Questioning The Book

[ShahKorR]

When i left my ealier post i myself was frustrated at certain things about this reality and how easily you can stray from the "path". There is so much information out there and filtereing is difficult becareful that you do not get caught up in misdirection ,if you start feeling confused about the direction you are heading in, then stop and think back to where your thoughts first lead you to that junction and examine everything once again. My frustration was not towards this sight in particular, it is most useful for people who have read michaels book and who need some help in direction, there are aspects of knowledge on here that will raise wuestions for you.
Remember it is all contrasts! without that there is no perception

[survivor]

Come on, you cant justify your beliefs throu WORDS.

Yes you can. Think of any belief you have, e.g. 'Earth is a planet', can you justify it in words? You should be able to, in a number of ways even. If you re-read what I said in the last post, you'll see that I'm not asking for indubitable justification . If you can't justify it in words, it sounds to me like faith (perhaps that is what you were thinking of), but I suppose that would still be an answer I would have to accept. How about: "I just feel that it is true"

What justification do you have for believing the book is true?

postscript 171 (TP)

"Thao told me that this book is not only intended to enlighten the inhabitants of
this planet, but also to open their eyes - wake them up to what is happening
around them. Thao and her people are very concerned about the ways in which
we allow ourselves to be led by a handful of rotten politicians, who skilfully make
us believe we are free and democratic, when, in relation to the Universal Law, we
are no freer than a flock of sheep. We may occasionally stray from the path and
think we are free, but that’s an illusion, because we end up in the meatworks
without even realising it."

..sometimes sheep get lonely and scared, they decide to go home where its safe.

[ArioK]

With Any other tale the inumerable lives of Sakyamuni Lord Buddha Siddartha Gotama, must have been imbelished and became a tall tale. Not Untrue but just grand in it's scope. I can understand your point because I have heard this from monks audio lectures from http://www.buddhnet.net that the Buddha Remembered 91 Eons. Meaning 91 Big Bangs ! 91 x let's say the average life span of a Universe is 17 trillion years... that is a lot to remember.

[the_greek]

I have one more thing to add to this topic regarding the questioning of the book. I've been thinking about dimensions and how was it possible for this man to be on the 9th when his body is 3rd? Yes i know, supposedly he could only stay for 9 or 10 days but he should not have been able to materialize there at all.Was this ever explained, if so I must have missed it but i don't feel like re-reading the book.

[dloheb]

I have one more thing to add to this topic regarding the questioning of the book. I've been thinking about dimensions and how was it possible for this man to be on the 9th when his body is 3rd? Yes i know, supposedly he could only stay for 9 or 10 days but he should not have been able to [/i]materialize[/i] there at all.Was this ever explained, if so I must have missed it but i don't feel like re-reading the book.

for what you said the body being on the 3rd dimension . . . the book actually made a seperation between our bodies and the levels of the planets

earth is level one yet physical bodies exist on the higher categories as well, your saying that the body is "3rd" is evidence of that fact (assuming the book is correct) because our planet is level one. .

also, the book says there are nine bodies within us, which includes the astral and etc.. which you would probably say are different dimensions if i understand your question correctly

[Robanan]

Guys I don't get it which dimensions are you talking about.

[InfoSource]

To Psi:

It's great to have someone on the forum who knows the author of TP personally and can help us understand parts of the book better as a whole.

Just one question I'm hoping you will respond to, and that is are you 100% certain from reading Thiaoouba Prophecy, talking to Michel about his experience that his story of being "abducted to the golden planet" is true?

I have my doubts about TP, I think the book is an enjoyable read, it’s well written, and has important messages in it, but can't say I truly believe it's true. Compared to other abductions stories I've read it seems the most genuine, Michel in the interview samples given on the Meanwell's site and in the Japanese interviews seemed genuine himself, but TP has it's flaws.

My doubts about TP also coincide with doubts in other items like global warming and the Big Bang theory, global warming more so than the Big Bang

I will perhaps later get links to articles with sceptical points of view on global warming and the Big Bang theory and post them in this thread.

I mentioned above I think TP has flaws, one big one that lead me to question the book is when Thao talks about having very little time on Earth to solve the problem of pollution, and if the problem wasn’t dealt with quickly it would lead to dire consequences for the entire planet very soon

‘There, they are making a big mistake, for the source of the coming disasters is
the pollution which is growing daily on your planet, and its consequences will be
felt very soon - much sooner than you can imagine. The people of Earth must
not do as the child forbidden to play with fire; the child is without experience
and, in spite of the prohibition, he disobeys and burns himself. Once burnt, he
‘knows’ that the adults were right. He won’t play with fire again but he will pay
for his disobedience by suffering for several days afterwards.
‘Unfortunately, in the case that concerns us, the consequences are much more
serious than the burn of a child. It’s the destruction of your entire planet that is at
risk1 - with no second chance if you don’t place your trust in those who want to help you.'

It’s been almost 20 years since the “abduction”, so what timeframe was Thao talking about in dealing with this issue? How much time did they expect Michel book on his experience to get mainstream attention, so far the book hasn’t reached a critical mass of people to revolutionize the world with it’s contents

The “no second chance” quote seemed to have motivated Dr. Tom Chalko into believing that the Earth was going to blow up from overheating due to the greenhouse effect. I can’t argue with Tom point for point on his reasoning as to why to Earth is going to blown because of a lack of scientific background to do so, but his theory on the effects of global warming have not been put for peer review in any scientific journal to be examined so that makes my question his core theory

So as you can see, I have doubts about TP, I would just like to know why you can say you know that TP is true?

[Psi]

Hi InfoSource,

Thanks for your comments.

Let me address them one by one, as best as I can . . .

Just one question I'm hoping you will respond to, and that is are you 100% certain from reading Thiaoouba Prophecy, talking to Michel about his experience that his story of being "abducted to the golden planet" is true?

I, of course, cannot vouch for the book 100%. I did not write it. Nor did I place Michel under a lie detector. But I can say that i do know Michel. I have spent a lot of time speaking with him. So, as far as you can get to know a person, I know Michel, and yes, I believe him. On a professional level, like others on the forum, I have done my homework - researching facts he presents and, so far, I cannot fault the book.

You are right in saying that there are errors. I made this point recently in an email to Vesko which he posted on the forum. These errors, however, have been addressed by Michel and are primarily due to translation problems (remember, he wrote the manuscript in French and it was translated by one or more people).

I have my doubts about TP, I think the book is an enjoyable read, it’s well written, and has important messages in it, but can't say I truly believe it's true. Compared to other abductions stories I've read it seems the most genuine, Michel in the interview samples you gave on your website and in the Japanese interviews seemed genuine himself, but TP has it's flaws.

Whenever I openly discuss the book, I make the point that it's not essential to believe Michel's book (ie his visit), but rather the message it contains: a message of warning and one of hope. I think the proof, as Thao says and no doubt we have all thought, is contained in the book - the knowledge and wisdom - that is often simply put so that it can be grasped by virtually anyone.

My doubts about TP also coincide with doubts in other items like global warming and the Big Bang theory, global warming more so than the Big Bang

I will perhaps later get links to articles with sceptical points of view on global warming and the Big Bang theory and post them in this thread.

Well, the jury is still out on both the Big Bang and Global Warning. I know there is an alternative view to the Big Bang (forgotten what it's called for the moment), but again - that's just a theory - it has not been proven and, therefore, hasn't disproved the Big bang. I know that there's some controversy regarding Global Warming as well, but I wonder if promoting doubt is yet another way the world's shakers and movers continue to prosper.

I mentioned above I think TP has flaws, one big one that lead me to question the book is when Thao talks about having very little time on Earth to solve the problem of pollution, and if the problem wasn’t dealt with quickly it would lead to dire consequences for the entire planet very soon

‘There, they are making a big mistake, for the source of the coming disasters is
the pollution which is growing daily on your planet, and its consequences will be
felt very soon - much sooner than you can imagine. The people of Earth must
not do as the child forbidden to play with fire; the child is without experience
and, in spite of the prohibition, he disobeys and burns himself. Once burnt, he
‘knows’ that the adults were right. He won’t play with fire again but he will pay
for his disobedience by suffering for several days afterwards.
‘Unfortunately, in the case that concerns us, the consequences are much more
serious than the burn of a child. It’s the destruction of your entire planet that is at
risk1 - with no second chance if you don’t place your trust in those who want to help you.'

It’s been almost 20 years since the “abduction”, so what timeframe was Thao talking about in dealing with this issue? How much time did they expect Michel book on his experience to get mainstream attention, so far the book hasn’t reached a critical mass of people to revolutionize the world with it’s contents

The “no second chance” quote seemed to have motivated Dr. Tom Chalko into believing that the Earth was going to blow up from overheating due to the greenhouse effect. I can’t argue with Tom point for point on his reasoning as to why to Earth is going to blown because of a lack of scientific background to do so, but his theory on the effects of global warming have not been put for peer review in any scientific journal to be examined so that makes my question his core theory

So as you can see, I have doubts about TP, I would just like to know why you can say you know that TP is true?

I don't wish to comment on Tom's theory - I don't know enough about it. But, with regard to the time frame, I would suggest that "very soon" may be years, decades or even centuries away. What is the point in saying that disaster is imminent in 100 years? What will people do today? The same as yesterday. Nothing. My thinking is that Thao is warning us now – so that we can take measures now - before it is too late. I also believe that Michel's book, much like Christ and his message, will reach critical mass long after we are all gone. I hope I am wrong.

I trust this helps answer your questions.

At the end of the day, it's up to each of us whether we choose to believe Michel and, more importantly, whether we choose to act responsibly and maturely. Remember, all of the great people throughout the history that we know about - Einstein, Galileo, Socrates - were all vilified for their beliefs. It's only, with the passage of time, that we see the truth.

[shezmear]

Psi said:

I don't wish to comment on Tom's theory - I don't know enough about it. But, with regard to the time frame, I would suggest that "very soon" may be years, decades or even centuries away. What is the point in saying that disaster is imminent in 100 years? What will people do today? The same as yesterday. Nothing. My thinking is that Thao is warning us now – so that we can take measures now - before it is too late. I also believe that Michel's book, much like Christ and his message, will reach critical mass long after we are all gone. I hope I am wrong.

Thao says in the book something to the effect of, when you return to earth you carry information that can/will help millions of your fellow human beings on earth....well, unless there is some shake up, a really can’t see that happening, and the people of thiaoouba don’t really strike me as people that are either misguided in their efforts or delusional in their expectations of what/can/will happen.

It seems strange to take him all that way, tell him all those things, then for the book to become a relative obscurity, and maybe you are right, 100 years from now it will mean more to more people, at present we are a minority’s minority, one can’t help but wonder what are the necessary conditions of such a social change to take place.

But then again they sent Christ one of their own and I`m not sure how well that was understood, I learn a lot from watching my daughter grow up, even if you set out with the perfect conditions for success, a great mess can still be made and all ruined and the point can be missed completely.

[Vesko]

The book contains an important point that considerable progress can be attained only within a single lifetime. Also, that good thoughts and deeds and special exercises like meditation, concentration and yoga are what is needed to achieve that. I have done enough meditation to be able to conclude without any doubt at all that it's an excellent anti-depressant and anti-stress tool, and it opens up my mind and increases its power. Through meditation and thought control, I have felt great relief even in very bad moments, full of mental and physical tension. Outside meditation, I have found out by my direct experience that when I don't spend much time thinking about money and material things but rather about psychological issues and internal mental states, I feel lighter and happier, I am able to do a much , much greater number of things with ease -- be it solving a math problem, drawing a picture or communicating with others on a satisfying level -- than I could otherwise.

Like so many people, I have felt and continue feeling anger, hatred, jealousy, lust and a great many other thoughts and emotions. But little by little, I observed the consequences from them, and I have concluded without any remaining doubt at all that they are negative -- they sap my physical and mental energy, distract my mind and make me unsatisfied and unhappy. Not only for the moment while experiencing them -- I found they diminish my mental performance and level of happiness for days after I have stopped thinking / feeling them. So, little by little, I have come to realise that the only way forward is to start to discipline my thoughts, without suppressing them, and to look to learn some special exercises that will help me attain greater control. And have seen the great benefits. I am interested in yoga and read about people who supposedly control each and every thought, and who feel tremendous happiness and satisfaction, and have great control of their lives. I believe such tremendous happiness exists and is attainable, because the more I control my thoughts without suppressing them, the happier I am with myself and I do not notice any sign that I'm reaching a limit of happiness attainable in this way. Regarding control vs. suppression -- because I understand that e.g. anger is bad, when I start getting angry and feel tempted to get even more angry -- you know how tempting it is to do so -- I remind myself that I am surely going to feel very bad after that, so my desire to continue with the feeling evaporates. Doing this, I have not suppressed anger in myself (I say this because there are people who think that control equals suppression and lack of freedom).

This is the living proof that the main message of the book -- that focussing on one's mental states is of great benefit -- is true. This is by far what the book wants us to help realise ourselves. Readers need to think carefully about what they have read in the book and what they think they have read in the book. Nowhere in the book it is said that if we don't prove that aliens exist, and that if we don't prove that the soul or reincarnation exists, we cannot progress spiritually. The books says we shouldn't depend on aliens, that we will be disappointed if we depended on them. If one thinks, it is also clear from the book that it is not necessary to prove that the soul exists or reincarnation exists in order to develop substantially and increase one's happiness substantially from the stage of evolution we are at now.

[Aisin]

Regarding control vs. suppression -- because I understand that e.g. anger is bad, when I start getting angry and feel tempted to get even more angry -- you know how tempting it is to do so -- I remind myself that I am surely going to feel very bad after that, so my desire to continue with the feeling evaporates. Doing this, I have not suppressed anger in myself (I say this because there are people who think that control equals suppression and lack of freedom).

I would like to add a few words from my understanding. The thing that usually happens when we get angry is that we turn a blind eye towards our own anger. We just continue to be angry without realizing the change of our state of emotion.

By acknowledging our anger as soon as it happens, it helps us to realize what we're doing, and hence consciously and effectively put a stop to it. This is controlling. Putting it plainly, we might be saying to ourselves, 'I'm feeling angry now because I don't feel respected / trusted etc'. The anger may just go away without us even further analyzing whether the outcome is pleasant or not.

Suppression on the other hand, is disregard for our anger, perhaps by pretending that we're not angry, by not acknowledging that we can get angry easily. The anger that is not acknowledged is not resolved, and doesn't go away, it stays somewhere buried waiting to erupt again. I'd say the same goes for other negative emotions, such as sadness, regret, jealousy etc.

[InfoSource]

Thank you for the response, Psi. I do agree that the most important thing to gain from TP is the messages contained within it and not whether the book is ultimately true or not, but still it would be nice knowing TP is true and that things like the astral body, and reincarnation do exist.

[Alisima]

Like so many people, I have felt and continue feeling anger, hatred, jealousy, lust and a great many other thoughts and emotions. But little by little, I observed the consequences from them, and I have concluded without any remaining doubt at all that they are negative -- they sap my physical and mental energy, distract my mind and make me unsatisfied and unhappy. Not only for the moment while experiencing them -- I found they diminish my mental performance and level of happiness for days after I have stopped thinking / feeling them. So, little by little, I have come to realise that the only way forward is to start to discipline my thoughts, without suppressing them, and to look to learn some special exercises that will help me attain greater control. And have seen the great benefits. I am interested in yoga and read about people who supposedly control each and every thought, and who feel tremendous happiness and satisfaction, and have great control of their lives. I believe such tremendous happiness exists and is attainable, because the more I control my thoughts without suppressing them, the happier I am with myself and I do not notice any sign that I'm reaching a limit of happiness attainable in this way. Regarding control vs. suppression -- because I understand that e.g. anger is bad, when I start getting angry and feel tempted to get even more angry -- you know how tempting it is to do so -- I remind myself that I am surely going to feel very bad after that, so my desire to continue with the feeling evaporates. Doing this, I have not suppressed anger in myself (I say this because there are people who think that control equals suppression and lack of freedom).

Instead of trying to control your thoughts, your negative thoughts, ask why they come?? Because they come for a reason. It isn't the case that there is a chaotic pool of thoughts and you are picking out some of them, at random. No, every thought has it's particular reason for being there. And understanding it's presence has more value than controlling them. If you understand why you feel hatred and anger, you might transcend them.

I found they diminish my mental performance and level of happiness for days after I have stopped thinking / feeling them.

If you are in the process of controlling thoughts, please control these too. Level of happiness?? That is a thought. Mental performance?? That is a thought too. If you feel unhappy because of this and that, that is a thought too!! I would say the negative thoughts, like anger and hate, aren't negative, but the thought "I still feel unhappy because yesterday I was angry" IS!! That is a negative thought because it is holding you down. So anger isn't negative because it usually only last for a minute to perhapse 5 minutes. What is negative is the thought that keeps haunting you for days!!

I once found out that unhappiness comes because of the thought "I am unhappy" or "I am feel sad." Apart from that, unhappiness has no existence whatsoever. The thought "I am unhappy" is the cause of all the unhappiness mankind knows. So from the moment I found this out, untill this very day, I usually do one of two things. I either stop placing value on the thought, simply let the thought come, let it go, and that is that, period. Or I start to question how the thought came into being, i.e., why do I feel unhappy? In both ways it takes me, at the most, 5 minutes, but usually far less, to revert back to my original state. Aside from that, I hardly feel unhappy anymore.

So, little by little, I have come to realise that the only way forward is to start to discipline my thoughts, without suppressing them, and to look to learn some special exercises that will help me attain greater control.

Controlling without suppressing?? In controlling one favors one thing from the other. If I were to control a group of people, as a King for instance, I could create the idea of Morality and say to those who do what I want, "you are doing good" and to those who do what I dislike, "you are doing bad". The latter will feel guilty, to the extend they bought the lie, and most of them will try to belong to the former. Now please explain me HOW do you control your thought, without suppressing another thought?? You say, "there are people who think that control equals suppression and lack of freedom", in what way isn't that true?? Like I said, in control you praise one thing and disdain the other.

The best way to control your thoughts is in seclusion. Go to the Himalayas and enter a meditation cave, that is where you can control your thoughts. But that hasn't got anything to do with living. There have been monks who have practiced their whole life so that they can live a good life. But in doing so, they aren't living anymore. They have secluded themselves somuch that the goal for their seclusion is wasted in it's very effort to attain it. They are practicing so that they can live a good life, but the practice itself leaves no time for living. It is self-defeating.

Investigate why your thoughts come into being, and from where. The moment you understand why you are angry, you won't be angry anymore. The moment you understand why you feel hatred, you won't feel it anymore. Control is not the key, understanding is.

[Vesko]

Alisima, you didn't notice or realise the meaning of the bolded word in

Regarding control vs. suppression -- because I understand that e.g. anger is bad

Because I understand that anger, etc. is bad, those thoughts do not occur in me, or if they occur, I do not feed them and they naturally die. This is control, and there is no suppression. What I do is similar to what you yourself described:

I either stop placing value on the thought, simply let the thought come, let it go, and that is that, period. Or I start to question how the thought came into being, i.e., why do I feel unhappy? In both ways it takes me, at the most, 5 minutes, but usually far less, to revert back to my original state.

Also,

If you are in the process of controlling thoughts, please control these too. Level of happiness?? That is a thought. Mental performance?? That is a thought too.

I control them. I encourage happiness and associated thought.

If you feel unhappy because of this and that, that is a thought too!! I would say the negative thoughts, like anger and hate, aren't negative, but the thought "I still feel unhappy because yesterday I was angry" IS!! That is a negative thought because it is holding you down. So anger isn't negative because it usually only last for a minute to perhapse 5 minutes. What is negative is the thought that keeps haunting you for days!!

Experiencing negativity only for 5 minutes doesn't make anger not negative. It still holds you down.

Controlling without suppressing??

Yes.

In controlling one favors one thing from the other.

Yes, of course.

If I were to control a group of people, as a King for instance, I could create the idea of Morality and say to those who do what I want, "you are doing good" and to those who do what I dislike, "you are doing bad". The latter will feel guilty, to the extend they bought the lie, and most of them will try to belong to the former.

Please explain how the above paragraph relates to this discussion.

Now please explain me HOW do you control your thought, without suppressing another thought?? You say, "there are people who think that control equals suppression and lack of freedom", in what way isn't that true?? Like I said, in control you praise one thing and disdain the other.

I examine all thoughts equally well before understanding which thoughts are good and which are bad. Then, I encourage the thoughts that I understand to be good and beneficial to me, and in the process the bad thoughts lose power and disappear by themselves. I control myself not to fall into the trap of following a thought that I understand / know is surely bad. If I fall into this trap, I again control myself to stop thinking this thought and replace it with a more positive one.

Also, it's not necessary to spend all your life in a Himalayan cave in order to practice the best spiritual discipline. The modern world has many benefits, thanks to science and technology, if one knows how to use them wisely.

So you are of the opinion that all yogis / monks / hermits practicing seclusion all their life are not living and your advice to them is effectively "get a life"? Can you elaborate more?

[Psi]

Im sure that there is a reasonable answer to how many lives it takes to reach level 9.

Hi Propaganda,

The answer is simple. That's up to you or, more accurately, your soul.

As Michel says on the Thiaoouba Truth interviews, you can progress from Category 1 to as high as 9 in your next lifetime or, of course, you can repeat your time here on Category 1 many lifetimes. That's up to you; that depends on what you learn in this and every life.

I have come across many people who have proudly proclaimed that they are an "old soul" as if it's some kind of badge of honour. To me, it's a little like saying I am 21 years old and I'm still in kindergarten. Horay for me!

I think it would be better to be the "youngest" in the class than the "oldest", don't you?..