Summary: Now that the facts are in, I can summarize this Calleman-created debacle as follows. What this exchange reveals, in the final analysis, is that Calleman has distorted and manipulated Don Alejandro's perspective on 2012 to give the impression that 2012 is "wrong" and his own idiosyncratic 2011 date is correct. It is revealing of Calleman's crafty agenda to manipulate public opinion—a public relations deception that would make Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz proud. 


After a long time of not receiving any direct emails from Carl Calleman, in late February 2006 I received the following contentious email.


1. The first message from Carl, addressed to me and Geoff Stray:


-----Original Message-----


Sent: Feb 23, 2006 8:09 AM





Dear John and Geoff,

I have interviewed Don Alejandro and he does not seem to have a specific idea on where the Hunab-Ku is located. He also very strongly argues against December 21, 2012 as being the end date of the Mayan calendar. Given that he speaks with the authority of the Mayan council of elders it is now impossible for anyone to say that the Maya support one or another explanation given for why this would be an end date. Not is it possible to argue against the October 28, 2011 date based on a purported conflict with the Maya. This interview will obviously be made available to the public because of its strong and important message.

All the best

Carl Johan


2. John Major Jenkins’ response:

On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:34:07 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

John Major Jenkins wrote:




I strongly encourage you to provide a link, when you post online opinions about this topic, to a page on my website (below) which will address your assertion. It is:


Are you willing to do this?




[Note: I wrote the “Elders and 2012” piece at this time, but did not post it to the link; as of March 28 I still have not posted it, because I wanted to wait to get more detailed on what Don Alejandro had actually said, which as of March 28 has not been provided. Also, I don’t why the item about the placement of Hunab Ku is relevant.]



3. Carl’s response


Sent: Feb 27, 2006 4:39 AM

To: John Major Jenkins <>

Subject: Re: Elders and 2012


We will see.

Carl Johan



4. John’s response:

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 14:03:04 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

John Major Jenkins <> wrote:




Okay. Can you direct me to where your interview with Don Alejandro is or will be located? I have an interview with Don Alejandro on file, and I thought it might be valuable for us to compare notes, in the interest of clarity. Do we have clarity as a shared value? If so, then my information on Don Alejandro, combined with your own, will certainly help us, and our readers, figure out what's going on here. What do you say? 





5. Carl’s response:


Sent: Feb 28, 2006 5:53 AM

To: John Major Jenkins <>

Subject: Re: Elders and 2012


Dear John,

I am not certain yet where the interview will be published and I would not at all be surprised if Don Alejandro has changed his mind. As the actual completion of the cosmic plan is approaching it is likely that his spirits has guided him closer to the truth and now has come to reject what the anthropologists say. We will present the material with him in such a way that best serves people's participation in the ongoing evolution of consciousness.


Carl Johan



6. John’s response:

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:20:34 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

John Major Jenkins <> wrote:


I see. You seem unwilling to share the information that you announced to me. Are the anthropologists always wrong, Carl? You've never explained why the interdisciplinary evidence that anthropologists have assembled to argue for December 21, 2012 is wrong. So on what grounds do you reject it? You've created your own idiosyncratic trademark niche, and rejecting the truth is necessary for its maintenance. Making alliances with Don Alejandro is a crafty strategy, and you're good at evangelizing and manipulating others into joining your club. The sad thing is, you know where the truth is and you choose to reject it. That’s worse that just being ignorant.


7. Carl’s response:


Sent: Mar 2, 2006 4:42 AM

To: John Major Jenkins <>

Subject: Re: Elders and 2012


Well, you are not famed of being a diplomat John and this letter attests to that. You have been denying the evidence from literally all fields of science that the Mayan calendar is not astronomically based and know you accuse me of hiding the truth. In the big perspective the kind of anthropological studies you’re presenting represents a very limited perspective indeed.


Carl Johan


8. John’s response:

On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 09:13:05 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

John Major Jenkins <> wrote:



I hope this finds you happy and well. It is good for us to discuss these things, triggered by your announcement of new information from don Alejandro (which I'd still like to see sometime).


That you believe my studies can be categorized as anthropology reveals your unfamiliarity with my work. It's just a loose and easy jab you’re making, and I consider that unfair and undiplomatic. My critique of  your 2011 model has much more substance behind it. If you actually knew me you'd find that I'm really a nice guy — but I do get very concerned and frustrated when people play fast and loose with Mayan tradition and won’t have a clear discussion about disagreements. In terms of diplomacy, when one of your fan sites expresses open forum options, and I try to engage diplomatically to contribute to the forum, they simply go silent. That’s diplomacy met with stonewalling.   


Your evolving journey with the Mayan material is transparently clear, and sadly it seems to have gone toward the strategic packaging of various ideas to sweep up sales. But maybe there is a hidden process at work, so let me assume the best: your sermons on the underworld days and so on would work fine if you simply anchored into the correct correlation, December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau = That's my guiding diplomacy. But at this point, you — much like Arguelles — cling at all costs to your idiosyncratic trademark inventions. You seem to believe that's what defines your unique contribution, but in so doing you have eclipsed the basic fundamentals. That's my issue — neglect of the fundamentals. And why you and Arguelles are cut from the same die on this is also pretty clear: during end-of-cycle dynamics, filters appear which serve to define certain levels of blockage as people transform on their way to the pure light of undifferentiated consciousness. Your system, like Arguelles's, contains several internal inconsistencies or blatant absurdities. The evolving consciousness of humanity at this time, as people open up to spiritual ideas, needs to encounter and then transcend the limit-barrier present in your system. Mainly, the problem is adherence to some form of duality, which your system has laid out very clearly — you know, reject astronomy, embrace only the spiritual. People still tend to self-identify with some form of duality, and so your system is perhaps a way station on the road to complete transcendence of duality. People from Western cultures that have been steeped in materialism will naturally swing to an extreme opposite identification with exclusive spiritualism, as they begin their spiritual awakening. But that's just another kind of limited duality paradigm. Now, your challenge is to slowly wean those who have come to your system from the dualism that ensnared them there in the first place. Take them along on your own journey toward the non-mutually exclusive transcendent position. You have a great opportunity.


I've wanted to have diplomatic discussions and I have taken the time to carefully assess your writings and many other author's writings, with careful and unbiased objective discernment. When I've pointed out basic mistakes that should have been appreciated (not simply opinionated disagreements), you and others have reacted defensively and instead engaged in stealth sabotage. The problem is that you and others are unwilling to accept that I can in fact be a voice of guidance and reason when it comes to channeling the emerging research into areas of genuine benefit for all, away from self-involved model making and the like. That problem may stem from me being much younger (you old geezers!), from me being self-taught, from me having done a lot more in-depth research into the academic and spiritual dimensions of the discussion, I don't know.  This last claim may seem wild, but an expert is someone who has studied a subject deeply and widely — and I claim no false modesty in asserting that the bibliography for Maya Cosmogenesis 2012 represents a good sample of my studies as of 1998 — And beyond  academic synthesis—very important in these times of hack research—I feel my Vipassana meditation and yoga from early adulthood has contributed to my ability to discern truth from B.S., so don't throw that aspiritual stuff at me.  My first paragraph above is also intended to guide you, us, the Maya calendar discussion, to unity. But it's got to come down to the fundamentals: December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau = (notice I'm not even invoking my own alignment reconstruction here, just the fundamental correlation of the Mayan calendar).


Finally, for you to deny that the falls in 2012 is odd, considering that the piece you asked me to post on my Web site many years ago (which I did, and which is still there), contains your words:


"Many people have become fascinated by the fact that the Mayan Long Count ends in the year 2012" (notice you wrote "the fact")


If you've changed your mind, maybe you should explain why. Was it the revelation of a deeper truth in any real sense, was it a need to define your own niche area, or just a reaction against me and my work? Peace and clear meditations to you,


John Major Jenkins

On the tzolkin day 1 Ix

Thursday March 2, 2006



9: Carl’s response



Sent: Mar 4, 2006 7:40 AM

To: John Major Jenkins <>

Subject: Re: Elders and 2012



I have always looked at you as an academically very competent person even if you may how few formal things to show for it. You are a better scholar than most from a traditional scientific perspective.


I have however never seen any serious discussion on your part as to what would be wrong with my model for the evolution of consciousness. In our previous debate your main idea was to say that the Maya had always said December 21, 2012. Now that falls.


Why would I be right and not you? Because I live closer to the world tree and so am much more strongly influenced by its rhythm. The fact that the October 28, 2011 date now is increasingly being embraced by people, and that even the council of elders now reject the December 21, 2012 date can only mean one thing. It is right! People are just getting more and more sensitive to the vibrations of the world tree as we are getting closer to the completion of this underworld. There will be more evidence coming from sources that think more closely to you and I will keep you posted.



Carl Johan


10. John’s response:

On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:40:48 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

John Major Jenkins <> wrote:




Even if I agreed whole-heartedly with your model of consciousness, your introduction of 2011 into the mix and the consequent rejection of 2012 is unnecessary. It adds yet another wrinkle of confusion to the entire discussion. My comments on my website in regard to your work involves the stated dualism in your model. I stand by my previous comments, and also note don Alejandro's previous comments on the Mayan calendar, seemingly taken wholesale from Arguelles, as summarized in Geoff Stray's Beyond 2012. I also welcome Geoff's book as an unbiased analysis of your work, my work, and many other researchers. His critique of your work is based on internal inconsistencies in the logic rather than rejecting it because it doesn't conform to a preconceived opinion about what is right.


That's the direction through to clarity. And the foundation of unity among researchers has to begin with agreeing on "the Equation of Mayan Time", which is: = December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau.


I've addressed all critiques and complaints against this equation, and have assembled the evidence for this equation in my previous books and on my website. 


I wish you well, and please try to include accurate reference to my website ( if you are going to mention/discuss my work in online or print locations.



P.S. We are engaged in a topic that will be generating more and more noise as it approaches, so I wish you peaceful and centering meditations.




11. Carl’s response:

Sent: Mar 6, 2006 12:52 PM

To: John Major Jenkins <>

Subject: Re: Elders and 2012


Dear John,

Maybe you would like to be an ambassador of the Breakthrough celebration together with Don Alejandro.


All the best

Carl Johan


12. John’s response:

Re: Elders and 2012

Mar 6, 2006 2:04 PM


When is that taking place?


13. Carl’s response:

Sent: Mar 7, 2006 5:59 AM

To: John Major Jenkins <>

Subject: Re: Elders and 2012


Dear John,

It is a process starting May 27 and continuing on every Ajpu day until May 22, 2007. We now have the foundation although the web page needs some more work, but some of the ambassadors will be Don Alejandro +Elisabeth, Ervin Laszlo + wife and Bhagavan and Amma who are all coming to the process described by the MAyan calendar from different angles.


All the best

Carl Johan


14. John’s response:

Re: Elders and 2012

Mar 7, 2006 10:13 AM




I checked out the site — that's connected with the Airstream group. I offered to submit an article about Izapa, the origin place of the 2012 calendar, but they never confirmed or responded to that offer, after a brief email exchange a few months ago. So I'm not sure how much my participation in the Breakthrough Celebration would be allowed.


Nevertheless, what would be involved in being an "ambassador"? The "whens" are Ahau days, but is there a primary  Ahau day and primary celebration place? Or is it an ongoing non-local consortium, with the web site as the main nexus?





15. Carl’s response:

Re: Elders and 2012

Mar 7, 2006 10:42 AM


Dear John,

Yes Andi has made this web site. It is meant to generate a process starting May 27 and ending May 22, 2007, which is the completion when Barbara Hand Clow will be making a world tree ceremony that I hope we will be able to broadcast in a televised form from Sweden. To be an ambassador means simply to be a stand for the series of events that are intended to generate a process towards oneness. Soon some knowledgeable ambassadors will be posted on the site.


All the best

Carl Johan


16. [I did not notice that this email came in when it did. I thought that Carl hadn’t responded and so dropped the ball — I get so many emails every day, and I often check my email when I’m at a library or café, it evaded my detection, so my later complaint about not hearing a response is my oversight.]



17. Two weeks later, Carl’s press release was sent mass-email:


From: Carl Johan Calleman <>

Sent: Mar 22, 2006 11:21 PM

Subject: Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan


Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan


Don Alejandro Oxlaj, who in his native language goes by the name of Wandering Wolf is head of the council of elders of the Maya and in addition head of the Indigenous Council of the Americas which has member tribes from Tierra del Fuego to Alaska. Don Alejandro spoke with the authority of the 440 person strong Mayan council of elders. Hence, his meeting with Sri Bhagavan represents an important contacts between spiritual traditions of the West and the East in a time when a flow towards Oneness may be arising and has broader implications.


February 20th I went to Chennai in India to meet with Don Alejandro Oxlaj. I spent the first two days there talking with Don Alejandro and his wife Elizabeth Araujo. Then Joseph Giove and Mario Hernandez both working with the Breakthrough Celebration joined in and a first interview with Don Alejandro, interpreted from Spanish by Elizabeth, was filmed in the park of the Theosophical World Headquarters at Adyar under a Bodhi Tree planted from a seed from the one under which Buddha is said to have been enlightened. This interview is a very important document that will later be made available more broadly.


Among other things, Don Alejandro contrary to popular opinion rejected the December 21, 2012 date touted by archeologists as the ending of the Mayan calendar, and presented knowledge about the traditional Mayan calendar and its place among today's Maya in Guatemala. After this we made a short visit to Nemam on the way to Golden City. On the next day Mario filmed another interview with Don Alejandro at the premises of Anandaloka with its equipment. This interview was centred more on Mayan spiritual traditions, rather than the calendar.


The next day the group went to Nemam for a darshan with Bhagavan where reportedly some 70000 people passed through on this particular day. Don Alejandro, expressed that he saw Sri Bhagavan as an incarnation of the god Shiva that was celebrated on this particular day.


Don Alejandro and Elizabeth also got dikshas at Bhagavan and Amma's huts at the GC. Another day, at sunrise, Don Alejandro led a fire ceremony at the Golden City, with materials that they had partly brought from Guatemala. This ceremony was also filmed and was a high point in Don Alejandro's visit and the participants were very moved by its humbleness and authenticity brought from another continent. This was a ceremony to the four directions including prayers to all the day signs with offerings to the fire. Later the same day this ceremony was reciprocated at the youth campus at GC [Golden City] where a homa was held ceremony for Don Alejandro and Elizabeth. After this Don Alejandro and Elizabeth had a meeting with Sri Bhagavan which was filmed by the Indian video team and has been said to be very moving.


The Mayan guests were then also invited to return to GC and add their knowledge to the curriculum of the Oneness University. All of these films are about to be edited and will have great documentary value. It is doubtful if interviews with Don Alejandro have been filmed previously when he has had the opportunity to express the Mayan view in such a straight view. The GC TV channel will send some of the material and we will do our best to disseminate it through other channels as well.


Both Sri Bhagavan and the Mayan couple agreed to support the Breakthrough Celebration, which will add to the creation of a flow towards Oneness in the time ahead ( The meetings also by themselves helped strengthen the bridge between cultures and spiritual traditions, which was also expressed by Don Alejandro.


Orsa, March 23, 2006 (9 Men)

Carl Johan Calleman



18. John’s response:


Re: Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan

Mar 23, 2006 9:55 AM




That's great to have facilitated a meeting between Don Alejandro and representatives of spiritual traditions in India. The photo and interview ops makes an impressive impact. I see that you mention your politically-motivated "talking point", that Don Alejandro rejects the December 21, 2012 cycle-ending date. Anyone anywhere is, of course, free to reject something. However, if you are going to broadcast such a notion with the seeming support of a respected Mayan elder, in fairness to clarity on the question you really need to give the reasons. This is especially critical in the context of a Oneness Celebration. Your quick characterization of Don Alejandro's viewpoint most likely does a great disservice to his views on the topic. My suspicion is that you framed the question as a "spiritual 2011" versus "materialist 2012" choice, and with that stricture the location of Don Alejandro's support would be predictable. And misleading. The December 21, 2012 end date is more than the opinion of "the archeologists", and you've never addressed all the evidence for it. 


Do you remember several weeks ago, when you invited me to be an "ambassador" at the 2006 celebrations? I was asking questions, trying to understand what the invitation would involve. I was disappointed that all of a sudden you stopped responding. What happened? I'm tempted to conclude that your invitation was not offered in sincerity. Or oneness. [note - this was my oversight]


Finally, it would be nice if you could provide your readers with some context as to the implications of Don Alejandro's "rejection", as you see it. You also might want to explain why Don Alejandro has expressed other views about 2012 in the past. Otherwise, your statement is just a misleading talking point, the kind of bumper-sticker slogan that manipulative politicos are so adept at using.


Best wishes,




Seven Macaw loves illusion

likes to lie and breed confusion

Such a mind is so distorted

with teachings that are unsupported


When the day for truth is here

all macaws will squawk in fear

For what they see is their own mess

couldn't fly and couldn't confess


To spreading selfish declarations

magnifying complications

But we love all those batty birds

they show the darkness of false words


They teach how darkness leads to light

if only truth will take to flight

We let go of illusion's blinders

when seekers transform into finders



19. Carl’s response:


Re: Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan

Mar 23, 2006 9:47 AM


Dear John,

Actually I thought that you stopped writing in the discussion of being an ambassador. Maybe some email was lost or something because at one point I responded and never heard back. In all honesty, I did not frame the question or even bring it up. Don Alejandro did and this was much more than I had hoped for, but as I think I said people will now increasingly be intuitively in touch with the actual wave movement of creation. The issue at hand is not so much whether an interpretation could be called materialist or spiritual, but the critical thing is that people will be able to identify the tuns ruled by Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca energy. If you were living in Germany in 1933 and thought that an era of light had begin this would have been a serious consequence and something like this could very well happen in the years ahead if people will continue to believe in an end date that is false. I suggest that you study my work at some point not being fixed with what Don Alejandro now rejects as an end point, but just as a study of creation.



Carl Johan



20. John’s response:

Datum: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:14:49 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

Till: Carl Johan Calleman <>

Ämne: Re: Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan




I have read and studied your work and although the model of alternating day and night cycles has congruency to it, I don't see how cherry picking historical events lends support for it. And I don't see how anchoring such a model to a date you decided upon yourself, rejecting in the process the timing established by the 2012 calendar's creators themselves, will lead us into the light. You are mainly involved in defining yourself as the leader in a system of your own creation, rather than a voice of the perennial truth that is trying to be reborn amidst all the noise and confusion of the modern world. Your system adds another choice to the menu of New Age delicacies, but as Daniel Pinchbeck quoted me in his forthcoming book, “These kinds of approaches are symptoms of modern confusion, rather than solutions to it.”





21. Carl’s response



I wonder what has made you so quarrelsome. Maybe it is the Wind in your Mayan chart. Or maybe it is that you have not like myself had scientific training from members of the Nobel committees in Stockholm. The reason does not matter unless you are able to see it yourself. What is so noble about being against the flow towards oneness that is now being generated? Have you thought about the consequences of people confusing the eras of Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca? Or is it more important that you are right about your own date? Anyway, I see little reason to have you as an ambassador, since it will most likely only bring in-house fighting under some intellectual pretense.




22. John’s response:

Re: Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan

Mar 24, 2006 9:10 AM



December 21, 2012 is not my own date. That date has the support of "scientifically trained" scholars, and I support it. This recent exchange between us started when you sent me an email several weeks ago with the highly contentious statement that Don Alejandro rejects the December 21, 2012. My response was to defend and support the authentic, proven, tested, end date.  You have not supplied any kind of information at all as to why it is important for you to try to demolish this date. But the underlying reason is clear: because you wish to clear away the one thing that we could all agree on, as a foundational truism, so you can propagate your own idiosyncratic system and 2011 date. There WAS unity until you defined your own separatist branch school. This situation is exactly like what emerged with Arguelles: I continue to insist on anchoring our spiritual and metaphysical work into the core truths of the Mayan calendar. The "core truth" I refer to is the True Count timing parameter which supplies the correlation upon which all systems could be unified. And it has the singular virtue of being the one that has interdisciplinary cogency and the work of Mayan scholars over decades of testing. That correlation is = December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau. I really don't think you understand the interdisciplinary calendric evidence and deep truth of this.      


Have you ever asked yourself why you have make great efforts to derail and reject this fundamental equation of Mayan time? ( = December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau.) It used to baffle me why researchers like you and Arguelles have found it necessary to establish your own idiosyncratic models, even to the level of manipulating and altering this fundamental equation. Perhaps the problem is that neither of you researched the question to sufficient depth to understand the issues, evidence, arguments, and what's at stake.  If you and Arguelles could just see unifying power of adopting the authentic Mayan equation of time, then your insights and your social engineering efforts toward oneness would have so much more efficacy. As it stands, there remains a kernal of stubborn hubris, seemingly left over from adolescent dreams to "make a name for oneself," and/or have ones name attached to a "new model of universe." That's the profane fantasy of egoism. And it always keeps one from opening up to the perennial and universal wisdom. We don't need anyone's new system or model; we need to respect and acknowledge the traditional ancient Mayan framework. In laying aside your creative inventions, you can open up to deeper truths. You know, in the late 1980s I had revelations about the role played, in the sacred calendar, by the three sacred science principles. The Trinity principles congealed into a unified model I called "The Tree of Life", and it framed the spiritual and biological unfolding of humanity on individual and collective  levels. I could have started my own trademark cult-group, as you and Arguelles have done, and worked hard to get the thing branded and marketed to the far corners of the world. But I quickly realized that my model, although inventive and unique, was only one of a myriad models that could be constructed. Even though they may be rooted in perennial principles, I realized it would be much better to transcend my own mental constructions and open up to deeper mysteries.


That analogy is perhaps not exactly appropriate for what you and Arguelles have  done, for your models require that the established, authentic correlation framework be rejected. You just keep saying that the December 21, 2012 date is wrong, or it is just what "the archeologists" prefer, but you have never addressed all of the evidence for it. You engage in intellectual dishonesty when you dismiss it wanly — giving your readers the wrong impression that it's all relative. You just assert it's wrong and your 2011 date is right. As with my critique of Dreamspell, this isn't about "me versus you", it's you versus the established correlation. You claim to have the auspices of scientific training behind you, but you certainly aren't using it to explain why December 21, 2012 must be rejected in favor of your date. Aligning with Don Alejandro is a politically wise move to further your agenda, but the underlying story of what's going on here will be preserved. Future generations are watching, and truth will prevail long after we are gone. 


I'm in your face about all this once again because, as I mentioned above, you approached me with your latest public relations ploy to oust the 2012 date. But I see that you really have nothing to support it, and you're just blowing smoke. Smoke pollutes the room for everyone, that's why I'm overjoyed at the new Colorado law banning smoking in restaurants, etc.


Hey, I just realized something that may explain our different values around what's important in this whole discussion. First, it seems clear that you and Arguelles must project and proclaim your own idiosyncratic inventions, toppling or ousting the established Mayan correlation in the process. I prefer to acknowledge and honor the established Mayan framework for the perennial wisdom — the value that we should be midwives in the revival of traditional Mayan wisdom, not its opponents. So, here it is:  I think there must be some kind of Pluto in Leo thing going on with you and Arguelles; your approaches are to frame the deep transformative power of Pluto in your own lion-like roaring and proud (arrogant) expression of your self-hood.


You two are echoes of that annoying self-magnifying guru-stance that West coast  bookstores still encourage. Self-promoting Kings of the Jungle, you feel you must push the previous occupant off the hill that you wish to take over; in this case, that would be the long-established Mayan tradition. So that explains your need to replace the fundamental Mayan time correlation rather than humbly accept and adopt the inherent unity between what you seek and what is already there. It's such a dominator stance, understandable given the Pluto generation you have incarnated into. Did you ever read  Ken Wilber’s Boomer-itis? Really interesting book. The fallacy of such an orientation to life highlights (and exposes) the underlying dominator fallacy of Western civilization. That's why I think that the greatest contribution of you and Arguelles are in showing clearly the distortions of ungrounded idiosyncratic individualism at the expense of tradition & perennial wisdom.


It is perhaps necessary in your own journey to fully manifest that desire-state before it can be transcended.


Best wishes,

John Major Jenkins

Ambassador of = December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau



23. From Eden Sky:


-----Original Message-----

From: Eden and Robert Sky <>

Sent: Mar 24, 2006 10:58 PM


Subject: 2012


Greetings John

How is your world? Hope you had a great equinox!

Your website looks great - I just checked it out - great energy!


I just had a dialogue with Calleman I thought you might be interested in - here it is - please let me know your thoughts on it! Blessings, Eden


[pasted in here, the Short report of Don Alejandro Oxlaj's meeting with Sri Bhagavan (same as above press release by Carl, email #17)]



24. My response to Eden and Robert:


Hello Eden and Robert,


Thank you for reaching out for what I can contribute to the recent goings on with Calleman and Don Alejandro. Carl, as you probably know, has been promoting his own end date, October 28, 2011. His reasoning behind it is self-serving and idiosyncratic, an attempt to corner his own trademarked niche in the Maya calendar discussion. He never seriously addressed the overwhelming support for December 21, 2012 as the 13-baktun cycle end date. All of this was debated and explored in our debate of late-2001. His book was published the next year, and I guess our debate helped Carl to anticipate some damage control and to add some carefully placed caveats to his rap on 2011 vs 2012, to the extent that he at least acknowledged 2012 before presenting his own end date as the superior one. But other areas of factual correction were neglected.


And so matters were laid to rest. But in the ensuing years I noted that Carl was engaging in stealth sabotage and sneak attacks on my own work with the "galactic alignment" in era-2012. He often asserted my work was solely based in astronomy and was therefore “materialistic.” Of course, he neglected the metaphysical and spiritual teachings I've written about since my earliest books in the 1980s.


Most problematical, in asserting his "physical reality is bad" stance, Carl kind of backed himself into a corner, because the non-dual nature of the Mayan calendar teachings are fundamental — you know, the basic insight that the Mayan calendar weaves together the tapestry of spiritual and physical events and processes. So it seems that recently Carl has back peddled from that approach and now has found it effective to align himself with a traditional elder who, for whatever reason, "rejects" 2012.


I became aware of this several weeks ago, when Carl emailed myself and Geoff Stray with his first teaser announcement. His email was brief and included no details. Naturally I was interested in what actually transpired, but Carl was not forthcoming. Then the latest press release came, repeating the "talking point" that Don Alejandro rejects 2012. Still no details, please notice. The implications of such a rejection would be interesting to explore. For example, I have an archive of various positions that Don Alejandro has taken over the years; early on he described (in the Mystery of the Crystal Skulls book) Harmonic Convergence in Dreamspell terms as if it was a revelation from his own elders. Later, after Ian Lungold read him passages from my book Maya Cosmogenesis 2012 (in mid-1999), he adopted a view that the earth would pass through a “dark cloud” and a “magnetic axis” for some 3 days, beginning on Dec 20, 2012 (this was reported in an Associated Press release after the Native American elder conference in New Mexico in late 1999).  Notice how that view sounds eerily like my description in chapter 25.


I'm not trying to disparage Don Alejandro here, as he is struggling and working hard to forge alliances with global supporters and students of Mayan teachings; understandably his views will change and vary depending on where he feels the energy is effectively going. However, Carl — a master at public relations and self promotion — has clearly capitalized on Don Alejandro's recent stance, to attack the established December 21, 2012 end date. I feel I've thoroughly organized, summarized, contextualized, and commented on the correlation question since the early 1990s, and have made available all the relevant documents and links on my website, but Carl refuses to avail himself of the evidence and facts of the matter. Instead, he resorts to sneak attacks, unfounded talking points, alliances with seemingly unimpugnable elders, and the like. Regarding Don Alejandro's unquestionable authority on matters of the Long Count, with all due respect the Long Count stopped being followed long ago in the highlands, as everywhere else in Mesoamerica. It is one of the calendar traditions that had to be reconstructed from secondary evidence; it was not transmitted through elder lineages to the present day. At any rate, such a "rejection" — by anyone — would fly in the face of all the interdisciplinary evidence that led scholars over many decades to the right correlation. Carl, who on the one hand cherishes his scientific training, dismisses this incredible accomplishment as "the opinion of the archaeologists."


It's about the least opinionated conclusion that can be found in Mayan studies, but, again, Carl and others would have to spend a little time studying the material to understand it.


However, let us imagine that Don Alejandro, or other elders, could convene and denounce something that was ultimately true. Maybe they were doing it with some guidance from Carl Calleman, in the hopes they could be more effective in achieving a wider reach though the Oneness Celebrations. Let us also imagine, for the moment, that my reconstruction of the importance of the galactic alignment, with its deep connections into ballgame symbolism, creation myth teachings, and prophecy at Izapa, were true. A council of elders may come along and reject or denounce it, but that would make it no less true.


But the main question here has nothing to do with my galactic alignment work — it impinges only on the correct end date. Once again we are up against a distortion of the calendar placement, as occurred with the day-count placement of Dreamspell. But, with Carl, we have an ongoing attack on the placement of the end date (of I've boiled down all the complexities of correlation studies to a fundamental “equation” that must serve as the basis of unity and oneness amongst all researchers. It is the following: = December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau.


This is a fundamental and well-supported equivalence that students and supporters of Mayan tradition should be able to embrace. Even if Carl wants to teach a doctrine of alternating day and night periods, fine, but the implied sacred interval celebrations should be fixed to December 21, 2012, not October 28, 2011. His argument for 2011 is tantamount to saying we should re-order the days of the week alphabetically. Clever, funny even, but based on a complete misapplication of what is relevant. And if Arguelles could make his day-count strike 4 Ahau on Dec 21, 2012, then all the blue electric skywalkers could dance.


Eden, doesn't this sound all too familiar to you? Isn't it just like a rerun? Am I going insane and should I simply abandon trying to defend the traditional Mayan teachings, and let the whole game be taken over by re-designers? The eerie similarities between Carl's need to assert his own clever invention and Arguelles' similar promotion of his own system got me thinking, as follows.


Their approaches are fundamentally similar, and I find their approaches to be fundamentally disingenuous to honoring the tradition. So, here's what it must be: Pluto in Leo. Yeap, Arg comes in right at the beginning of this in 1939, Carl's right in the middle in 1950. 2012 is about deep transformation, it's the end of an age, the death-rebirth nexus, and there is much volcanic transformative power in that. Leo is a very proud, personally proud and vocal (roaring, self-promotion) sign. Pluto in Leo means that the deep transformative power gets channeled through the solar male projection of proud individualism. Hence, the need to oust the previous king of the hill (Mayan tradition) off the peg. There's very little ability for partnership, for honoring what's there and deepening the work. By asserting branch systems and groups, the centralized energy of the root gets dispersed. It's funny that I'm often accused of causing splits and dissent — but I only defend and reassert the core root; it is the branch systems that invite "confusion" and dislocation. I have Pluto in Virgo, so deep transformative power is more associated with relationship to the Great Mother, the pure spirit of transcendent connection and relationship, honoring the mother and root.


Probably younger seekers who have felt a connection to the Arg and Calleman teachings have certain propensities toward a Leo expression of power. Of course, the self-serving globalization of Western civilization is basically a plutocratic dominator thing — very expressive of the Pluto in Leo generation that are now running things.


Well, I've probably rambled overlong. What is your sense of the recent announcements? Oneness Celebration promises to be a unifier and is no doubt serving some socio-political purpose, but is it necessary, fair, or mature for Carl to use it as a platform for his gripe with me and the established 2012 end date? Best wishes,






25. Carl sends out a general press release on March 29, with the introduction:


The Breakthrough Celebration -
Generating a flow towards oneness by the year 2012

There have been many questions about the fact that Don Alejandro Oxlaj - head of the council of elders of the Maya - in an interview has rejected the December 21, 2012 date as the ending of the current creation. I want to point out here that I have also myself for more than a decade consistently rejected this date. Although the Maya have continued to use the sacred 260 day  calendar unaltered they abandoned the use of the Long Count several centuries ago and so the date December 21, 2012  is something that has become known from the archaeologists and not from the contemporary Maya.


There are however strong reasons to doubt that archaeologists, who often look upon the Mayan calendar as a superstition to begin with, would be able to address the question when the point of completion of the present creation is. I feel finding the answer to this requires a different point of departure, one where you see the Mayan calendar as a true description of the evolution of consciousness.


Based on research based on such a point of departure I have come to the conclusion that the fulfilment of the present creation will take place on October 28, 2011 following which a world in the state of oneness could emerge in the year 2012. I feel however everyone should try to come to some kind of conclusion on the end date issue. Is the end date about some event that then is to happen (in the sky or elsewhere) or is it a completion and a fulfilment of an evolution that we are part of already at the present time?



26. My comments (John Major Jenkins). First, Carl has yet to provide specific details about what actually transpired in the interview with Don Alejandro. As such, it remains an unsupported “talking point.” After we have the specifics then it will be a question of why December 21, 2012 is rejected. I suspect that it involves an alliance with Carl’s international efforts to organize Oneness Celebrations. These have a worthy goal, but then we must question why the established end date of December 21, 2012 must be rejected. The answer has to do with Calleman’s Pluto-in-Leo tendency (or need) to project his own individualistic creativity into his chosen field and (like the lion playing king of the hill) oust whatever happens to already be there. What is already there is the established end-date of December 21, 2012. It’s fascinating how Calleman never has actually addressed all of the evidence that scholars have rallied over many decades to support this end date. Calleman wanly dismisses it as the opinion of archaeologists, and frames his support for his own invented end-date as the one that fits the “real” situation, the “wave of creation.” Calleman tries to frame his work as the one that supplies spiritual truth unsuspected by myself and/or “the archaeologists.” But since the 1980s I’ve perceived and written about the non-dual basis for Mayan time philosophy — spiritual and material realms are interwoven. Astronomy, cycles in nature, reflect the evolutionary vicissitudes of the human spirit incarnating in material bodies — material bodies are condensed expressions of the spiritual essence, and thus are interrelated on a continuum; there’s no mutually exclusive duality. Now, with Calleman’s work, this profound, central, perennial teaching of the Maya is under fire, for he frames everything as spiritual versus material, astronomy versus theology. 


It’s really very simple to understand a basic problem with the position taken by Calleman, as follows. Both Calleman and Don Alejandro follow the authentic day-count of the 260-day calendar (the “True Count”). With this placement, we can project forward — count forward day by day — to December 21, 2012. We arrive at the tzolkin calendar day 4 Ahau. Okay, now, archaeologists and scholars have catalogued hundreds of Long Count dates and the corresponding tzolkin dates on those monuments all belie a consistent relationship between those two calendar systems.


Furthermore, several Creation Monuments relate information about the Creation Date, This is the end of a 13-Baktun period, one World Age, and there is a tzolkin date associated with it. Whether the date refers to the end of the previous 13-Baktun cycle (over 5,100 years ago) or the end of the current 13-baktun cycle is irrelevant, for in either case they will be the same: 4 Ahau. What this means is that the Classic Period monuments support an equation between the Long Count and the tzolkin in which = 4 Ahau. The traditional day-count followed by Don Alejandro was documented by ethnographers in the Guatemalan highlands beginning in the 1920s. By 1950 it was realized that this day-count was an unbroken survival from the Classic Period. It provides secondary support for the interdisciplinary work that determined December 21, 2012 to be the end of the 13-baktun cycle because, as mentioned above, when we project it forward to December 21, 2012, we arrive at 4 Ahau. This situation can be summarized as the “equation of Mayan time”:


December 21, 2012 = = 4 Ahau


Carl, who often touts his scientific training, cares little for the amazing work which allowed us all to understand the fundamental principles of the Mayan calendar’s placement in real time. Carl rejects this equation as the work of archaeologists, but why is that so repugnant? Scholars have made important contributions to reconstructing Mayan hieroglyphics, Mayan archaeoastonomy, even Mayan spiritual traditions. If Carl wants to promote his vision of a wave form of creation, why can’t he anchor it to the real situation? His position does a great disservice to clarity on the 2012 discussion, and by rallying others to his cause he only demonstrates the manipulative need of Pluto-in-Leo to project ones own creativity and oust the perceived occupant of the desired throne. In this regard Carl shares a dynamic also evinced by José Arguelles; both are Pluto-in-Leos and their approaches seek to usurp the traditional Mayan foundation and establish their own idiosyncratic invention — more on this need/dynamic of Pluto-in-Leo can be found in Jeff Green’s Pluto book. This isn’t to say that Pluto-in-Leo is bad, but that the understanding of transformation (Pluto) is channeled through self-expression (Leo). If reinforcing encouragement is not felt, the Pluto-in-Leo type will resort to manipulation of others and misrepresentation of facts, often resulting in deception and betrayal of underlying truths. In the case of working with traditional systems, there will be a need to eclipse the tradition in favor of ones own creativity. It’s a very lamentable situation when it comes to preserving perennial traditions. In the same way that an alcoholic shouldn’t work in a liquor store, manipulative self-promoters shouldn’t be voices for perennial traditions and wisdom.


Why is Carl’s position dangerous or lamentable? Well, it should be clear — because Calleman seeks to replace the fundamental orientation of Mayan time philosophy with his own end date and his own creative model. It’s Dreamspell, Part II. Modern people feel that it’s okay to eclipse tradition, because we often have a bias that tradition is old, bad, controlling — often coming from bad experiences with Catholic upbringings. But a more objective understanding is that traditional teachings are perennial, undiluted, untainted teachings; they are rooted in core principles and spiritual insight. Western philosophy and science can be seen as a reaction against and rejection of perennial truth in favor of relative truth — my system versus your system, my opinion versus your opinion. But the real issue is whether we are going to be rooted in the perennial truth or in some relative man-made model, which is ultimately a passing fad or illusion.


Carl frames the end date dilemma in this way:


“I feel however everyone should try to come to some kind of conclusion on the end date issue. Is the end date about some event that then is to happen (in the sky or elsewhere) or is it a completion and a fulfilment of an evolution that we are part of already at the present time?”


There is an echo here of Carl’s rejection of December 21, 2012 because of my work to identify an astronomical alignment as the reason for its placement. My work goes well beyond this astronomical identification to explore the metaphysical and spiritual teachings of cycle endings. But my work should really be irrelevant to the point of whether or not December 21, 2012 is the 13-Baktun end date. That’s not “my work” — that correlation was established, as mentioned, by decades of interdisciplinary scholarship. Carl also states that he has been rejecting December 21, 2012 for over a decade, but in an essay that he asked me to post on my website in 1999 (which I did and which is still there) he states:


“Many people have become fascinated by the fact that the Mayan Long Count ends in the year 2012” (notice he wrote “the fact”)


Carl needs to address the evidence for December 21, 2012 rather than wanly dismissing it as the work of clueless archaeologists. In the end, it would be much more conducive for celebrating oneness if Carl would have done a little more research at the outset of his campaign, and fixed his wave model to the already established fundamental equation of Mayan time (December 21, 2012 = = 4 Ahau).


Note: This equation isn’t my invention, it is a simple presentation of the fundamental orientation of Mayan time philosophy, supported by scholarship as well as by the surviving True Count in the highlands. As for the deeper spiritual teachings for cycle endings, in my work I’ve elucidated what is present in the primary documents on the subject — from the Mayan Creation Myth and from the carved monuments of Izapa, the origin place of the 2012 calendar. My work on the spiritual teachings takes the position that it is better to reconstruct and revive the original core teachings — because they were closely allied with the original transcendent revelation — rather than inventing new models in an era of great mental and spiritual chaos and confusion. It’s about reconnecting with source rather than aggressive expression of individualistic creativity. So now we have Calleman and Arguelles versus the fundamental tenets of Mayan time philosophy. This current polarization in the Mayan calendar movement reflects, interestingly, the teaching encoded in the Creation Myth — that, at the end of the Age, ego (Seven Macaw) will battle for attention and try to obscure the resurrecting light of the higher dimensional source (One Hunahpu). But the Mayan “prophecy” encoded in the Creation Myth asserts that Truth and Light will ultimately conquer illusion, deception, and spiritual darkness and confusion.


—John Major Jenkins. March 30, 2006.


UPDATE. Breakthrough! March 30, 2006. Thanks to Tuva for calling me and letting me know what was going on with Don Alejandro. Finally, I am now aware that Don Alejandro is involved in an important unification of the two hemispheres, and is right now travelling to Bolivia to retrieve a sacred staff that will be used in a ceremony later this year. A documentary is being filmed on Don Alejandro's life, by Steve Copeland & Co. Information on these events is here:

It is even more apparent to me now how Carl Calleman is trying to co-opt these events, to exploit a statement in the above document that Don Alejandro will be speaking about how December 21, 2012 is not to be thought of as a specific day of transformation. Well, that's been my position all along as well. There is the process oriented shift, and there is the specific calendric artifact (indicative of the True Count correlation: December 21, 2012 = = 4 Ahau). But, contrary to Calleman's distorted appropriation of Don Alejandro's intent, the December 21, 2012 date stands, and remains, as the accurate end-date calculation. It's just that it's a process oriented "Shift of the Ages" and we are in it now. This too has always been my position, even while recognizing December 21, 2012 as the accurate calendric artifact. The two are not mutually contradicting, as Carl tries to imply. With this new inspiration of Don Alejandro we can finally begin to focus on the process of unification between the two hemisphere, north and south, left and right. In a metaphysical and spiritual sense, this is about the perennial cycle-ending teaching of how the limited finite ego can be reunified with the infinite eternal source. Thank you, Don Alejandro, for paving the way to transcend the self-serving position of those who wish to proclaim their own idiosyncratic systems that are so out of tune with authentic tradition. December 21, 2012 remains in the background in the general context of a process-oriented shift. (Note: the above link to the documentary summary draws from my galactic alignment research in Maya Cosmogenesis 2012 and my appendix on the Black Hole hieroglyph in Mayan Creation Texts.)

It is a revealing testimony to Carl's desire to exploit Don Alejandro and Carl's ability to distort the facts to serve his own idiosyncratic 2011 date, that in our five weeks of recent email exchanges, Carl never once was willing to share specific information on what Don Alejandro actually was saying—even after my repeated request for the source of Carl's information. This is a good illustration of how manipulators try to control access to information so they can continue their deceptions, and it also illustrates how, for seekers of Truth, Vincit Omnia Veritas—truth ultimately wins in the end.

Email sent to Carl on March 30:

Hey Carl,

How long have you known about the Steve Copeland documentary on Don Alejandro, and the write up here?:

I suspected Carl was going to go incommunicado, so I sent the following email to Carl on March 31:


The write up on Don Alejandro's activities, at the link below (, is very informative. Is the write up consistent with the information you were told? Because if it is, I don't see how you can conclude that Don Alejandro "rejects" 2012, as you say. Since he discusses the 60-72 hours of the earth passing through "a dark cloud" beginning on December 20, 2012, wouldn't that mean he recognizes December 21, 2012 as the accurate calendrical end-date? Also, Don Alejandro supported December 21, 2012 in the interview that appeared in Mystery of the Crystal Skulls. We have two things: There is the calendrical end-date artifact and there is the process-oriented work of spiritual transformation --- the two are not mutually contradictory.

The distinction that you should make is between the calendrical artifact that pinpoints (necessarily so) a specific date, and the process-oriented shift that is the spiritual work. Don Alejandro isn't so much "rejecting" December 21, 2012, but is rather emphasizing the importance of not fixating on a future date and instead engaging with the ongoing spiritual work. Don't you think so? Carl, I've been making this distinction for as long as I've been writing about 2012 --- read the ending of Galactic Alignment, the last page of Pyramid of Fire, or comments in chapter 25 of Maya Cosmogenesis 2012. Your quick exploitation and conflation of two categories of consideration only serves your own 2011 model. At least, that's how you framed it in your recent press releases. Now, after five weeks of you broadcasting your unsupported "talking point" I've finally gotten access to what you withheld --- Don Alejandro's actual words --- and I can now see, as I predicted, that you distorted and misrepresented his intention. Pluto-in-Leo needs to work on not manipulating others for their own self-serving need. Please do not wager any more assaults on the traditional calendar system. If you want to promote your wave of creation model fixed to 2011, go for it. Leave the Mayan tradition alone. I'm sure you had a fine time visiting with Don Alejandro, but if he actually knew what you were doing I believe he would see Seven Macaw.

We could have sorted this out at the beginning if you were honest and up-front with your information. You're hilarious, Carl. You're like my cats --- the little one attacks the other and runs away. A few minutes later, he attacks from the other side and then runs again. You latch onto different attack plans, always trying to be king of the hill, always trying to oust the thing (the established Mayan tradition) that occupies the place where you want to be. Attack and run, attack and run, and you can count on the public eye having such a short attention span that you can just back off, never explain yourself, and just figure out your next plan of attack. As Pluto-in-Virgo, my approach has been to unify with the root tradition, elucidate it more deeply, and serve the whole process. That has forced me into a position of defending the tradition from the self-serving creative-aggressive types, those like you and Arguelles who value your own free-form creative model making over the preservation of the authentic tradition.

In closing, when you say you live closer to the sacred tree, what do you mean? In a spiritual sense that you are closer to God? Or in a geographical sense that Sweden is closer to the north pole? I'm just curious.

All of this is being documented for the benefit of future generations.

John Major Jenkins
Ambassador of = December 21, 2012 = 4 Ahau

Update #2. April 5, 2006. Although we had been nurturing a lively exchange, after I discovered the truth of what was really going on, Carl hasn't responded to my two emails (above). I posted this exchange a few days ago, and today I was pleasantly surprised to receive the following email from a reader:


-----Original Message-----
From: Debra Ouellette <>
Sent: Apr 4, 2006 10:39 PM
Subject: Carl Calleman and his "Prediction"

Hi John,
I saw Geoff Stray last month at the 15th Annual UFO World Conference in Laughlin, Nevada. His presentation on Beyond 2012: Catastrophe or Ecstasy? was very interesting. Even though I have never studied, in depth, the Mayan Calender, I understood completely what Geoff was talking about. His studies and findings were well researched and authentically presented. I checked out Geoff's website and then your own, particularly your discussions with Carl Calleman. In my opinion, the man is extremely arrogant to think that his prediction of October 2011 is the date that the Total Enlightenment will occur. When you asked him for hard proof to back up his claims, he had none forthcoming. Yet he claims to be scientifically trained with acknowledgment from the Nobel Committee. This is not what it means to be a scientist. I feel your research and study into the Mayan Calender and its teachings it has to offer, is more closer to what true science should be then Mr. Calleman and his self-imposed personal agenda. I am not an academically trained scientist, but like yourself, I am a self-taught persuer of the truth and how one should truly live one's life. I have trained with several Lakota elders and shamans to learn to walk the Red Road. I have studied Reiki and many other forms of healing. I am a Star Child who has been fortunate to learn about where I truly come from (my homeworld is Galena) through hypnosis. I have been blessed to be able to study so many different ways to connect with other brothers and sisters and the Creator.

But have I used my gifts to try to bolster my own opinions so that no one else is right or has a say in certain beliefs? I hope not and I really try to be as open as possible to other peoples's beliefs and opinions. However, for Mr. Calleman to use Don Alejandro as a platform to bullhorn his own propaganda, is something that is frowned on by many Native elders. The elders are very wise and try to teach that ego will not help one to learn, it is in the letting go of ego and embracing of spirit that one truly becomes enlightened. The Mayan Calender prediction of December 21, 2012 is the correct date, period. I have seen this in visits from my guides and many other gifted ones have seen this, too. If folks stop listening to individuals like Mr. Calleman, then they will see the true date manifest itself. I look forward to further correspondence from you and perhaps we might even be fortunate to meet one another some day. Aho!


Light and love,
Wolf Wind
(Debbie Ouellette)

I responded (April 5, 2006) as follows:

 Hello Wolf Wind,

Calleman is a good example of Seven Macaw, the vain ego maniac who tries to control and manipulate for his own agenda. In the Mayan Creation Myth teaching (Popol Vuh), he has an opportunity to let go, surrender his ego, honor the higher light, and be humble. One Hunahpu is the example of doing this, of humbling oneself and being reborn. Dying and being reborn --- the first initiation into spiritual life. Seven Macaw shows the example of holding on, grasping at the illusion of ego, and suffering from the disconnection with the higher spirit.

I appreciate your acknowledgment of the recent exchange. When I got to the bottom of it, and realized the Don Alejandro really wasn't "rejecting" December
21, 2012 wholesale, Carl stopped responding to my email. Carl's path and process can illustrate for others --- especially those many people who are likewise stuck
in deceptions --- the fallacy of their position. That is why I jump into the fray with him, because the truth always comes out. Left unchecked, Carl could really
spread a lot of confusion about the fundamentals. I do have frustrations at times, however, because of his sneak-attack methods and the mental struggle can be exhausting. I only recently became aware of Don Alejandro's activities in Brazil. I'm hoping to connect with others in the spirit when I travel to Santa Fe tomorrow, for a bookstore event and presentation. I come out of my cave in northern Colorado and try to be open to what's going on. The Native American elders need to be honored and supported in their work to renew the human spirit and reconnect the world to spirit. Blessings and peace,



Update. April 26, 2006.

In the recent three weeks since posting the pages (, I've received several emails from people who questioned me on certain implications of my essays. Incredibly, several believed I was arguing for a break in "the Maya calendar tradition." This was a mistaken generalization of my more specific observation that the Long Count tradition stopped being followed by the Maya. That's not the same as the tzolkin core of the tradition, which survives unbroken in the Highlands. It is an unwarranted critique given the clarity of my treatment of this topic in the posted essays. In fact, for sixteen years I have defended and championed the continuity of the tzolkin "True Count" — the 260-day sacred calendar.

Other critiques addressed other concerns, beginning with:

-----Original Message-----
From: Goenka Geewhiz
Sent: Apr 9, 2006 8:58 PM
Subject: Vipassana's message

Dear brother John; a small reminder from the teachings of Vipassana. The agitated mind looks outward to blame others as its source of irritation, attacking, defending, and attempting to spread misery. Those who come into contact with this energy also become irritated, agitated. Generating negativity in the mind is the cause of suffering; this cannot co-exist with peace and harmony. By always looking outside to the source of our unhappiness, blaming and trying to change others, we ignore the fact that suffering lies within. ***The balanced mind is not only peaceful within itself, it helps others to become peaceful.*** A pure mind is always full of love, selfless love for all others. Full of compassion for the failings and sufferings of others, full of equanimity in the face of any situation. A Vipassana meditator is sensitive to the suffering of others, and does their utmost to relieve all suffering- not with any agitation, but with a mind full of love, compassion, and equanimity. To live in a peaceful, harmonious, joyful and loving world, we must be peaceful, harmonious, joyful, and loving. With equanimity, Goenka Geewhiz.


Hello Goenka,
It seems you may be referring to recent posts regarding Carl Calleman's assaults on Maya tradition. I appreciate your reminder. But my proactive, open minded, and investigative corrections of Calleman and others are based on the following:

A man is stabbing a child in the head. What do you do? Sit and meditate on compassion, or intervene quickly, urgently, with the hope of saving the child? I must honor my spiritual calling to defend authentic Mayan tradition from distorters, who in my heart I feel are doing something much like the above metaphor. If I, for having acted swiftly to prevent more distortion, co-opting, and confusion for others down the road, cause myself or Carl more personal anguish, so be it.


-----Original Message-----
>Sent: Apr 11, 2006 2:54 PM
>Subject: Jenkins vs Calleman discussion
>I posted this on in response to the discussion over the Don Alejandro
>"This pdf highlights the contents of the recent video interview with Don
Alejandro Cirilo Perez Oxlaj in India.
>Of interest:
>"There are scheduled impulses of Creation that are affecting global events
right now and will continue through the next few years until this cycle ends. December
21, 2012, is the date we have all heard about. Alejandro will explain why there
is no exact date. He plans to clarify this in detail for the world's consideration."
>My suspicion is that Don Alejandro will explain to us that the actual temporal
point at which the new world begins is dependant upon if and when our species aligns
itself with the approaching fields of galactic underworld resonance. In that sense,
both Jenkins and Calleman are contributing something.
>I resonate with Jenkins in that the astronomical events of December 21st, 2012
are revealing, and have thus far been the most convincing evidence for major shift.
There is also impressive momentum behind the 2012 date, which also speaks to the
auspiciousness of this date.
>With Calleman's discussion of the World Tree and the historical periods geographical
resonance, I also feel that there is something significant being said there. I think
the name of the game here is the search for an overarching field of resonating synchronicity.
We have our individual and communistically pocketed experiences of synchronized
phenomena, but to extend the lessons/downloads incurred from local to global synchronized
experience, we must discuss how each of each other's events fit into a larger
more complicated puzzle. Our individual ontological and eschatological puzzles need
solving for sure, but to address the global field
>I think it is important to remember that from the creators' point of view (elves
do seem the most appropriate), the piecing together of this puzzle isn't always
going to go as planned. What if, in anticipation of the eschaton quickly approaching,
our species realized that we had to scrap all the tools that we were currently working
with in preparation for 2012. If we are truly living at the end of creation, wherein
creation is initiating a process of letting go, kind of like the image of a bike
with training wheels gliding along, only daddy has to remove the wheels when they
are in motion (hrm, there is conveniently no perfect metaphor... yet), then clearly
we are the ones who must take the reigns of this beast and tally ho! What is decent
about that metaphor is that it demonstrates a very insecure, anxious moment when
we are not sure if we are really in command.
>Jenkins and Calleman are, though they may differ on a specific end-date, both
contributing to the consolidation of information. Calleman's evolution of consciousness
model is a beautiful tool for us to use and ponder over. It shows us that our roles
according to the geography of our cultural heritage factor into the contributions
we put toward to the unification of consciousness. And Jenkins' astronomical and
archaeological review of the Mayan calendar encourages reductionist, materialist
evaluation. Both are quite effective in their own way.
>Remember, no one ever has to take sides. We can pick and choose and laugh all
the way (ho, ho, ho...)."


Hi Jacob,

Thank you for your diplomatic assessment of the recent exchange. I too have attempted
to qualify Calleman's model as having some efficacy in bringing out the harmonic
nature of time (even though it is largely Arguelles recast). However, I think you
have overlooked one or two very significant things that the posted dialogue brought
out. First, there is a difference between the calendric artifact of the cycle ending
date, and the discussion of exactly when we should expect some kind of spiritual
change. There is a strange assumption in this that if we were to decide the "wave
of time" crescendos in, say, 2011, 2015, or 2027, then we should adjust the
calendric artifact. This unnecessary manouever obscures the already well-established
fact of the correlation ( = December 21, 2012) --- the traditional,
authentic end date. So, there are assumptions about how we choose to think about
this that I find to be upside-down. And they lead to misleading conclusions. For
example, Carl seems to believe that if the solstice-galaxy alignment does not occur
exactly on December 21, 2012, then that end-date is invalid and "wrong."
But if the end date is a forward calculation in precession of some 2,000 years,
how can we possibly expect it to be absolutely precise? These are the real considerations
or precessional calculations and calendrical inaugeration. Now, that's the astronomical
basis. Did I ever say that spiritual transofrmation occurs exactly on December 21,
2012? No, I haven't. That's Terence McKenna's rap. But I have addressed the cycle
dynamics that map onto spiritual awakening, following principles in the Maya creation
mythology, in most World Age doctrines, and in perennial wisdom teachings.

Carl is looking for some kind of recalibration of the crest of a wave of unfolding.
For reasons discussed, I believe his pursuit to be poorly defined, not clearly reasoned
or expressed, and, in principle, a red herring. But the fact remains that there
is a calendric artifact that should remain unmolested, as it is what it is. Meanwhile,
Carl and others can play with historical events to prove the arrival of God. That
would be fine, except --- and here's another important point you overlooked ---
Carl initiates contentious debates when he tries to denounce the December 21, 2012
date without really having any basis for doing it. That's irresponsible and self-serving,
because he wishes to promote his own 2011 date.

Finally, I find your assessment of my work to be completely wrong, and a simple
repetition of one of Calleman's endlessly repeated talking points:

"And Jenkins' astronomical and archaeological review of the Mayan calendar
encourages reductionist, materialist evaluation."

*sigh* My work is an interdisciplinary synthesis, and thus aspires to the exact
opposite of a reductionist, materialist evaluation. I've also gone to the heart
of the Creation Myth at Izapa to elucidate the original spiritual teaching and
prophecy for 2012. My ability to provide a rational analysis of the evidence ---
which I've been forced to focus on in these recent debates --- should not pigeonhole
me as a reductionist empiricist. So, like Carl, you are spreading a completely false
notion. Can you please respond to this?

Your final assessment thus propagates Carl's desired polarity, that I focus on materialism
and he focuses on spirituality. But, again, I'm completely baffled that you can
conclude this if you've actually read my books. A Meta-physics of spiritual transformation
--- which I have addressed in all my books --- embraces both spiritual and physical
considerations. I've also advocated traditional methods for transforming consciousness
without evangelizing "my" spiritual system, as Carl does.

In conclusion, I think one thing we all need to keep in mind is that Carl actively
tries to denounce December 21, 2012; he feels threatened that it exists. That date
is not "my" date; it is an authentic artifact of Mayan calendar tradition.
If Carl and others would actually do the basic research and set aside personal agendas,
they would find this to be true. Carl claims his views are superior to those found
in authentic Maya tradition. We should call this for what it is. What is it? It
is an authoritarian and dogmatic stance which actively dishonors Mayan tradition.
Are we going to call it for what it is, or are we going to be apologists for what
it is? Complacency breeds Hitlers.

In the interest of clarity, discernment, and truth,

John Major Jenkins


-----Original Message-----
>From: Carlos Cedillo <>
>Sent: Apr 11, 2006 8:52 PM
>To:, Carl Calleman <>
>Cc: Ranita Parrish <>
>Subject: The Calleman Question....
>HI John,
>I am a friend of Dr. Calleman. He has come to Texas, and stayed at my home
twice to teach classes on the Mayan Calendar, his view of it and his research.
> I have read your arguments from 2001 and the most recent back-and-forth from
you and him posted on your website.
> There are a couple of things I see that could bring you guys into a more perfect
> First off, please take a look at the Chilam Balam of Chumayel. There are
prophecies listed there for each Ahau Baktun. Now I understand that the cycles
discussed there have already happened in the 1600's and 1700's. The fact is, however,
that they ring true today everytime we pass an Ahau day on the tzolkin round.
> Now read the prophecies for 13 Ahau and 4 Ahau. Only the prophecy for 13
Ahau states "Holy Completion of time, Truly!"
> Also, if everyone would start keeping a journal based on the tzolkin, you
would find out that indeed, there are patterns to your own life, world politics,
modern culture, relationships, scientifiic discoveries, etc...etc....magically directed
by forces latent in the Mayan understanding of time. Also, some of the most important
days tend to be Ahau days at the end of the "Light/Day" and "Dark/Night"
when those of us with heightened awarness can FEEL very much the changes as sure
as a snake feels its skin come off.
> The calendar could never have been discovered without thousands of years of
careful observation to what can only be described as "Spiritual" forces,
not at all by thinking about this or that planet or star. Although, yes, amazing
planetary alignments tend to accent the archetype of the tzolkin day-signs.
> So, I don't know why Dr. Calleman did not argue more vigorously in his own
defence. There seems to be more good points he could have made.
> Please visit for more of my writings about the
tzolkin and other cycles.
> I have attached below the text of the 13Ahau prophecy. (Source: The Book of
Chumayel, edited and annotated by Richard N. Luxton, Agean Park Press)
> I would love to hear your response.
> Many Thanks and Blessings,
> Carlos Cedillo
> CHILAM BALAM quote for 13Ahau -
>The Third:
>Katun 13 Ahau is to be counted and read.
>Kinchil Coba seats the Katun -
>The Thirteenth fold of the Katun.
>The perfumed flower will open
>The prophet lordship of the lands,
>The universal judgement
>Of our Father God.
>The blood of stick and stone will come.
>Heaven and earth will burn.
>The Word of God the Father
>And God the Son
>And God the Holy Ghost-
>Holy completion of time, truly.
>Holy Judgement,
>Because of the coming of Our Father God.
>There will be no power in heaven and earth.
>The great towns will enter into Christianity.
>The towns of all the householders
>Of the city.
>Whatever the name
>Of the town,
>Over the engendered offspring of the towns,
>Over all that is forest then,
>Maya Cozumel
>Accepts Mayan tribute.
>It is because of the Two-day people,
>A result of their madness,
>That there is the drying up of the engendered sons,
>And of their flowers.
>There is no good day for us, truly.
>This is the origin of death,
>Their bad blood.
>At the rising of the moon,
>At the going down of the moon,
>At the completed final reason of the end,
>Then there is the possibility
>Of complete blood,
>Acording to the planets,
>Perceived as good, truly.
>The end of the Word of God
>Will provoke universal baptism
>Through the resurrection of the Holy Spirit.
>They recieve holy annointment
>Without compulsion at their backs
>And come to God.
>Much healing goes to the Christians,
>The protectors of holy beliefs,
>The Lord Itzas,
>And the Jaguars.
>There is the end of losing again.
>My interpretation is that after a period of great tribulation and destruction
by those who use the wrong calendar (i.e. Gregorian or Dreamspell!, the "two-day"
people), many people will have their eyes open to the reality of their evil ways
and begin to change on their own.
>Those of us who have been struggling to get this message across will be vindicated
and receive help and healing from our communities.
>For those who still are in doubt about the end date of the Mayan Calendar, this
passage makes abundantly clear that the last day will be a 13Ahau day!
>Carlos Cedillo, a.k.a. Cosmicjaguar
>Please visit COSMICJAGUAR.COM !!!
>My new email is



Hello Carlos,

Yes, I've heard that point. But there is much more evidence for the end date being
December 21, 2012, correlating the end of the 13th Baktun with the tzolkin date
4 Ahau. I've sketched the evidence before, and also see:'ak'tun/

Yucatec calendrics and Short Count Katun prophecies were derived from earlier Long
Count material. In the many nested time cycles and in Mayan prayers one finds many
"holy completions of time."

There is the question of how one spiritually feels time flowing and culminating,
and then there is the actual calendric artifact for the end date. It is confusing
to make one abide by the other. For example, Carl believes December 21, 2012 is
"wrong" because it doesn't agree with his felt conlusion about the wave
of time. However, it is misleading and dishonors the well-established traditional
end date for him to thus say that December 21, 2012 is "wrong." It is
fine for Carl to teach the Carl Calleman system, but when he actively assaults the
established traditional calendar, as he recently attempted, I respond.

Best wishes,

John Major Jenkins


-----Original Message-----
>From: Carlos Cedillo <>
>Sent: Apr 12, 2006 5:52 PM
>To: John Major Jenkins <>, Carl Calleman <>
>Cc: Ranita Parrish <>, tonya riley <>,
Jeff Mitzel <>, Carlos Davis <>,
"Anette Carlstr�m" <>
>Subject: Re: The Calleman Question....Jenkin's response
>Hi John,
> Thank you for your quick response.
> To me the Chilam Balam is a pretty authoritative source. The language may
be cryptic, but the intent is clear. If the original Jaguar Prophets said 13 Ahau
is the holy completion of time, then so be it!
> Can you map out the Long-count cycles the way that Dr. Calleman has in his
books? Perhaps then you could show clearly, with historical data why we should
keep regarding 12.21.12 as the end date.
> Personally, I am not really bothered one way or the other. I plan to be at
Coba, on top of the great pyramid Oct.28th, 2011. If the Mothership doesn't come
down then, I'll be there again Dec.21, 2012! No biggie.
> Truly, we must look at our own intentions. The ultimate goal in preparing
for the shift, is the unification of masculine and feminine energies. I could give
personal examples of this shift happening in my own life, but that's my own business.
If you have no other intention except to beat down anything "unscientific"
then you make yourself irrelevant because there are plenty other archeologists and
anthropologists who look at the calendar as a dead relic painted on broken pottery.
> What I see wrong in your argument is all this "logic" business.
Logic just doesn't have all the power to unlocking the Mayan calendar. Logic is
good to present the mechanics of it, but if your intuition is not in high gear,
you just won't see the Mayan calendar ever doing anything.
> So open your right-brain a little, maybe with some nice mushroom tea or a
peyote journey and follow your heart down the Sac-Be.
> Truly, this is where flowers will arise. Logic is only shows that something
here is a mystery. Intuition is the completion and solution to the mystery. My
intuition and experience tells me that 13 Ahau is a much more powerful date than
4 Ahau. Sure, Quetzalcoatl may not return until Dec. 21, 2012, but there is much
going on in between then and now. It is NOW that we should all be focused on.
You place way too much faith and trust in Logic, there should be a better balance.
> Please don't try to classify me as a Calleman wannabe. His work has only
confirmed all that I had seen and felt in my own intuition. Logic does not phase
me like that. Any nerd can look at the anthropological/archeological info and conclude
that 12.21.12 is the end date to the Mayan calendar. It took a much greater leap
to see that 13 Ahau, 10.28.11, is going to be much more intense. Perhaps if you
miss the boat then, you won't be prepared for what comes next in 2012.
> If Dr. Calleman is wrong, you will have a year and two months to say "I
told you so!" So why do you act like he is pulling your hair or something?
> I will be continuing to post the Chilam Balam prophesies on my website's forum It should become clearer and clearer as we swiftly
move through the cycles that the prophecies hold the key.
> In the mean time you should not act so beligerent to Dr. Calleman's ideas
simply because they don't gel with the traditional academia. You could be doing
your readers a dis-service by not being open to a more intuitive/experiential way
to use the Mayan calendar.
> Sincerely yours,
> Carlos Cedillo
> PS Arguelles' Dreamspell still sucks! Don't put Carl down to that level.
> Link to original exchange btwn Jenkins and Calleman:

Hello Carlos,

Peace, patience, and openness. In answer to some of your comments as I read through

I think we need to recall how this recent debate started. On February 23, Carl emailed
me and said Don Alejandro rejected 2012 in no uncertain terms. After 5 weeks Don
Alejandro's actual words were revealed to show that he did not "reject" 2012 but was emphasizing
a process-oriented shift. Carl thus chose to distort Don Alejandro's words to lend
support for his own 2011 date. That, to me, is a red flag in the integrity department.

The Long Count already provides a map, with tuns, katuns, and baktuns retroactive
from December 21, 2012. I'm not interested in rallying together historical events
to demonstrate the validity of 2012. That is a game of cherry picking data to prove
your preferred placement, and it is simply the wrong approach. The correlation has
already been demonstrated. Moreover, Carl's own historical evidence ranges many
years on either side around his ideal interval --- so how can such historical vagueness
prove his correlation, which is only 14 months different from December 21, 2012?
It's rather silly to say "I feel the change will happen in 2009, so the end
date is wrong."

My right brain is open. If I must defend this assertion to you, I'd be forced to
send you poems, songs, and drawings. What you are seeing is my left brain in action,
because Carl's assaults require careful analysis of his twisted logic and hidden
agenda. It is possible to exercise left and right brain functions, each when needed.
To imply that a person is either left brain or right brained is a narrow assumption.
And what lies behind my right brain activity is the left brain intuition that the
truth will shine in the end.

You shouldn't wait for October 28, 2011, or December 21, 2012. The blessing of the
eternal now is not located in the future. Sacred plants show you that. I never advocated
December 21, 2012 as a specific transformational date. What I've done is to reconstruct
the cosmology at Izapa --- the origin place of the 2012 calendar --- and the spiritual
teaching and prophecy that goes with it. It's all about healing and renewal. Do
a sweat lodge, my friend.

I see from the rest of your email that you've pigeon-holed me as a logic scientist.
That is a completely wrong assumption, and I encourage to actually read my books,
or the great spectrum of writings on my website, from poetry to song to story to
sacred science to metaphysical insights to spiritual teachings to studies to debate
and critique. You will see that I've given voice to the original spiritual prophecy
and teachings from Izapa --- the place that invented the 2012 calendar. The interdisciplinary
synthesis that I've accomplished has less to do with logic than with the intuitive,
integrative function of seeing a unified vision --- the wholistic vision of the
big picture that the early Maya achieved at Izapa. That's been my contribution ---
the work of "reconstructing" the original 2012 cosmology and teaching.
And it's a wholistic vision that unites heart and mind, earth and sky, matter and
spirit. My god, Carl doesn't even acknowledge the physical side of the universal
picture --- the unification of spirit and matter is what you learn in Mayan calendar

You write that the Mystery is solved with intuition. Peace be with you. There is
no solution to the mystery --- logical, intuitive or otherwise. Mysteries aren't
to be solved; they can be experienced, in the awesome beauty and wonder of the eternal
moment. Yes, I see that you advocate the NOW. You must be offended by my use of
clear words when I write, and your assumptions about me having a one-sided logical
approach again make me feel like you are working with a lot of wrong assumptions
about my approach and work. Have you read ANY of my books?

I find myself repeating points endlessly covered in previous emails. Please read
them, and let's not forget how this all started. You may want to ask Carl (Hi Carl!)
how he explains the actual intention of Don Alejandro, as compared to his distorted
self-serving interpretation of Don Alejandro's words that he has repeated in his
"talking points" since February 23. Because now the truth is out, and
I have other testimonies from those close to Don Alejandro that I haven't even posted
yet. December 21, 2012 remains the calendric artifact; the work is a process-oriented
work to be engaged in with heart, mind and soul, right in the here and now. I'm
doing it, right now. That's what I've been saying; that's what we should focus on.
My heart is open to you, to Carl, but that doesn't mean I'll sit idly by while the
truth is actively and continually distorted.

In the interest of clarity, truth, and defending the authentic Maya calendar tradition,


another follow up email to Carlos:


You may be interested in reading the text of the Chilam Balam prophecies. As you'll
see below, most of them relate to Katun 4 Ahau. This would refer to a cycle ending
on 4 Ahau, rather than 13 Ahau. The final prophecy below, the one for 13 Ahau, is
the one you prize, but it was generated after they began naming katuns by their
beginning date rather than the ancient method of naming katuns according to their
ending date (thus, the 13 Ahau katun was originally an 11 Ahau katun).

There are prophecies preserved in the Chilam Balams, which mention "descent"
and the Nine gods, and which are associated with katun endings, if not (as
argued by Makemson), baktun endings. The first one is from the Chilam
Balam of Chumayel:

"Katun 4 Ahau . . . . The katun is established at Chichen Itza. The
settlement of the Itzá shall take place [there]. The quetzal shall
come, the green bird shall come. Ah Kantenal shall come. Blood-vomit
shall come. Kukulcan shall come with them for the second time. [It
is] the word of God. (Book of Chilam Balam of Chumayel, XXII)"

In the Chilam Balam of Tizimin, (the version translated and with
commentary by Makemson), it is pointed out that the prophecies are
cyclic, and so would be pertinent to repeat endings of named katuns.
The rest of the quotes are from Makemson:

Four Ahau is the katun for remembering knowledge and compressing it
within annals. (Makemson p.57)

"The Nine shall arise in sorrow, alas...And when over the dark sea I
shall be lifted up in a chalice of fire, to that generation there will
come the day of withered fruit. there will be rain. The face of the sun
shalll be extinguished because of the great tempest. Then finally the
ornaments shall descend in heaps. there will be good gifts for one and
all, as well as lands, from the Great Spirit, wherever they shall
settle down. Presently Baktun 13 shall come sailing, figuratively
speaking, bringing the ornaments of which I have spoken from your
ancestors. Then the god will come to visit his little ones. Perhaps
"After Death" will be the subject of his discourse."(Makemson p.30)

In the commentary, we find, "There is an unusual prophecy about the end
of the world on page 16: " the final days of misfortune, in the
final days of tying up the bundle of the thirteen katuns on 4 Ahau,
then the end of the world shall come and the katun of our fathers will
ascend on high". It is entirely possible that there is a copyist's
error here and that thirteen baktuns were intended, since the katun
cycle began and ended with 11 Ahau, we are told elsewhere, and the
thirteen baktun cycle ran from 4 Ahau to 4 Ahau. The prophecy
continues: "These valleys of the earth shall come to an end. For those
katuns there shall be no priests, and no one who believes in his
government without having doubts...Pay heed to the truth which I
present to you in the katun of dishonor. Shall my intercession, my
pleading be in vain? I speak to you! I Chilam Balam, the prophet of the
Jaguar! I recount to you the words of the true gods, when they shall
come." (Makemson p.167)

Another prophecy concerning the last katun of a series, (katuns started
being named after beginning instead of their ending, so katun 11 Ahau
became katun 13 Ahau), may have some bearing on the final katun of the
final baktun:

"Thirteen Ahau is the thirteenth katun and they shall count it at
Cabal. In the assemblage of people they shall open the sealed katun. At
dusk they shall smell the fragrance of flowers. Day shall be turned
upside down;. their faces shall be disturbed. The genealogical tree
shall descend. Stones shall descend and Heaven and Earth shall be
universally consumed by fire. They shall make a divination concerning
the living and the dead: 'The dead shall live! Dying from old age, they
shall immediately ascend into heaven. They shall ascend quickly by good
roads'. Evil roads descend, spreading out on the earth. At the end, in
the final days of the katun, we will hear the words of the fathers of
Heaven and Earth regarding the government of Katun 13 Ahau during his
days, at the completion of the katun. Vale." (p.107-108)



On 4-13-2006, Carl sends out an article called "The Question of the Maya Calendar End Date." This article was the culmination of a dialogue Carl had with defender of the True Count tradition, Tree Frog. It is on the Forum at:, or here, and it should be read in the context of the forum exchange that led to it.

My response to Carl's article was sent as "Reply to All" (so that those who received his article would also receive my reply):

To all,

All of Carl's items in his new article have been addressed ad nauseum in previous
exchanges, so we're just entering the rerun zone here. The WHOLE THING is really
quite simple:

Carl Calleman devised his own end date: October 28, 2011.

The traditional and authentic Mayan end date is December 21, 2012.

You chose.

Updates continuing at:

John Major Jenkins


And my specific email directed only to Carl:


I sure am glad I have your email list. Your arguments in your article just dredge
up the same old faulty rationales that I've responded to in the past. I sincerely
wish that you would have studied the source material before you started constructing
your theological models.

You never ever ever have addressed all of the evidence for December 21, 2012. Pluto
in Leo, your lesson is to place your genius in service to higher truth. That's what
you're trying to do in this life. But your dark tendency is to filter things through
your own self-serving creativity. Your darker tendency is to mislead and manipulate
others into giving you the attention and praise you want.

Again, if you wish to broadcast your own system, do so quietly and do so without
assaulting the traditional calendar and Mayan teachings.



Apr 17, 2006 11:46 AM. Carl and his assistant request money.


Dear Friend,

As you may know, this spring, Mel Gibson's film APOCALYPTO is due to
come out. (Please see Given
previous audience response to Hollywood films, it's likely this film
will greatly stimulate people's interest in the Mayan calendar all
over the world. Many viewers will discover the Mayan Calendar for
the very first time. Others will have heard of it but not have a
very clear idea. And surely the audiences may not have previously
considered the possibility that we are living in the end phase of a
16 billion year long divine time plan and would like to know what
this may mean. The one thing we wish to avert is to have the global
moviegoing population think the Mayan calendar forecasts the end of
the world. It does not. The science behind the Calendar is
profound, significant, and inspiring.

That is why Dr. Carl Johan Calleman, the renowned Swedish scholar of
the Mayan Calendar, who holds a Ph.D. in Physical Biology and has
served as an expert on cancer for the World Health Organization, has
called for the creation of a Portal web site for the true Mayan
Calendar. A portal that would gather within its wings the various
writings, articles, web sites, and other materials and information
about the Mayan Calendar that are available but not easily found. A
portal that would set the record straight on what the Mayan Calendar
is, what it says, how it works and what it means for our
civilization. We need to give the world a more objective, fact-based
source of information about the Mayan Calendar.

There is currently a stronger unity among those following the true
Mayan Calendar than the general public might think. This unity needs
to be expressed through a Portal. And what the Portal would
accomplish is nothing less than to unveil evidence of the phase in
the evolution of consciousness that humanity is currently in and thus
indicate a possible path toward oneness and balance for human
civilization, which is so profoundly needed in our world.

---long details follow---


-----Original Message-----
>Sent: Apr 23, 2006 2:03 PM

Dear John Major Jenkins, I recently came across an article of yours
on the Internet that appeared to claim that there was a break in tradition between
>the ancient Maya and the modern. This article appeared to bring Don Alejandro
>Cirillo Perez Oxlaj into the picture as an example of how this affects modern
>Mayan views of 2012.
>I have spent about 20 years studying, researching, and experiencing (in
>certain ways), aspects of the Native American, esp. the Mayan way. I still know
>nothing. I did an MA in Native American Studies in the UK, had my eyes opened
and my perspectives shifted. I read mostly Native authors for this MA,
>politically incorrect, but much more enlightening.
>I visited the US twice, in 2001 and 2002 to take part in the Language of
>Spirituality Conferences between Native Elders and Western scholars and
>scientists, in Albuquerque NM. I can tell you, the Native Elders, mostly from
the Miqmaq, and Navaho peoples and the Pueblos of the SW impressed me far more than
all the Western scholars and scientists I met, with the shining exception of Dan
>Moonhawk Alford, a little known genius of a scholar whose understanding of
>Native language and culture in the tradition of Worfe and Bohm was such that
he was loved and respected by a great many North American Native Elders, uniquely
>so. He has passed on but I believe his website is still functioning.
>However,my greatest transformative experience came on my second visit when I
>had the awesome honour and privilege of attending a workshop given by Don
>Alejandro at St Joseph near Kansas. I had read works by his friend and colleague
>Hunbatz Men, indeed had read him for my MA. Don Alejandro gave me and my
>American friend a private meeting before the workshop began. I showed him the
result of about 10 years of research on aspects of Mayan science. He showed me his
>daybook, and explained a Mayan glyph. My journey truly began at that moment.

I threw my research away and began again. He didn't tell me much, He didn't
>have to. He knew and I got to know what I had to do. All our 'guides and helpers'
>were present. That's how we both knew.
>Later he gave me a lifepath reading. He charged $50 for his Orphans fund.
>Actually it was priceless.
>My point in all this is that, if you truly understand how Natives work, how
>the interdimensional works, you will know that there is no break. Everything
is far too well integrated for that. It is power at a Galactic level. When the
>450 Mayan Elders meet, they are accompanied by 450 Mayan Elders 'on the other
>side'. It is quite frankly ridiculous to speak of any break in continuity. That
>is not the Mayan way. If you look too hard for something you will not find
>it. You must first dream it at night, then it will come to you in the day. Read
>'The Secrets of Mayan Hieroglyphs' by Richard Luxton and Don Pablo Balam.
>If you don't understand these things inwardly, then you have understood
>nothing. As I had understood nothing of the Maya even with my MA, until I met
Don Alejandro. Then I began to understand just the merest glimmer, and that glimmer
>becomes the Light of the Creator shining through the Hunab K'u.


Dear Philip,

Thank you for sharing your experiences. I think you have mistaken my meaning. I
am an outspoken advocate for the continuity and preservation of the 260-day calendar
and for the spiritual teachings that have been passed down. The specific point I
was addressing, in terms of a break, was the calendrical operation of the Long Count
calendar. This addressed the topic under discussion --- the December 21, 2012 date
and why we should think that Don Alejandro would have a specific preserved tradition
about that date. The fact is that we should not expect this, as myriads of ethnographic
and historical studies have shown. The recording of the Long Count calendar, like
other Mayan traditions (for example, hieroglyphic writing) has not survived down
to the present day. That's not so offensive or surprising, is it?

This is not to say that the core teaching of worldrenewal that is implicit in that
date is not preserved by Don Alejandro. I hope you will see this distinction if
you read further into the documents I posted for the purpose of clarity on this.
Coming out with this information was a recent necessity since Carl Calleman had
erroneously appropriated don Alejandro's words to lend support to his own idiosyncratic
end date. It came out, after five weeks of dialogue, that Calleman had severely
distorted Don Alejandro's intention.

I have read 'The Secrets of Mayan Hieroglyphs' by Richard Luxton and Don Pablo Balam
long ago --- a wonderful book that was with me on my third visit to Yucatan, in
1989. Finally, I think you are assuming too much about my background and experience
(or lack thereof) among the Maya. Or in regard to a lack of inwardness in my work.
This may come from the general no-nonsense tone of the essay you read and my need
to refer to evidence when dealing with Calleman on his disortions of points of fact.
But as you may see from looking more closely at my books and writings, I champion
the continuity and survival of the 260-day calednar, of many Mayan traditions, and
have been a voice for elucidating perennial wisdom in Mesoamerican cosmology. I
have also worked to recover the original spiritual teachings for 2012 at the site
of Izapa --- the place that invented the 2012 calendar.

The tricky part of this reconstruction work, as I reluctantly had to put on the
table to clear the air, is the fact that the Long Count calendar stopped being followed
well before the Conquest. The Long Count-derived katun prophecies (or Short Count)
in Yucatan faired somewhat better but also succumbed to time. Consequently, modern
Maya knowledge of this date comes through exposure to modern reconstructions, as
I clearly showed by citing the sources of Don Alejandro's own statements. I'm sorry
if this truth is unacceptable. Nevertheless, as you point out the important thing
is that the core spiritual authority and wisdom remain, most of which revolve around
the 260-day calendar. I've defended and championed the survival of this calendar
in highland Guatemala since my earliest writings. In honesty, openness, and clarity,
my best wishes,

John Major Jenkins

-----Original Message-----
>From: grey Moon-Wolf <>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2006 7:12 AM
>Subject: unbroken line...
>Dear Sir,
>In an article refuting a fellow who argues for Don
>Alejandro the Mayan Daykeeper saying the end of the
>Calendric Cycle will occur in Oct of 2011, you make a
>point of mentioning that there is a 'break' in the
>keeping of the calendrical cycles.
>I have encountered this argument many times and for
>many years among Christian scholars about the Jewish
>tradition and keeping of the Torah.
>Unfortunately to make such a statement is to make an
>assumption, and deny any such possibility of a true
>succession of keeping.
>In my studies I have found repeatedly evidence within
>the text of the Torah showing it to be a verbal, a
>chanted record, an oral tradition that has been keep
>some many hundreds of years orally before being put
>into written record. So well has it been kept in that
>culture that only seven letters of variance are in
>occurance among the three major groups of the
>The Samaratin Torah text is not considered a true
>Torah because it was not kept in the 'legal' way.
>My argument against your assertion that the calendric
>tradition being of a 'broken' line is that you have
>discounted the traditions of the people. And the oral
>traditions among the keepers. The Mayans may have
>been conquered as a governing force in the region or
>as a major civilizational structure,.. but I doubt
>very strongly that the calendrics could have
>disappeared so thoroughly from proper keeping.
>As an additional example, I would offer up the Yuipi
>of the Lakota People or the Medicine traditions of the
>Anishenaabe(the Chippewa as most folks know them) The
>Yuipi is one of the only true magics I have EVER
>witnessed. This tradition is very strict and solid in
>its secrecy and keeping and passing on and this from a
>people that were forbidden their tongue by government
>law... and yet more than once I have experiences the
>'little stones'.
>We (my wife and I) now live within the boundries of
>the Leech Lake Reservation in Northern Minnesota just
>a couple of miles from the village of Inger. This is
>a traditional village that has no allowed churches,
>and has a family that keeps a ceremonial drum that has
>been passed down for well over a hundred years. There
>are birch bark canoes that are ever now and then found
>INTACT buried on the shorelines of lakes in the mud
>that are ressurected and able to be used for ricing.
>This is how the Anishenaabe would store their ricing
>canoes when they went south for the Winter from this
>area down to Mille Lacs, before the Chimookimaan came
>(the long-knives). They too had a very strong
>tradition of Medicine. One of the most famous
>Medicine men of recent times came from Inger. And his
>medicine is recorded in government documents... These
>people were all but obliterated as a culture and yet
>the traditions are being rebuilt by knowledge and
>memories passed down one to another in families and in
>So you see to me, one of Mexican ancestry, and who is
>finding out genetic memory comes in to play as well...
>your argument for a broken line, is questionable. You
>can assert the 'broken line' as many times as you want
>before whoever, but it is just as many things a
>theory, and not a fact.
>People have said that the populating of North America
>came from those crossing the Bering Strait. To that
>any Mexican worth his being can tell you to your face
>you are wrong. It came from the South and the West
>and the East long before people came over the North
>passage. Consider the term for North among the Maya,
>Xaman... it refers to 'SHAMAN' an eskimo term that
>comes from a tradition found in Siberia.
>The Cree of Michigan hold songs that speak of 'the men
>(people) who live way to the South with who we trade'.
> The origin of the song is long forgotten but it is
>kept with the knowledge that they were not the first
>I was told by an Anishenaabe friend, "Oh yeah, you
>guys were here about 16,000 or more years before we
>were." This really took me back. Because I was
>taking my knowledge from archaeological information
>and he was quoting from tradition...
>There are some things that whether we think we have
>the facts or not become more evident in broader
>In the final analysis I am just saying to assert a
>'break in the line of keeping' is to make an assertion
>that is not a fact. It is more likely that the
>knowledge Don Alejandro is voicing is real, and is an
>original keeping, than that it is not. And I would
>invite you to allow that possibility.
>Respectfully yours,
>Manuel Colunga-Hernandez
>rural Deer River MN


4.26.2006. Hello Manuel,

Thank you for taking the time to register your feelings about a "break" in the keeping of calendrical cycles. As I read your letter I notice that my intention was misunderstood. And as I respond I think you will see that we are in complete agreement.

First of all, I've been defending the survival of the 260-day calendar in the highlands of Guatemala since the late 1980s. I became aware that the surviving tradition, among Quiché and Tzutujil Mayan that I've lived and worked with, was directly connected to the same day-count followed millennia ago in Mesoamerica. My defense of this surviving calendar brought me into conflict with the New Age cult group called Dreamspell, invented by Jose Arguelles. The so-called "Mayan" day-count used in that system was not at all synchronized with the surviving day-count, which I labelled "the True Count" and for this reason I was seen as a negative antagonist. My 1995 write-up on this is here:

Arguelles had clearly invented his own system, at the expense of honoring the authentic surviving tradition. For 5 years, between 1991 and 1996 I patiently responded to complaints and letters from Dreamspell people, who had been told by Arguelles that no unified system survived. But that was misinformation. Finally, truth prevailed and the Dreamspell group now recognizes that a True Count still exists in Mesoamerica, one with an unbroken continuity going back at least 2,500 years. Of course, they slipped in that acknowledgement as if they knew it all along, without any recognition of my efforts to dispell the ignorance.

Now, the area of confusion here is when we shift to discussing the Long Count calendar. This was a specific dot-and-bar system using periods of baktuns, katuns, tuns, and so on. As I'm sure you know, this calendrical system has to do with World Ages and Creation mythology, and since the early 1900s scholars have had to reconstruct its operation and placement in time. The reason why it had to be reconstructed, is because it stopped being recorded in the 11th century AD. The last Long Count date recorded on stone was carved 4 centuries before the Invaders arrived from Spain. A shorter version of the Long Count survived in Yucatan, and was used for Katuin prophecies, but that system fell into disuse in the 1500s.

The Long Count calendar was forgotten, like many other specific traditions (for example, hieroglyphic writing, sacred kingship, or the ballgame mystery play). This is the "break" I speak of, and that's not so offensive or surprising is it? The specific point I was addressing, in terms of a break, was the calendrical operation of the Long Count calendar. This addressed the topic under discussion --- the December 21, 2012 date and why we should think that Don Alejandro would have a specific preserved tradition about that date. The fact is that we should not expect this, as myriads of ethnographic and historical studies have shown. If Don Alejandro's info about 2012 comes from an oral tradition passed down from his elders, then why are his statements about 2012 derived from modern writers? I related the background to this situation in:

As I stated and restated, this does not diminish the authority and the importance of the work that he and other Mayan elders are doing. In other words, the important point is that the core teaching of worldrenewal that is implicit in the 2012 date is no doubt preserved by Don Alejandro. I hope you will see this distinction if you read further into the documents I posted for the purpose of clarity on this. Coming out with this information was a recent necessity since Carl Calleman had erroneously appropriated don Alejandro's words to lend support to his own idiosyncratic 2011 end date. It came out, after five weeks of dialogue, that Calleman had severely distorted Don Alejandro's intention. Calleman's self-serving distortion of don Alejandro's words reminded me of the stubborn assertions of Arguelles's group back in the early-mid 90s. And I'm still committed to clarity and truth on these questions.

So, I'm pretty sure I was being clear on the distinction between the Long Count break as compared to the unbroken continuity of the underlying 260-day tzolkin calendar. So, I agree with you completely about the continuity of the core tradition. The 260-day calendar was the glue. Don Alejandro's own accounting of the 260-day sacred calendar tells him that today, April 26, 2006, is 4 Muluc. If we count forward from this day-sign to the reconstructed Long Count end date, we find that December 21, 2012 falls on 4 Ahau. Since Creation monuments from the Classic Period record that corresponds to 4 Ahau, we have confirmation that the tzolkin part of the equation preserved by Don Alejandro is accurate. And, also, this provides confirmation that the December 21, 2012 date, reconstructed by Goodman, Martinez, and Thompson, is accurate. But, alas, the truth is that the Long Count information was lost long ago. But I agree with Don Alejandro that, in terms of the spiritual work we shcould be engaged in, a specific date in the future is meaningless. In this context, I've been saying the same thing for years. But the calendrical artifact remains. And that artifact was reconstructed by modern scholars.

I'm sorry I had to recount the details in such a long response, which basically repeats what I've written in the online essays. But if it helps us to understand the true situation, then we can move forward together. Best wishes,

p.s.: You might be interested in a little book I wrote about the True Count, called 7 Wind: A Quiché Maya Calendar for 1993. It is online at:


April 25, 2006:

Hi its Sidd here. The Maya Calender ends in 2012. If you are really serious to know what is going to happen after 2012, please take some time out. You will thoroughly have to go through the following links in the following order:

You will be amazed with what you read. I understand that it will take days to understand as to what I meant to say, but when you do really understand, I'm sure you'll send me a feedback.

Request you to go through all these links before you get back to me on this mail.



Dear Sidd,

Have we met? Anyway, the Maya calendar does not end in 2012. December 21, 2012 is a cycle-ending target, but there will still be Maya day-keepers counting the days in 2013, and beyond. I'm more concerned with what is happening now, than with what is "going to happen after 2012." As I've written in my various books, future projecting to a target date does not help us connect more deeply with the now. And all spiritual transformation happens in the now. But the links looked intriguing, so I'll share my thoughts as follows.

The first link is to essays written by Carl Calleman. As you may have gathered, if you read any of our exchanges, Calleman's work with the calendar may serve as a generic intro for seekers, but his understanding of the Maya calendar is demonstrably distorted. He also tends to magnify his own idiosyncratic end-date invention at the expense of honoring authentic Maya tradition. More recently, he distorted the words of Mayan elder Don Alejandro in order to lend support for his 2011 end date. If that kind of crapulous rhetoric works for you, go for it.

The second link. Oneness is good. Sure, I can agree with many teachings presented on this page. If you were familiar with my books, you might have noticed that I advocate 2012 as a return to perennial wisdom. The What the Bleep phenomenon bodes well in terms of more people being interested in spiritual topics. However, I found the Bleep movie to be strangely imbued with J. Z. Knight influence. Also, did you notice that the concepts of quantum mechanics were never once associated with the concepts of ancient metaphysics? Why? Instead, they were presented as new breakthroughs among modern scientists. As Capra pointed out in the 1970s, the profound thing about quantum breakthroughs is that they were anticipated millennia ago by Hindu and Vedic sages. They are modern reflections of perennial wisdom. The movie elevates modern superiority and hubris when the real transformation comes when modern consciousness humbles itself before the ancient wisdom teachings.

The third link. More or less ditto, with one added observation: Gosh, I wish I was could afford to go, then I could go for the 21-day thingy and get me some enlightenment.

The fourth link. What this site promises is provided to me through different avenues. If that's okay.

The center is eternal
It is your source and fate
It is within you
even now
You are standing at the gate

When serene Edenic garden dreams
Arise from unknown deep
Nigrescent death, and the moon it seems
Brings you an uneasy sleep

Do not fear what is not clear
Some things you just never can see
Answer loudly to the voice
Reply not too proudly
With your choice

That you are free, can only be
And cure your lone asymmetry

Fifth link. The Oneness University looks intriguing, and will no doubt provide structure for many seekers. I've been around the block with man-made exoteric religious institutions, and have learned that it is better (for me) to tread the inner way.