Everyone,

I'm not going to attempt to explain this. I'm only reporting it because it just happened this past week to one of my Facebook friends. Her name is Le'ema Kathleen Graham and she is a priestess of Isis. She is the author of a book called Dancing the Inner Serpent: Memoirs of a Suburban Snake Priestess, which I haven't read yet. I don't know her very well and haven't known her for very long either. She read a comment I wrote on a mutual friend's profile page and liked it, so she sent me a friend request which I accepted. I've done the same thing with other people. Link to her website: Goddess Work.

That's simply by way of background, to give you an idea of the person I'm talking about. As I said, I don't know her very well, but any friend of the Goddess is a friend of mine--unless she or he proves otherwise. BTW, not all of Her friends are female, although this one is.

Anyway, this is what Le'ema posted on her profile on Monday, January 11th: "Prayers for my momma who is having breast surgery at this very moment... Divine Mother Thou art omnipresent. Thou art in all thy children. Thou art in my mom Lurah Jane. Magnify Thy healing presence in her body, mind and soul so she may be filled with radiant health!"

I wasn't aware of this situation when Le'ema first posted this note, since I was preoccupied with other friends and other websites at the time. But 21 of her friends posted comments in support of her prayer for her mother, indicating that they were joining their energy and their intentions with hers. They said things like "Sacred Mother Isis may Lurah Jane be freed from all bodily ailments & afflictions. xxx" and "Sending prayers and blessings to you both."

Since most of her friends are also devotees of the Goddess or at least sympathetic even if that isn't their primary orientation, often the prayers were less petitionary and more proactive in tone than a Christian or Jewish prayer under similar circumstances might be. Other times they were almost indistinguishable. Using the word "sending" in a prayer for healing is very common in alternative and Goddess circles, because of the specific action or intention that goes with it. As far as I know, orthodox Christians and Jews don't do this because they believe they have petition God for a blessing--a petition which might or might not be granted. Never mind that Jesus assured his disciples they had it within them to perform miracles as great and even greater than the ones he performed.

So yesterday at 11 a.m. Le'ema posted the following message to her profile: "Thank you everyone for prayers, affirmations and blessings for my mom. Oddly enough the surgery was postponed and they couldn't find anything on her scans! Blessed Be for the power of love & connection & prayers! I am grateful!"

Again, I'm not going to try to explain this, and I'm not going to say that it works every single time. Obviously it doesn't, and we all know that. I'm sure all of us who have lived long enough have had the experience of praying for the healing of a loved one who died anyway. I know I have. I'm just saying that sometimes it does work.

I'm posting this for anyone who may feel their faith wavering, as mine does quite frequently. But it is still a testament to what Le'ema called "the power of love & connection & prayers." Most of us, no matter how much we may claim otherwise, aren't in the habit of thinking of love as having real power. We still habitually connect power with brute force. And yet Love could very well be the most powerful force there is. It could even be *THE* Force.

Love and Light,
Linda

There's no evidence whatever that prayer and remission in this case are connected. You see cause and effect. I see coincidence (assuming it wasn't a misdiagnosis to begin with).

Surely we both agree that there's no scientific evidence of prayer helping or hurting those with diseases. The idea has been tested in controlled experiments often, and always fails to produce results better than chance. (There have been a couple of faked experiments, with one of the more prominent hoaxsters now in jail for fraud.)

And if there's no evidence that it works, why believe that it works? If it did work, surely there WOULD be credible evidence.

Jeff

Jeff, that kind of makes no sense to me. At the very least prayer should be related to positive mental attitude and positive mental attitude should be related to better chances for recovery.

-- John

quote:

At the very least prayer should be related to positive mental attitude and positive mental attitude should be related to better chances for recovery.

The best mental attitude in the world has no effect on many diseases. Try that with cancer or a heart attack or plague/polio/smallpox/malaria. There were some reports of positive images helping cancer patients decades ago--retesting the notion showed there was no significant difference in recovery rates.

Why would someone else praying for you affect YOUR "mental attitude" anyway, whatever the heck that means? Are you saying being told someone is praying for you is effective? If so, tell everyone someone is praying for them. No need to actually have anyone praying.

http://www.skepdic.com/essays/healingprayer1.html
has a brief two-page summary of the research done on prayer and healing.

Typical result:

quote:

MANTRA II July 2005

This study was published in The Lancet, a respected medical journal in the UK. The research team was led by Krucoff of the Duke Clinical Research Institute in Durham, North Carolina. The study followed 748 patients either having a thin tube inserted through an artery to the heart to check for blockage or a procedure to clear a blocked artery.

Patients were divided into four groups: 192 received just the standard care, 182 were assigned prayer, 185 got bedside music, imagery and touch (MIT therapy), and 189 prayer and MIT therapy. There was no significant difference between the four treatment groups when comparing clinical outcomes. Prayers, as well as music, imagery and touch therapies, were started before the patients had their procedures done.

Patients receiving MIT therapy were taught how to relax their breathing and told to imagine a beautiful, peaceful place while listening to either classical, easy listening or country music. The therapist then applied 21 “healing touch” hand positions, each for 45 seconds. The patient could then wear headphones with musical background during the heart procedure.

A little data mining permitted the researchers to claim that MIT therapy appeared to cut the rate of death six months after the procedure. It was also associated with significantly less “pre-procedural distress,” the authors said. It's not clear whether this is because of the “presence of a compassionate human being at the bedside” or the therapy, the study said. Another alternative is that the statistic might be a fluke.

During the first two years of the study, the name, age, and illness of each patient assigned prayer therapy was given to each of 12 prayer groups. The prayer groups chose their own prayers, and prayed for their assigned patients for 5 days to 30 days. Patients were not told that people were praying for them.

In the third and final year of the study, an additional 12 prayer groups were added and asked to pray for the prayers of the original 12 groups, which researchers described in the study as “high-dose” praying. Skeptics might describe it as high-dose magical thinking.

In short, the prayers of Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist groups failed to reduce serious medical complications of patients undergoing heart procedures. Patients being prayed for were as likely as others to develop complications such as heart attacks, be readmitted to hospital, or die. MIT therapy didn't have a significant effect, either.

I'm talking science here. Evidence, not faith. Not nonsense. Not comforting notions like "positive mental attitude should be related to better chances for recovery." Scientists don't use notions that attitude "should" be related to better chances for recovery. You have that hypothesis, for whatever reason? Fine. Test it. Get some evidence one way or the other.

Look, this is VERY IMPORTANT stuff. People believe the anecdotes and ignore the science--and as a result, people rely on mystical false notions instead of known useful medical approaches. Those people increase their mortality and their pain and their suffering. These disproven ideas are dangerous. They're evil. And they're spread by people with the best of intentions but limited knowledge and limited critical thinking skills. It's very sad to me. People are dying from believing this garbage.

Jeff

Jeff, well my thinking was that someone into prayer (their own or someone else's) would tend to be someone religious and there should be some kind of correlation between being religious and a positive mental attitude. It is however even from an esoteric point of view a messy thing I would think cause prayer leaving things up to the universe and selfish prayer and something like the quantum zeno effect watched pot never boils too much expectation thing could come into play.

You have got to think non-esotericly that someone with a good positive attitude who does all the things the doctors advise has a better chance for recovery than someone depressed who kind of just gives up (perhaps they factor this obvious benefit out of the data?).

Channeling-wise there are these:

Q: (L) I would like to know if there is anything T*** G***
could do to enhance his recovery from cancer?
A: PMA. Positive Mental Attitude.

Q: (L) I read a recent article by a woman named Dr. Hulda
Clark, and she claims that all cancer, depending upon certain
variations, is caused by parasites.
A: No.
Q: (L) Well, if Hulda Clark's theory isn't it, what is the cause
of cancer?
A: There are many causes.

Q: Let me ask quickly, does giving Reiki to a person who has
a bacterial or viral infection increase the potential of the
infection? What is the effect?
A: Broad inquiry, but Reiki is best suited to conditions not
microbially induced.
Q: Is it the case that you are actually feeding the microbes with
energy?
A: Can, or effects can cancel each other out.
Q: What about when you are dealing with cancer... not,
cancers are not microbial necessarily... but some have been
shown to be microbial...
A: Microbially triggered.
Q: So cancers are microbially triggered?
A: Some.
Q: (V) As we practice Reiki, how do we know if we are
doing the person more harm than good? How do we decide if
we are going to make them sicker or better?
A: Ask if they are suffering from infection.
Q: What if they don't know? There are a lot of times that a
person doesn't know.
A: True, but odds are in your favor.
Q: (V) So the viruses cannot be treated by etherical healing?
Is there any method that will work other than Reiki?
A: Prayer.

Q: That brings this up: if a person has a life plan and do not
seem to be following it because they are distracted for one
reason or another, do dire things happen in such cases?
A: Yes.
Q: If C**** had been more in the direct seeking mode while
she was married to T**** - is it possible that he would not
have died so soon? I mean, was she supposed to be moving in
a different direction and all these things happened to stop her,
turn her around, make her think and so forth?
A: Marriage was not right to begin with.
Q: Well, T**** was the love of her life.
A: Cancer is evidence of this. How many instances can you
think of where husband and wife, relatively young, are each
subsequently stricken with such potentially deadly strains?

Q: (L) I have been reading recently about the shrine at
Lourdes where the Virgin Mary supposedly appeared to
Bernadette Soubirous...
A: Energy focusing center.
Q: (L) What kind of energy is focused there?
A: Positive due to consistent prayer patternings.
Q: (L) Okay, what appeared to Bernadette?
A: Imaging energy consciousness wave.
Q: (L) Was this image out of her own mind?
A: Close.
Q: (L) The healings that take place...
A: Because of the concentration of positive energy.
Q: (L) What or who has been causing the apparitions of the
Virgin Mary at Conyers, Georgia?
A: Deceptive field.

-- John

John
]
Do you believe in thumping someone else's head in healing prayer?

Donald

quote:

Look, this is VERY IMPORTANT stuff. People believe the anecdotes and ignore the science--and as a result, people rely on mystical false notions instead of known useful medical approaches. Those people increase their mortality and their pain and their suffering.

Jeff,

No they don't! I can't think of anyone except for Christian Scientists who uses prayer "instead of" standard medical treatment. And Christian Scientists are considered total cranks even by people who believe prayer increases the chances for recovery, or who believe a positive attitude on the part of the patient increases the chances of recovery--or both.

In the example I gave in my lead post (Le'ema's mother), she was scheduled to undergo surgery for breast cancer. Her friends were praying for a successful outcome for the surgery, which turned out not to be necessary. Another recent case in my circle involved a newborn who apparently had a stroke a few days after birth. I've never heard of a baby having a stroke before, but that's what they told me. She was the newborn daughter of one of my daughter's friends. Again this was in a very Pagan/New Age circle with a heavy emphasis on alternative healing and prayer. It was touch and go there for a few days, and everyone prayed for the baby, including me and some of my friends that I contacted by e-mail.

The baby was in the NICU with all the latest medical technology monitoring her condition, until she was out of danger and it was safe to bring her home. The big concern in that case was whether there would be any permanent brain damage, and I guess it's still a concern. I believe she's about six months old now. By all accounts she is developing beautifully, with no sign that she was inches from death a few days after she was born. I'm not sure how long it will be before they can tell whether there was any permanent brain damage, but so far there is no sign of it.

You seem to be making a straw-man argument here. I personally don't know of anyone who uses prayer instead of traditional medical treatment. Invariably, they use it in addition to medical treatment. I'm pretty sure that includes even most Christian Scientists nowadays. There were a number of cases where people died of curable conditions because they believed in the "power of prayer" to the point where they refused all medical treatment. And then there are the Jehovah's Witlesses who don't believe in blood transfusions and the Scientologists who don't believe in psychiatry--again with some tragic outcomes either for themselves or their children. But these people are very much the lunatic fringe and very much the exception.

--Linda

quote:

The study followed 748 patients either having a thin tube inserted through an artery to the heart to check for blockage or a procedure to clear a blocked artery.

Jeff,

Angioplasty, right? A friend of mine had that done twice recently. At least they tried to do it twice, and it failed both times. Once they inserted the tube through his arm and the second time through his leg, but both times they were unable to maneuver around a "hairpin turn" in the artery and had to give up.

And yes, his friends prayed for him. I didn't know anything about the procedure until after the fact, or I certainly would have done the same. Please note that my title is "Sometimes it works." And sometimes it doesn't! I'd be a fool if I claimed it works every single time.

--Linda

quote:

Q: That brings this up: if a person has a life plan and do not
seem to be following it because they are distracted for one
reason or another, do dire things happen in such cases?
A: Yes.
Q: If C**** had been more in the direct seeking mode while
she was married to T**** - is it possible that he would not
have died so soon? I mean, was she supposed to be moving in
a different direction and all these things happened to stop her,
turn her around, make her think and so forth?
A: Marriage was not right to begin with.
Q: Well, T**** was the love of her life.
A: Cancer is evidence of this. How many instances can you
think of where husband and wife, relatively young, are each
subsequently stricken with such potentially deadly strains?

John,

WHOA!!! Bad question and bad answer! The question should not even have been asked in the first place, especially if "C" (the wife) were still alive at the time. This is making her somehow "responsible" in some esoteric sense for her husband's death. It's a terribly guilt-inducing thing and just plain wrong to go there at all. As a surviving spouse myself, I know from experience that people tend to beat themselves over the head for all kinds of things, even their thoughts and your attitude, as if they could somehow had an effect on the outcome "if only."

It's things like, "If I hadn't been such a loser and dumped so much responsibility onto Bill, maybe he wouldn't have given up. Maybe then he'd still be alive now." Crap like that. It's bad enough when no third party is encouraging that sort of thing, and flat-out unforgivable when they are.

But it sounds as though "C" was also stricken with a deadly cancer not long after her husband's death. Unfortunately, there *IS* a statistical correlation here. The first year after a spouse's death is a dangerous time for the health of the surviving spouse, with the odds increasing that he/she will develop cancer or some other serious disease during that time.

Although I believe in the mind/body connection, that doesn't mean the idea can't be abused. And this looks to me like an instance of abuse. Nobody should ever be led to believe that their failure to think positively--or to think positively enough--led to the death of a loved one. That should never even be implied, let alone stated outright.

--Linda

Linda,
     The many stories of healings by prayer are interesting, but they will not impress a scientist because such cures cannot be repeated under strictly controlled conditions. Controlled experiments have been the rule since the early 1900's and no well-designed experiment since then supports the hypothesis that prayer helps recovery from illness. The same thing can be said for all phenomena involving supernatural elements: If they cannot be explained by natural means they cannot be reproduced and, therefore, cannot be studied.
     If you really want to see a scientist snapping to attention, just show him a teensy-weensy miracle that can be reproduced at will. He will fall in love with you forever and roll-over on command.
Seán

quote:

I can't think of anyone except for Christian Scientists who uses prayer "instead of" standard medical treatment.

Again, you're going by personal experience. It doesn't matter whether or not YOU PERSONALLY know anyone who relies on prayer INSTEAD OF standard medical treatment. You mention Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists. There are other groups--all too many. I confess I was thinking of more than prayer groups--I was thinking of all the "alternative" cures and all the nonsense spouted by the uninformed that leads people away from vaccinations and blames autism on modern medicine. There are many cultish groups that use unproven treatments INSTEAD OF sound medical treatments, NOT in addition to them.

I fully realize that you say that prayer sometimes works and are not saying it always works. I'm trying to point out that you have no basis for saying it sometimes works. Again, you see a successful outcome and assume that somehow prayer helped it along. I see no connection whatever. For me, it's like saying drinking milk sometimes cures cancer and sometimes doesn't, or eating chocolate cures the common cold. One has nothing whatever to do with the other. These ideas can be tested--and the idea of prayer helping HAS been tested. It just doesn't work. All the credible evidence says prayer makes no difference whatever. It's as simple as that. It's irrelevant. Someone with a disease gets worse or gets better or remains the same. There are spontaneous remissions. There are sudden deaths. Prayer has nothing to do with it at all.

I didn't cite the prayer study about angioplasty for any particular reason except that it was recent and the description was short. Actually, modern thinking is coming around to the idea that angioplasty is not a very useful technique at all. There are dozens of prayer studies involving other treatments and other diseases that reach similar conclusions.

Jeff

quote:

If you really want to see a scientist snapping to attention, just show him a teensy-weensy miracle that can be reproduced at will. He will fall in love with you forever and roll-over on command.

Sean,

The bottom line is this: When someone you love is very sick or badly injured, the anecdotal evidence is all that matters to you. Nobody in that situation CARES whether healing by prayer or by touch works under controlled conditions or not! They care about one thing only: Is going to work in THIS situation?

As my good friend and teacher Stephan used to say about sacramental healing, "It can't hurt, and it might help!" I might as well mention here that I've been on the receiving end of such healings, both in a sacramental context in the Ecclesia Gnostic, and a Reiki-type healing at Witchcamp the last time I was there (2008). The physical and emotional responses are very interesting. With the sacramental healing (also known as laying-on of hands) there is very often a strong sensation of heat emanating from the priest or priestess' hands.

Also, the person performing the healing seems to be using his/her own energy, and I've seen them become exhausted if too many people come up for the healing service. I don't know if this means they are doing something wrong or what it means. But they say it's exhausting too. I believe they are supposed to draw up power from the earth, or act as a channel for the Holy Spirit, but from what I've seen it's a very physical kind of thing, and the healer's personal energy is very much involved.

Reiki healing seems to call forth a very emotional, very primal reaction from somewhere deep within you. I know I started crying, and my reaction wasn't as extreme as some of the other people I watched before and after it was my turn. Something definitely happens, although I'm not sure what it is.

--Linda

But it can hurt, just as other false beliefs can hurt. They encourage magical thinking and reliance on miracles. They help charlatans and con artists of all kinds. They absorb time and energy that would be better spent on other things.

If you believe that praying for someone's health works sometimes, do you also believe that praying for someone's death works sometimes? Do you think curses work sometimes too? Isn't that a fair question? Do you think that prayer is some kind of contest to see how many people pray FOR some thing versus how many pray AGAINST some thing, so that, say, a football game will be decided based on how many people pray for a particular team? Is your concept that there is some God or force that hears prayers somehow and changes a decision based on that? Doesn't that contradict some of your basic notions? Why would any omnipotent omnipresent force care what YOU pray for?

If you look at someone praying for good--or praying for evil--you see the same thing: someone who is quietly doing nothing at all that could possibly affect the outcome. It's a waste of time. It may provide some emotional comfort to the person who prays--and, if the person prayed for is told about it, some emotional comfort for that person as well. Knowing people care about you is nice to hear. But cure a disease through prayers? That's nonsense.

Jeff

quote:

But it can hurt, just as other false beliefs can hurt. They encourage magical thinking and reliance on miracles. They help charlatans and con artists of all kinds. They absorb time and energy that would be better spent on other things.

If you believe that praying for someone's health works sometimes, do you also believe that praying for someone's death works sometimes? Do you think curses work sometimes too? Isn't that a fair question?

Jeff,

I'm only going to answer this part of your post because it requires some serious explanation. I don't condemn *all* magical thinking across the board like you do, and I'd be flat-out lying if I said I did. I guess what I believe is that there is "right" magical thinking and "wrong" magical thinking. I'll try to explain as best I can and I'll probably do a pretty sloppy job of it, but here goes:

What you asked me about cursing is a very fair question and also a very interesting question. So I have to tell you--yes, I do believe it has an effect and I'm not alone in that belief. But the effect may NOT always be what the person intends.

That is why, in the groups that place credibility in what you call "magical thinking," there is the strongest prohibition against anything that smells even faintly like hexing, cursing or directing negative energy at another individual on purpose, especially if the motive is personal vindictiveness. But it holds true even when no harm is intended, if the motive is considered an invasive attempt to interfere with another person's free will.

There *may* be exceptions in a political context, but nobody I know ever prayed for Bush's death (for example). At least they didn't admit it in public if they did. It would have been a pretty stupid thing to do anyway, because all it would have gotten us was President Dick Cheney! Like things weren't bad enough during the Bush years anyway?

But when I say that deliberately directing negative energy at another person has an effect, I don't necessarily mean the effect is on the person who is the object of one's hatred. The belief is that "what goes around, comes around" and that whatever you put out there comes back to you, whether it's love or hate.

This is another of those beliefs that can be abused/caricatured SO easily that I'm almost afraid to talk about it. That sometimes happens with children if they get pissed off at Mom or Dad for some trivial reason and they say: "I hate your guts! I wish you were dead!" And then a few days later Mom or Dad really does drop dead of heart attack. It doesn't happen too often but it has been known to happen. And then the poor kid can be consumed with guilt over it for years, believing that his thoughts and/or words "caused" the parent's death.

I think we'd both agree that this is magical thinking in the negative sense, and it's a total illusion. That child did not and could not cause the fatal heart attack in a moment of passing anger. The energy wasn't sustained or directed, and the kid didn't mean it in the first place. Something like that is nothing more than an unfortunate coincidence.

But when it comes to REAL black magic (and this is the definition of black magic), meaning when it's an adult or a group of adults, and when the energy is sustained and consciously directed....well, that's another story. I have known a *few* sane people who have admitted to this sort of thing, and also a few insane people (translation: Christian fundamentalists) who are actually proud of it.

There was this one person I remember from *P Classic, in fact I think there were two of them. But one of them was into the Nichiren Soshu (?) form of Buddhism, where they chant Nam myo renge kyo for whatever it is they want. Okay, this person chanted for several days for the death of her stepfather, IIRC. It could also have been her father or her father-in-law. I think there may have been an inheritance involved, or some specific (i.e. selfish) reason why she was chanting for this person's death. It was so long ago that the details are pretty fuzzy now.

Coincidence or not...apparently it did work. The person who was the target of this curse actually did drop dead of a heart attack not long afterward. Years later, my friend was still haunted by what she had done. "I know it was wrong," she said. She also knew (and I reminded her although I really didn't need to) that she was going to have to pay for her sin if she wasn't already.

It is central to the belief in a holistic, interconnected Universe that whatever you put out there comes back to you whether it's positive or negative, creative or destructive. That's why people who take magical thinking seriously have a near-universal prohibition against cursing anyone. In fact they stop well short of that.

You don't ever attempt to interfere with the free will of another person in any way whatsoever.

That is the rule. It's the law. Don't ask me whose law because I can't tell you. I just know that it is, and that you DON'T do it. No exceptions. For example: Regardless of how much I want a particular man to love me, I would never consider focusing a love spell on a specific person. Apparently generalized love spells are okay, but I have to take other people's word for that. I've never actually done one of those myself, although it might be interesting to try it just to see what happens.

And then there's the real biggie: The fundies praying for the conversion of the Jews. They do that ALL the time, and they tell us they are doing it too. There even used to be a prayer that was part of the pre-Vatican II Roman Catholici liturgy that called for the conversion of the Jews. As a matter of fact that prayer was the flash point for the biggest online brawl I was ever involved in, on *P Classic or anywhere else. It involved the regulars from Judaism board on RelCon 1 and the regulars from the Catholic/Latin Mass board on RelCon 2, who had been banished from the regular Catholic board. Now THAT was a flame war of truly Homeric proportions!

This has turned into a much longer reply than I expected to write, and it's probably a lot more than you wanted to read! But as long-winded as I've been, I've just barely scratched the surface. There is still a lot more I could say. It might be interesting to start a new topic on the subject of Negative Prayer, and its first cousin invasive prayer, which is ALSO a form of black magic whether the fundies like it or not.

--Linda

Linda and Jeff,
     I only explained that cures by prayer have not met the criteria required to claim scientific credence: My personal opinion was unstated because I didn't think it mattered. In fact I do believe that prayer is efficacious.
     This is my rationale: Illness is a lonely state and often fraught with fear. At such times a person finds great comfort in companionship and love and needs it urgently. Being prayed for is good evidence that others really care and the consolation that provides may be sufficient to make the difference between giving up the struggle against death and fighting to remain alive.
     The sensations, described by Linda as associated with the therapies, are not surprising since the ambiance is highly charged with emotion. The apparent expenditure of energy by the therapist has interest: It should result in increased carbon dioxide production and an elevated release of heat, both of which are measurable.
Seán

quote:

Being prayed for is good evidence that others really care and the consolation that provides may be sufficient to make the difference between giving up the struggle against death and fighting to remain alive.

Yes, Sean--we agree there. BUT what you're talking about isn't prayer--it's the knowledge that someone cares. Prayer is supposed to work whether the person being prayed for knows he's being prayed for or not. The notion that others really care about the sick/dying can be shown in many ways. In fact, many pray for someone because they don't really want to show any kind of caring or compassion in those other ways, such as spending time with the dying, reading to them, paying for their surgeries or care, helping their family while they're hospitalized. For me, those things are better evidence of true caring than claiming you are praying to some divinity while avoiding the actual people involved. Prayer is often at a distance and NOT personal at all.

Linda, you say "You don't ever attempt to interfere with the free will of another person in any way whatsoever" is the iron-clad rule. Then why are you praying? If you really believe prayer can work, then isn't prayer interfering with the free will of the person--as well as interfering with God's plans? Some people think that you are responsible for what happens to you--if you get sick, you're responsible. If you get killed by an earthquake, somehow you're responsible. It was your karma, your thoughts, some pact with the Devil made by your ancestors. (Yes, it's crazy.)

If you believe prayer works sometimes, then you have to deal with all the other philosophical issues. No one is all good or all bad--how do you decide whom to pray for? How much should you pray, how many should pray, whom do you pray to, what's the most efficacious form of prayer, what is the physical mechanism by which a prayer is heard and answered, what determines whether prayer works or doesn't. What if I pray for harm and you pray for good--which side prevails? And so forth and so on, endlessly, spinning wheels of philosophy and getting deeper and deeper into the eternal riddles and contradictions.

My viewpoint is so much simpler and easier. Before you get into all those questions about prayer, you first decide whether it really works sometimes. I say it doesn't. I don't have to spend time on the rest. The discussion ends for me right there. To me, the whole notion is obviously ridiculous and preposterous. It's irrational. It's like saying that if you're good Santa will bring you gifts. Getting gifts is no proof that Santa exists. Getting well sometimes is no proof that prayers for you worked.

I was held up and shot in 1985 and spent three weeks in critical condition. A preacher came to my bedside and told me how God saved me because he loved me, and how the prayers of my friends and family had undoubtedly helped. I asked him: "If God loves me so much, why did he have me shot?" He didn't know how to handle that one.


Jeff

quote:

A preacher came to my bedside and told me how God saved me because he loved me, and how the prayers of my friends and family had undoubtedly helped.—CompGuy

Jeff,
     The preacher-man was ham-handedly attempting to reinforce the solace you had from knowing you were cherished by family and friends. The technique wouldn't be so bad if it were not applied so unctuously. Once, when I was hospitalized for a condition far less interesting than yours, a priest approached me in like manner, repeatedly, for days. Eventually I resorted to real insults to get free of his attentions, so I can't say for sure his prayers for me continued unabated.
     I will concede that prayers, in normal circumstances, must be known about to be effective. There is no rule proscribing that.
Seán

quote:

I will concede that prayers, in normal circumstances, must be known about to be effective. There is no rule proscribing that.

Sean,

I agree. You don't *have* to tell the person you're praying for, but I think it's better if you do. If you don't know the person, most likely you wouldn't tell them. None of us on Facebook know Le'ema's mother for example. We didn't know she was about to undergo surgery until Le'ema posted it on her status line. I personally didn't know until after fact, since I was preoccupied and not paying attention to her Facebook page when she first posted it.

So most likely what she told her mother was something like, "A bunch of my Facebook friends are praying for you and sending healing energies your way." So the message gets through anyway.

Of course depending on philosophical and theological POV, some of these people avoid using the word "prayer," since they don't like the implications of making a petition to a Supreme Being. So they say things like "My intention for you is..." or "Sending healing energies your way," etc.

Hopefully I'll be able to respond to Jeff's post and yours more extensively later on, but I really can't spend all day mouthing off on discussion boards--even though I've been known to do that on more than one occasion. So let's just say I can't do it all day every day, and just leave it at that.

--Linda

quote:

Originally posted by Raksha:
WHOA!!! Bad question and bad answer!

Linda, in general I'd agree but in this situation the session began with a warning for the wife (who was and as far as I know still is alive) that something bad would happen to the wife if she continued doing things the way she was doing them. So the issue kind of had to be explored. Also the wife was a semi-regular participant in the sessions (though she wasn't at this one) and it's kind of like if you are at the board you have to be prepared for unpleasant things, some of which might be for you personally.

-- John

From http://www.cassiopedia.org/glossary/Prayer

From the passage of Matthew 18:20, we also have a reference to combining for praying. But again, if two cannot understand each other, then how can they say the same prayer? Thus this joining would have the power referred to in 18:20 only within the esoteric circle or close to it. This would also entail having the understanding of not praying that twice two cease to be four.

Another aspect of this question touches on man's internal division. The conscious part prays for world peace and the unconscious affirms that same peace is lacking. The one with more power to affect reality seems to be the subconscious. Also the question of anticipation ties into the question. Intent is one thing, imposing dictates on the universe by fixed expectation seems to block realization. The Cassiopaea material discusses this in more detail.

Another category of possible consciousness-reality interaction has to do with objectivity. A wide divergence between consciousness and reality makes for a system with more entropy than one in which these are aligned. Subjectivity contributes to a winding down of the universe through entropy, so to speak and therefore usually collapses on itself. Some negative entities are however capable of such consistency and intensity of subjectivity that they progress quite far beyond the human level before this deceit catches up with them.

Another problem that can easily arise with prayer is intent to violate another's free will or interfere in another's lesson plan. This was blatantly ignored for example in the experiments on efficacy of prayer mentioned at the beginning. Such energy interactions, if effective, may simply build karma. Deciding what is best for another is an act of pride. Offering or sharing knowledge is different but this is hardly ever the mode of such intercessory prayer.


-- John

Linda, there's a Search of the Miraculous quote in the link too.

John,

I read the entire section on prayer you linked to in Cassiopedia, including the sections from the Philokalia, and including the long Ouspensky quotation, which sounds familiar to me from the book and I believe I already read it. Insofar as it has any kind of theological basis, Gurdjieff's system is based on Eastern Orthodoxy, that is to say on paleo-Christianity, and on what he claims is a very ancient esoteric tradition going back to pre-Christian times. Of course all modern esoteric movements claim an ancient origin, but I think there might actually be something to it in this case. His system does have many features in common with Gnosticism, although a somewhat different terminology is used.

As far as the Philokalia excerpts are concerned: I agree with some of it, disagree with some of it. and basically think most of it sounds out of the reach of mere mortals like me. That's an attitude I find intimidating and off-putting. I don't think you should have to achieve sainthood before you can pray, and don't appreciate anyone telling me I do. I realize that the Philokalia was written from a monastic POV, but that's precisely the problem! How much of it is applicable outside of a monastic environment? The parts about distracting and contradictory thoughts are already WAAAY too familiar to me! I appreciate the sympathetic recognition, but that's about it.

One thing I flat-out disagree with may really surprise you:

31. Do not pray for the fullfilment of your wishes, for they may not be in accordance with the will of God. (...)

I realize this makes me an oddball even on this board, but I ignore this one...consciously and deliberately. I don't think there is anything wrong with so-called "selfish prayer," and I only wish I could remember to pray "selfishly" a lot more often than I do. In no way does that interfere with the free will of my loved ones, because their wishes for me are the same as my wishes for myself. They all wish I'd be more self-sufficient, because then I'd stop being such a burden on them.

But then I shouldn't even need explain this, let alone justify it. So I won't. This is the way it is with me, and the way I want it to be.

--Linda

quote:

I will concede that prayers, in normal circumstances, must be known about to be effective. There is no rule proscribing that.

Look, this has been tested. People are told that others are praying for them--but no one actually prays for them. People are told that others are praying for them--and groups actually do pray for them. The results are the same--some people get better, some don't. There's no evidence that the actual praying does anything.

There are plenty of sick people around, and plenty of people who believe prayers are effective sometimes. These are ideas that are easy to test--and they have been tested, over and over again. The results are clear. Prayer doesn't work. No evidence that it helps in any way.

And, perhaps I shouldn't say it, but isn't it obvious that's the case? Talking to yourself isn't going to change the progress of a disease in another person. It's ridiculous to think it will. Curing with prayers would be wonderful and, as I keep saying, would open up whole new frontiers in medicine and science in general. But it's extremely unlikely on the face of it--how could it possibly work? And the experiments show it does NOT work. End of story.

Jeff

quote:

Talking to yourself isn't going to change the progress of a disease in another
person.—CompGuy

Jeff,
     I infer from context that your definition limits prayers to entreating a Supreme
Being to alter the course of events in some desired way. That summarizes what my
dictionary says, so your stance is perfectly correct. Since you maintain, as well, that
the Supreme Being is a figment, you are doubly justified in doubting the efficacy of prayer.
     To me, prayer is a very different thing: I would never ask for favors because I rely
on my own efforts to alter circumstances, or else accept the things I cannot change. My
prayers are never simply verbal; they are both the searchings for understanding and the
endless efforts those entail. And they are not directed to an Entity who operates the
Creation business; I address the Cosmos, of which I am a pleased to be minor part. I
should have said this sooner.
     If I wanted to change the progress of a disease in another person, my prayers would
include good nursing, excellent nutrition, medical intervention, and as pleasant an
ambiance as I could possibly provide. Experience has taught me that prayers of my kind
sometimes are not answered.
Seán

Sean, direct your prayers to whatever you like--your concept of the entity or force or whatever is irrelevant. God or Satan, Gaia or the Greek Gods or the Cosmos--it doesn't matter. You're doing nothing by praying. You are contacting nothing. You are emanating nothing. You are basically being quiet and thinking. That is not going to stop a disease or win a lottery ticket or whatever your goal is in praying.

If you want to "change the progress of a disease in another person" don't pray for "good nursing, excellent nutrition, medical intervention, and as pleasant an ambiance as I could possibly provide." Get that sick person a good nurse, shop for them, prepare their meals, take them to a doctor, cheer them up as best you can. Do something useful. Prayer is NOT useful, and as I said earlier those who say "I'll pray for you" often don't care at all about the person prayed for--making a statement like that is an easy way to pretend to show concern and gets them off the hook from having to actually DO something to show their concern is genuine--you know, something that might really make a difference.

If prayer was shown to help people prayed over, I'd recommend people do it in a second, whether I understood how it worked or not. I'd organize prayer groups for sick friends. I'd use this technique for the betterment of people, regardless of the mechanism or my own puzzlement about how it could possibly work. So would all doctors and good-hearted people who wish the best for their fellows. But since all studies show prayer is totally useless, there's no point in doing any of that. It is a total waste of time. It's a fraud.

Jeff

Jeff,
     When explaining my concept of prayer I said "...I rely on my own efforts to alter circumstances,.." I did not say I asked a higher being to do the job. Then I said "If I wanted to change the progress of a disease in another person, my prayers would include good nursing, excellent nutrition, medical intervention, and as pleasant an ambiance as I could possibly provide.". (Note that I said provide and did not not say request). To which you responded "Get that sick person a good nurse, shop for them, prepare their meals, take them to a doctor, cheer them up as best you can..."
     Do you see some similarity in our viewpoints?
Seán