Spiritwalker

Good timing, as I just re-read this book and dove into the other two books in the trilogy as well.

OK-- the books irritated the hell out of me to the point where I just persevered through the last one out of sheer grit.

Problem number 1:  Was I reading a metaphysical adventure, or a steamy romance ala the Mammoth Hunters series?  I get that he reallly likes sex, but is it necessary to give us all the little details, down to oral sex?

Problem number 2:  He's way too proud of his "powers."  I counted at least 10 times when we said variations on these words:  "It would sound presumptious of me to say (fill in the blank), but it would not be innaccurate."  IOW, I'm the shiznit, but I'm attempting to look humble, as all gurus are supposed to.  Aren't I swell?

Problem number 3:  I was right there with him in the first book, up to a certain point.  That point is a fuzzy one, but I just felt myself disbelieving him and feeling he may have been exaggerating some things to make his experiences sound more interesting (and sell more books).

Problem number 4:  He kept harping on overpopulation as being the inevitable cause of our demise, but he intimates that we only reincarnate through our descendants, and that it's important for us "evolved" people to have children so they can save the world.  He often articulates these things back to back in a way that makes me wonder if he ever reads what he's just written.  My guess is that he thinks the unevolved plebes are the ones who should not procreate, not the superconscious mystical ones such as himself.

I had more issues than that, but that's about all I can come up with at this point.

What's your take?

I understand all your points as well, Limukala.  I just finished reading the books the day before yesterday, so I'm afraid I just disgorged all the distasteful points I'd been storing up all that time!  : )

But as to whether he's for real.... I just can't say.  I do believe with certainty that some, maybe even most of his experiences were real, at least to him.  I also believe he's coming from an honest place despite his hubris.

The question here is how accurate is what he's seeing in the future?  The real reason I'm concerned with his hubris and his sense of enlightenment is because I know that this is a fulcrum that can be used by the unwholesome aspects of the astral realm to deceive.  IOW, my concern is that they could draw him into a false reality quickly and easily because of the nature of his ego. 

Also, I never quite understood where he got the idea of 5000 years into the future being an accurate representation of the date.  Do you remember how he caluclated this?

Robert Monroe also had a vision of going into the far future, and people were indeed living without technology.  The difference was, they had no need of it.  Their spiritual technology had grown to the point where they could provide everything they needed without exploiting the Earth at all, and they could come and go in their bodies at will.  I think part of me was disappointed in "Dr." Hank's vision of the world, in that I expected people who survived to be more like that.  Instead, Wesselman seems to think of today as our "golden age," one that we'll never reach again due to a lack of iron stores close to the surface.

Sorry, been out of the loop for a bit.

First of all, the number 5000 years in an estimate based on the 249 generations between the crash and the present time (Hawaiians are big on genealogy, so it is plausible that they would keep such detailed records).

As to the rest, well, I have similar doubts.  What leads me to believe it is when Makua's ancestors confirmed everything:

This was spoken by a powerful elder too, "Seventh generation descendant of King Kamehameha. Seventh generation descendant of High Chief Keoua Kuahu'ula, who was the one who Kamehameha killed to become paramount chief himself."  The guy has 27 generations of his ancestors in constant attendance, and can communicate freely with them.  I guess if you want to believe that his ancestors are really parasitic spirits or some such, but the fact is that flies in the fact of thousands of years of effective hawaiian spiritual practice.  I'm sure they figured out along the way how differentiate the various astral entities, and if anyone in modern hawaii learned these skills, it is someone like Makua.

Also, I haven't read any on Monroe's works, so maybe I'm off base, but I don't think the future you decribed contradicts a crash scenario, it seems more likely to me that the vision he saw was even farther in the future, when we had evolved even further, if you get my drift.

As far as "huna" goes, I've gotten a lot of great stuff out of it, and many of its concepts are still central to my thinking, but that doesn't change the fact that they have very little to do with actual Hawaiian spiritual practice.  It is mostly based on the work of a white guy who admits the Hawaiians wouldn't give him the time of day when it comes to spirituality (Max Freedom Long).  Real hawaiian spiritual practice is called ho'omana (to make/do mana), but is not written down, so you won't find any books on the subject.

I gotta say though, huna is still darned effective, and it does keep a few kernels of genuine hawaiian thought (like the three minds, etc).

Looking through the two bears site though, it is apparent the author has little knowledge or intuitive understanding of real hawaiian culture.  He/she may have read every book about huna there is, but is obviously an outsider.  He obviously knows a lot about huna and has researched it extensively, but looking at the bibliography's order of recommendation, it is apparent that the author has little feel for authentic hawaiian culture.  I say this because out of all the books I have read, only one actually conveys the true sense of Hawaiian spirituality, and that was placed 15th on the order of importance, and not considered worth reading.  Maybe it is because it doesn't focus on "huna" or even mention it (because it was actually written by a hawaiian).  But if you want to get the true flavor of Hawaii (or even not, it is a great book no matter how you slice it) there is no better written source.

Edit:  I guess I should mention the name of the book I'm talking about, Change We Must, by Nana Veary.

First, I have to admit I'm not Hawaiian myself, but my wife is and many of my friends are, and any of them that have read the book have been blown away.  I just don't see how anyone who has the slightest inkling of the culture could fail to see the paramount important and amazing brilliance of the book (read it, you won't be dissapointed).  I mean, come on, he place 4 Max Freedom Long books above it!!! 

Edit: I guess the only thing I could really explain this with is that "Change We Must" doesn't give you any techniques or theory, but instead gives you a powerful insight and feeling for true Hawaiian culture (which is far more important, IMO)

Also, I can't imagine a Hawaiian choosing the name "two bears" since there are no bears in Hawaii and such association would mean little to them