataclysm happens. So, there are two ways I could look at this. Either it's harvest time for the lizards, yum. Or the Earth being essentially incompatible with the energies of STS sort of has a fit, a fever, calls a doctor or something and starts again. Or a bit of both scenarios. I hear a lot of the time people talking about humans as a cancer, but what if only certain kinds of humans are cancerous? And of course there are more and more of those all the time. But I keep thinking doesn't the Earth want to get to 4th density too?

Okay here's something I wrote a long time ago.. any thoughts at all would be appreciated. Maybe I've got it all wrong so tell me if I do... :D I'm sure I can count on ya'll...

The following is a list of concepts and precepts found amongst all religious thought emanating from civilizations, ancient and modern, notably, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Judaism. Also including 'pagan' religions such as Sumerian, Egyption, and Roman as well as Celtic, Welsh, Germanic and Scandinavian pantheons. Mayan, Incan and Aztec religion also meet these criteria. And including recent bastard children such as Wicca and New Age spiritualism. Buddhism is the one exception to this list, as I simply don't know enough about it to include it here. However, Buddhism shares some of the same characteristics but appears to stand at something of a crossroads. I am currently researching Tibetan and traditional Buddhism.

* Concept of religion or Deity with distinct personality, often egocentric.
* Thrives on controlling human behavior and all historical and political outcomes.
* Disregards natural law, considers humans to be above such law and divinely ordained to hold dominion over nature.
* Natural world created for the benefit of humans
* Punishment and fear used as means of controlling human behavior.
* blood sacrifice (animal and human)
* All conversations between humans and Deity revolve around making a deal, bargaining, paying a price, 'feeding' the deity with blood, honey, wine etc.
* Priestly class intervenes and acts as go between.
* Deity resides somewhere else- Heaven- some good humans go this place of bliss and live eternally by heavenly decree
* Fear of death.
* Religion liturgical and static.
* Goal of religious observance and ceremony personal(i.e. personal salvation, personal enlightenment,atonement for personal sin, always essentially self serving)
* Linear progressive sense of Time.
* Fascination with godhood, becoming godlike or a god or enlightened being. Becoming something other than human. Physical immortality(Rapture, Egyptian and Tibetan book of the dead, Nirvana etc)*
* Genocide committed for religious/philosophical/ racial reasons. War and war mongering(politics) institutionalized and centralized and often 'blessed' by the priestly class.


Now we will compare the above with the concepts held by 'primitives'(very specifically hunter and gatherers) as follows:

* Supreme Deity referred to as Great Mystery, Spirit that moves in all things etc. not anthropomorphic. Many lesser beings with personalities, divine ancestors etc. with distinct personalities revered but not worshiped.
* Deity not interested in political course of event/outcomes- Deity above such petty concerns.
* Natural law and natural consequences serve as restraints, rather than fear of punishment.
* Humans embedded in natural world, no dominion. View all of natural world as alive and as relatives, ancestors and spirit helpers.
* Blood sacrifice unknown.
* Conversations with Spirit helpers ask and implore the Helper as a poor relative and seek to convince the Helper of the supplicants need and humility. All sacrifice is self sacrifice.
* No priestly class, all stand as individuals before the Creator. All men expected to perform various shamanic ordeals to gain visions and powers for the benefit of the people. Some distinguish themselves as being especially favored by the Spirits and are consequently leaders amongst their people, nonetheless, humility is essential for both secular leaders(chiefs) and religious leaders(medicine men).
* Deity is embedded in the natural world. Deity is always present. Deity is the matrix which manifests all reality. Deity resides within all creation NOT somewhere else. Creation cannot be flawed as it is the Perfect manifestation of the Creator. No concept of sin, redemption, atonement.
* All Beings reenter that matrix at death, animals, humans, birds, insects, rocks, mountains etc. All things are immortal and eternal. Concept of different planes of existence all within the realm of the Creator.
* No fear of death. Death not an enemy to be vanquished. Death part of universal design.
* Religion ceremonial and fluid.
* Goal of religious observances and ceremony for the good of others, in service to others. Specifically forbids attaining visions, powers, or medicine for self serving purposes and considers all such persons who attain such things for their own benefit witches and in league with evil beings.
* Not codified, oral tradition, living traditions, not literate.
* Nonlinear circular sense of Time.
* No genocide.. No centralized military or political structures. Warfare is ongoing in the form of territorial skirmishes and raids. Or in less densely populated areas warfare may be entirely unknown.


kila


Edit - paragraphs

 

[Brenda86]

Kind of late here and I don't have time for a really long comment, but I thought this was interesting.

I also remember thinking as a kid what if God(yahweh) is actually the devil, every tree by it's fruit and all that. When I didn't die by lightening strike I continued to consider that possibility.

I remember having that exact same thought as a child at one point. Of course, most of us here I think have a bad taste about many of the major religions. I grew up with Christianity, but I began to wonder early on why people would kill each other over religion when they were supposed to be about love and acceptance.

 

[shijing]

Hi Kila --

It sounds like you had pretty good intuition about religion and religious concepts when you were younger, and I think the list you put together comparing the mainstream religions with the animistic (or 'primitive') religions is interesting to read. When you have a chance, do your best to get your hands on a copy of The Secret History of the World -- I think you'll really enjoy it. One of the main themes it explores is that the 'primitive' religions maintain a positive older tradition in piecemeal form to various degrees (with a focus on shamanism), whereas the monotheistic religions represent an innovation -- a specific program generated by 4D STS (the 'gods') in order to achieve a spectrum of thought control and societal control objectives, keeping the sheep subdued in their pens until they can be fleeced and eaten. There is a Jehovah discussion in there which you will probably find quite enjoyable.

 

[Voyageur]

kila,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and prior “I wrote a long time ago” juxtapositions which distinguishes realities of the two indeed. Very much here could be discussed, but immediately note was this;

" * Blood sacrifice unknown."

Well perhaps in lunar (generally northern) worshiping communities but hardly unknown in southern Sun worshiping communities as historical fruits show.

Liked what you wrote here;

Even the land is different, it goes under the plow, it can be owned, it too is made a slave.

Yes, 3d does to 1d and 2d in so many ways; however, natives have such a respectful nature, intent of consciousness so different than non as is apparent it seems.

Here you said;

I also remember thinking as a kid what if God(yahweh) is actually the devil, every tree by it's fruit and all that. When I didn't die by lightening strike I continued to consider that possibility.

“…die by lightning strike…” is this allegorical, if not, would be very interesting to hear you expound on this point, if not too traumatic; why did you, “…continued to consider that possibility” upon this event? This made me think of Walter Russell when he was struck by lightning and many wanted to shut him away, institutionalize; yet his physician who spent time with him finally convinced everyone he was fine, leave him be - interesting story, inclusive of his exchanges with Tesla later on.

Also you mentioned;

So all that said, though, I keep finding one persistent assumption. This linear progression proceeding from 'primitive' society to horticulturist to agriculturalist.

Yes, “from ‘primitive' society to horticulturist to agriculturalist”, and further along to industrial and technological (for some beings), with much warring in between; and now to where…? This seems to be what our consciousness sees of short wave reading of linear time but maybe what you said about “comfortable illusions” is our blindness of frequencies unknown to our measure and if not blind, how would our consciousness interact with this new sense of sight/being?

Laura’s “Secret History of the World” searches and makes remarkable observations concerning our physical history and directions towards understanding non-physical understanding in many regards inclusive of other important works here; you may have found this thread already.

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4718.msg31032#msg31032

You also mentioned the following;

Kind of like it's tied very intimately to progression through the various densities, you know animals are 2nd and we're 3rd. Still getting a linear picture and not so much like the spherical imagery I got when the C's were describing the various densities. So I keep thinking what if it isn't so? What if understanding and knowledge are not always arrived at in this fashion? What if there isn't any kind of linear progression? What if this is just a very comfortable illusion? I mean the C's, they're us right? Right now this moment they're us?

Kila, it seems that the C’s being us, is not exactly us, but those with whom they are communicating, who are grooved and this emanates from Laura and some of those within the group. Although being us, is not out of the realm of possibilities, but perhaps it is subjective to place oneself as “us” without doing the work and knowing.

About what you said re linear progression; was thinking about what one sees in nature, OSIT; that if one considers so many things from the macro to the micro, this seems to me to be much more cyclical than linear as it once did before. Used to think/see progression i.e. as analogy; seed to roots to tree to leaf etc. but now the tree seeds, drops its leaf litter which stimulates microorganisms, which oxygenates and nutrients are released and the tree may even perish, but its life/death gives rise to so much more inter-relationship, including animal species and even us. You said, “What if understanding and knowledge are not always arrived at in this fashion? (Linear progression)” Honestly I don’t know. The C’s said I think or at least close, “when one know, you know”. Progressive lessons that build understanding and knowledge may not just be influenced by linear progression and may, as has been said (hope this is not a wrong past reference), that one might be interacting with oneself/thyself in some bifurcated dimensional state, future state, possibly via DNA complex, tachyons etcetera. It has also been said that we can be at different positions of understanding and knowledge but with work can arrive at the same place together; however, lessons are lessons and they appear progressive it seems, accelerated for some, such as W. Russel upon getting hit by lightning. There is also the slow progression, in the Karmic wheel sense. For my thinking this is still a work in progress…

One thing that stays in mind is that as complex as we can make things, there are simple truths.

Last mention;

So, there are two ways I could look at this. Either it's harvest time for the lizards, yum. Or the Earth being essentially incompatible with the energies of STS sort of has a fit, a fever, calls a doctor or something and starts again. Or a bit of both scenarios. I hear a lot of the time people talking about humans as a cancer, but what if only certain kinds of humans are cancerous? And of course there are more and more of those all the time. But I keep thinking doesn't the Earth want to get to 4th density too?

The above is good thanks! Take refuge in the fact that however exactly it works out, STS/none being will fail with such a big Achilles Heel - their “Wishful Thinking”, as Laura has mentioned.

Regards. :)

 

[abstract]

I remember having that exact same thought as a child at one point. Of course, most of us here I think have a bad taste about many of the major religions. I grew up with Christianity, but I began to wonder early on why people would kill each other over religion when they were supposed to be about love and acceptance.

Especially when your ten commandments says "thou shalt not kill". That's a good point though! I was always questioning things as a child, especially religion. Of course we all bought into it as long as we still though adults were "smarter". If i asked "how did moses make water come out of a rock?" the adults had no answer, at least not a real answer.

 

[Kila]

" * Blood sacrifice unknown."

Well perhaps in lunar (generally northern) worshiping communities but hardly unknown in southern Sun worshiping communities as historical fruits show.

Firstly, thank you parralex for taking the time to respond. Sorry it's taken me so long, it kind of got lost to me..so much to read... it's pretty consuming.
But I did want to respond.

What I found was that, very specifically among hunter and gatherer people, blood sacrifice was unknown. There has been some recent sites in African from the paleolithic period that have some rather interesting remains that some have speculated may be evidence of sacrifice. But I'm skeptical. I remember not to many years ago a large deposit of human bones were found with skulls showing large round punctures which presumably were the result of some kind of ritualistic execution. It was later found that the circumference and placement perfectly matched the placement of canines within the jaw of saber toothed lions. So, what had been documented as human sacrifice was later reclassified as the remains from some unlucky hominid who got to be lunch for a saber. Archaeology is not an exact science and very prone to subjective conjecture.

From extant hunter and gatherer tribes we have not been able to document any regular ritual use of human or animals as blood sacrifice. Cannibalism is a different matter all together and is frequently a result of external environmental pressures, but may over time become ritualized. But is obviously more about feeding the humans rather than feeding the gods.

Yes, 3d does to 1d and 2d in so many ways; however, natives have such a respectful nature, intent of consciousness so different than non as is apparent it seems.

yes... that has been a constant question for me.. WHY? Why so different. What happened? What went awry? Two things that keep coming up as pivotal are agriculture and literacy. I will post some references soon so we can discuss and maybe you all will share your perspective and I will have another framework in which to do the analysis.
I keep bringing up the native or aboriginal mind set because I have spent many years considering and comparing the similiarities between the Western (that which was born in the Fertile Crescent) and aboriginal paradigms, assumptions and perspectives. I keep looking for universal themes. I have found a certain unity of thought among all aboriginal hunter and gatherer people whether they inhabit the North American plains, the Kalahari, Alice Springs or the Amazon. And those assumptions about the nature of human existence or reality stands pretty much in opposition to the assumptions made within the Western traditions as I am aware of them.

So, please forgive me for constantly bringing up the comparison. I am trying, for my own sake, to tease it all apart. What interests me about all of this is how many similiarities in thought I am finding, with patterns of thought that I have found good and useful( but I am trying to be careful not to pat myself on the head). Not that I am looking specifically for similarities. I also appreciate the different frameworks and am willing to consider everything for it's internal value, worth. There are certain beliefs I carry I do hold dear in that they have been hard won, but not so dear as to trade them for truth.

So please be patient with me as I bring up certain perspectives as I try to weigh everything, and decide what is worth keeping, what is good and useful and what is only empty and illusion. There is much, certainly around Native Tradition that comes very close to the new age noble savage that is nothing more than wishful thinking, and frequently those 'traditions' are watered down feel good nonsense. But at the same time, there are things that have been passed down because they are useful tools, like the spirit board, like the shamanism that is the foundation of this forum. I am trying to figure out what forms of Shamanism you all agree are useful tools and what forms are not useful. As far as the use of plants, it's not part of my personal tradition as we used our own 'juices' so to speak to alter conscioussness.

I'll tell you something that, is a struggle for me to digest, has been, what seems to me, a superior attitude towards the natural world. I am trying to understand this and not react. Just observing my reactions though it brings up some anger and hurt as if you were saying something insulting about my mother.
That's how strongly we feel about our relatives the many leggeds, so to say they are somehow beneath us...well... It smacks of 'holding dominion' over nature. Now I do feel that I must be missing something because I already feel sure that you all are not of that mindset.

I've really sat and smoked with this and I can see that we two leggeds have a different awareness than other things do, and we do also acknowledge that the 'spirits that know us by name' that help us have a bigger awareness than we do. And unlike what we see in Western thought, this constant question of "Why are we here", we know we are here to care for and give back to everything something uniquely human and that is ceremony, energy. So maybe that could be also explained in terms of OP, so by being 'real' human beings we help those beings who are OP's increase awareness, in the same way, as those spirits that help us help us increase awareness. The only difficulty I am having is that we have frequent interactions with 'animal' spirits that also help us increase awareness. Don't know what to do with that one. We just don't see ourselves above other animals, unique perhaps, but it isn't so much a pulling up as a reciprocal relationship between us and the animal people. So dunno...
I'll keep working on it. For us, the ultimate goal, is to be in right relationship with all things.. You all seem to be striving towards something similar..am I right? I am still very glad to be in your company.

“…die by lightning strike…” is this allegorical, if not, would be very interesting to hear you expound on this point, if not too traumatic; why did you, “…continued to consider that possibility” upon this event? This made me think of Walter Russell when he was struck by lightning and many wanted to shut him away, institutionalize; yet his physician who spent time with him finally convinced everyone he was fine, leave him be - interesting story, inclusive of his exchanges with Tesla later on.

HA HA ..nope just allegorical...

Kila, it seems that the C’s being us, is not exactly us, but those with whom they are communicating, who are grooved and this emanates from Laura and some of those within the group. Although being us, is not out of the realm of possibilities, but perhaps it is subjective to place oneself as “us” without doing the work and knowing.

That clarifies ..thank you

About what you said re linear progression; was thinking about what one sees in nature, OSIT; that if one considers so many things from the macro to the micro, this seems to me to be much more cyclical than linear as it once did before. Used to think/see progression i.e. as analogy; seed to roots to tree to leaf etc. but now the tree seeds, drops its leaf litter which stimulates microorganisms, which oxygenates and nutrients are released and the tree may even perish, but its life/death gives rise to so much more inter-relationship, including animal species and even us. You said, “What if understanding and knowledge are not always arrived at in this fashion? (Linear progression)” Honestly I don’t know. The C’s said I think or at least close, “when one know, you know”. Progressive lessons that build understanding and knowledge may not just be influenced by linear progression and may, as has been said (hope this is not a wrong past reference), that one might be interacting with oneself/thyself in some bifurcated dimensional state, future state, possibly via DNA complex, tachyons etcetera. It has also been said that we can be at different positions of understanding and knowledge but with work can arrive at the same place together; however, lessons are lessons and they appear progressive it seems, accelerated for some, such as W. Russel upon getting hit by lightning. There is also the slow progression, in the Karmic wheel sense. For my thinking this is still a work in progress…

One thing that stays in mind is that as complex as we can make things, there are simple truths.

Maybe the cycle is so big.. the circle so large.. it just appears to be a straight road... I can understand that. That is really lovely.

p.s.. what does OSIT mean?

kila

 

[anart]

Hi Kali,

OSIT means 'or so I think' - there is a thread here that explains the meaning of other acronyms.

Have you read 'Secret History of the World' yet, by Laura Knight-Jadczyk - I think you would enjoy it and learn a lot from it.

 

[Kila]

Have you read 'Secret History of the World' yet, by Laura Knight-Jadczyk - I think you would enjoy it and learn a lot from it.

HAHAHA.... okay... as soon as I get 20 bucks I'm ordering it...

 

[Bo]

Have you read 'Secret History of the World' yet, by Laura Knight-Jadczyk - I think you would enjoy it and learn a lot from it.

HAHAHA.... okay... as soon as I get 20 bucks I'm ordering it...

I am sorry, but I fail to see what it is that is so funny about Anart's reply?

 

[anart]

Have you read 'Secret History of the World' yet, by Laura Knight-Jadczyk - I think you would enjoy it and learn a lot from it.

HAHAHA.... okay... as soon as I get 20 bucks I'm ordering it...

I am sorry, but I fail to see what it is that is so funny about Anart's reply?

Hi Bo, I could be mistaken, but I think the fact that Kila is discovering a mountain of books to read might have been why she was laughing. If I am mistaken, I'm sure she'll clarify.

 

[shijing]

Hi Bo, I could be mistaken, but I think the fact that Kila is discovering a mountain of books to read might have been why she was laughing. If I am mistaken, I'm sure she'll clarify.

I think its also because she has now received at least three recommendations on this thread alone to read SHOTW. Otherwise, what anart said.

 

[Kila]

Yes...

yes.. just laughing to myself...for exactly both of those reasons...

you all are too kind...

I'm just over eager....and falling all over myself.

What I would really like is just a mind meld....this reading business is sooo time consuming

guess we'll all have to wait for that level of communion.. so in the meantime I'll just have to slog along as best as I can with the current limitations.

 

[Argonaut]

Hi Kila,

Have you read the novel Ishmael by Daniel Quinn? It explores the idea that two distinct cultures exist on Earth: The "Leavers" - the ancient hunter/gatherer peoples who live in harmony with nature; and the "Takers" - the civilizations that began 10,000 years ago with the advent of agriculture. The book contrasts the two, and discusses how our "Taker" culture lies to us by convincing us that our way is the inevitable result of human progress and that there's "no turning back." All of this is explained through the unique perspective of a gorilla who has learned to read and speak. So obviously the info is presented in a work of fiction, but it still paints a very good, clear picture of what went wrong 10,000 years ago and where it's all headed.

The works of Derrick Jensen also cover the same basic subject, most notably his book Endgame, about the unsustainable nature of our civilization. I haven't read anything by him yet, although I have seen several quotes from him that I really like. Here are three brief ones:

[quote author=Derrick Jensen]
"Within this culture wealth is measured by one's ability to consume and destroy."

"To pretend that civilization can exist without destroying its own landbase and the landbases and cultures of others is to be entirely ignorant of history, biology, thermodynamics, morality, and self-preservation."

"Surely by now there can be few here who still believe the purpose of government is to protect us from the destructive activities of corporations. At last most of us must understand that the opposite is true: that the primary purpose of government is to protect those who run the economy from the outrage of injured citizens."
[/quote]

Sorry to add more reading material to your list (if you haven't read them already). But I figured you may find these two authors of interest.

 

[Kila]

I did really enjoy Ismael, although the anthropology was a bit sketchy in places. I loved the allegorical quality of the story. At the time I read it one of the difficulties I had was with the explanation for Cain and Abel, as a story describing the tensions between agriculturalists and pastoralists. I think the story of Cain and Abel has deeper esoteric meaning, and aside from that, in my opinion, pastoralists cannot really be categorized as Leavers. To be a pastoralists is still to hold other beings in bondage, in slavery. The primary concern of a pastoralist is to mold the world into one best suited for ungulates. The distinctions between pastoralism and hunting and gathering people are still pretty huge. We have to be very specific. I hesitate to even use the word native or indigenous because the Aztecs were indigenous but in all respects had far more similarities with ancient Sumerians than, say, Lakota people. When we trot out hunter and gatherer people to make a point we have to be careful not to fall into the noble savage trap. It's hard to be objective sometimes and to hold two disparate ideas in juxtaposition, such as a respect for all life and infanticide or euthanasia or for that matter warfare.

So while it is that I have found really specific seemingly universal distinctions that are worth further analysis, not to mention I have pretty deep ties with that sort of culture on a personal level, I try to be aware of my own subjectivity and make a point of looking at things I don't really want to consider because they sort of screw up the whole pretty picture of native people=good, civilization= bad.
Quinn is painting a pretty simplistic picture in Ismael with a limited palette, but all that said, I think it's a great book as a jumping off point. Actually the first two books are both good, then well... He goes to great length to illustrate the superiority of the 'old gods' as opposed to the 'God of the Bible' when, in fact, he misses the point entirely which is...they are the same.


Derrick Jenson..... I love Derrick. He's actually a friend of a friend, though I can't say I know him well at all. He's a beautiful human being but, due to no fault of his own, is in such tremendous pain it's hard to stand next to him( he was terribly abused as a child, he writes about it some in his first book). He's used the pain and it has been an impetus for him to do the work he's doing. I just wish, somehow, he could get to the other side of it. I've enjoyed reading him. But when I do I smoke a lot, it's just so big and heavy. A little like SOTT.

My favorite books are A Language Older than Words and his book of interviews and essays...Listening to the Land: Conversations on Nature, Culture and Eros.

Speaking of Jensen... have your read any of John Zerzan? I really enjoyed his book Running on Emptiness: The Pathology of Civilization.

 

[Bo]

yes.. just laughing to myself...for exactly both of those reasons...

Ahh I see, thanks for clarifying!

What I would really like is just a mind meld....this reading business is sooo time consuming

To bad it's not like the matrix where you just have to plug a cord in the back of your head :P