The Cassiopaean Cult? (Page 1 of 4)

Ya also gotta wonder when extraordinary attempts to discredit show up.  I'm with you, Aprogas.  I'm not afraid of information either.

I'm only going to say this once here because I know how many people on this board believe in the Cassiopean material, and I don't want to get into long heated debates (did that once before already).

I think the Cassiopean material is garbage, completely self involved and way, way too lengthy to relay anything worthwhile.  I got a headache anytime I ever tried to read it.  In general, I don't trust any channeled material.  I believe it is usually 'active imagination,' and at worst, government disinformation.  But the Cassiopean material does not seem to fulfill either of those classifications.  The style, information and Laura Knight's whole persona seem to suggest that it is the ramblings of an unstable lunatic.  There may be a little truth in everything, but the sheer length of her documents (coupled with my aforementioned qualms) require so much time and effort that it's not worth it in my opinion.

From the little bits I've read of the Cass material, it seems intriguing and interesting, but have to go on record here and say that anytime you get an actual organization based around something like this, watch out.    If your inner voice is throwing up red flags and telling you something doesn't seem right with this source of information, you'd be wise to heed the warning.  That's a good rule to follow anytime. 

Especially when someone claims to be channeling spirits <cough>.

Thoth: personal opinion, I think "new age" movements get the same type of idiotic devotees that you find in any religion... just less organized, and generally not trying to impose their wills on or kill everyone else (at least in my experience).  So, that's one less _negative_ about them at least.

Well, here is my 2 cents:

I've attended a session of the C's in Laura's home, and I have to say, it was quite impressive.   I don't say this to "convert" anybody, I'm just offering up my perspective on the matter and what I've experienced as far as the material goes, and the nature of how it is / was obtained.   Unless you see it happening, there's no way for anybody to truly appreciate it.    For the record, Laura doesn't "trance channel" the material like most other channeling is done, ie, Barbara Marciniak, the Seth Material, Ra, The Pleiedians, etc. etc.   Trance channeling involves the host body relinquishing themselves to some outside entity who "takes over" the body for a period of time and talks through them.  In that sense, it really can be open to the host's imagination;  they could really just be tapping into information they already know on a subconscious level and speaking freely now that the walls are down.   The C's material is obtained in a very different way:

-  It uses/used a ouija board, not trance channeling;
-  There are / was always someone else on the planchette besides Laura;
-  There are always multiple witnesses present in the room, including transcribers;
-  Nearly all of the sessions were tape recorded, save for the occasional session where something went haywire with the recorder;
-  The planchette moves very quickly around the glass topped ouija board, as Laura or the other planchette holder calls out the letters that come out one at a time, often times rapid fire.    The transcriberS, plural, in turn write the letters down on a notebook as they're called out;    This happens so quickly that not only do Laura and the other planchette person not actually know what words the letters form, but either do the transcribers!    After an answer comes out, sometimes paragraphs long, the job is to now go back and figure out the spaces between words.   So, if the answers are all just Laura's wild imagination, then damn, that's quite an amazing set up.  SHE doesn't even know what the answers are when they first come out.     

As someone who's helped with the transcribing that time we visited, let me tell you.......it's such a cool feeling to see that each and every time the answers coming out are very coherant.   You look at the page of letters and it LOOKS like it'll be gibberish, and you think there's no way it'll work out to be anything meaningful.   But it does, every time. 

And as far as whether it's all the work of any overactive imagination.......again, when you see it in person being done, it'll change your view.   For it to be imagination would mean both planchette people would have to already have the answers memorized or agreed upon to make the planchette go to the letters in unison.  And considering the lengthy answers....hmmm, I'd love to know how they manage to coordinate and memorize everything so well.   And considering that the sessions are spontaneous and there are no pre-planned questions, and others in the room are free to chime in with questions and comnments on the spot also means there's no way the answers are pre-arranged.

Another interesting point is that the answers are oftentimes not what Laura or anybody in the room actually expected.  If the disbelievers combed through the transcripts, they'll find many an instance of Laura or others debating / arguing points with the C's. 

As far as who the C's actually are.....that remains to be seen.  I just know what I saw, and that there's no logical explanation for it, no way to disprove that there is SOMETHING coming through that planchette, other than Laura's imagination.   It's something, that's for sure.   I still don't know whether to believe it's actually "6th Density STO", but whatever it is, I like their answers, comments, advise and perspective on things.   It resonates with me. 

On a sidenote:   I used to think it was difficult to read the transcripts too, but once you learn the format set up, it's quite easy actually.   You just have to get used to the whole  "Q" and "A" and first initials in parenthesis thing.

Lyra,

The question that immediately pops into my mind is: Isn't it possible that ONE of the people holding the planchette is dominating the movement between letters in a subtle way, and DOES have the answers memorized, and is only acting as if she didn't know them ahead of time?

I've personally corresponded with Jay Weidner and Vincent Bridges, and they're both hot-heads who are good at using a few facts to make a bunch of lies sound convincing. If you pick apart their thesis on the psychopathology of channeling, it falls apart. Of course, it looks good to  the flippantly dismissive types and those who are intellectually lazy and easy to sucker. It's always better to go to the source and sort the wheat from chaff, than throw out the baby with the bathwater because of someone else's misinformed opinion.

Not so in my case. My intuition says it's some of the most explorative and accurate material out there, right in line with the Ra Material. But on top of intuition, I've also got personal experience, insight, and critical thinking backing up my intuition. Sure, the Cass material isn't perfect, but compared to most channeling out there it's prime.

I'm not sure whether you're referring to the Cassiopaean Transcripts, or the articles published at Cassiopaea.org.  Okay, so some of the articles there are lengthy and dense which can cause for headaches, but physiological reactions aren't really criteria to judge material on. Better criteria would be: usefulness, accuracy, intuitive confirmation, clarity, and correlation with personal experience. Of course, that takes both comprehension of the material and dissection, for which some people don't have time/willpower/energy. For those people, they're entitled to their opinion but I wouldn't take their opinion too seriously.

I make a distinction between the original Cassiopaean Transcript material or early articles, and the latter more organizational structure and material that grew out of it. It would be a mistake to throw out the first because of the latter. Also, what better way to discredit good material than associate it with an organization some later accuse of being a cult. I should mention that currently, the organization doesn't associate itself with the original Cassiopean Material anymore, which is further reason to keep in mind the difference between original and latter material.

mmmm...critical thinking, personal experience, intuition, and research come to mind as being sufficient to verify the source of any information. Unless, of course, you want direct proof like Sananda's sandals or clippings Mother Sekhmet's whiskers or an image of Virgin Mary on some office building window. Which of course opens you up to deception by STS forces keen on creating "proof" for the stubborn.

Yes, there's lots of disinformation out there, lots of truth sandwiched between lies. But the lies can be thrown away and truth kept. It takes practice, but it can be done. It's not enough to be suspicious, there must also be reason for suspicion and perhaps examples of why something is false, inconsistent, contradictory, or manipulative. I'm just wondering, by what criteria are you basing your dismissal of the Cass information, and what qualities would you consider sufficient to call something "great channeling" or "great information"?