Given the amount of PR Rush has given the TMO over the years, reckon they'll
reciprocate by having the rajas encourage all the TM'ers in the world to buy
Simmon's book on non-TM meditation?
Reckon the MUM bookstore will carry it and the Peace Palaces? Might could get a
discount if you paid in raams.
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 2/26/14, Michael Jackson <mjackso...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Russell Simmons on TM - Front page of
Yahoo.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014, 9:38 PM
Well, hell, old Marshy always said the mantra
didn't matter, so I think I'll meditate to
"bourbon" tonight. Ora maybe "tequila"
and if that works I'll make up some sutras like
"tequila with an amrit chaser" and see can I walk
through a wall.
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 2/26/14, Bhairitu <noozg...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Russell Simmons on TM -
Front page of Yahoo.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014, 9:34 PM
"Ram"
rhymes with "Tom" while "Rum"
rhymes with "bum". Also it is highly
improvable the writer knows
ANY Sanskrit. :-D
On 02/26/2014 01:01 PM, cardemais...@yahoo.com
wrote:
In Sanskrit, vowels save the short a-sound
are "pure". I guess another way to
express
that is they are "non-reduced".
I'm quite certain that for native
speakers
of English the
"impurity" of the short
a-sound in Sanskrit is easier to hear than
for
those whose
native languages have only pure
vowel sounds, like e.g. Italian and Finnish.
Be it as it may, I think the short a-sound
in
Sanskrit
*might* be closer
to vowel sounds
like 'aw' in English 'raw',
but short.
Listening to the pronunciation of
'rum' in Google
translator rendered me quite shure
it's
fairly close
to the Sanskrit pronunciation of
'ram', whereas
pronouncing that (ram)
according to the phonetic rules of English
might make it
too frontal(?), like the a-sound e.g.
in 'bat'.
