Celestine Prophecy

Lillie

Teheuti said:
Of course there can be lies. All novels are lies, as is most art and a lot of nature (creatures that mimic others for survival, etc.). In the magical universe, "reality" exists on many levels. Presenting a lie as a truth is one part of the magical world. That doesn't mean you have to "like" it. And sometimes you have to do something to stop the lies—to uncover them. With magic, you enter the world of the trickster - buyer beware. It's a slippery place and finding your way ethically is not always easy, but it is essential.

I so disagree.

It is never Ok to to lie to people.

It is never Ok to give false information.
This is tantamount to theft.

This is stealing from someone the ability to understand and to comprehend the world they live in and the situation they may or may not be in.

And yeah, the world is full of liars, and the world is full of people who make excuses and justifications for liars, but it don't make it right and it certainly don't make it spiritual.

Lying to someone is harming them. It is denying them choice and knowledge.
I do not believe that there is any way that harming someone can be helping them on their spiritual path.
Or any path.

And yes, it's a damn sad fact that we are all surrounded by liars all the time.
Just about every day we have to decide what is and what isn't the truth.
And we learn to do so, and we learn to live with it.
But that does not make it right.

We also learn to live with the danger of thieves and murderers and rapists.
But the fact that they exist does not make them right either.

And novels are different. Novels aren't lies. They are invented stories that say they are invented.
Lies are defined as being deliberate deception.
A lie that says it's a lie is not a lie.
 

Teheuti

Lillie said:
I so disagree.

It is never Ok to to lie to people.

I understand what you are saying and can sympathize with your pov even though I don't experience the world in such black-and-white terms. I, too, get angry when I feel I've been deliberately lied to by someone. But it is often through lies that I learn more about truth. I've probably grown as much or more from examining lies, falsehoods and misconceptions as I have from being handed the truth (and how do I know that what someone is saying is true, anyway?). Also, what is truth at one point can become a lie at another and vice versa.

If I tell the truth about the future I see in a tarot reading and it doesn't come to pass, does that make it a lie? Some querents have had this happen and feel betrayed—that their tarot reader lied to them. But, what if, as the result of the reading or something else, the querent changed something that changed the future outcome? Let's say the reader told the truth, but the truth they told turned out be not-true. Sure, they weren't telling a deliberate lie—but does the querent know that? I mean, the reader could have been a con artist!

Another reader deliberately tells a lie. For instance, the reader doesn't tell a mother that things don't look well for her unborn child. It happened to me. The baby died at three months of SIDS. Could it have been prevented? I really don't see how (I didn't see any specifics) and I've certainly thought long and hard about it. (I no longer do readings about someone's pregnancy and birth.)

In the case of The Celestine Prophecy — will the book be an "okay book" if it clearly says somewhere that it is fiction? But "not okay" if it doesn't? Can there be any value in a book that a book reader falsely takes as true when only part of it is true?

I used to teach Women's Biography and Autobiography in a college. What I discovered was that all autobiographies (classified as nonfiction) contain lies—where the author deliberately (as well as unconsciously) lies about themselves. Does this make all autobiographies "not okay"?

I think it's important for the reading public to let publishers know that they want honesty in how a book is presented. The outcries about Marlo Morgan—who presented her experiences in _Mutant Message Down Under_ as literal fact when she spoke in my town—caused the publisher to add "fiction" to her works. Lynn Andrews had a similar problem with _Medicine Woman_. Castenada's books have always been suspect.

The authors originally presented their books as fact, which, I admit, leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I prefer to let the material, the teachings, prove themselves or not.

In the Catholic Church one question that always came up was "can a sinful priest grant absolution and truly pass on the grace of sacraments?" The church's answer was yes. Of course, you might already condemn the Catholic Church as a hotbed of liars—so that may not be a good example.

Sorry to ramble on.
 

gregory

Teheuti said:
In the case of The Celestine Prophecy — will the book be an "okay book" if it clearly says somewhere that it is fiction? But "not okay" if it doesn't? Can there be any value in a book that a book reader falsely takes as true when only part of it is true?
If the reader does not know, and the publisher/author did not make any claim to truth, that is not the author/publisher lying; that is a simple misconception.

Teheuti said:
I used to teach Women's Biography and Autobiography in a college. What I discovered was that all autobiographies (classified as nonfiction) contain lies—where the author deliberately (as well as unconsciously) lies about themselves. Does this make all autobiographies "not okay"?
I think those writing factual books should not lie in them. If a lie is genuinely unconscious that is a slightly different thing. But those autobiographies - like that shocker by the woman who claimed to have had a dreadful life in a concentration camp - which are based on deliberate lies should not be peddled as truth.

Teheuti said:
The authors originally presented their books as fact, which, I admit, leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I prefer to let the material, the teachings, prove themselves or not.
It doesn't prove itself if it's a lie, though. And I am glad to hear of the bad taste (except in so far as it was unpleasant for you !) You and I aren't as far apart as I thought !

Teheuti said:
In the Catholic Church one question that always came up was "can a sinful priest grant absolution and truly pass on the grace of sacraments?" The church's answer was yes. Of course, you might already condemn the Catholic Church as a hotbed of liars—so that may not be a good example.
I don't think a priest offering absolution is saying he offers it out of a totally sinless self; he is passing on the forgiveness of God. You can pass good stuff through a crappy pipe.... The priest isn't lying and saying he has not himself sinned; he is saying "God says OK."

Not that I buy into that, and I know Catholics who lie and Catholics who don't..... :D
 

Teheuti

gregory said:
those autobiographies . . . which are based on deliberate lies should not be peddled as truth.
Show me a single autobiography where the author doesn't lie somewhere about themselves. That's what I wasn't even referencing the out-and-out frauds. I agree that what the woman you mentioned did was unconscionable.


I don't think a priest offering absolution is saying he offers it out of a totally sinless self; he is passing on the forgiveness of God. You can pass good stuff through a crappy pipe.... The priest isn't lying and saying he has not himself sinned; he is saying "God says OK."
My point is that an author who presents a fable that some take as the truth (either because it being fiction or non-fiction is not clear on the cover or because it was misplaced on the shelf where you got it), and sometimes even an author who lies, may be passing on really good and helpful information or teachings. You can pass the good stuff through a crappy pipe.
 

Lillie

You bring up a load of interesting points in your post, and you are probably right. I do see things in black and white while in reality there are many shades of grey.
I have to learn to live with those shades of grey and make my own accommodation with them, as we all do.

I think the main point for me is the idea of deliberate deception.
That for me is the definition of a lie.
Not if the truth changed, or if the real truth wasn't known, but the deliberateness of the deception.

I don't like it.

And for me it taints whatever it touches.

Also for me there wouldn't have been any value in this book regardless of it's status.
If it had presented itself to me as fiction it might have been a mildly diverting read. But as I felt (rightly or wrongly) that I was being deliberately lied too, it was just annoying. Very annoying in fact, and made me quite angry.
Though, once again, if others got something from it then I am happy for them.
My copy is probably available to anyone in the UK who would like to try it for themselves.

I don't know much about the catholic church, so I wouldn't like to comment.

But yes.
I think I do see things in black and white.
I find it very difficult to lie, I find it very difficult to be lied too.
I have been told that I may have some sort of Asbergers thing which would explain this.
However, I have to say that it was not a doctor who said that, just people pointing and laughing at me when Asbergers stuff comes on TV and saying 'That's just like you! Bet you have that!'

So, who knows.
It's the way I am.

I really hate to be lied to.

Don't get me started on autobiographies!
Especially the celebrity ones that are ghost written!
Shocking!

Jordan has her novels ghost written!
That's so weird...
 

Libra8ca

I think it is very important to state if something is fact or fiction and if it is fiction I would also like to know more of the reasoning behind it (not including fiction for pure entertainment).
If fact and fiction become mixed then you end up with ideas that shape our world that can mislead a lot of people - a perfect example is the "Mayan Calendar supposedly ending in 2012" - the Mayans did have a very complex calendar and system of measuring time based on the planets and cosmos and it ends at some point.
So much has been written about it by people who copied information from someone who copied it from someone else that I have no idea anymore what we know as a fact (and is a well-established fact at that) and what has been added by various researchers based on their own theories and speculations.
 

Teheuti

As Lillie said, "The world is full of liars." It's what humans do. Even chimps have lying behaviors and, as I said before, plants and animals sometimes present themselves as they are not. Some of it is a perceived-survival instinct—deliberate and not.

To vastly over-simplify things -

A "new age" approach is to try to insist on a world where everyone tells the truth.

A "magical" approach is to see lies as something that simply "is" (i.e., it is reality), to recognize that most truths are not absolute but malleable, and that lies can be worked with appropriately and inappropriately—even among those who ascribe to the "harm none" law. When someone's lies are hurting people or a situation then I may choose to act.

For instance, if someone sends me one of those urban legend/activist emails, I don't get mad (that just affects my own body negatively). I first check it out (research skills are paramount here) and then, if I know where it originated I usually email the sender (and/or the group who got the email) with the information that I think can help them to be better informed.

Likewise, when I read amazon reviews I look for the ones that intelligently present examples of what is good or bad in the work itself. I always read the 1-star reviews and often realize that the damning reports actually recommend the book to me. For instance, blind anger at a work sometimes means that the work is presenting material that threatens conventional wisdom. (That's not a dig at you, Lillie, it's just how my mind works.)

And, Lillie, I really do respect those who insist on truth, even though I have a different understanding of the truth/lies issue. We need the watch-dogs who are first to speak up when they see something is wrong, and who demand a stringent adherence to principles and values. To me, it's always a reminder to do my research and evaluate the situation closely—to not become complacent, but question everything.
 

Teheuti

Libra8ca said:
I think it is very important to state if something is fact or fiction
If someone "channels" something or sees it in a vision—is that fact or fiction? Did it happen or not?

If I experience in a vision something that I know to be absolutely "true," and I tell people it was a vision, knowing those people will believe it to be fiction and won't believe the truth I know it to be, am I being true to the truth?—and which truth?

I believe some people are caught in this dilemma.

Personally, I like knowing it was a vision, but then I'm willing to believe some of the things people "see" in visions. Others discount it on principle.
 

gregory

I like to believe as many impossible things as possible. Sadly, deliberate lies and dissembling spoil that for me.
 

Lillie

:(

You do all know that when I get to find that book I am probably going to have to re read the wretched thing to make sure I'm remembering it right...