Gaia: Knights & Maidens of the Roundtable - Read First and Refer Back Often - Onward Maidens and Knights

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://goodworld.gaia.com — Tue, 20 May 2008 17:53:18 GMT

Hello Wolf,

Thanks for your observations. You are right about fighting and confrontation. The intention is certainly something more productive. A better vision of how the world could work, for example.

That better vision is a world community (in a modern world fully interconnected by transport, communications and realisation of the same basic needs of people everywhere for adequate food clothing and shelter) where the basic gifts of nature (i.e. all the natural resources without which no one could make a living on this earth) are shared like between the members of a happy and enlightened world family.

But for this vision to be presented to "enemies" we have to understand the inadequate ways in which economics and politics and education, etc., is conducted.

Hence the twelve key areas of human concern form the backbone of this discussion.

You are also right that Knights and Dames would have been a better name for this community. But I think that at this stage we should just ask people to make their substitution according to your observation.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://thelittlecow.gaia.com — Sat, 17 May 2008 00:32:11 GMT

You cannot eradicate anything by fighting it. Haven't we learned anything in the last thousand years? Even using the framing of conflict binds you more fully to the "enemy" without which the resistance has no purpose. Can we not build something more creative and more fun and more affirming?

-from an English Wolf possessed of many honours, real and imagined.

PS, Did anybody cover that the feminine term equivalent to Sir, as in Sir Alan, Knight of the Realm, is Dame, as in Dame Judy Dench, Knight of the Realm. Where these titles hold, they are more than sufficient, however in the US, where they are not common, the masculine term has just come to be what people call men they choose not to call by name, and the feminine has become perjorative, as we seem to be afraid of the strong women in this hyar society.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://goodworld.gaia.com — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:49:43 GMT

By way of update.

Unfortunately, being a visionary does not mean being a leader. This pod has gone to slep for lack of leadership. For failing to provide that leadership I accept responsibility but the hope has been that the principle of self-organising would respond to the vision:

"...dreaming of twelve teams each made up of twelve modern "knights" (144) working together to subdue the (roughly) five* thousand year old conspiracy of a minority to dominate and exploit the surplus labour of the majority."

Let that be a note sounding out of this community; and let our benign universe guide the right team members to it.

Let the blessings be

*Riane Eisler in The Chalice And The Blade shows that settled civilisations did not start out as violence dominated, exploitative societies but were over run by war and conquest inspired nomadic hordes.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:12:45 GMT

I think the sword wielded by... knights-- well, the Big Sword, the famous sword, was the sword of love. in this oxymoron-- a sword of love, called cutsteel, caledwich, etc-- we can find the association of knighthood to violence. Amazons, knights, a better word to me is Servants. I believe knight meant a few things, such as "child," and "servant." Children of the roundtable would work too, but sounds a bit odd. : ) But do what you will, any solution is a solution. : ) I feel it's probably better though to find a solution in which both men and women fit the same definition. I still contend knight works, but I seem to recall even in history it was a troubling premise for warrior women fighting for the light. (an alternate reason there were no female knights: camelot disliked the idea of a standing army, and warriors were dissuaded from joining. Only those who refused to be dissuaded were accepted. There was a warrior women somewhere to the north gathering armies of warrior women, seeking to end rome. We told them attack was doomed to failure, by the simple nature of attack. they didn't listen. They were wiped out.)

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://goodworld.gaia.com — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:21:37 GMT

I am just getting round to reading these recent fascinating exchanges.

The issues that I can immediately speak to are lack of the female equivalent for "knight",

somewhere I suggested changing "maidens" to "amazons". What think you?

and the association of knighthood and violence,

very serious and must not be imported into the updated version of the "story". Battles today have to be fought between ideas and worldviews. The tragedy of the twentieth century is that in spite of all the great learning and knowledge we have been amassing we have not learned to resolve conflict at the level of ideas. Modern knights and amazons have to track down and slay bad and distorted ideas about what makes for the best possible societal arrangements. Swords wielded by the knights and amazons are swords of truth (as far as we can discern "truth").

We must put an end to belief in "redemptive violence"*; or that good ends can justify bad means of reaching it.

*a conceptual disaster explored at length by the American theologian, Walter Wink in his trilogy on temporal and spiritual "Powers".

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:26:05 GMT

Yes ms. achemist, Women warriors abounded in the old world. I remember killing quite a few, actually, they were most well represented on the fields in the areas known today as germany, sweden, etc. well built women, from those regions. they were the kills I regretted the most, and I regretted them all more than any who haven't killed could imagine, perhaps. It's time I came clean. in the first place, I'm no damn good at subterfuge, and at this point it'd be difficult to continue here without actually lying. And as ms. wise lady A. has graciously helped me see, (and if she's reading this, join this pod, A., please) it's no good running away from it, because you can't run from memories, and you can't run from the future. Both will always find you. But it means I'll probably be waiving bye bye to my average life! I guess I'd grown attached to it. But whatever. The information I and my friends posess is quite valuable, and everything we did was for what is to come now. I remember being King Arthur, is what I'm saying. These things I've been writing here, they don't come mostly from research, as I tried to subtly suggest, but from past-life memory. Its quite a thing for me to write that, just so you know. I am leaving it all to you to judge: I am either 1: batshit nuts, 2: the one who's soul is the same energy of king arthur's soul, or 3: an unwitting agent for the void, aka shadow. My ego's still trying to deal with this. It's a little, humble ego, never much wanted status and feared fame. I swear the last thing it wanted was to be told it was the reincarnation of an ancient legendary king who only really odd people believe was real. And yet, Not only do I remember being him, but there are others from that time who are in my life now. Guenivere. Gwain/Gwalchmei. Both remember being those old selves, and both remember my old self and recognize me as it. Guen and Gwalchmei are very close to me. I see both at least weekly these days. Both have traded sexes, if that means anything: guen's a boy and Gwalch's a girl. Between us, we've remembered quite a lot. We stood against, mainly, rome. Rome was actualization of void. Rome bought the dark ages, and they'd inherated them from the priests of babylon. the idea that women are below men in any way is fucking ridiculous, an abomination, and frankly one of the biggest tools void has. The good societies, such as camelot, were pretty much run by women. Though we men definately played our roles too. the round table served the temple of isis. I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally miss serving the temple of isis. Guenivere wasn't some queen from france, although in a sense she was a queen. she was guen iveres. She was the high priestess of isis in camelot, and my love. She was my liege, I was her servant. the reason there were no other women at the round table was something about the structure of the temple and how only the high priestess was supposed to be there or something. But those explinations never really penetrated my male brain no matter how hard I tried to understand them. There's nothing my ego is particularly enjoying about this process of remembering, except remembering the good times in the past. But it's been 1400 years or so since then, and those weren't good years for me at all (understatement). In fact, it would love to run away somewhere. I kind of tried actually-- I figured I'd served my time, maybe the sanandas would let me kick it up there with them, where camelot still is. Of course it didn't work: the reasons why are as scientific as mystic, or I'm nuts, one of the two. I could try again, but there's no running for me. I'm stuck with this. I want to see kingdom come. for all of you. I can't do it for you. I think all the old crew who have been working for eons on the earth's development towards an enlightened planet are going to be very active in the next four years, but we can't do it for you, only with you. If I have to do this, the only thing I desire is reunion with temple of isis. everything else is kundalini-joy, service and passing time. I have no desire for any form of kingship or leadership, but I long to serve them. We all need the temple of isis restored to it's former glory, but hardly anyone really remembers it... I don't even know if they have their old information! (the libraries of isis were the best around) I've tried to contact them but they're wary of men, for good frikkin reason. (I'm a bit miffed at us boys, for real. Rape? Come on. RAPE??? Every time I think of it, I fight back the horrid urge to kill, followed by tears.) Anyway, they should be our center again. They always were. Can you imagine a world where everyone has happy, joyous mothers? What else would the world need to work out for everyone? Husbands, love your wives... Edit: I have to elaborate on that bit about killing women warriors: my guilt is enormous. But, if we were fighting, they were seeking to rule camelot. Camelot was ruled by no one. moreover, if they suceeded, the first thing the invaders would have done was rape and or kill my guen iveres. That simply was not going to happen, period. So, they died, and my guilt is enormous. Trying to let it go. It's hard.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://sunight.gaia.com — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:20:39 GMT

I have been drawn to the story of Bouddica, Celtic queen who fought the Romans. There is a 'list' of women warriors at this site http://www.lothene.demon.co.uk/others/womenrom.html

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 07:40:01 GMT

integration and upgradation of the legends, yes.

but here's something: joan of arc was real.

Just how did some farmgirl with no military training in an extremely anti-female society get good enough at the blade to earn respect from 2 standing armies? How did she learn generalship?

that story is CRAZY. and yet, she was really burned at the stake, really a general, really a soldier. a farmhand with no training whatsoever. it's unheard of, boy or girl. as a girl, it's both unheard of and unthinkable, except for the fact that it's part of historical record.

unless it was a form of .... miracle? or a form of legend?

A re-coming of the pure hero principle?

what if she wasn't the first to be some random guy or girl who all the sudden saw god and could fight like hell? what if she wasn't the first walking legend?

What if atlantis is real? And camelot? And the yeti?

What if what if what if....

and since so little of the truth actually gets into our history, how are we to prove legends are just legends?

: )

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://sunight.gaia.com — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 05:16:20 GMT

The leather and suede girl, oh my!!! LOL!!! That's too cute!

Overall, I think it's beneficial to study the legends, metaphors, and archetypes of 'old' in order to understand them, and glean the real essence of them. Like the stories in the fairy tales, or the parables of Jesus, they provide a way to understand, through symbols, the deeper human, psychological and spiritual aspects of life.

For me, it is necessary to find a way to integrate them into my life now - what they represent for me, and what they say to me now, and not to necessarily accept them on the face of things as they were understood in 'yesteryear'. As you indicated, there is the story as the model by which we could live, and the interpretation of the story...

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:36:05 GMT

And for what it's worth, if I imagine myself in a position where I'm chosing knights in today's world, violent or non-violent, and anyone I pick will automatically say yes, I'm going with a woman first. a specific woman, the leather and swede girl. : ) Just so it's known where I stand.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:16:11 GMT

The missing piece for you is the lack of knight-esses, you say, and all I can tell you is that the legends have no record of them, and I think the legends were correct. but again, you have to understand that it wasn't that the knights served arthur, it was that the knights, and arthur, served women, the goddess principle, above all else in the oneness of all, as the goddess is closest to the oneness of all. In this way, arthur, for example, would have served guenivere, and to him she would have been the personification, the embodiment, of camelot. But she would have been more too. Can you concieve of 'knight-esses' if they are non-violent? Guenivere would have been one of these, to be sure, and there would have been others-- but again, patriarchic based history would have washed that away. If you can concieve of non-violent female knights, then they were there, as a knight was simply a servant. But I think the men of that time would have prefered to take on the abborhant, soul-crushing act of necessary violence for themselves, and leave the women to create something beautiful in the kingdom. one could either see that as sexism or chivalry. one could also see that modern sexism came from an intense corruption of the idea of chivalry. but one could also understand that in order to build a proper community, there are all kinds of roles to be filled. You'd need a cobbler and a gardner and a stonemason and a doctor... and without any of these rolls, the community would suffer. So too, would the community suffer if some decided their roles made them 'better:' rolls are just rolls, jobs are simply service to the community, once we strip from them this idea that we work to receive paper currency and that's the way it is and should be. As it is for cobbler and stonemason, so too was it for 'king.' to be a true leader in a sense is not at all fun, there is no ego pleasure to be derived there. seriously. If it's not ego pleasure, all that's left is service. But my explinations do still have a duality, as you've pointed out: this round table idea vs. a 'kingship' of legend, with the round table. But here's a scene: Roman General:"The roman army demands a council with your leaders." Camelot-guy: "we have no leaders." Roman General: "what?" Camelot guy: "We have no leaders. We're a community of equals." Roman General: "A community of equals? how weak you all must be! If I tell ceasar, he'll give me gold... right, you die now." What this little story suggests is that there would be logistical problems for a kingdom back in the days of bows and arrows and swords and rome with openly being a kingdom of anarchy, and so a role of 'king' was needed for all official interaction. naturally, I think the one who took on this role became the face of the kingdom, not necessarily because he so desired but because it had to be done, and he always acted with the interests of all the people in his heart. But I think in a sense, it was really just a front. Or, a completely different model/understanding of kingship than has previously existed. But either way, it's all history for us, I personally don't suggest we have kings anymore. that role seems unnecessary to me, now. I personally can easily picture a woman in armor. Joan of Arc, for one, as you say. How was she different than the legends of arthur? Arthur: a boy, sees christ in his mind, becomes a great warrior, leads Joan of arc: A girl, sees christ in her mind, becomes a great warrior, leads what difference? Breasts? A penis? These things are just articles of flesh. Joan of arc was beautiful, and doubtless to me a pure soul, a great soul, and true. Nothing that one needs to kill and destroy does woman not have. Woman might tend to have something beyond that, the sense to find a better way than death and destruction. For even killers for light are still killers.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://sunight.gaia.com — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:18:18 GMT

Yes, round, like circles. It is no coincidence that in today's board rooms the tables are not circular - any other shape delineates a 'head' of some sort - a heirarchy. In my experience of community - a face-to-face community, not a cyber-community - everyone sits in a circle for discussion and decision-making - where each person can be seen. In the Arthurian legends, there was a round table AND there was a king. Was Arthur a metaphor for God? And Guinevere a metaphor for Goddess? Were they equal? With all the nights in service to them? The missing piece here is where are the 'Knight-esses'!

I think it's important that we be very specific about the words and metaphors we choose...take for instance, "husband" and "wife". These terms are accepted in today's society, without any real thought about what they really mean. I will say that I will never again be(and, on some level, probably never was) a "wife". As we evolve we need to drop those things that don't work for us, and not necessarily try to 're-frame' an old understanding into a new one. We need to find new ways to express the new paradigms.

Another thing about Knights and Maidens is the romanticizing of the roles of each. When most folks think about these terms they project certain qualities, many unrealistic, onto them. I wonder if we could visualize a woman in a knight's armor (like Joan 'Arc?) and a man in a dress.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:28:34 GMT

Hi ms. alchemist! First, it's important that, if you feel perhaps it's the wrong metaphor, that it's discussed-- so I'm very glad we're discussing it. : ) but to give an abstract for this post, I think you raise some very interesting issues, but I think we can parse out the good of this metaphor from the things that trouble you. I think we can throw out the bathwater, but keep the babies, to invoke another metaphor. first, we should consider that the name of this pod, knights and maidens, is simply the name of this pod, and does not necessarily reflect what is good about this metaphor. indeed,I share some of your reservations about the name, as it seems to separate women and men into those who would be maidens and those who would be knights. I've actually already sent a message to the pod's cultivator, suggesting the pod be renamed. I don't know if zaadz as a site has scripts for that though. But again, the trick is to give ourselves a different understanding of knights and maidens, perhaps. Granted, the way it's been retold has an extremely patriarchic bent, but consider who was retelling. europeans and english, really, durring a time when they considered women little more than property. So their stories twisted the legend to reflect their misunderstanding. Do we think the knights, the true knights of the time, the chivilrous, considered women little more than property? I do not, and I think, personally, that story was "shaded" towards denial of female involvement. One issue is warrior energy itself. It's quite important to understand warrior energy to me in historical context: it's next to useless today, as outdated as maidens. anyone with warrior energy and light and love enough to be a 'knight' would use that warrior energy in service. but warrior energy tends to exist as an oppositional force-- meaning, it finds itself in opposition to other (void-actualizing) warriors, or usurpers, or destroyers... in camelot's case, a main convergience point of opposition was the roman empire. in a sense, warrior energy is, on the totum pole of all energies, below "goddess energy,' which knows no opposition, only oneness. Thus, women learning the warrior energy is a good thing, but in terms of women seekign true service, perhaps there is and was a higher energy for them, and so learning warrior energy for them would almost be like... I dunno, learning how to eat termites with sticks for men. Devolution. (it's sad to me we live in a world where the solution to modern problems of sexuality is for women to model the behavior of men. Kind of like saying the solution to the environmental confusion is for men to model the behavior of chimps) I know that sounds perhaps offensive to us boys, but in my head, the age old debate (men vs. women) is settled by the simple fact that the female energy is the oldest energy around, far older in the scope of the cosmos than male, and if the round table ones believed that too, then they wouldn't have seen it as patriarchy, but as men in service of the feminine principle, which is oppositionless. Indeed, men feeling warrior energy is also a good thing, but in terms of men seeking true service, perhaps it's time for US to learn to tap into our "non-oppositional energy," a higher energy, a peaceful one. One thing that I feel personally has been left out of our tellings of this story is the important role women DID play-- not maidens, but women, including guenivere. I think personally guenivere was as important, if not more, to camelot than arthur. I think even then, warrior energy NEEDED the higher energy to stay on track, and so goddess energy and goddess-type service to the community was more important than the warrior energy. I think the knights in general would have preferred a world without warrior energy, but found themselves in a paradigm where the best way, at the time, to serve would have been warrior energy. But this was a MEAN, not an end, not the point. which is the big place the stories get confused, says me. so for today's knights, perhaps the task is not for the girl-knights to learn warrior energy, perhaps it's for the boy-knights to unlearn it. The point was simply the round table, and what such a thing can and did accomplish. call it a resonential beacon. a true round table is a small or large number utterly devoted to raising the vibration of everyone. until the day when the world is awake, personally, I don't think that devotion is ever out of style, but perhaps in constant need for evolution and upgrade. thanks!

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://sunight.gaia.com — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:43:27 GMT

Interesting discussion here.

I've wondered if we maybe have the wrong metaphor to work with - especially as 'maidens' weren't part of the round table. Certainly today the female is learning to tap into her 'knightly' energy, or the warrior/hero energy. My sense is that 'Knights and Maidens' is too archaic for today's needs for change. In my opinion, the archetypes of Knight and Maiden are not useful in the context of this pod. It may have sounded good at the time, but I think it serves patriarchy, and promotes status quo thinking, not equality or interdependence. "Round" or circular is good, though.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:34:29 GMT

I hope your personal life issues clear up nicely, Janos! As to me, I tend to get word diarrhea, and I kinda have it now. I think there's a lot about that 'story' that can give us understanding of what's going on today: I'm finding more and more that's true for me, and I'm the type to share, and I guess this is as good a place as any! First, to reiterate, but nicer: if King Arthur his bloody self could decend on this pod from a golden cloud surrounded by angels, he couldn't make a single one of us knights. There's only one person that could make me as one of them, and that's me. There's only one person that could make you as one of them, and that's you. second: there's no such thing as tomorrow! It's a myth, I tell you. When have you ever existed in tomorrow? Where in your photo albums can you show pictures from it? Even should you timetravel, all you have is now, as the flaming lips say. "being" is timeless: it just is. So don't wait! You don't have to go slay dragons: there aren't any on earth anyway, but if you're on a street and somebody drops her scarf and doesn't notice, speak up! If there's no grand action that appears to be taken in the now, do something small. It's like yoda said: there's no such thing as scale, big and small, it's intent of the action that maters. third: In order to gain the most from understanding of arthurian myth, you have to imagine it is real and put it in context. It'd take a number of books maybe to do that justice but we can start by remembering that the period of time these myths arose out of is the dark ages. Thus, if we imagine camelot as a real place, historically we'd put it around 400, and we can probably think of that as the beginning of the dark ages. 3 statements: 1 the dark ages weren't simply a european thing, although they 'hit' europe first 2 the dark ages did not end with the 'age of enlightenment,' which wasn't really enlightenment, obviously, or things would be very different. The dark ages continued. 3 the dark ages are a natural part of the progression of earth. Ok, now keep that in mind-- and consider Joseph Campbell's theory that the round table knights held high in their hearts the idea and image of eros, and the fundaments of romanticism. Eros, the male half of Love. But I wonder-- we have no real functional history before the onset of the dark ages, most of the older histories have been destroyed. So what was it like before? And if it was much better before, and there were these poeple that held eros in their hearts-- wouldn't they stand against the dark ages? And at the beginning of the dark ages, in order to stand against, to shore a story up against time, so it would be remembered-- wouldn't they have to use violence and stuff, and wouldn't a "kingdom" in a sense be necessary? because the dark ages were bought on by man, seeking to control, snuffing uncontrolled lights out. (or trying to, at least-- they put us to sleep) Just some questions, but the final analysis, I believe, leads to the conclusion that many of the specific methods used by the round table, including ideas of 'kingship' and especially the actualization of violence, are not necessary today. But if we get to the core reason the knights were knights, perhaps things we can do today will become abundantly clear. I have a habit of packing waaay to much info in any given sentance, so we can discuss individual ideas as needed. : ) sorry, don't know how else to talk. I've tried. : P

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://goodworld.gaia.com — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:40:30 GMT

Dear Alan,

No problem. We are entitled to get carried away a bit every now and then.

I think that one important guide to e-mail communications is to be slow to getting into a huff.

Thank you and Serafim for adding new energy to this rather abandoned pod. I have been slow to respond due to some special circumstances arising in my life (apart from finding the writing of reasonable quality collaborative contributions quite slow and difficult).

Allan, your deeper understanding of the Arthurian legend is very valuable to this pod and I intend to benefit from it in trying to apply the spirit of the "story" in our current evolutionary crisis as a species.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:18:07 GMT

Sorry everyone. Just wanted to say that. I've been feeling like a bully on a soapbox all day for what I've said in this thread. I hope I haven't discouraged anyone from action. The point to what I'm saying here is anyone is capable of being "a knight--" sort of. "sort of" because the year is 2008, not 395. Quite a different time, the age of the sword is over... and there was never romance in swords anyway. Everyone tends to think of the round table from the perspective of those who viewed it, because they told the legends first. personally, I highly doubt it was like that. I think there was true joy and love and beauty in all those men's (legends) lives, but I don't think any who envy them understand what they were. Only those who would simply have thanked them, or be glad that once they existed, get it... or those who realize what the knights were, and therefore choose to serve... But then again, maybe only a few in history have figured out that camelot was less a 'traditional' kindgom than a kingdom of anarchy. any who decided to "be" a knight were trained in knighthood. any. because any in camelot that decided to "be" anything were simply that thing, end of story. (due to the serious nature of knighthood, however, I suspect those who chose knighthood would have been rather seriously tested) Because any who chose true service already is a knight in the arthurian sense. There is no real need for tables, or swords, or armor, or horses. It's all heart, heart and nothing else. heart heart heart. goodday!

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:50:30 GMT

Yeah janos, I'd say fresh ispiration should be the tune of the year. : ) Four and one half years to go, not a lot of time, so I'd assume things begin speeding up nicely. I think this convergience will or won't happen naturally. Remember, in the stories when the knights left the kingdom, they tended to go off in small groups, or by themselves. The shared vision they believed in was only service, and the oneness of all things. If they shared sub-visions, in terms of individual actions, it was only because they were able to convince one and other that a specific task was both needed and required more knights then one. This did happen, but those origional knights considered themselves quite capable of acting alone... really the shared vision was camelot itself. It was the people and love for the people. Nothing beyond this love, this kingdom and it's protection, was necessary. but if now the kingdom is the earth, then nothing but love for the earth and it's people, and service to it, is necessary. all else is a conversation when the time for coordinated action begins, and submission of each and every knight to the round table itself. but the paradox is that for this way to work, a 'knight' must, must, must be the type of person who has committed him or herself to doing whatever needs to be done for the earth and in the oneness of all things. For example, if a knight had to take an action that would result in millenia of nightmare-dreams for himself, but would also be a necessary step in the evolution of earth, then he would do so, without thought. Kind of a high standard to set, but also, perhaps now's the time it gets re-set.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://goodworld.gaia.com — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:35:00 GMT

What a great post! Thank you, Alan.

Maybe a fresh inspiration is available at the start of this New Year (4 more to go to the mysterious 2012).

A lot to discuss here. Each paragraph needs its own thread.
Anyone else inspired to chip in?

Convergence is inessential

Maybe there is a misunderstanding of what we understand by convergence.
I mean really a shared vision that touches, moves and inspires every team member's commintment to working towards an agreed goal.

Re: Onward Maidens and Knights

http://songofstorms.gaia.com — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:25:57 GMT

Janos says: "However, the contents and mode of our talk does matter. Although free-form is good, somewhere, somehow convergence of positions would be nice. An end product (in, say, a year's time) in the form of a small set of shared visions is desirable for effective collaborative physical action." ------------ Convergence of positions to me is inessential. Discussion of positions and willingness to change positions when it can be proven one's positions are misunderstandings is essential-- at least when you're talking about circular tables. In a sense, convergence of position is not the issue, the issue is understanding of the unity and the kundalini eye being open. What is necessary was the ability for cosmic sight, and the willingness and proven ability to seek the grand design. The shared vision, to me, is the world as you see it. many actions need to be taken in order to see the joyous, awake earth arrive, and so if we have different understandings, this is in the oneness of all things, because it will lead us into different sections of acting. So in a sense, autonomy is crucial to the idea of a round table. remember, the knights of old were renouned for taking the road less travelled. for them, the question would have been: 'what actions do I see myself taking, when I follow the grand design?" And what they would have been subject to was only the questioning of the others when they returned. But allowing that kind of freedom of action, given the serious nature of action and how it is true the road to 'hell' can be paved with great intentions that misunderstand themselves, the knights were checks and balances for eachother, they in a sense were the only thing keeping themselves up. Rather like an arch. So given the nature of this pod, perhaps more oversite wough be needed... Perhaps something that would help would be for everyone to say what they are interested in doing, willing to do, and wanting to do? For a while I've been interested in the idea that physical gathering of people acting in the grand design in and of itself is a powerful tool to aid the world and it's awakening. I had the idea that using some form of green industry as the base to start a community of kundalini and christ consciousness types would be a good thing. I had the idea that youtube could be used as a tool to make america a truly representative government, if all the people would post messages to their president and congressmen, the government by its own design would have to actually serve the interests of the people. I had the idea that there are higher dimensional plains of earth that we can go to. Sometimes called heaven, olympus, aesgard, avalon. I'm still working on that but if it resonates with anyone, let me know. Recently, a dude named stuart wilde reported having seen the camelot gateway, the gateway to this higher dimensional plain of earth, on the winter solstace. I'm still working on this rather shocking idea, or rather the theories behind it, but I had the idea it would be good to gather information on this gateway, because behind it is a better world for everyone. I had the idea that, given principals of resonance, if Jesus, one healer, could with twelve believers behind him heal crowds, than thirteen hundred healers could perhaps heal an entire hospital. I had the idea to gather as many healers as possible in order to test this theory: go to a hospital, and funnel as much healing energy towards it's inhabitants as possible, both healing many and creating evidence that the world is essentially based in the consciousness of what we've been calling god. I'm trying to persue these ideas, but convergience and collaboration would probably speed the process greatly. Also, resources, funding, for many endevours in this modern world are necessary. It seems to me a real discussion about this has to ask about that... I have been asking myself, but not yet finding.