Guest guest Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Sela - I do have to agree with Peggy. There is no " one way " in using crystals and minerals and for that matter that applies to everything in life. To even say there's only one way is also very limiting in and of itself which stops the growth process of learning, understanding and spiritual development. Perception is all relative to the perceiver and the universe communicates in the ways that it needs to for the individual to comprehend. This group contains many experienced healers and users of gems and minerals with their own individual strengths so the constant referencing to your experience and book is not necessary and I do have to add is a little off putting as it seems ego driven. I myself also use intuition and magical experience along with the chemical attributes when facilitating Crystal Healings. Many, many times crystals just ask me to take them and I don't have any idea why until they tell me where to place them during the healing and upon speaking with the client I find out what the crystal facilitated. I have found often crystals doing something that wasn't considered one of its attributes. My knowledge of crystals and how to heal with them were given to me directly from spirit. I have read only one book on Crystal Healing so to say any other way other than the chemical application slows down the mainstream is wrong and again limiting. Maybe the mainstream should catch up to all the Shamans, Medicine Men and Witches that have been using minerals and crystals for healings by spirit guidance way before science was able to prove what the stones did. Sincerely, Anne Marie >Hopefully I will not be offending anyone here, my job is to educate... > > Sela, I've heard you speak in person, of course you will offend some people here and you know it. You are one of the most abrasive people I have ever encountered and you love to attack people beliefs and experiences if they disagree with your ideas.. I'm very grateful to you because your work has inspired me to speak out about my experiences with the crystal Deva. I presume you read the introduction before you joined the group. The Chemical approach to crystals is one valid approach. However it is only one approach and ignores the vast depth of experience and wisdom realized through intuitive connection with the deva and spirits of the Mineral world. I hope that someday you will be able to have a fuller experience of the crystals and hear what they have to say. My job is not to promote Mainstream acceptance of anything I encourage people to have a direct connection of Spirit and move forward in harmony. Peggy Jentoft truncated === Discover Use to plan a weekend, have fun online & more. Check it out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 I want to thank all of you who posted clarifications of your feelings and beliefs. The single most valuable point is communication. I do respect each of you. I will continue to enjoy this site. Off this site I am just trying to help those who want to be rid of various illnesses. Mostly their doctors have nothing to offer them or the course of treatment being prescribed is as bad or worse than the illness itself. I did not mean to either be defensive or to put others in that position. Thanks again. sela - anneaquarius Friday, June 24, 2005 9:48 AM Re: [CrystalHW] Digest Number 1262 Sela - I do have to agree with Peggy. There is no " one way " in using crystals and minerals and for that matter that applies to everything in life. To even say there's only one way is also very limiting in and of itself which stops the growth process of learning, understanding and spiritual development. Perception is all relative to the perceiver and the universe communicates in the ways that it needs to for the individual to comprehend. This group contains many experienced healers and users of gems and minerals with their own individual strengths so the constant referencing to your experience and book is not necessary and I do have to add is a little off putting as it seems ego driven. I myself also use intuition and magical experience along with the chemical attributes when facilitating Crystal Healings. Many, many times crystals just ask me to take them and I don't have any idea why until they tell me where to place them during the healing and upon speaking with the client I find out what the crystal facilitated. I have found often crystals doing something that wasn't considered one of its attributes. My knowledge of crystals and how to heal with them were given to me directly from spirit. I have read only one book on Crystal Healing so to say any other way other than the chemical application slows down the mainstream is wrong and again limiting. Maybe the mainstream should catch up to all the Shamans, Medicine Men and Witches that have been using minerals and crystals for healings by spirit guidance way before science was able to prove what the stones did. Sincerely, Anne Marie >Hopefully I will not be offending anyone here, my job is to educate... > > Sela, I've heard you speak in person, of course you will offend some people here and you know it. You are one of the most abrasive people I have ever encountered and you love to attack people beliefs and experiences if they disagree with your ideas.. I'm very grateful to you because your work has inspired me to speak out about my experiences with the crystal Deva. I presume you read the introduction before you joined the group. The Chemical approach to crystals is one valid approach. However it is only one approach and ignores the vast depth of experience and wisdom realized through intuitive connection with the deva and spirits of the Mineral world. I hope that someday you will be able to have a fuller experience of the crystals and hear what they have to say. My job is not to promote Mainstream acceptance of anything I encourage people to have a direct connection of Spirit and move forward in harmony. Peggy Jentoft truncated === Discover Use to plan a weekend, have fun online & more. Check it out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 Actually I agree with somethings you write but you aren't thinking you are just reacting and attacking. I've thought about these issues a lot and I hear them over and over. So forgive me if I find it boring to hear your mind numbing superficial screeds yet again. I would rather hear about than the most superficial economic factors. To those who have been in a Chinese hospital to hold up your professors White Coats while at the same time decrying your college's dirty floors is revealing of a certain naivity. The vehemence which you attack any one shows you lack skills to further discussion and therefore your own learning. Inflexibility is the worse quality to have in this medicine. If you don't hear that then I agree you won't be in this medicine long. take care, doug " goldenlotuspublishing " <goldenlotuspublishing Re: Digest Number 1261 -Sorry Doug. You'll be glad to know that I've embraced the True TCM faith. I will no longer question anything. What's YOUR conclusion re: standards and supervised practice? That we can ignore it all and the problems will disappear? You'll have to tell me what's politically correct to think since I'm no longer allowed to think for myself... Thanks Doug. -- In Chinese Medicine , douglas eisenstark <doug@t...> wrote: > > Well, why don't you just talk about those problems instead of > alienating your colleagues with your rants? > Don't you realize we're all thought these things out with our own > conclusions? > This is ridiculous listening to you attack everybody and every word. > It's not very smart, Rachel. > I've work with students all the time and you are just as much a > " type " as everyone else. We all are. > i've seen a dozens of students who sound just like you. And that's my > reality listening to " highly intelligent " people who have it ALL > figured out. > Either tone it down, have the moderator turn you off or I'm out of > here too. > doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 I deeply respect that you have put so much thought into these issues. But have you only *thought* about them, without taking steps to educate yourself about them? What if we only *thought* about point location, without doing some real homework and educating ourselves? I'm not saying this to react or attack. I'm saying this because there is a real difference between thinking about something and obtaining real facts/educating yourself. And if you view supervised practice as a " superficial economic factor " with all due respect, you don't really understand the issue. The economics of it don't concern me as much for myself as for the patients who will experience increased costs of care. If you view their struggle to find the means to pay for their medical treatments as being a " superficial economic factor " then you don't really care about the patients. You may only care about OM as an intellectual exercise, as something to kick around with other people on the listserv. And you'll still have your intellectual exercises long after the practice opportunities have diminished further. It seems that your own analysis might be a bit superficial, or naive. You think that anyone who bores you with practice management and legislative issues is " naive " , but really, am I? Or are you? Am I inflexible, because I think about OM as well as the legislative and financial realities, or are you? I'm not asking these questions to attack you. It seems more like you are the one attacking. Nero sat and fiddled while Rome burned. But he was engaged in an intellectual, artistic activity, not concerned with " superficial economic factors " . I wonder what his citizens thought as homes and businesses burned? Did they love and admire him for ignoring " superficial economic factors " and admire him for choosing to engage in his art/intellectual activity instead? I'm talking Nero, now, not you personally. Think about that before you reply. Best Regards, Rachel Chinese Medicine , douglas eisenstark <doug@t...> wrote: > > Actually I agree with somethings you write but you aren't thinking > you are just reacting and attacking. I've thought about these issues > a lot and I hear them over and over. So forgive me if I find it > boring to hear your mind numbing superficial screeds yet again. > I would rather hear about than the most superficial > economic factors. To those who have been in a Chinese hospital to > hold up your professors White Coats while at the same time decrying > your college's dirty floors is revealing of a certain naivity. The > vehemence which you attack any one shows you lack skills to further > discussion and therefore your own learning. Inflexibility is the > worse quality to have in this medicine. If you don't hear that then I > agree you won't be in this medicine long. > take care, > doug > > > " goldenlotuspublishing " <goldenlotuspublishing> > Re: Digest Number 1261 > > -Sorry Doug. You'll be glad to know that I've embraced the True TCM > faith. I will no longer question anything. What's YOUR conclusion > re: standards and supervised practice? That we can ignore it all and > the problems will disappear? You'll have to tell me what's > politically correct to think since I'm no longer allowed to think > for myself... > > Thanks Doug. > > -- In Chinese Medicine , douglas > eisenstark <doug@t...> wrote: > > > > Well, why don't you just talk about those problems instead of > > alienating your colleagues with your rants? > > Don't you realize we're all thought these things out with our own > > conclusions? > > This is ridiculous listening to you attack everybody and every > word. > > It's not very smart, Rachel. > > I've work with students all the time and you are just as much a > > " type " as everyone else. We all are. > > i've seen a dozens of students who sound just like you. And that's > my > > reality listening to " highly intelligent " people who have it ALL > > figured out. > > Either tone it down, have the moderator turn you off or I'm out > of > > here too. > > doug > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 First you don't think I've thought about them and educated myself. Ok... But don't you dare question my integrity and committment to my patients. You apologize. Now. And don't be swarmy about it. You've crossed the line into slander. Attilio- email me privately when this diaster is over... I got no time for this... later, sexy lady, doug Chinese Medicine , " goldenlotuspublishing " <goldenlotuspublishing> wrote: > > I deeply respect that you have put so much thought into these > issues. But have you only *thought* about them, without taking steps > to educate yourself about them? What if we only *thought* about > point location, without doing some real homework and educating > ourselves? I'm not saying this to react or attack. I'm saying this > because there is a real difference between thinking about something > and obtaining real facts/educating yourself. And if you view > supervised practice as a " superficial economic factor " with all due > respect, you don't really understand the issue. The economics of it > don't concern me as much for myself as for the patients who will > experience increased costs of care. If you view their struggle to > find the means to pay for their medical treatments as being > a " superficial economic factor " then you don't really care about the > patients. You may only care about OM as an intellectual exercise, as > something to kick around with other people on the listserv. And > you'll still have your intellectual exercises long after the > practice opportunities have diminished further. > > It seems that your own analysis might be a bit superficial, or > naive. You think that anyone who bores you with practice management > and legislative issues is " naive " , but really, am I? Or are you? Am > I inflexible, because I think about OM as well as the legislative > and financial realities, or are you? I'm not asking these questions > to attack you. It seems more like you are the one attacking. Nero > sat and fiddled while Rome burned. But he was engaged in an > intellectual, artistic activity, not concerned with " superficial > economic factors " . I wonder what his citizens thought as homes and > businesses burned? Did they love and admire him for > ignoring " superficial economic factors " and admire him for choosing > to engage in his art/intellectual activity instead? I'm talking > Nero, now, not you personally. Think about that before you reply. > > Best Regards, > > Rachel > > Chinese Medicine , douglas > eisenstark <doug@t...> wrote: > > > > Actually I agree with somethings you write but you aren't > thinking > > you are just reacting and attacking. I've thought about these > issues > > a lot and I hear them over and over. So forgive me if I find it > > boring to hear your mind numbing superficial screeds yet again. > > I would rather hear about than the most > superficial > > economic factors. To those who have been in a Chinese hospital to > > hold up your professors White Coats while at the same time > decrying > > your college's dirty floors is revealing of a certain naivity. > The > > vehemence which you attack any one shows you lack skills to > further > > discussion and therefore your own learning. Inflexibility is the > > worse quality to have in this medicine. If you don't hear that > then I > > agree you won't be in this medicine long. > > take care, > > doug > > > > > > " goldenlotuspublishing " <goldenlotuspublishing> > > Re: Digest Number 1261 > > > > -Sorry Doug. You'll be glad to know that I've embraced the True TCM > > faith. I will no longer question anything. What's YOUR conclusion > > re: standards and supervised practice? That we can ignore it all > and > > the problems will disappear? You'll have to tell me what's > > politically correct to think since I'm no longer allowed to think > > for myself... > > > > Thanks Doug. > > > > -- In Chinese Medicine , douglas > > eisenstark <doug@t...> wrote: > > > > > > Well, why don't you just talk about those problems instead of > > > alienating your colleagues with your rants? > > > Don't you realize we're all thought these things out with our own > > > conclusions? > > > This is ridiculous listening to you attack everybody and every > > word. > > > It's not very smart, Rachel. > > > I've work with students all the time and you are just as much a > > > " type " as everyone else. We all are. > > > i've seen a dozens of students who sound just like you. And > that's > > my > > > reality listening to " highly intelligent " people who have it ALL > > > figured out. > > > Either tone it down, have the moderator turn you off or I'm out > > of > > > here too. > > > doug > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.