Tom Campbell on Projection

[Xanth]

I fell asleep listening to this guy.

LOL  My fiance says the same thing about him, that he has a voice that puts you to sleep. 

[Volgerle]

LOL  My fiance says the same thing about him, that he has a voice that puts you to sleep. 

That's a fair criticism in my view. He's rambling way too much, orally as well as in his book(s). He could be more concise and less repetitive all the time, then it would be even better and more people would be willing to listen (for a longer time).

[AteBits]

Hes great IMO, but if he could use the simple wording like say.. William Buhlman, that would be great. (PS. English is not my native language).

[Bedeekin]

That's a fair criticism in my view. He's rambling way too much, orally as well as in his book(s). He could be more concise and less repetitive all the time, then it would be even better and more people would be willing to listen (for a longer time).

That's pretty much how it sorts the wheat from the chaff; If you aren't patient enough to listen or read... then you wont have the patience to grow and learn. Also the guy is operating on more levels than most people can imagine.

He couldn't be more concise though. Especially about the nature of reality. Some things just cant be wrapped up for the popcorn X factor no attention span culture that is prevalent today. Everyone wants quick fast and easy bite sized nuggets.

I f&*&^*g love the fact he doesn't cater for that... Which is I think a massive disadvantage of todays society; "I want it quick.. fast... easy to swallow... I want it now and under MY terms... MY WAY!!! gimme gimme gimme"

It's the main problem people fail when practicing nonphysical exploration.

[Volgerle]

I f&*&^*g love the fact he doesn't cater for that... Which is I think a massive disadvantage of todays society; "I want it quick.. fast... easy to swallow... I want it now and under MY terms... MY WAY!!! gimme gimme gimme"

Nope. I read his book (all 3 in 1 edition, you can make weight-lifting exercises with it). I also listened to some lengthy lectures he gives. I like them, that's not my point. I'm neither one of the short-attention-span-people (yeah, it's a cancer with that technophile twitter-facebook-mobile-flash-generation...).

As said, I like it, but STILL the criticism stands:  If he's repetitive and boring, he's repetitive and boring, simple as that. He explains things at length with 10 sentences where you can 1-2 for, and this has nothing to do with any phone-texting or twitter-affinity (I'm not on twitter, facebook, I don't even have a modern up-to-date internet-capable and what-have-you mobile where I write texts on, so actually I'm almost a social hermit by choice (and free will...) ).

I'd just like him to do some Cliffs-Notes versions of his book (and speeches) one day. It's also good for reaching a larger mass of people with it and by that I do not mean the twitter-maniacs, they are so deeply enmeshed in nowadays materiality that it would not make any sense to explain to them his or any metaphysical concepts. Wheat from chaff you say .. I don't know. I believe that's not how he sees it, he wants to reach more people (and he should, so I think). So as always ... there's an in-between, not just "wheat and chaff" ...  it's a continuum and not two extremes. He could reach more people if he was a little more user-friendly (regarding length, not content of course!).

[Bedeekin]

I wasn't necessarily talking about you personally. 

He does specify in the book that this thing can't be put into bite-size tidbits or soundbites. It requires the hard drum of repetitive statements to get through to our stubborn memories and egos.

I thought that it was a shame after reading it that not a lot of people had the patience to read it and suspected it would be tedious for certain people to read. But on reflection that's not really a problem.

It's not supposed to be a reader friendly book... he comments on this several times and also congratulates you after getting through certain bits. He is aware of the long path. it contains truths a lot of peeps wouldn't like and takes the long path to reasoning and understanding... another subject he also talks about in the last book.

When I say wheat from the chaff... I mean a sort of continuum of sorts. The chaff... whoever they are aren't ready and maybe they will be after watching the videos... again... something he mentions is that people need to read the book... not just watch the videos.

A few friends have watched the videos and say "well that's an interesting idea"... This isn't a satisfying result in my eye... so I have advised them to read the book. They did... and it helped them understand a hell of a lot better than if they had just simply watched the videos... all have thanked me for pushing them to read it because it has changed their lives. most of these friends are work colleagues who don't have any particular interest in OOBEs.

I think it maybe bothers 'us'... me included... that the books may be a bit boring and that it may turn people away, because we feel that we have been imparted with a very special piece of knowledge that not only do we want OTHER people to understand like we do, but that it is nigh on impossible to explain it satisfactorily in a way that the book does. The reason that the book does work this way... is because it is written in that fashion. It's almost a catch 22.

So I agree with you... but I can see a wider picture.

[Stookie_]

I've never read his books or watched an entire lecture... just skimmed stuff, along with hearing all about him here over the past few years. He is very clear and concise with everything he says. I don't have any arguments about his material. But I've never heard him say anything I haven't already came across somewhere else. He just puts it together in a nice, more modern package that's backed with personal experience. I can't argue with that.

[Bedeekin]

This is where I say.. .read the books. 

They are worth it in the long run. He doesn't go into great detail about the TOE during lectures... and taken on face value they contain nothing new, The real meat is in the book/s.

[Xanth]

As said, I like it, but STILL the criticism stands:  If he's repetitive and boring, he's repetitive and boring, simple as that. He explains things at length with 10 sentences where you can 1-2 for, and this has nothing to do with any phone-texting or twitter-affinity (I'm not on twitter, facebook, I don't even have a modern up-to-date internet-capable and what-have-you mobile where I write texts on, so actually I'm almost a social hermit by choice (and free will...) ).

I'll kind of continue Bedeekin's point here.

Guys like Tom and even Adyashanti are repetitive for a reason (and they both mention the same reasons, even being on polar opposite ends of the terminology spectrum).  For Adyashanti, he tries to use different words every time he gives a talk.  He uses different words, but means the same thing with each of them... for example, he'll use 5 different terms to describe the same thing in a single talk.  Why?  Because one of those words he uses will grab 20% of the audience... another word will grab another 20%... and another word another 20%, and so on and so on.  Tom would describe it as him using the many metaphors out there to accomplish the same task.  The more metaphors he can use, the greater audience will understand what he's trying to say.  It's why religious folks are really starting to take a shine to his MBT, because of the "god" implications of what he refers to as "the system".

Boring... well, that's a highly subjective concept.  I find Tom's lectures extremely fascinating and engaging, because I can relate to a lot of what he says through my own personal experiences up to this point in my life.

I've never read his books or watched an entire lecture... just skimmed stuff, along with hearing all about him here over the past few years. He is very clear and concise with everything he says. I don't have any arguments about his material. But I've never heard him say anything I haven't already came across somewhere else. He just puts it together in a nice, more modern package that's backed with personal experience. I can't argue with that.

And that's the real beauty about all this talk.
You will *NEVER* find something you haven't already come across somewhere else.  You might find a new metaphor... a new way of describing something.  But when you break the metaphor down to its constituent parts, you'll find nothing new.
It's all been said and done... the next step now is to simply put it all into practice in your own life (obviously not talking about you personally Stookie, you're already a model practioner ).