I feel compassionately sad whenever I meet those who still cling
to the idea that their individuality (individual intellect) can
guide them to the goal of realization, of remembering, of waking
up again to Reality.  They're sure that they don't need a guide
on the path, don't need to surrender control, don't need to ask
for help, and don't need to embrace their intellect's incompetence
and impotence to handle the job.

They are sure that their relative, finite intellect, bound in the
world of space and time, can grok and master infinity, the field
without boundaries, far beyond the ken of the relative intellect.
That is delusion, that is arrogance of the deepest kind, that is
the very essence of ignorance.  Their individual ego/intellect has
convinced them to trust it (not only to trust it, but to actually
believe that they ARE it), and to never entertain the idea that the
ego/intellect's assertion of its importance and ability to guide
them "back home" IS ITSELF THE VERY CRUX OF THE PROBLEM, the very
core of the ignorance.


It is like hiring the master cat burglar (albeit in his clever dis-
guise as the 'great detective') to solve the string of (his) burglar-
ies.  The great detective (master burglar) will will NEVER EVER turn
himself in, never participate in his own exposure, but instead will
always have some encouraging progress report, and some inspiring vi-
sion of possibilities, to "string us along" as long as possible, as
he secretly continues his life of crime.

It is a very similar thing, to entrust our spiritual awakening to the
ego/intellect consortium.  They ARE the problem, and putting them in
charge of solving the problem is lunacy.  [Technically, the problem
is our identification with them, our belief that we ARE them, that
they are "in charge", that they are "all that there is".]  The real
solution is not to "hire" them to guide us to realization, but to let
go of them and remember our true status as the infinite field that is
beyond them.  Instead of following them, we have to step out of their
realm entirely, beyond where they can go, into the unbounded field of
the Self.  Then they revert back to their real status as our servants,
as managers of the relative field of life - and let go of the delusion
that they are "hot stuff", "in charge", "the boss".


The path from ignorance to awakening IS a path of discrimination,
but not discrimination by the relative intellect.  It is the waking
up of the cosmic intellect from its immersion in illusion, from its
identification with boundaries, with individuality, from its belief
that it ever was (solely) the relative intellect.  It is the path
of the infinite Self "waking up", curving back on its Self, and stop-
ping its old habit of getting stuck in the finite boundaries.  It is
the path of separating what is Real from what is not.  And the rela-
tive ego/intellect is in the field of "what is not real", and there-
fore hardly fit to lead us to the Real.  It is the path of the cosmic
intellect regaining its settled, even state of being established in
its own, infinite Self (sama-dhi = evenness of intellect).


I can say this so boldly, about the struggle of the individual ego/
intellect to perpetuate its illusion and never admit it needs help,
because I was very, very much there once; I know how that feels.  I
have a very strong, powerful relative intellect.  I have a deep ten-
dency in my relative personality to believe in self-sufficiency, to
hold that I can/must take care of myself, be vigilant, figure it out,
protect myself, etc.

So I tried figuring it out on my own (for many lifetimes, and for many
years in this lifetime), sorting through the myriad philosophies, spi-
ritual traditions, techniques, teachers...  I tried "interviewing"
various teachers, testing them, evaluating them.  Until I met one that
chose me.  I thought I chose him; I thought I poked and prodded with
my intellect and discovered someone where I couldn't find any "holes",
any inconsistencies, any weaknesses.  But looking back, in hindsight,
that belief was still part of my delusion of independence and power
of my ego/intellect.  In reality, it was just grace that he was offer-
ed to me, it was just that I was ripe and being harvested by something
so much beyond me, beyond the delusion of who I thought I was, that I
couldn't conceive of It, much less evaluate and judge It.

So It presented me brilliantly with just the right qualities in a
teacher that allowed my ego/intellect to feel safe, to relax, to let
the armor down just enough that the inexorable process could begin
[or move into its final phase after all that preparation time].


And even then it didn't happen all at once, my belief in the power
of my relative ego/intellect didn't crumble, I didn't jump off the
edge of some cliff.  I just started sliding down a very inviting
but apparently gentle slope.  I kept getting seduced by It, so that
the hold of my belief in the power of my relative ego/intellect faded
over the course of a couple of years in stages.  Layer by layer, I
struggled, but I let go.  I shifted from identifying with my indivi-
dual ego/intellect to identifying with the Self, with cosmic ego/in-
tellect.  I trusted something bigger to guide me.  And that "something
bigger" was shown to me through the vehicle called "my teacher", "my
Master", Maharishi.



People on this list sometimes call me a "true believer".  I was once.
In the beginning, in the 70s, I spoke and taught based on faith, on
belief.  But that was a long time ago.  Now, most of my speech and
behavior spontaneously arises from direct personal experience/under-
standing, and from the source in cosmic mind - from awareness cur-
ving back on its Self.  This makes life SO much simpler, so much
easier.  ;)

When we live in a universe apparently ruled by the relative ego/in-
tellect, then everything feels like it has to be "figured out",
"checked out", evaluated, vigilantly watched and decided.  Discrimi-
nation rules - our very existence feels like it depends on it.  One-
upsmanship is the way - to make ourself "more OK" by making others
"less OK", to "prove" ourselves "right" by making others "wrong", to
bolster our sense of existence and safety and solidity by taking that
away from others.  Certainly, handing over that personal discriminat-
ing power to someone feels like danger, like foolishness.  We must
avoid being "taken advantage of", being fooled, letting our guard
down.  So its a great put-down to call each other "true believer" or
"true non-believer", to imply that someone is blindly and indiscri-
minately following a path.  And it puffs us up to position ourself
as the "objective", "clear-minded", "logical" one.

But it's just a big illusion - no one is objective until they are re- 
established in the Self.  That is the only uninvolved, neutral, free-
from-desire, free-from-fear vantage point.  Everyone else is just un-
knowingly supporting their deep beliefs (which are often based on un-
conscious traumas and the resulting constrictions), by cherry-picking
among the available "evidence".  What's called "objective", "truthful", 
"right" by many turns out to be merely that which supports their exis-
tence, comfort, safety...that which supports their relative, and often
skewed, world-view.

To the relative intellect, concepts like intuition, feelings, devotion, 
surrender, submission, homage, bhakti, etc. feel so foreign - more than 
foreign, they feel dangerous.  They threaten the intellect's carefully
held-together illusion of stability and safety.

In my experience "true-belief" is a stage - to carry you on the path
until direct experience and understanding catch up and take over. When
the Self comes back to its Self, and the universe "ruled" by the rela-
tive ego/intellect is seen objectively, then there is no more need to
be a "believer" of any stripe, to take someone else's word for it.
Then you can take your own word for it, the word of the Self; you speak
from The Truth, rather than from your individually-colored truth or

And only at that point, established in the Self, do those words like
"devotion", "surrender", "bhakti" actually start to have any real
meaning.  Only at that point is there something real to actually sur-
render.  Our surrender of the relative intellect to step into the
field of the Self was the surrender of an illusion, of a "shadow".
But to surrender who we really are to God - to transform Self-reali-
zation into God-realization - that is surrender worthy of the name.
Only at that point does the real opening of the heart take over,
does the path of discrimination (separating) turn into the path of
love (merging).

Most people who've not realized the Self know, somewhere deep inside,
that no matter how strongly they present their views, and how much
one-upsmanship they foist on others to try and make their own position
look solid and right by making others wrong, their whole thing is built
on quicksand - there is nothing solid, stable, true anywhere in their
world.  They know that everything is relative, slippery/slidey - and
that the only way to find any slight stability is to use the intellect
to build a structure of beliefs that looks solid.

So those who haven't had that real, objective experience of living
from the Self, and who haven't directly experienced that there is
non-relative, non-slippery, non-changing absolute Truth - often as-
sume that anyone who speaks clearly and firmly must have been "brain-
washed", taken in, hypnotized...OR they must be an ego-maniac.  The
idea that someone could be speaking from direct, personal, innocent
experience of unchanging Truth is difficult for them to grok.  And
the concept that someone would be willing to take that absolute Truth
and "give it up" for something greater, for some urge of the heart,
is even more baffling.


People on this list sometimes call me an insider in the TM Movement.
I was once.  I founded and ran one of the biggest TM Centers in the
country (Chicago), helped create the corporate TM Program (AFSCI),
taught credit TM/SCI classes at colleges, was trained as a Special
Techniques teacher, led international ATRs and TTCs and AEGTCs,
edited Maharishi knowledge tapes, ran the International Film and Tape
Library in Switzerland, spent years on deep meditation courses under
Maharishi's personal guidance, searched out and bid on multi-million
dollar real estate projects for Maharishi (Capitals Project), headed
up one of the three divisions at the National Headquarters at Living-
ston Manor while doing Minister Training, helped organize the big
Amherst course that ultimately brought all the people to Fairfield,
lived in Fairfield for almost 20 years (I still own a house there),
served on the board of the MIU "chamber of commerce" that helped bus-
inesses move to Fairfield, renovated MIU's dorms when their condition
threatened MIU's accreditation (and didn't lose my shirt in the pro-
cess!), created a multi-million dollar business that was one of the
top 10 sidha employers in Fairfield in its day, taught on MIU's Con-
tinuing Ed faculty, helped inspire and research the huge Taste of
Utopia course that brought over 7000 to Fairfield, did my years of
tapas in the Golden Domes...

And for 20 years now I've done NONE of that - no direct ties or re-
sponsibilities to the TM Movement.  I left the "student phase of life"
and became a householder, as Maharishi urged.  I'd "run that gauntlet"
of life within the Movement - sometimes gracefully, sometimes pain-
fully.  My time inside the TM Movement did its job, bore its fruit,
and wasn't needed anymore.

So I've long been my own man - doing many things that get some peo-
ple into very hot water with the Movement - I run satsangs and I talk
about experiences, I publicly discuss knowledge on the internet, I
teach tantra, I do counseling, I run spiritual workshops, I've stud-
ied and taught many healing techniques, I've brought teachers to Fair-
field that have affected hundreds of meditators lives, I interact with
many spiritual teachers, I read "forbidden" books, I expound contro-
versial views, I teach about sexuality and am at home with my own and
with its place on the spiritual path, I explore and lecture about and
do counseling with people living alternative relationship styles -
controversial styles such as polyamory, bdsm/fetish, swinging, tantra,
lgbt, etc.)...

So, based on my current interests/activities, you could say I am very
much an outsider in relation to official TM Movement positions, but
still very much an insider to my Master.  He is inside me; I am inside
him.  Where could I go that he isn't?  And he introduced me to my God,
and brought Him/Her to sit down inside me and begin expanding.  I bow
down to Maharishi for all that.

If you have a teacher, who is a conduit for the Self, the infinite, to
shine through - and if you still think that has much of anything to do
with that teacher's relative body, relative personality, relative be-
havior - then you are still at a very immature level of relationship
to your teacher, and a very immature level of utilizing that conduit
to the infinite.  Maharishi is my "worm-hole" to the Self, to God, to



Someone commented that I couldn't claim devotion to Maharishi if I
haven't seen him (his relative body) in person for a long time.  (So
I'm curious, where does the boundary line come that distinguishes real
devotion?  Does seeing Maharishi far off across a big lecture hall
count?  Does it count if he's in the next room, speaking over a sound
system?  What about seeing him live on TV - but from the next room,
the next town, the next continent?  What about streaming live internet
video?  Or videotapes/CDs - how recent do they have to be?  Do audio-
tapes count - you're not literally "seeing" him?  What about telephone
calls, letters, etc.?  How close in time/space do I have to get to him
to qualify as a "true devotee"?  How often do I have to get that close?
Does it count if he's thinking of me, or if I'm thinking of him?  How
often?)   Obviously, from my laughing sarcasm, in my experience this
person's comment reflects a very limited, relative, basic-level view
of devotion.

It's not Maharishi's relative body that I relate to much anymore; it
is his expanded reality, his cosmic presence, his omnipresence, the
awareness that he is.  He lives in me, as my Self.  I live in him.
It's his thinking, in his role as a reflector/conduit of That, that
I attune myself to and become ever more deeply.  Our relationship is
on that level.


Someone commented that, with all my activities, I'd never be welcome
anymore in the Movement, or to represent it, and wondered how I could
be devoted to Maharishi and yet not able to participate in his Move-

First, that actually isn't what I find.  Just two years ago, living
in Fairfield, I was invited to do knowledge presentations for a cam-
pus advanced lecture program for students.  And because I have no
major power issues - with the Movement, or with masculine authority
in general - I get a program badge when I apply, without hassle. Also,
I'm on the Movement's various e-mail lists (national and local), and
I go to TM Movement events in my local area occasionally; I am respect-
fully welcomed as an experienced teacher/leader and even asked to take
on responsibilities now and then (which I rarely have the time or in-
clination for).

Second, even if I couldn't do these things, they are irrelevant to my
devotion to my Master.  There was a time, when I was more identified
with the field of boundaries, that my involvement or not in activities
on that level was important, made me feel connected...  When I didn't
have Maharishi established inside me, as the Self, than contact with
his "trappings", his Movement, offered some solace, some comfort.

But my relationship to Maharishi now transcends these specific rela-
tive activities.  The TM activities that I can or can't participate
in neither add to nor diminish my love for Maharishi, or my connec-
tion to the Self (for which he acts as my conduit, or touchstone).

To me, the TM Movement, with all its activities, is a kind of train-
ing facility, a place to test yourself, temper yourself, strengthen
yourself; it's also a place to take refuge when you need to escape
the world, and for some a place to hide; it's definitely a place to
burn up karma.  The TM Movement is a kind of a spiritual "game" - a
gauntlet to run - and you'd better be awake and know what you're get-
ting into if you choose to enter that arena.  It's Maharishi's Move-
ment - and a big mirror of the world's karma - but it's certainly not
the only path to Maharishi.


Someone commented that I couldn't claim devotion to Maharishi if I'm
not following every "instruction" that he gives.  Again, this is a
very narrow, immature view of the relationship to a Master.  If only
it were that simple.  ;)

Q: Does Maharishi ever give apparently contradictory instructions?
A: Often.

Q: How do you resolve those?
A: By tuning into the Self, to Maharishi's thinking as That; so these
    contradictions become an invitation to further attune yourself to
    the Self - much more important on that level than on the level of
    performance, of action.

Q: Does Maharishi ever give individuals instructions which contradict
    his general public instructions?
A: Often.
    So, based on outer appearances/behaviors, you can't really tell
    if someone is following Maharishi's instructions or not.  That's
    a very personal, private thing that you'd likely not have access

Q: Does Maharishi ever give individuals direct instructions to ignore
    some of his public instructions, no matter how that "looks" to
A: I've experienced this personally.

Q: Does Maharishi ever give one group of people one instruction, and
    another group an apparently contradictory one?
A: Often - causing them to either have a huge conflict, or to act as
    "checks and balances" on each other.

Q: Does Maharishi ever give an instruction, and later completely re-
    verse it?
A: Of course - we've discussed that here many times.

Q: Does Maharishi ever give so many instructions (for various daily
    practices, routine, study, etc.), and then other instructions
    (for activities to accomplish, family duties, etc.), that there
    would not be enough hours in the day to do them all?
A: Of course.

Q: Does Maharishi ever give instructions that have different mean-
    ings at different levels of consciousness, at different places
    on the path - or that may appear to mean one thing, but on deep-
    er investigation mean something different?
A: All the time.

Q: Does Maharishi ever give instructions to test you - test your
    attachment to something, or your devotion, or whatever?
A: Sure - not for his sake, but to point out to you where you're
    stuck, or attached.  And once you've had that insight, he some-
    times retracts the instruction, and doesn't make you go through
    with the difficult thing.

This whole question of "following the Master's instructions" is much
richer, much deeper than your question implies - than the simple idea
of mindlessly following orders.  It is a field ripe with possibilities
for attuning your mind to cosmic mind, for alert, wide-awake devotion.
It's as complicated, or simple, as life itself.

So, since you don't know what instructions I've been given - public-
ly or privately - what my "program" is, what my responsibilities or
assignments in life are, etc., you really have absolutely no way to
tell how well I'm following Maharishi's instructions, do you?  Nor
would you have any need to; that would be a very private thing between
Master and devotee.

The only thing of any value for you to do in this arena, is to focus
your attention on YOUR instructions, YOUR understanding of them, and
YOUR success in following them.

Here's a story that illustrates the ease with which we can misinter-
pret another's path:


Maharishi tells the story of a young Guru Dev, who may have been
around 11 or 12 years old at the time, and was a newcomer to the
ashram of his Master:

The Master had given young Guru Dev instruction in meditation.  And
he quietly told him to leave the hustle and bustle of the ashram and
go practice in silence, in the caves in the hills nearby.  So for
some time, young Guru Dev was not seen much around the ashram.

The Master's ashram had many people in it, including some senior
disciples who had been with the Master for decades, and were very
learned in the Vedas.  They had some subtle ego about their posi-
tion, and some resentment of the obvious deep relationship young
Guru Dev, a mere boy, had developed so quickly with their Master.
So, when he disappeared from the ashram, they were secretly pleased,
assuming that he'd done something to displease the Master, or was
found to be too young and immature to handle the ashram life.

One day, after many months had passed, a holiday approached and
the Master expressed to his senior staff a desire to take a re-
treat of silence in a cave up in the hills.  He sent his top dis-
ciple to the hills to seek out and prepare a proper cave for him
to reside in.  He reminded the disciple that young Guru Dev was
living in one of those caves, and because of his familiarity with
the area, he should be consulted about the cave selection.

So the chief disciple arrived at the caves in the hills, and sought
out young Guru Dev, finding him meditating in his cave.

The chief disciple said: "I am on a very important mission for the
Master.  He has sent me here to find him an empty cave in which to
reside.  Please help me to find one suitable for him - unoccupied,
clean, large, dry, etc. - since you are familiar with this area."

After a brief hesitation, young Guru Dev said: "Please tell the
Master: 'There is no empty cave here'".

The chief disciple, thinking that the young boy was not taking the
mission seriously, said: "Of course there are empty caves here; I
passed some on my way to find you.  Please help me to find a suit-
able one!  The Master has commanded it."

Quietly, but firmly, young Guru Dev said: "Are you not here on a
mission for the Master?  Are you not his messenger?"

The chief disciple answered: "Yes, but..."

"No 'buts'" said young Guru Dev.  "You may be the chief disciple,
but today your role is that of a messenger.  You were instructed
to bring me a question, and now your job is to take my answer back
to the Master.  Respectfully, I ask that you please do just that,
do your duty.  The question from the Master, to be asked of me, was
'Is there a suitable empty cave there?'  The answer I'd like you to
deliver, word-for-word, is: 'There is no empty cave here'."

The chief disciple, astounded at the audacity of this young boy to
speak to him this way, left.  He surveyed some caves on his own and
then went back to the ashram to report on his mission, and especial-
ly this arrogant boy's behavior, to the Master.

But first, he discussed this rudeness with the other senior disci-
ples.  They agreed that it would be most instructive (and embarras-
sing), to young Guru Dev, and to other young disciples, to have this
issue raised in the ashram-wide satsang that happened with the Master
each afternoon.  They knew that young Guru Dev came down from his cave
each Friday for supplies, and attended the satsang, and they waited
patiently overnight, since the next day was Friday.

Overnight, the ashram was abuzz with rumors of the young boy who had
disrespected the chief disciple, and the Master.  Everyone made a
point to attend the afternoon satsang to see what the Master would
do to this insolent boy.

At the appropriate time in the satsang, the elder disciples moved
to broach the subject.  But rather than appear blatantly accusatory,
they instead chose to bring up the subject in the form of a hypo-
thetical knowledge question.  They asked: "Master, is it not a great
sin for a disciple to disrespect or disobey the Master?"  "And is
that sin not extended to the senior disciples of the Master, acting
on his business?"  "Master, is not the punishment for such a serious
offense, banishment from the ashram?"

To all of these, the Master responded "yes".

Having set the stage in this way, the senior disciple then related
the behavior of young Guru Dev the previous day, and the members
of the ashram were shocked.

The Master strongly said: "Young man, step forward and explain your
behavior to the whole ashram."

Young Guru Dev stepped into the center of the gathering, directly
in front of the Master, clasped his hands in devotion, and pros-
trated to the Master.  When the Master directed him to rise, he
calmly spoke these words:

"Master, when your chief disciple found me, and asked me that ques-
tion from you, I knew that it had a deeper meaning than the appar-
ent surface one.  Surely, with all these great, long-time disciples,
with all their wisdom and experience, and with all those here who've
spent much time in those caves, and some who live there now, and
with your own great spiritual vision, I knew that you did not actual-
ly need my advice on picking a physical cave.  So the meaning of your
question was immediately obvious.  You were asking me something much
deeper, about the condition of my spiritual practice that you had
assigned me and sent me to the hills to do.

"And when I looked inside, and surveyed the situation, I realized that
somehow you had been very successful in your work with me, because
when I looked into the only cave about which I had any valuable infor-
mation, my heart cave, I found that it was completely full - full with
you.  No matter where I looked, there was not a bit of vacant space
there; there was no place that you were not already.  So I respectfully
told the chief disciple: please report to the Master, and tell him
'There is no vacant cave here'.  It was the simple, obvious, truthful
answer to your real question."

With that, the whole ashram was astounded, for they saw that where
they had perceived an insolent young boy, there was a devotee who
had innocently accomplished what they dreamed of, who had become
the true reflection of the Master.  Everyone, from the chief disci
ple to the barest beginner in the ashram, felt the wave of love that
connected the Master and young Guru Dev, and were reminded how im-
portant it is to put their attention on the depth of things, rather
than let their attention get caught in the boundaries.


People on this list sometimes accuse me of ignoring all the talk
about Maharishi's "relative behaviors, flaws, faults, inconsistencies,
mistakes, harmful actions"...  It's amazing how people who don't know
me can project so much onto me.  I read this list, and many others
about TM and Maharishi, pretty religiously, and with clarity and alert-
ness.  I could repeat your stories and complaints and arguments better
than some of you can.  I stay alert to discriminate what is fact, what
is opinion, what is rumor.  I pay attention to the motives and feelings
of those who raise these issues.  I watch for the degree of obsession/
attachment of the reporters.  I use all this as opportunities to exa-
mine my own feelings, to open my heart even more, and to attune to
cosmic intelligence.

But even more relevant, I lived around and reported to Maharishi for
years, more than most (not all) of you, saw many things, and could add
stories to yours - not rumors or 3rd-hand accounts, but stories that
powerfully impacted on me and my feelings and caused tremendous upheav-
al and soul-searching.  I know what it's like to face that fork in the
road in relationship to Maharishi/the Movement: (1) be deeply hurt,
yield to anger, blame something "out there", close up, become a victim;
vs. (2) feel the pain, dive into it, embrace the karma, explore the
lesson, thank Master/Nature for that purifying fire, expand.

The thing is, I've come to realize that none of these discussions
about Maharishi's individual personality and behaviors, taken on the
relative level, are important to me.  Maharishi was presented to me
to be my conduit to the Self, to God, to That.  "Tat padam dharshitam
yena - by which the sign of That has been revealed."  He serves that
role beautifully.  I am blessed to have that conduit, and selfishly
make use of it.

I can direct my attention toward that conduit in such a way that I
invite it to open and pour its blessings on me more and more and
create more connection/unity (that kind of attention is called
devotion/bhakti); or I can direct my attention toward that conduit
in such a way that I invite it to close and shut down and create
more separateness/fear (that kind of attention is called doubt/
criticism).  We each have that choice of how to approach a conduit
to infinity.


So when people try to paint me with their broad brush of "true be-
liever" and "insider" and "intellectually weak devotee and ignorer
of the facts" - it just makes me laugh and laugh.  The things we
try to project onto others is often a mirror of what we don't want
to admit to in ourself, or fear in ourself, or censor in ourself.
Lovingly I say to you, the next time you call someone a "true
believer", see if you aren't just as much a "true non-believer" -
just as stuck, blinded by your own emotional traumas, etc.  The
next time you call someone an "insider", see if you aren't resent-
ing being an "outsider" - unloved, unbelonging, abandoned.  The
next time you call someone an "unthinking, deluded bhakti", see
if you aren't an over-thinking believer in individuality, afraid to
let down your guard, to open up your heart.  These labels only re-
veal your own doubts and cynicisms.

In my next post I'll address self-doubt and cynicism, and the role
of profound trust and surrender, not as the negation of intellectual
inquiry, but as the true foundations for alert and meaningful ques-



Michael Dean Goodman Ph.D., D.D., Director
Boca Raton (Palm Beach County) Florida
561-350-3930 (24 hours) * [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Counseling * Private Educational Sessions * Spiritual Guidance * Satsang
Classes * Workshops & Retreats * Group Presentations * Articles & Essays
Clients and programs throughout the United States, Europe, and India
Working in person or by phone
Free initial consultation to discuss your needs and goals

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to:
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to