[FairfieldLife] Lurk, Miscommunication Re: Angela's take on the pompous shit
From Angela of the Wednesday night satsang again: Note: forwarded to Bronte and Posted snip Angela wrote about the Wednesday satsang group, on their forum: Though I have seen some wisdom in this group, I have also seen too much pompous shit, and with that, I am outa here. Lurk wrote, misunderstanding what group Angela was referring to: This is like a drive by shooting. Like this lady ever posted, and now she leaving in a huff. Not passing the smell test, IMO. Bronte writes: SORRY, ANGELA, LURK AND FFL GROUP! I CAUSED THIS MISUNDERSTANDING! Lurk is thinking the comment Angela made about the group was directed at FFL, which it was not! Angela is a person from the Wednesday night satsang. I had forwarded to that website today's FFL discussion about the satsang's anonymous holy woman. Angela was pretty disgusted and wrote that group to say she was sick of the pompous shit she often found there, and was going to leave and join FFL instead. She's outa there, into here. Part of her desire to join us was Turq's post on Challenging Assumptions which I also had forwarded to the Wed. satsang chatroom, and which she admired. So please, take it easy, Lurk, ole' buddy. You'll like her. She's an independent thinker who very much belongs here. Reread her posts that I've transferred over from the other website, and you'll see what I mean. WELCOME, ANGELA! We're a little rough and tumble here, but you'll find we're very real! Love, Bronte - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Judy and everyone / Trying to Find Fair
Bronte, who started the talk that led to the damn new rule, gives herself permission to rip into people. Where's the justice in the universe, right? I say no flame ocurred. For the record, I enjoy seeing sacred oxes gored, or at least challenged. It is in-your- face, toe to toe confrontation, and it is awesome. But I say there has been no foul, and no harm. This is sport, not a brawl. Let's keep it this way. The damn new rule was bullshit. And most of us knew it at the time, and just ignored the posturing whiners who climbed on board and used it as a vehicle for *their* flaming of others who didn't abide by their idea of how others should live and conduct their onscreen communications. We all saw how long *that* lasted. We saw what happened the moment that one of the prime posturers, who took up the flag of no flaming and waved it like it was his right to be hall monitor here at FFL got *HIS* buttons pushed. Then it became non-stop-flaming on his part, calling anyone who disagreed with him perverts and predators. We saw the same thing with Bronte. All sweet and nice and offended at the improper tone of Fairfield Life, and especially its treat- ment of the few delicate tender feeling level women in its midst, until a new woman comes around and starts expressing tender feelings. Then she suddenly has the right to flame away. Bullshit, pure and simple. That's the way it ALWAYS is with Puritan move- ments to clean up our town or clean up our newsgroup. The people who sign up for the new cleanup campaign don't have their buttons pushed at the moment, and thus are easily swayed by someone who does -- *by* the issue they're trying to get everyone to rally behind. But then the moment their buttons *do* get pushed, they're first in line to do the very thing they railed against earlier. It's just human nature, and I for one think that people should just lighten up about it. As long as they have egos to *get* offended by something that someone says, egos are going to get offended. And at that point they are going to do whatever they think is required to express their offended- ness and try to infect others with it. It's just what happens. Rules aren't going to change this, and posturing crusaders aren't going to change it. And the rule *itself* was a joke. If *anyone* should have been banned for a week for flaming, it should have been Saint Edg the Anti-Flamer himself, the posturing pissant who, mere days after pretending he was really interested in cleaning up the environment of FFL, did every- thing he possibly could to drag it down into a gutter of his own making. It's just SILLY, people. Lighten the fuck UP. This is a cyberbar full of people with EGOs. And egos are *always* going to get their buttons pushed, and in that button-pushed state of atten- tion feel that they have the right to say the very things that the day before they were denying someone else the right to say. If you want to clean up Fairfield Life, monitor your *own* thoughts and words, and leave off try- ing to do it with the thoughts and words of others.
Fwd: [wednesdaynightsatsang] Re: Fwd: [FairfieldLife] Challenging Assumptions
This is an email posted on the wednesday night satsang site in response to Turq's post on Challenging Assumptions, which I forwarded over there. I'll write the poster now and let him know he needs to join FFL if he wants to get into these discussions. It's getting confusing playing mailman! - Bronte Note: forwarded message attached. - Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. ---BeginMessage--- Hey, that's awesome that you challenge assumptions. Challenging assumptions is what keeps us from doing things that keep hurting or don't work, as I'm sure you know. I'd like to take a moment to consider what you've said: Enlightenment is a worthy thing to spend one's life pursuing; in fact, it is the *most* worthy thing you could spend your life pursuing. This begs the questions, what is Enlightenment? From my understanding, Enlightenment is understanding what we really are and have always been, leading to constant experience that cannot be overshadowed that: 1. the individual is cosmic and not different from the rest of the universe and 2. this connection IS that which fulfills all of our desires. If that is true that the experience of the Self fully established IS the fulfillment of all desires, then how would Enlightenment NOT be the highest? So you want to help people. Cool. Why? Why is helping people important? Why is preventing the suffering of others important? I do what makes me happy and am not condescending enough to say that others cannot take care of themselves, even if they are suffering. Some people fall upon extremely difficult circumstances and still seem to be doing quite well despite that. Others go through hard or even not so hard circumstances and suffer SO much. This suggests that there is some degree of choice over our suffering (even if it's not easy or clear how to make that choice), and finding the path the enlightenment is the ability to choose non-suffering, even if it's difficult. No matter what. It does make me happy to see other people do well, grow, and/or become happier. But that makes helping others just as selfish as taking care of myself, and I'm not going to get all self righteous about how important it is to help people, because helping others is every ounce as selfish as just going for your own Enlightenment. You seem to think helping others is important to try to ease your own fear, guilt, sense of justice (which does seem a but condescending to me suggesting that people need you or others to come to their rescue but you don't need that), or possibly just to make yourself happy. Either way, it's completely selfish. You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I'm not making a personal attack on you, but it seems that the idea that helping others is important is just another assumption. I would be very interested to discuss that you if feel that is wrong. Either way, I hope that it's okay to make these points as I'm not looking to deeply offend or start a war (I know our beliefs are held to be sacred :) ) but if you're willing to look at this point, I would enjoy continuing to discuss it with you and anyone else who wants to. --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Note: forwarded message attached. - Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. [ Interestingly, I wrote this Friday afternoon, several hours before Ron's reply to my email to him, on a similar subject. I'm posting it this morning in lieu of a direct reply to his post. ] The healthy mind challenges its own assumptions. ~ The I Ching That's what it says on the main page of Fairfield Life. And that's what a number of the folks who chat here do, on a fairly regular basis. That's why I like the place. But I've noticed that there are a few assumptions that no one (or almost no one) ever challenges. These assump- tions have *been* assumptions for so many of us, and for so long, that they are just given a free ride, and almost everyone accepts them as a given. No one even *thinks* about challenging them. The one I'm going to challenge tonight, just for the fun of it, is a Big One, possibly the biggest, never-challenged assumption in the whole enlightenment game. Briefly stated, it is: Enlightenment is a worthy thing to spend one's life pursuing; in fact, it is the *most* worthy thing you could spend your life pursuing. You find this assumption underlying all but a few traditions that have a notion of enlightenment, as part of their dogma. It manifests as respect for (or even reverence for) those who are one-pointed in their desire for enlightenment. It manifests in the time that seekers spend searching for the supposedly-enlightened, and then listening to what they have to say. It manifests in the monks (in TM-ese, Purusha types) and nuns (in TM-ese, Mother Divine ladies) who give up
Fwd: [wednesdaynightsatsang] Re: Fwd: [FairfieldLife] Challenging Assumptions
Bronte, While I understand that you like to get into topics and discuss or debate them ad infinitum with others, I don't. I just say things that interest me at the time and then allow others to bounce off of them if they feel like it. If some of their bouncing interests me, I might join in. If it doesn't, well discussing or debating the ideas I put forth is *their* business, not mine. I have no need to defend or debate the ideas I sail forth on Fairfield Life, and certainly don't have any need to do so when you forward them to people I don't even know. The response this person seems to be looking for was right in the post he is responding to: And I've met monks who ... have what I think is a cool attitude about enlightenment. ...they focus on Here And Now, and on doing the things that they feel will have the most benefit for other sentient beings. Their assumptions about how to live and where to put their focus in life may be *just* as flawed and *just* as challengeable as the assumption that one should be one-pointed about enlightenment. I have no problem with anyone who wants to challenge them. What I am expressing is mere preference, not any kind of rule or cosmic law or truth. But at the same time I can't help but think that these monks who consider the objective well-being of others more important than their own subjective well-being are onto something. But this is all Just My Opinion. You guys talk it out for yourselves... I don't see how I could have been any clearer. If *you* want to talk it out yourselves, feel free. I feel no need to participate. If the poster in question feels so strongly about his stance that he wants to join FFL to debate it, I *still* have nothing to say to him on this topic. Debate is just not my idea of fun. As I said about how and why I write here in another post yesterday: I like posting to Internet talk forums because it's ephemeral and in the moment, like stream of consciousness, but structured, *not* like stream of consciousness. An idea flows through me and I give it my best shot, trying to express it as well as I can. But then, the instant I press Send, I let it go. With the click of the Send button the idea is no longer mine, in that I don't have to feel ownership of it or allegiance to it. It was just an idea, passing through. If others like it and want to talk about it, cool. If others *don't* like it, and want to talk about it even more, cool. 'Nuff said. Talk amongst yourselves... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is an email posted on the wednesday night satsang site in response to Turq's post on Challenging Assumptions, which I forwarded over there. I'll write the poster now and let him know he needs to join FFL if he wants to get into these discussions. It's getting confusing playing mailman! - Bronte Note: forwarded message attached. - Hey, that's awesome that you challenge assumptions. Challenging assumptions is what keeps us from doing things that keep hurting or don't work, as I'm sure you know. I'd like to take a moment to consider what you've said: Enlightenment is a worthy thing to spend one's life pursuing; in fact, it is the *most* worthy thing you could spend your life pursuing. This begs the questions, what is Enlightenment? From my understanding, Enlightenment is understanding what we really are and have always been, leading to constant experience that cannot be overshadowed that: 1. the individual is cosmic and not different from the rest of the universe and 2. this connection IS that which fulfills all of our desires. If that is true that the experience of the Self fully established IS the fulfillment of all desires, then how would Enlightenment NOT be the highest? So you want to help people. Cool. Why? Why is helping people important? Why is preventing the suffering of others important? I do what makes me happy and am not condescending enough to say that others cannot take care of themselves, even if they are suffering. Some people fall upon extremely difficult circumstances and still seem to be doing quite well despite that. Others go through hard or even not so hard circumstances and suffer SO much. This suggests that there is some degree of choice over our suffering (even if it's not easy or clear how to make that choice), and finding the path the enlightenment is the ability to choose non-suffering, even if it's difficult. No matter what. It does make me happy to see other people do well, grow, and/or become happier. But that makes helping others just as selfish as taking care of myself, and I'm not going to get all self righteous about how important it is to help people, because helping others is every ounce as selfish as just going for your own Enlightenment. You seem to think helping others is important to
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like the Maniprabha's comment on this sutra: These siddhis [that is] the Vividness of the subtle senses and the like in the case of one devoted to samadhi, (the fruit of which is final bliss), are obstacles, [that is,] impediments. Accordingly he who desires liberation overlooks them. For his task is not accomplished, even if he have ten thousand perfections, unless he have a complete enlightenment of self. Seems like he haven't been reading the fourth paada. The first suutra sez: ...samaadhi-jaaH siddhayaH. ... which could be translated to 'siddhis are born of (or: the result of) samaadhi'.
[FairfieldLife] Hysteria, the UCLA Study, and other memes about women
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now don't you worry your pretty little head about this man talk. You will just get overwrought trying to keep up with the conversation and it'll give ya the vapors! Or even worse, hysteria! In the same vein, I pass along one of the few things I've read recently that made me spit my drink out onto the screen with laughter. It did the same for everyone I've shared it with, both men and women. So if anyone here gets offended or hysterical about it, you're atypical. UCLA Study A study conducted by UCLA's Department of Psychiatry has revealed that the kind of face a woman finds attractive on a man can differ depending on where she is in her menstrual cycle. For example: If she is ovulating, she is attracted to men with rugged and masculine features. However, if she is menstruating, or menopausal, she tends to be more attracted to a man with duct tape over his mouth and a spear lodged in his chest while he is on fire. No further studies are expected.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Imagine
Wow... At Rick's encouragement, I rejoined Fairfield Life a few days ago. Reading the last few days of posts I can see I made a mistake. I trust this e-group serves your evolution, although I confess that I am at a total loss to understand how that might be. Frankly, why do you all bother with the complete and utter waste of life the vast majority of posts here are? Spend time with a child... Play with your cat if you don't have a child... Go out dancing... Make love for a few hours... Enjoy the stars without imagining anything about jyotish or celestial beings or Maitreya or some other bullshit someone else has convinced you to believe... The stars are pretty awesome just as they are - no embellishment needed. So are you. Sincere best wishes and a friendly goodbye, Cliff --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip But just for a moment, try to imagine what it *feels* like to have someone just *explode* with his own simmering hatred of self, and aim it at you, and put it into the most carefully-crafted attempts to *hurt* he possibly can. Gosh, I don't have to imagine it, Barry. I've been dealing with it from you for a very long time. That's what it's been like for me to post to the Internet FOR THIRTEEN YEARS. Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. The projection in this remark is just astounding. If he actually believes it, it's frightening. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since, No, she has done no such thing. That isn't a delusion, it's a quite deliberate untruth. with rarely even a one-week break in the invective and criticism she aims at me. Richard Williams, the troll from Texas, picked up the same mindset from her and has been doing the same thing, for almost as long. A couple of other people here seem to have also logged on to this particular notion of fun, and consider me their personal punching bag. Barry indeed has many critics. But for the record, and from my perspective, the only unfair criticism of Barry I've ever seen, on both alt.m.t and FFL, has been the recent spate of rants from Edg concerning his fantasies about Barry's behavior in his private life. (Well, with the exception of some of Willytex's posts, but fairness doesn't really apply in his case.) Edg's posts were so outlandishly unfair that even I had to jump in to defend Barry. From the early days on alt.m.t right down to the present, Barry has spent *most* of his time putting down other people, without the slightest regard for fairness or accuracy or intellectual honesty. That's why he's come in for so much criticism. snip The more that these people rag on me and spew their bile at me, the more I try to channel that hatred and use it to inspire me to write more, and to write well. If I can read one of their hate-filled posts and, immediately after- wards, sit down and write about something that inspires me and makes me happy, and might also inspire someone else, then I have practiced the dharma of Living well is the best revenge. And I have managed to do so without being sucked into a head-to-head confrontation with them, and giving them what they want, which is my attention. Oh, yes, we've noticed how assiduously Barry has avoided head-to-head confrontation. When he's feeling particularly self-righteous, he actually *does* manage to avoid it for a while, instead putting his vicious insults and dishonest characterizations in posts purportedly addressed to the group, like this one, utterly oblivious to the gross hypocrisy involved. Sorry, but writing a few happy-happy posts doesn't make up for the rest; and the rest call into serious question just how genuine the happy ones are. Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: I like the Maniprabha's comment on this sutra: These siddhis [that is] the Vividness of the subtle senses and the like in the case of one devoted to samadhi, (the fruit of which is final bliss), are obstacles, [that is,] impediments. Accordingly he who desires liberation overlooks them. For his task is not accomplished, even if he have ten thousand perfections, unless he have a complete enlightenment of self. Seems like he haven't Ei toi niin paha virhe taida olla, että sitä viitsisi ryhtyä editoimaan, vaikka olinkin hetki sitten ryhtymäisilläni tuohon puuhaan... Ye be glad that ye don't have to speak a depressing Uralic language! :D
[FairfieldLife] Re: Diksha Initiation vs. regular Initiation.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ater all these years of doing tm and if regular and sincere with it, I would submit there is a good chance that one would move rapidly by taking diksha under the terms specified below. my experience dictates that it is different to have the initiation by the diciple compared with the sat guru. human teacher Keep fishing among TM'ers Ron, if you think this is an positive activity for you. I think you are a disgrace to yourself and your guru. If she has not attraction by herself and needs you to try to drum up followers from other groups then it stinks. And that is exactly what you do Ron; you are a pathetic fool and you stink !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 13, 2007, at 8:41 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Oct 13, 2007, at 7:37 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: Don't do this, be careful about this, watch how this and that goes, warning against this...Absent common sense, why be so concerned about this practice and that? Such thinking reeks of dogma to me. LOL, no it's not dogma Jim, it's the collected wisdom of sages across the ages--and my own personal experience as well. I'd like to hear more about your personal experience, then, because you are always quoting others or mentioning the experiences of others, but not correlating such experiences with your own. I don't recall you ever speaking about your experiences in this way here on FFL. No, I don't typically talk about my own experiences. Vaj has for years been happy to try to put the experiences of others down and trying to create doubts. No wonder he does not want to describe his own (lack of) experiences.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Died Thursday at the age of 72 of a heart attack. . my highest respects to a beautiful God-Realized being. I attended a few of his peace concerts and always felt His Deep Peace and Love in my heart a friend of mine, and his wife and daughter, were his disciples and the personal guidance that they received, even while meditating at home, was very impressive. Sri Chinmoy was a wonderful personal guru, if one resonated with Him. I read just a few of his books that resonated with me; they were extremely helpful. A unique God-Realized life well lived only to be admired, respected and loved as a beautiful expression of the Self. Om Shanti, anatol I met this Saint only a few times but the strength of his darshan is paralelled by that of Maharishi only - in my experience. If the quality of someones devotees means something, and I think it does,; those I met were superb, soft and wonderful people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I met this Saint only a few times but the strength of his darshan is paralelled by that of Maharishi only - in my experience. Uh, Nabby...not to rain on your parade or anything, but the next time you berate someone here for being off the TM program and tell them to get a checking, you might want to remember that the very fact *that* you met this saint a few times means that you would never be allowed in the TM flying dome in Fairfield or in many other places in the world. Unless you lied about having done it, of course. If that's the kind of spiritual movement you think is spiritual, I wish you well with it.
[FairfieldLife] Lurk, Miscommunication Re: Angela's take on the pompous shit
Bronte writes: SORRY, ANGELA, LURK AND FFL GROUP! I CAUSED THIS MISUNDERSTANDING! Lurk is thinking the comment Angela made about the group was directed at FFL, which it was not! snip Angela is a person from the Wednesday night satsang. WELCOME, ANGELA! We're a little rough and tumble here, but you'll find we're very real! Lurk Sorry, I was going through 400 posts in a hurry. Bound to mess up. makes a lot more sense now. Welcome Angela. lurk - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Died Thursday at the age of 72 of a heart attack. Piece in the New York Times about devotees gathering in Briarwood, Queens, to pay their respects, and about the devotee community there: http://tinyurl.com/2us9hr Excerpt: Followers several hundred of them have built a utopian existence in the middle of a bustling New York City neighborhood. Guided by devotion and strict adherence to their guru's teachings, they trumpet his message on T-shirts and store signs and go by flowery, peace- oriented Bengali names he bestowed upon them. Mr. Chinmoy kept himself in meticulously good health, so his death was unexpected and has thrown his followers into upheaval. As followers embarked upon a weeklong vigil of meditation, song and poetry, grief was mixed with a feeling of distress. Many disciples are wondering what the future will hold. It is as if the group has suddenly become a family of orphans. I remember seeing this guy in the 80's I guess, I left distinctly feeling he was a fraud! He plays instruments like a child with non-nonsensical melodies. I don't know what all the commotion was about surrounding him, at least his music is a joke! See for yourself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Shri Chimnoys darshan was, for me, of the highest caliber. A wonderful Saint. Surely now people like Rick et al will soon start the rumourmill denouncing him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Creationism, Evangelicals, and SCI
In a message dated 10/12/07 8:31:09 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Scientific Creationism and the Science of Creative Intelligence Robert M. Price As is well known, proponents of creationism loudly contend that their doctrine is surely scientific, not religious, and therefore nothing should stand in the way of its being included in public school science curricula. This claim naturally presents us with a tangle of several legal issues, not the least of which is the danger of mandating by law that any specific view be taught. One thinks immediately of the canonization of Lysenko in the Soviet Union, and one can well imagine what would happen if racist fanatics succeeded in having the views of Shockley or Jenson forcibly included in genetics courses. Creationists, it seems, are oblivious to such dangers--or at least we may be charitable enough to suppose so. But an issue that is in some ways more interesting is that of church- state separation. Would the mandated teaching of creationism constitute the promotion of a religious doctrine by the government, something forbidden by the U.S. constitution? This is the only thing that the Constitution says about Church and state. Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Notice, the Congress shall make *no law* either *establishing* or *prohibiting*, the free exercise thereof. Also, that there will be no religious test for the office of the Presidency. In other words, the government can not mandate that a president *must* or *can not be* of any specific religion. The people get to make that choice, if they make it an issue, by the democratic process of majority rules. Therefor, there can be no law mandating that any specific theory of creation be taught or prevented from being taught. It should be left up to the individual states and school boards to decide what they want to teach. If the majority in a community want to teach only evolution in their schools, so be it. But if the majority want only creationism taught, so be it also. A community also has the right to teach all or any combinations of ideas as they see fit. By virtue of the first amendment, the Government needs to butt out and let the people decide for themselves. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Imagine
Hey Cliff, how are you? Glad to see your name attached to a post. -Peter --- Cliff Rees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow... At Rick's encouragement, I rejoined Fairfield Life a few days ago. Reading the last few days of posts I can see I made a mistake. I trust this e-group serves your evolution, although I confess that I am at a total loss to understand how that might be. Frankly, why do you all bother with the complete and utter waste of life the vast majority of posts here are? Spend time with a child... Play with your cat if you don't have a child... Go out dancing... Make love for a few hours... Enjoy the stars without imagining anything about jyotish or celestial beings or Maitreya or some other bullshit someone else has convinced you to believe... The stars are pretty awesome just as they are - no embellishment needed. So are you. Sincere best wishes and a friendly goodbye, Cliff --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip But just for a moment, try to imagine what it *feels* like to have someone just *explode* with his own simmering hatred of self, and aim it at you, and put it into the most carefully-crafted attempts to *hurt* he possibly can. Gosh, I don't have to imagine it, Barry. I've been dealing with it from you for a very long time. That's what it's been like for me to post to the Internet FOR THIRTEEN YEARS. Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. The projection in this remark is just astounding. If he actually believes it, it's frightening. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since, No, she has done no such thing. That isn't a delusion, it's a quite deliberate untruth. with rarely even a one-week break in the invective and criticism she aims at me. Richard Williams, the troll from Texas, picked up the same mindset from her and has been doing the same thing, for almost as long. A couple of other people here seem to have also logged on to this particular notion of fun, and consider me their personal punching bag. Barry indeed has many critics. But for the record, and from my perspective, the only unfair criticism of Barry I've ever seen, on both alt.m.t and FFL, has been the recent spate of rants from Edg concerning his fantasies about Barry's behavior in his private life. (Well, with the exception of some of Willytex's posts, but fairness doesn't really apply in his case.) Edg's posts were so outlandishly unfair that even I had to jump in to defend Barry. From the early days on alt.m.t right down to the present, Barry has spent *most* of his time putting down other people, without the slightest regard for fairness or accuracy or intellectual honesty. That's why he's come in for so much criticism. snip The more that these people rag on me and spew their bile at me, the more I try to channel that hatred and use it to inspire me to write more, and to write well. If I can read one of their hate-filled posts and, immediately after- wards, sit down and write about something that inspires me and makes me happy, and might also inspire someone else, then I have practiced the dharma of Living well is the best revenge. And I have managed to do so without being sucked into a head-to-head confrontation with them, and giving them what they want, which is my attention. Oh, yes, we've noticed how assiduously Barry has avoided head-to-head confrontation. When he's feeling particularly self-righteous, he actually *does* manage to avoid it for a while, instead putting his vicious insults and dishonest characterizations in posts purportedly addressed to the group, like this one, utterly oblivious to the gross hypocrisy involved. Sorry, but writing a few happy-happy posts doesn't make up for the rest; and the rest call into serious question just how genuine the happy ones are. Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/
[FairfieldLife] Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Sri Chinmoy also finds other ways for his disciples to please him. I lived a celibate life for ten years and barely even looked into a man's eyes, other than Chinmoy. But then in the fall of 1991, when I was getting in shape and exercising a lot, out of the blue, Chinmoy invited me to join a group trip out of New York for a peace concert near San Francisco. He even offered to pay for me when I said I didn't have the money. I was very honored by this gesture. After the concert a woman I knew as the leader of the San Francisco Center approached me and said that Chinmoy wanted me to go to his room. She gave me a piece of paper with the room number on it. After going to my room to tidy up, I nervously went to his room. I thought I had been invited to a special private party or function and never dreamed that it was for sex. After a short interview about my previous sexual experiences Chinmoy said, You should surrender your vital (sexual) energy to me. I folded my hands, looked him in the eyes and offered him my energy, but he indicated that this wasn't enough. So then I said, Supreme I bow to thee, a few times. He had me embrace him, I hugged him, feeling very warm and loving, but not aroused. Then Chinmoy told me to take my clothes off. I was shocked! However, prior to being in the Center, I had been very open minded, so I was happy and not angry. I took off my clothes, he then removed his and we proceeded to have sex. Afterward, he told me that I must never tell anyone. He said that I was specially chosen and that this was not rally sex, but his life breath, which he was giving me. He also mentioned that if anything happened, such as a.pregnancy, I should not even tell him, but instead go immediately to a clinic for an abortion. Having spent the last 10 years worshiping Chinmoy as a God, I didn't question this. I accepted what was happening, even though after this experience, I had nagging doubts about him. I started looking around and noticing through the behavior of other women, that they were probably sexually involved with him too. I came to realize that I was probably not the only woman with whom Chinmoy was involved, but I don't think I ever imagined the scope of his sexual activities. Over the next few months, there were several late-night trysts, but then the calls suddenly stopped. After several months elapsed without a call from Chinmoy I became very depressed. I felt that if I got involved with another man I would come out of my depression. So with the help of a friend and confidant, I made contact with one of the men in the Center. This worked out very well and we saw each other secretly for several months. We ended up deeply involved, but then were discovered. Chinmoy didn't make us leave the Center at that time, but circumstances eventually led to our leaving on our own about a year later. After being out of the Center for a few years I still hadn't moved on in my beliefs. I blamed myself and thought that my departure from the group was because I had become weak and succumbed to my emotions. My partner also hadn't moved on and wanted to return. During this period I told my partner about my secret activities with Chinmoy. He didn't act surprised and later hinted that he too was involved, not only with Chinmoy, but that Chinmoy had directed him to be involved with other people. My partner eventually begged to come back to the Center. He was accepted, but only conditionally. We must separate and I would also return. Initially I had misgivings, but I went back. Over the next several years I became more and more aware about the many women sexually involved with Chinmoy. There were also signs that he was having sexual relations with men. The first time that I was called for sex again after my return, I was asked by Chinmoy to first write him a letter. I wrote something spiritually devotional, but that wasn't what he wanted. He told me put details in my letter about my desire for him and specifically to tell all about the sexual things done together with my partner, while were outside the Center. After complying with that request, Chinmoy called me for sex once or twice a year. A few years ago I got a special call from Chinmoy, he said that he wanted to introduce me to a new way of having sex--with women. The first time, he had me come over to his house with another woman. We were together downstairs, while he waited in another room upstairs. Then the other woman went upstairs. Later, Chinmoy came down and had relations with me. He told me that I must never talk to anyone about these trysts and must instead act as if I had never been intimate with him. Another time, a woman and I had relations, while he sat on a chair and
Re: [FairfieldLife] Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
Lies! Lies! All lies! Any man who can play so many instruments, and so very, well could never possibly do the bling-bam with disciples! --- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Sri Chinmoy also finds other ways for his disciples to please him. I lived a celibate life for ten years and barely even looked into a man's eyes, other than Chinmoy. But then in the fall of 1991, when I was getting in shape and exercising a lot, out of the blue, Chinmoy invited me to join a group trip out of New York for a peace concert near San Francisco. He even offered to pay for me when I said I didn't have the money. I was very honored by this gesture. After the concert a woman I knew as the leader of the San Francisco Center approached me and said that Chinmoy wanted me to go to his room. She gave me a piece of paper with the room number on it. After going to my room to tidy up, I nervously went to his room. I thought I had been invited to a special private party or function and never dreamed that it was for sex. After a short interview about my previous sexual experiences Chinmoy said, You should surrender your vital (sexual) energy to me. I folded my hands, looked him in the eyes and offered him my energy, but he indicated that this wasn't enough. So then I said, Supreme I bow to thee, a few times. He had me embrace him, I hugged him, feeling very warm and loving, but not aroused. Then Chinmoy told me to take my clothes off. I was shocked! However, prior to being in the Center, I had been very open minded, so I was happy and not angry. I took off my clothes, he then removed his and we proceeded to have sex. Afterward, he told me that I must never tell anyone. He said that I was specially chosen and that this was not rally sex, but his life breath, which he was giving me. He also mentioned that if anything happened, such as a.pregnancy, I should not even tell him, but instead go immediately to a clinic for an abortion. Having spent the last 10 years worshiping Chinmoy as a God, I didn't question this. I accepted what was happening, even though after this experience, I had nagging doubts about him. I started looking around and noticing through the behavior of other women, that they were probably sexually involved with him too. I came to realize that I was probably not the only woman with whom Chinmoy was involved, but I don't think I ever imagined the scope of his sexual activities. Over the next few months, there were several late-night trysts, but then the calls suddenly stopped. After several months elapsed without a call from Chinmoy I became very depressed. I felt that if I got involved with another man I would come out of my depression. So with the help of a friend and confidant, I made contact with one of the men in the Center. This worked out very well and we saw each other secretly for several months. We ended up deeply involved, but then were discovered. Chinmoy didn't make us leave the Center at that time, but circumstances eventually led to our leaving on our own about a year later. After being out of the Center for a few years I still hadn't moved on in my beliefs. I blamed myself and thought that my departure from the group was because I had become weak and succumbed to my emotions. My partner also hadn't moved on and wanted to return. During this period I told my partner about my secret activities with Chinmoy. He didn't act surprised and later hinted that he too was involved, not only with Chinmoy, but that Chinmoy had directed him to be involved with other people. My partner eventually begged to come back to the Center. He was accepted, but only conditionally. We must separate and I would also return. Initially I had misgivings, but I went back. Over the next several years I became more and more aware about the many women sexually involved with Chinmoy. There were also signs that he was having sexual relations with men. The first time that I was called for sex again after my return, I was asked by Chinmoy to first write him a letter. I wrote something spiritually devotional, but that wasn't what he wanted. He told me put details in my letter about my desire for him and specifically to tell all about the sexual things done together with my partner, while were outside the Center. After complying with that request, Chinmoy called me for sex once or twice a year. A few years ago I got a special call from Chinmoy, he said that he wanted to introduce me to a new way of having sex--with women. The first time, he had me come over to his house with another woman. We were together downstairs, while he waited in another room
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
I've been staying out of this, but before someone jumps on Vaj and accuses him of either making up stuff about a great saint or something even more nefarious, what he posts below is fairly common knowledge. The Rama guy (Frederic Lenz) I studied with had previously himself studied with Sri Chinmoy. (I know, I know...duh...where did Fred get his ideas about how appropriate it was to sleep with his students, eh?). Chinmoy used to announce Fred as his best student, before Fred caught a clue and split, setting up shop as a teacher himself instead of being a recruiter for Chinmoy. Anyway, given the fact that Fred walked away from Sri Chinmoy, I tended not to place much credence in his occasional negative comments about the guy. But I also knew 5 or 6 people who used to study with Sri Chinmoy, and they pretty much confirm everything said in the article below. The guy may have had a lot going for him; I don't know. But please don't try to make him into a saint in the traditional sense of the word saint. The man had a serious ego on him, whether it man- ifested itself in believing he had the right to bed his students or in the faked superhuman strength bodybuilding stunts he used to stage. From what I can tell from those students who worked with him, he had an ability to flash people out with some cheap shakti, which many of them mistook for enlightenment. His musical abilities have already been commented on suffic- iently. For me, never having met him but having met a few who worked with him...uh...intimately, he strikes me as Just Another Indian Teacher Who Made A Living Out Of Westerners' Ignorance Of Indian Spiritual Teaching. As for Resting In Peace, that's out of our hands. He'll rest as he lived, dealing with his karmas. If he did more good in the world than he did harm, he may rest peacefully; if not, not. As will each of us. I wish him well on his Way. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Sri Chinmoy also finds other ways for his disciples to please him. I lived a celibate life for ten years and barely even looked into a man's eyes, other than Chinmoy. But then in the fall of 1991, when I was getting in shape and exercising a lot, out of the blue, Chinmoy invited me to join a group trip out of New York for a peace concert near San Francisco. He even offered to pay for me when I said I didn't have the money. I was very honored by this gesture. After the concert a woman I knew as the leader of the San Francisco Center approached me and said that Chinmoy wanted me to go to his room. She gave me a piece of paper with the room number on it. After going to my room to tidy up, I nervously went to his room. I thought I had been invited to a special private party or function and never dreamed that it was for sex. After a short interview about my previous sexual experiences Chinmoy said, You should surrender your vital (sexual) energy to me. I folded my hands, looked him in the eyes and offered him my energy, but he indicated that this wasn't enough. So then I said, Supreme I bow to thee, a few times. He had me embrace him, I hugged him, feeling very warm and loving, but not aroused. Then Chinmoy told me to take my clothes off. I was shocked! However, prior to being in the Center, I had been very open minded, so I was happy and not angry. I took off my clothes, he then removed his and we proceeded to have sex. Afterward, he told me that I must never tell anyone. He said that I was specially chosen and that this was not rally sex, but his life breath, which he was giving me. He also mentioned that if anything happened, such as a.pregnancy, I should not even tell him, but instead go immediately to a clinic for an abortion. Having spent the last 10 years worshiping Chinmoy as a God, I didn't question this. I accepted what was happening, even though after this experience, I had nagging doubts about him. I started looking around and noticing through the behavior of other women, that they were probably sexually involved with him too. I came to realize that I was probably not the only woman with whom Chinmoy was involved, but I don't think I ever imagined the scope of his sexual activities. Over the next few months, there were several late-night trysts, but then the calls suddenly stopped. After several months elapsed without a call from Chinmoy I became very depressed. I felt that if I got involved with another man I would come out of my depression. So with the help of a friend and confidant, I made contact with one of the men in the Center. This worked out very well and we saw each other secretly for several months. We ended up deeply involved, but then were discovered. Chinmoy didn't make us leave the Center at that
Re: [FairfieldLife] Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Peter wrote: Lies! Lies! All lies! Any man who can play so many instruments, and so very, well could never possibly do the bling-bam with disciples! It was the one Sri that tipped me off.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rick's lady friend's cosmic knowledge
--- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 13, 2007, at 2:34 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 13, 2007, at 1:20 PM, Rick Archer wrote: snip published author. You'll know about that one too. AFAIK, neither of these people are trying to position themselves to be a pubic guru You mean, a guru like you've been claiming Maharishi is? ;-) of any sort. I think their motivation is as you said: it might really blow some minds that valuable new states of mind are being reached. And not only to blow minds, but I think that reading such accounts and discussing them with these people helps to enliven these states in one's own experience. Now let me get this right Rick: she doesn't think it's special, BUT SHE'S WRITING A BOOK ON IT? She said *she* wasn't anything special, Vaj, not that her experiences weren't special. It was not so much how she felt about her experiences instead that they would be singled out preferentially from any other experience. Personally I feel a kind, thoughtful, caring person coming from the posts--very similar to other empaths I know. Agreed. Bronte might want to look up the word, projection to understand what is going on here ;-) The audacity of anyone who writes a book about their experiences! Who do they think they are, better than me? How dare they! Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
Re: [FairfieldLife] Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
--- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Peter wrote: Lies! Lies! All lies! Any man who can play so many instruments, and so very, well could never possibly do the bling-bam with disciples! It was the one Sri that tipped me off. Ha! Yes, two negate the bad ju-ju from one Vaj, are you in Maine? Has it started to snow up there? Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. http://travel.yahoo.com/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Died Thursday at the age of 72 of a heart attack. . my highest respects to a beautiful God-Realized being. I attended a few of his peace concerts and always felt His Deep Peace and Love in my heart a friend of mine, and his wife and daughter, were his disciples and the personal guidance that they received, even while meditating at home, was very impressive. Sri Chinmoy was a wonderful personal guru, if one resonated with Him. I read just a few of his books that resonated with me; they were extremely helpful. A unique God-Realized life well lived only to be admired, respected and loved as a beautiful expression of the Self. Om Shanti, anatol Yeah, but what about all his dick play? There's a zen koan for ya to chew on. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
Re: [FairfieldLife] Related to recent discussions
WHAT THE F**K ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT! I HAVE TO GO MEDITATE NOW, YOU BASTARD!! --- Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To see reality is as simple as to see one's face in a mirror. Only the mirror must be clear and true. A quiet mind, undistorted by desires and fears, free from ideas and opinions, clear on all the levels, is needed to reflect the reality. Be clear and quiet, alert and detached, all else will happen by itself. HYPERLINK http://www.nonduality.com/nisarga.htmSri Nisargadatta Maharaj No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.9/1067 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 6:02 PM Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Judy and everyone / Trying to Find Fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I may be being inconsistent, Judy. I don't think hypocritical, because that implies conscious adherence to one's inconsistency. Where I am wrong (and I often am), I do want to change. I know something is wrong here, but I don't know what. You are clearly angry at me. Don't know if it makes any difference to you, but disgusted with would probably be a more accurate characterization. That you've now acknowledged the inconsistency, though, makes a big difference. I think I get why. You didn't like my suggestions for a new rule on FFL but went along with it like a good sport when it was imposed. Probably you had to hit the backspace key a number of times in order to go along, when you'd have felt much better slamming someone you felt deserved it. Then after all your sportsmanship, Bronte, who started the talk that led to the damn new rule, gives herself permission to rip into people. Where's the justice in the universe, right? Well, I think I'd be pretty pissed, too. Well, sorta. But it wasn't only you who was agitating for the new rule, and it had come up from time to time in the past before you even joined us. So that wasn't really the source of my disgust; it was just the gross inconsistency on your part. I think I HAVE been inconsistent. When I wrote the let's play nice emails, what I wrote felt sincerely like the right thing. But when I lay into somebody, that also feels sincerely like the right thing. Probably, I'm guessing now, when anyone lays into anybody, it feels that way for them. So what is right, restraint or letting the turkeys have it? Before today I would have said restraint, no argument. After this new experience, I feel No way! Judy, you have a highly discriminating intellect. You catch stuff the rest of us usually miss. I really would like you to shed some light and opinion here. Do you still think, as you did a few weeks ago, that people on a forum should just be able to say any damn thing they please? Or have these weeks of greater civility modified your point of view? I'll do my best, but I'm not sure I can catch anything others have missed, and I certainly don't have The Answer. I think greater civility works only if everyone actually abides by it. I *don't* think it's going to work well here because there are a couple of people who simply refuse to abide by it, and Rick is reluctant to do any enforcement. Also, even if we all behaved with civility, it wouldn't be *genuine* in all cases. There are too many animosities between members that are already well established, some of them of very long standing. Some of us might *behave* with civility when we interacted with those we had reason to dislike, but we wouldn't *feel* civil. To my mind, fake civility is far more poisonous than overt hostility. And those of us who are skilled with words know how to convey our hostility without being overtly uncivil, so it wouldn't do anything to address the various animosities; if anything, it would inflame them. I'm thinking about Rick's party talk yardstick for what is and isn't acceptable: if you wouldn't say it at a party, don't say it here. This could work to prevent overt hostility if it were strictly enforced across the board. But that seems unlikely; Rick doesn't like to play policeman, and he doesn't really have time to closely monitor what goes on even if it were a comfortable role for him. That seemed to me like a simple and good yardstick at the time. Tonight, after my experience, it doesn't work for me anymore. Using the party analogy, what if someone you knew to be a child molester walked in the door of the party and started hobnobbing with the young folks? Or a person who you knew had been in jail for fraud came into the party and started talking up business deals to your friends? Would you say, I have to be civil I don't want to spoil the party? Or would you say, Shit! This is horrible! and expose the guy? There are times when it doesn't matter if something's against the rules. You need to do it anyway. But who is to decide when those instances occur? Edg thought he was experiencing such an instance regarding Turq recently. The rest of the people listened to what he had to say and decided Edg was making too big a deal. They asked him to give it up. Today, I felt something was worth making an issue over, and you felt I was wrong about that. Not really. I didn't have anything remotely like your reaction to what she wrote, but I wouldn't have objected to your having expressed it if it hadn't been for your initial let's make nice posts, because you clearly weren't practicing what you had been preaching. You have a tendency to throw your weight around, which isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's just who you are. But given that tendency, you have to be willing to deal judiciously with objections to how you're doing it in
[FairfieldLife] The secret behind some spiritual teachers' ability to see
There was one section in the female student's account of studying with Sri Chinmoy that I found fascinating, because I saw the same thing going down with Frederic Lenz, Chinmoy's former student: ...I had a mammogram and it that turned out positive. There was a lump in my breast that looked suspicious, so I needed to have a biopsy. My female partner made a big deal out of bringing this to the attention of Chinmoy. He sent one of his disciples, who was a nurse, to attend the biopsy with me. This was unsettling, because Chinmoy told this nurse that the HMO should tell him first (through her) what the outcome of my biopsy was. I'll skip the rest of the story, the part about Chinmoy claiming it was a miracle. What was familiar to me from my time around Rama/Fred was the technique of having one woman spy on another and report what she'd heard back to the spiritual teacher. I'd heard from women I was involved with that that is exactly what Rama/Fred had had them do. They were to listen carefully when they were around other women students and when one of them confided something secret to the others, they were to report on it back to him. What *he* then did with the information was to get alone with the student he knew some dirt about and pretend to have seen it psychically. And of course the poor girl was all flashed out by his astounding psychic powers. Sick shit, man. And, at the *same* time, there were aspects of Fred the guy and Fred the spiritual teacher that were positive and often *really* astounding, like what it was like to meditate with him. That part -- and the infinite silence of it -- was real IMO, even if some of his claims of being psychic were not. Spiritual teachers are *human* above all else. Even if they *are* enlightened IMO they don't suddenly rise above their own long-established habits and samskaras. And so they occasionally do stupid shit and even sick shit. Just like we do. These days I tend to cut them a break if it seems that they managed to help even a few people find some sense of feeling better about themselves and the world around them. I'll leave the judging to others who feel that they have a suitable point of view from *which* to judge. I do not. But at the same time, I'm with Curtis in that if there is a simple, Occam's Razor explanation for some teacher's supposed special powers, I've seen enough trickery and sick subterfuge in the spiritual game to know that it's more likely that the Occam's Razor explanation is correct than it is that the person really has special powers.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: I met this Saint only a few times but the strength of his darshan is paralelled by that of Maharishi only - in my experience. Uh, Nabby...not to rain on your parade or anything, but the next time you berate someone here for being off the TM program and tell them to get a checking, you might want to remember that the very fact *that* you met this saint a few times means that you would never be allowed in the TM flying dome in Fairfield or in many other places in the world. Unless you lied about having done it, of course. If that's the kind of spiritual movement you think is spiritual, I wish you well with it. You have no idea how Maharishi operates. You only read words my friend.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:48 AM, Peter wrote: --- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Peter wrote: Lies! Lies! All lies! Any man who can play so many instruments, and so very, well could never possibly do the bling-bam with disciples! It was the one Sri that tipped me off. Ha! Yes, two negate the bad ju-ju from one Vaj, are you in Maine? Has it started to snow up there? Nope not yet. Global warming makes it a spotty start. More ice storms. Predictions are that we'll lose 75% of the snowmobiling weather over the next 20 years. It was 1960's style early September into early October. The weather's about 3-4 weeks off from what I grew up with in the 60's, sometimes more.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Here we go, the slander from Vaj has just begun...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Imagine
Frankly, why do you all bother with the complete and utter waste of life the vast majority of posts here are? Sincere best wishes and a friendly goodbye, Who else can find the words that don't belong here? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Cliff Rees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow... At Rick's encouragement, I rejoined Fairfield Life a few days ago. Reading the last few days of posts I can see I made a mistake. I trust this e-group serves your evolution, although I confess that I am at a total loss to understand how that might be. Frankly, why do you all bother with the complete and utter waste of life the vast majority of posts here are? Spend time with a child... Play with your cat if you don't have a child... Go out dancing... Make love for a few hours... Enjoy the stars without imagining anything about jyotish or celestial beings or Maitreya or some other bullshit someone else has convinced you to believe... The stars are pretty awesome just as they are - no embellishment needed. So are you. Sincere best wishes and a friendly goodbye, Cliff --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But just for a moment, try to imagine what it *feels* like to have someone just *explode* with his own simmering hatred of self, and aim it at you, and put it into the most carefully-crafted attempts to *hurt* he possibly can. Gosh, I don't have to imagine it, Barry. I've been dealing with it from you for a very long time. That's what it's been like for me to post to the Internet FOR THIRTEEN YEARS. Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. The projection in this remark is just astounding. If he actually believes it, it's frightening. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since, No, she has done no such thing. That isn't a delusion, it's a quite deliberate untruth. with rarely even a one-week break in the invective and criticism she aims at me. Richard Williams, the troll from Texas, picked up the same mindset from her and has been doing the same thing, for almost as long. A couple of other people here seem to have also logged on to this particular notion of fun, and consider me their personal punching bag. Barry indeed has many critics. But for the record, and from my perspective, the only unfair criticism of Barry I've ever seen, on both alt.m.t and FFL, has been the recent spate of rants from Edg concerning his fantasies about Barry's behavior in his private life. (Well, with the exception of some of Willytex's posts, but fairness doesn't really apply in his case.) Edg's posts were so outlandishly unfair that even I had to jump in to defend Barry. From the early days on alt.m.t right down to the present, Barry has spent *most* of his time putting down other people, without the slightest regard for fairness or accuracy or intellectual honesty. That's why he's come in for so much criticism. snip The more that these people rag on me and spew their bile at me, the more I try to channel that hatred and use it to inspire me to write more, and to write well. If I can read one of their hate-filled posts and, immediately after- wards, sit down and write about something that inspires me and makes me happy, and might also inspire someone else, then I have practiced the dharma of Living well is the best revenge. And I have managed to do so without being sucked into a head-to-head confrontation with them, and giving them what they want, which is my attention. Oh, yes, we've noticed how assiduously Barry has avoided head-to-head confrontation. When he's feeling particularly self-righteous, he actually *does* manage to avoid it for a while, instead putting his vicious insults and dishonest characterizations in posts purportedly addressed to the group, like this one, utterly oblivious to the gross hypocrisy involved. Sorry, but writing a few happy-happy posts doesn't make up for the rest; and the rest call into serious question just how genuine the happy ones are. Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting
[FairfieldLife] Re: Imagine
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frankly, why do you all bother with the complete and utter waste of life the vast majority of posts here are? Sincere best wishes and a friendly goodbye, Who else can find the words that don't belong here? The ayurvedic dude who does meal planning for me said after reading Cliff's post that he should eat more Frankenberry and Count Chocula cereals to balance his dachas, alternating with the waxing and waning phases of the moon. Seemed obvious to me...
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Judy and everyone / Trying to Find Fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Bronte wrote:] Bronte, who started the talk that led to the damn new rule, gives herself permission to rip into people. Where's the justice in the universe, right? snip We saw the same thing with Bronte. All sweet and nice and offended at the improper tone of Fairfield Life, and especially its treat- ment of the few delicate tender feeling level women in its midst, until a new woman comes around and starts expressing tender feelings. Then she suddenly has the right to flame away. Barry obviously didn't bother to read the post of Bronte's quoted at the top. He probably didn't even notice that the quote was from her post. In that post, she acknowledged the inconsistency and did considerable soul-searching about it. That's all too rare here. She deserves kudos for it, not putdowns, especially not from folks who think they're just too smart to have any need to pay attention.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Imagine
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frankly, why do you all bother with the complete and utter waste of life the vast majority of posts here are? Sincere best wishes and a friendly goodbye, Who else can find the words that don't belong here? This one has my vote for Post Of The Week. No one cuts to the chase in as few words, and as well-crafted words, as Curtis.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The secret behind some spiritual teachers' ability to see
On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:06 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: But at the same time, I'm with Curtis in that if there is a simple, Occam's Razor explanation for some teacher's supposed special powers, I've seen enough trickery and sick subterfuge in the spiritual game to know that it's more likely that the Occam's Razor explanation is correct than it is that the person really has special powers. Barry, I'd guess you've seen the Steve Martin movie, Leap of Faith? He never was one of my favorite actors until I saw that. Excellent expose of some (I'm sure not all by any means) of the many tricks evangelists use. Ought to be required viewing. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 13, 2007, at 8:41 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Oct 13, 2007, at 7:37 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: Don't do this, be careful about this, watch how this and that goes, warning against this...Absent common sense, why be so concerned about this practice and that? Such thinking reeks of dogma to me. LOL, no it's not dogma Jim, it's the collected wisdom of sages across the ages--and my own personal experience as well. I'd like to hear more about your personal experience, then, because you are always quoting others or mentioning the experiences of others, but not correlating such experiences with your own. I don't recall you ever speaking about your experiences in this way here on FFL. No, I don't typically talk about my own experiences. As for the wisdom of sages, its like that expression about lying with statistics-- some quotation can be found in the long history of spirtual literature to back up anything. Means very little when warning about siddhis for example. And as I have said, why bother to warn people about siddhis, repeatedly? Either they work or they don't, and if properly taught, no problem, in my opinion. But just you opinion. I did practice them for many years-- very helpful, no issues, worked exactly as my teacher explained they would. Lots of fun too! You are constantly warning people about this practice or that, this guru or that, this illusion or that. Really? Could you quote an example? from your past posting. Reads like a warning to me: One of the most insistent warnng is from the Holy Shankaracharya tradition on CC. It warns at least half dozen times, quoting different sources. It specifically warns against yogic flying (interestingly)! Without which the meditator could get lost on subtle (astral) levels of experience...that is the value of a true Guru (sat-guru), he can guide the chela on the subtle levels of creation by his radiant form. Note: I didn't write this last part. It's primarily about promoting obscurations for one thing, the other common reason is that they make one more vyutthana or outward and thus they tend to block the introverted samadhis (vyutthana is the Sanskrit word for outward stroke). Another very important thing is what it does to the subtle pysiology. People will have experiences, since siddhis occur in the dalas or petals of the sahasara, but they will become less and less likely to culminate in full enlightenment, since this style of cultivation tends to lead shakti up a non- completing path. Another common side effect is for one to develop various sensitivities, emotional and in terms of allergies, etc. You have replied that this is backed up by your personal experience, but it just reads like dogma to me. meant to frighten the reader about the siddhis if not done properly, i.e. according to the guidance of a teacher you approve of. Pure dogma, Vaj. LOL. As I've mentioned recently, there are exceptions. So of course that means it's not a dogma then. You haven't seen listening closely methinks! When you say there are exceptions, to whatever it is you are warning against or criticizing, it comes across as someone trying to cover their rear, vs. keeping an open mind, and to me, that still reeks of dogma. I make the assumption that we are all adults here, and respect each and every one of us to be making the right choices for ourselves, whatever it is. Listen to Maharishi, do the sidhis, do TM, do anything else, or not. I don't think our lives are well served in the least by listening to anyone say much of anything that they don't back up with personal experience, in my opinion. As per the above, I'd agree. I'm so sensitive to it, I can tell a deflected rising in a TM sidha and some others if I'm around them long enough, but I can also sometimes get it from their voice. I don't know what a 'deflected rising' is. In any case, I'd like to hear more about you and your experiences, and less about books you've read or teachers you are quoting. Not my style really. If it's appropriate, I may, but otherwise 'why bother' I say. Only because it lends credibility. Otherwise you just sound like any other critic.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Lurk, Miscommunication Re: Angela's take on the pompous shit
Pompous shit is a somewhat condensed locution, so I'll be a little more discursive about it. Anything at all can be constructed with words (and deconstructed), including the semblance of enlightenment. Anyone with half a brain can learn the lingo pretty quickly, and this is not just about us, but about any group that calls itself us. After you learn the lingo, it becomes a game of one-upmanship among the guys and a petting zoo among the girls. And I didn't like the general attitude: More enlightened than thou is no improvement on Holier than thou. I saw too much of that in the Wednesday night satsang group after observing it for about a year, and had too many experiences of folks who didn't want ideas challenged in any way. So I left somewhat precipitously. Another reason I left, though, was that they really were completely unwilling to deal with the questions I, personally, have about the whole enlightenment trip. I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. My physics teacher in High School had been a famous scientist and a member of the SS and, because early one morning he caught me meditating, we became friends as well. To him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism. A vegetarian, Hitler was guru to the SS, in every sense of the word, and he did group meditations with the top brass. So by the time I got around to taking an SCI course in my early thirties (after meditating since age six, but without any expectation or any intellectual knowledge attached to it), I already knew the whole trip because I'd heard it all from my physics teacher. Now, the current political scene in the U.S. has been predicted by European observers since the late fifties. And they were able to do it because they dug deep to learn how and why Nazi Germany could have happened in the land of Goethe, how did it happen that dark theurgy and the light of reason faced one another---speechless---at the Nuremberg war crimes trials? Well, after studying that question for a life-time, I've become convinced that it is no accident that a New Age scene accompanies American fascism. I'm interested in the uses of meditation, not to enlighten individuals, but to manipulate societies. And I am not at all interested in such questions as Am I enlightened? or Are you enlightened? a a Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Angela of the Wednesday night satsang again: Note: forwarded to Bronte and Posted snip Angela wrote about the Wednesday satsang group, on their forum: Though I have seen some wisdom in this group, I have also seen too much pompous shit, and with that, I am outa here. Lurk wrote, misunderstanding what group Angela was referring to: This is like a drive by shooting. Like this lady ever posted, and now she leaving in a huff. Not passing the smell test, IMO. Bronte writes: SORRY, ANGELA, LURK AND FFL GROUP! I CAUSED THIS MISUNDERSTANDING! Lurk is thinking the comment Angela made about the group was directed at FFL, which it was not! Angela is a person from the Wednesday night satsang. I had forwarded to that website today's FFL discussion about the satsang's anonymous holy woman. Angela was pretty disgusted and wrote that group to say she was sick of the pompous shit she often found there, and was going to leave and join FFL instead. She's outa there, into here. Part of her desire to join us was Turq's post on Challenging Assumptions which I also had forwarded to the Wed. satsang chatroom, and which she admired. So please, take it easy, Lurk, ole' buddy. You'll like her. She's an independent thinker who very much belongs here. Reread her posts that I've transferred over from the other website, and you'll see what I mean. WELCOME, ANGELA! We're a little rough and tumble here, but you'll find we're very real! Love, Bronte - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The secret behind some spiritual teachers' ability to see
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:06 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: But at the same time, I'm with Curtis in that if there is a simple, Occam's Razor explanation for some teacher's supposed special powers, I've seen enough trickery and sick subterfuge in the spiritual game to know that it's more likely that the Occam's Razor explanation is correct than it is that the person really has special powers. Barry, I'd guess you've seen the Steve Martin movie, Leap of Faith? He never was one of my favorite actors until I saw that. Excellent expose of some (I'm sure not all by any means) of the many tricks evangelists use. Ought to be required viewing. I'd all but forgotten this movie; thanks for the reminder. It's been years since I've seen it, but wasn't there some neat twist at the end, like the appearance of a real miracle? I'll have to try to find a copy of it and watch it again.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Sri Chinmoy also finds other ways for his disciples to please him. I lived a celibate life for ten years and barely even looked into a man's eyes, other than Chinmoy. But then in the fall of 1991, when I was getting in shape and exercising a lot, out of the blue, Chinmoy invited me to join a group trip out of New York for a peace concert near San Francisco. He even offered to pay for me when I said I didn't have the money. I was very honored by this gesture. After the concert a woman I knew as the leader of the San Francisco Center approached me and said that Chinmoy wanted me to go to his room. She gave me a piece of paper with the room number on it. After going to my room to tidy up, I nervously went to his room. I thought I had been invited to a special private party or function and never dreamed that it was for sex. After a short interview about my previous sexual experiences Chinmoy said, You should surrender your vital (sexual) energy to me. I folded my hands, looked him in the eyes and offered him my energy, but he indicated that this wasn't enough. So then I said, Supreme I bow to thee, a few times. He had me embrace him, I hugged him, feeling very warm and loving, but not aroused. Then Chinmoy told me to take my clothes off. I was shocked! However, prior to being in the Center, I had been very open minded, so I was happy and not angry. I took off my clothes, he then removed his and we proceeded to have sex. Afterward, he told me that I must never tell anyone. He said that I was specially chosen and that this was not rally sex, but his life breath, which he was giving me. He also mentioned that if anything happened, such as a.pregnancy, I should not even tell him, but instead go immediately to a clinic for an abortion. Having spent the last 10 years worshiping Chinmoy as a God, I didn't question this. Granted, Chinmoy sounds like quite the lech and scammer, but regarding those that fall for it, What Is Wrong With These People!?? Why not a kick in the balls for this creep instead? I am not blaming the victim here, as it is clear Chinmoy instigated this scam, but come on, why get s very lost in the teacher that all ability to have a life, or maintain some critical thinking skills, is lost?
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. And ? The music is obviously not the point in his performances. Did you ever see him Jim ?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. What an odd display of random playing of instruments. I do like the lazy-susan thing though! To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC
[FairfieldLife] Why I say Barry is dishonest
Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since Barry is, of course, referring to me. The first paragraph is Barry's *opinion*, even though he states it as if it were established fact. He's totally wrong, but he's entitled to hold wrong opinions. The dishonesty is in the next line: She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since This is a lie in the narrowest sense of the term, in that Barry knows it isn't true. He has repeated it many times here and elsewhere. Here are the facts, of which Barry is very well aware: Barry and I have been on exactly three of the same groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, FairfieldLife, and Knapp's blog, TMFree. I encountered Barry for the first time on alt.m.t, so obviously I couldn't have stalked him there. I was a member of FairfieldLife before Barry ever joined it. I didn't read it regularly or post to it, however, until after Barry had joined and *invited* everyone on alt.m.t to participate in the discussions on FFL. Stalking can mean several different things. One thing it does *not* mean is responding to an invitation by the purported stalkee. And I was posting comments on TMFree shortly after it went live, *well before* Barry had posted anything there himself. If anything, he stalked *me* there. Again, Barry is very well aware of all these facts. His claim that I have been stalking him from forum to forum is a deliberate lie. This is not an isolated example; it's not some kind of aberration. It's very far from the only lie he's told, here and on alt.m.t and TMFree (and goodness knows where else that I'm not aware of), about me, and about others. But as I say, it's an unambiguous example, and it's something anyone can verify for themselves. Finally, just as a bonus, note the phrasing ever since, following Barry's claim about what had happened 13 years ago. In fact, for 11 of those years, until 2005 when I started posting to FFL, alt.m.t was the *only* forum Barry and I were on together. Ever since is therefore deliberately deceptive, making it sound as though the purported stalking has been going on for 13 years. It's a lie on top of a lie.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. And ? The music is obviously not the point in his performances. Did you ever see him Jim ? Hi, no I didn't-- I just watched the youtube clip.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
And ? The music is obviously not the point in his performances. Did you ever see him Jim ? So he is sort of a silk robed punk musician like Sid Vicious? It ain't about the music ya bloody wankers! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. And ? The music is obviously not the point in his performances. Did you ever see him Jim ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. What an odd display of random playing of instruments. I do like the lazy-susan thing though! Yeah, the only thing I could surmise from his no talent performance was that he was demonstrating to his disciples how perfect he was at everything (!?). I just bought some music composing software with a bunch of samples that can be put together to form music, so I was listening to him play with an ear for any sort of structure or melody in what he was doing. zip.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since Barry is, of course, referring to me. The first paragraph is Barry's *opinion*, even though he states it as if it were established fact. He's totally wrong, but he's entitled to hold wrong opinions. The dishonesty is in the next line: She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since This is a lie in the narrowest sense of the term, in that Barry knows it isn't true. He has repeated it many times here and elsewhere. Here are the facts, of which Barry is very well aware: Barry and I have been on exactly three of the same groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, FairfieldLife, and Knapp's blog, TMFree. I encountered Barry for the first time on alt.m.t, so obviously I couldn't have stalked him there. I was a member of FairfieldLife before Barry ever joined it. I didn't read it regularly or post to it, however, until after Barry had joined and *invited* everyone on alt.m.t to participate in the discussions on FFL. Stalking can mean several different things. One thing it does *not* mean is responding to an invitation by the purported stalkee. And I was posting comments on TMFree shortly after it went live, *well before* Barry had posted anything there himself. If anything, he stalked *me* there. Again, Barry is very well aware of all these facts. His claim that I have been stalking him from forum to forum is a deliberate lie. This is not an isolated example; it's not some kind of aberration. It's very far from the only lie he's told, here and on alt.m.t and TMFree (and goodness knows where else that I'm not aware of), about me, and about others. But as I say, it's an unambiguous example, and it's something anyone can verify for themselves. Finally, just as a bonus, note the phrasing ever since, following Barry's claim about what had happened 13 years ago. In fact, for 11 of those years, until 2005 when I started posting to FFL, alt.m.t was the *only* forum Barry and I were on together. Ever since is therefore deliberately deceptive, making it sound as though the purported stalking has been going on for 13 years. It's a lie on top of a lie. I think anyone who reads Barry's posts regularly is aware as he said that he writes to unwind, for fun, on the spur of the moment, not to debate his writings. More like a blog than items for further discussion, and that is the spirit in which to read them. Try to call him on his stuff and it'll just drive you nuts.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And ? The music is obviously not the point in his performances. Did you ever see him Jim ? So he is sort of a silk robed punk musician like Sid Vicious? It ain't about the music ya bloody wankers! Perfect quote! A lot of truth in that-- just like Sid, much more performance art than musicianship.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): snip I think anyone who reads Barry's posts regularly is aware as he said that he writes to unwind, for fun, on the spur of the moment, not to debate his writings. More like a blog than items for further discussion, and that is the spirit in which to read them. Try to call him on his stuff and it'll just drive you nuts. Sorry, but I don't believe deliberately slandering people--telling lies about them--falls into the category of for fun. And I didn't post this for discussion or debate, but just to make a point and for future reference. We certainly know that Barry does not want to be held accountable for what he says; but that isn't something he gets to decide.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): snip I think anyone who reads Barry's posts regularly is aware as he said that he writes to unwind, for fun, on the spur of the moment, not to debate his writings. More like a blog than items for further discussion, and that is the spirit in which to read them. Try to call him on his stuff and it'll just drive you nuts. Sorry, but I don't believe deliberately slandering people--telling lies about them--falls into the category of for fun. I agree. And I didn't post this for discussion or debate, but just to make a point and for future reference. Same here. We certainly know that Barry does not want to be held accountable for what he says; but that isn't something he gets to decide. So true.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
Judy, I think he's just pushing your buttons for entertainment. Nonetheless, for some mysterious reasons, there appears to be a mutual synergy between the two of you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since Barry is, of course, referring to me. The first paragraph is Barry's *opinion*, even though he states it as if it were established fact. He's totally wrong, but he's entitled to hold wrong opinions. The dishonesty is in the next line: She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since This is a lie in the narrowest sense of the term, in that Barry knows it isn't true. He has repeated it many times here and elsewhere. Here are the facts, of which Barry is very well aware: Barry and I have been on exactly three of the same groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, FairfieldLife, and Knapp's blog, TMFree. I encountered Barry for the first time on alt.m.t, so obviously I couldn't have stalked him there. I was a member of FairfieldLife before Barry ever joined it. I didn't read it regularly or post to it, however, until after Barry had joined and *invited* everyone on alt.m.t to participate in the discussions on FFL. Stalking can mean several different things. One thing it does *not* mean is responding to an invitation by the purported stalkee. And I was posting comments on TMFree shortly after it went live, *well before* Barry had posted anything there himself. If anything, he stalked *me* there. Again, Barry is very well aware of all these facts. His claim that I have been stalking him from forum to forum is a deliberate lie. This is not an isolated example; it's not some kind of aberration. It's very far from the only lie he's told, here and on alt.m.t and TMFree (and goodness knows where else that I'm not aware of), about me, and about others. But as I say, it's an unambiguous example, and it's something anyone can verify for themselves. Finally, just as a bonus, note the phrasing ever since, following Barry's claim about what had happened 13 years ago. In fact, for 11 of those years, until 2005 when I started posting to FFL, alt.m.t was the *only* forum Barry and I were on together. Ever since is therefore deliberately deceptive, making it sound as though the purported stalking has been going on for 13 years. It's a lie on top of a lie.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, the only thing I could surmise from his no talent performance was that he was demonstrating to his disciples how perfect he was at everything (!?). Exactly. And that's another trait that I saw in Frederic Lenz/Rama that I think he picked up from Sri Chinmoy. And occasionally with the same less-than-desired results. Fred wanted all his students to study the martial arts. For fitness, because he believed they taught things that were applicable to the spiritual path I happen to agree with him on this. But when a lot of his students started getting black belts, well he felt compelled to get up on stage with them wearing a karate gi himself, wearing a black belt that I'm pretty sure he never earned, showing off a few of his moves. O... and Ah... went the adoring crowds. And I'm sitting there thinking, This guy has the worst form I have ever *seen* in someone performing a karate move. No balance, no control, no focus, nada. He makes the guy in 'The Karate Kid' look good. Or when he went on a TV interview show during the latter days of his teaching, when his focus had shifted away from traditional spiritual teaching and onto business and succeeded at it. He was describing himself as a CEO type, talking about all of the successful computer businesses he was running. And the interviewer asked him, So name a few of your clients. And he couldn't. There *were* clients for some of these companies -- big clients -- and a few of the companies were actually making money. But the fact that the CEO didn't know the name of a single one of them was pretty telling in my opinion. It's a phenomenon I've seen in a lot of spiritual trips. The teachers, after a few years, find themselves surrounded by bhaktied-out students to whom they can tell pretty much *anything* and they'll believe it. And so they start believing that they can get away *with* saying anything. And so they start trying to do stuff that they really can't do, or claim that they can do it. My bet is that if you did a poll among Sri Chinmoy's students, 95% of them would tell you that he was a *tremendous* musician, very avant-garde and misunder- stood...near genius. Only about 5% of them would say, Yeah...he couldn't play worth a damn. That 5% would be the ones you'd want to hang out with.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
Judy, You say Barry's a liar of significant degree. You're accusing him of mindfully trying to besmirch you, and that this agenda of his is undeserved by you. Even though this personality has waged a ten year 'war' on you, you choose to support and defend and assume that his other intents in life are not equally tainted by this dynamic. I think the concept of infinite self-reference applies here. Barry can't be so cruel towards you without it leaking out into his other actions. If he can so coldly stalk you hoping for the least chink to slam a wedge into, why can't he stalk a girl in a bar with an equally offensive intent? After he utters hit that, you do not think that it is logical to call for a concern that he'll pursue a manipulative intent in a bar while talking to a 25 year old. Why? He's burned you not once, but hundreds of times, yet you'd trust his words here to be a correct description of his modus operandi in bars? Hit that tells any man in the real world that the speaker is out for objectified sex, yet you say Barry's not revealed any predatory intent and is, well, I guess, trustable, and that we should take him at his word about his true motivations? You've taken the stance that girls of the world are too savvy to be tricked by him, and that I am off base thinking women are so easily targeted, and that I am being offensive to women to assert that they are at any risk. I do think women are as easily manipulated by loving gestures, as men are by tits and ass. A balanced equation if you ask me, and I'm not so much saying women are weak as I am saying that all folks are weak in some way and that predators know how to exploit these things. If anything, I think women are vastly superior to men in ways that I really envy. OTOH, men have their niche advantages. Men and women, thus, go together like peanuts and chocolate. And I reserve the right to be as wildly corrosive in my descriptions of anyone here as I want to be -- call them projection if you like, but I'm trying to encapsulate emotions, and the emotions just need big words and phrases. Miss not my point, I am disgusted with Barry's glib disregard for society when he of all people here has had the life experiences to know the value of core morals. To express this, I've reached into my magic word basket and pulled out phrases that are as offensive as his hit that are to me. If he were in a bar next to me and said hit that, I'm a man, and in a man's world, men get to say that to each other, so I wouldn't start a fist fight about it, but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. That's my sexist double standard, and I'm trying to fix that by calling Barry -- AND ALL MEN -- to task about their marauding, outlander, manipulative, conniving and denying ways. Edg PS -- The Judy boy toy thing was due to your words that suggested that you would take a lover 20 years your junior. I don't see you as a predator on a regular basis though -- just willing to be one if you got lucky. Barry seems to work the crowd regularly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since Barry is, of course, referring to me. The first paragraph is Barry's *opinion*, even though he states it as if it were established fact. He's totally wrong, but he's entitled to hold wrong opinions. The dishonesty is in the next line: She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since This is a lie in the narrowest sense of the term, in that Barry knows it isn't true. He has repeated it many times here and elsewhere. Here are the facts, of which Barry is very well aware: Barry and I have been on exactly three of the same groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, FairfieldLife, and Knapp's blog, TMFree. I encountered Barry for the first time on alt.m.t, so obviously I couldn't have stalked him there. I was a member of FairfieldLife before Barry ever joined it. I didn't read it regularly or post to it, however, until after Barry had joined and *invited* everyone on alt.m.t to participate in the discussions on FFL. Stalking can mean several different things. One thing it does *not* mean is responding to an invitation by the purported stalkee. And I was posting comments on TMFree shortly after it went live, *well before* Barry had posted anything there himself. If anything, he stalked *me* there. Again, Barry is very well aware of all these facts.
[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20016@ wrote: When the court ruled against TM in public schools in NJ (Malnak case), that meant that TM could not be taught in the public schools there whether the parents liked it or not. If a lawsuit is filed against TM in the SF school, it's unlikely that the regional court finding would be any different than it was in the 70s in NJ, so it would not matter whether the parents liked it or not. The TMO is trying to be quiet about TM in this school, but sooner or later, somebody (and it can be any taxpayer in the state -- or possibly any taxpayer in the local school district, I'm not sure about who the law gives standing to in this case) will file suit against TM in this school, and it will just be a ton of bad publicity that could be avoided by only dealing with private or charter schools until public recognition of the benefits of TM is more established. The Science of Creative Intelligence, a 33-lesson course covering the nature of existence, the flow of intellegence, higher states of consciousness, etc, was taught in the NJ schools. The SCI course is not part of the TM instruction today when students learn TM. That difference is signficant. ** The Malnak decision cited three factors which influenced the court to declare that TM in public schools was in violation of establishment provisions: A. Establishment Clause Issues The Establishment Clause to the First Amendment prohibits government practices which advance a particular religion. Although the courts have found it difficult to define the term religion, for public school First Amendment issues that term has included affirmation of a belief in a supreme being and reading verses from the Bible. (Malnak v. Yogi 592 F.2d 197, 199 (3d. Cir. 1979).) The court in Malnak concluded that the Science of Creative Intelligence- Transcendental Meditation was a religious activity in the New Jersey public high schools in violation of the First Amendment. The concurring opinion in that case stated that the record revealed nothing other than an effort to propagate TM, SCI, and the views of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. The concurring opinion in the Malnak case referenced three factors to consider in determining whether a particular belief system constitutes a religion for purposes of the Establishment Clause: (1) Does the belief system address fundamental questions, or areas of ultimate concern [e.g., theories of man's nature or his place in the universe]? (2) Does the belief system proffer a comprehensive systematic series of answers to these fundamental questions? (3) Are there any practices that may be analogized to accepted religions [e.g., formal services, ceremonial functions, existence of clergy etc.]? http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/Gen_Couns_to_SD.html Presumably, not talking about SCI issues would remove or minimize objections based on factors (1) and (2), but the puja would still be a problem, right? I can't see any higher court ultimately not ruling the same as they did in the NJ case, so I would like to see the TMO stick with instruction in private schools, and enjoy the publicity from that. Like a surgeon who scrubs for surgery outside of the surgical suite, away from the patient, the TM teacher can prepare for teaching TM by performing the puja privately, in an adjoining room. Avoiding public schools is playing not to lose, instead of playing to win. It is time to win, by offering to teach TM in all schools, instead of cowering in fear of opposition. *** Are TM teachers in public schools actually doing this, preperforming the puja out of sight of the initiate? [maybe this is how they did it in Pakistan and other Islamic countries] If that is the case, then clearly the TMO might stand a chance in court.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mainstream20016 Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 11:59 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris Regarding the reassurance that SatYug is nigh at hand, through the inevitability and necessity of India's role to bring all good to all of us - Great ! Wonderful ! I look forward to cathcing the rays of a global bath of beneficent light. Yet, as a practicality, it would be a good thing, and wise, to have a direct hand in raising one's consciousness. So I advocate for wide-spread individual TM practice in the West, yet that cannot happen if TMO remains an overtly religious organization. TM has, and can again, be taught honestly and effectively as a secular technique. As the last thirty-two years has shown, unless TM is taught as a secular technique, it's impact will be nill, notwithstanding the coming glories of SatYug. Seems to me Pandora’s box has been opened. Even if the TMO were to try to scale back and present TM as a secular technique, critics would be able to present all sorts of evidence that for decades, it has been associated with Hindu and various wacky things. The TMO would be accused of trying to hide all that for marketing purposes. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.9/1069 - Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
[FairfieldLife] Shaktipat Diksha initiation
This looks good from what they write: http://www.siddhyog.org/shaktipat_diksha_-_initiation.htm
[FairfieldLife] quote from MMY for Nabby
The world is as you are. Develop unbounded consciousness and the Universe is yours
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. I think the addiction here is to imagining things to get angry about. Hypothetically stimulating your righteous anger gland alone in your room. What does this remind me of... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy, You say Barry's a liar of significant degree. You're accusing him of mindfully trying to besmirch you, and that this agenda of his is undeserved by you. Even though this personality has waged a ten year 'war' on you, you choose to support and defend and assume that his other intents in life are not equally tainted by this dynamic. I think the concept of infinite self-reference applies here. Barry can't be so cruel towards you without it leaking out into his other actions. If he can so coldly stalk you hoping for the least chink to slam a wedge into, why can't he stalk a girl in a bar with an equally offensive intent? After he utters hit that, you do not think that it is logical to call for a concern that he'll pursue a manipulative intent in a bar while talking to a 25 year old. Why? He's burned you not once, but hundreds of times, yet you'd trust his words here to be a correct description of his modus operandi in bars? Hit that tells any man in the real world that the speaker is out for objectified sex, yet you say Barry's not revealed any predatory intent and is, well, I guess, trustable, and that we should take him at his word about his true motivations? You've taken the stance that girls of the world are too savvy to be tricked by him, and that I am off base thinking women are so easily targeted, and that I am being offensive to women to assert that they are at any risk. I do think women are as easily manipulated by loving gestures, as men are by tits and ass. A balanced equation if you ask me, and I'm not so much saying women are weak as I am saying that all folks are weak in some way and that predators know how to exploit these things. If anything, I think women are vastly superior to men in ways that I really envy. OTOH, men have their niche advantages. Men and women, thus, go together like peanuts and chocolate. And I reserve the right to be as wildly corrosive in my descriptions of anyone here as I want to be -- call them projection if you like, but I'm trying to encapsulate emotions, and the emotions just need big words and phrases. Miss not my point, I am disgusted with Barry's glib disregard for society when he of all people here has had the life experiences to know the value of core morals. To express this, I've reached into my magic word basket and pulled out phrases that are as offensive as his hit that are to me. If he were in a bar next to me and said hit that, I'm a man, and in a man's world, men get to say that to each other, so I wouldn't start a fist fight about it, but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. That's my sexist double standard, and I'm trying to fix that by calling Barry -- AND ALL MEN -- to task about their marauding, outlander, manipulative, conniving and denying ways. Edg PS -- The Judy boy toy thing was due to your words that suggested that you would take a lover 20 years your junior. I don't see you as a predator on a regular basis though -- just willing to be one if you got lucky. Barry seems to work the crowd regularly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Some here have expressed skepticism when I have said that Barry is dishonest. Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example (from #151367): --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone else developed the same kind of twisted fixation on me, confusing me with all the things she hates in herself but cannot accept or recognize in herself. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since Barry is, of course, referring to me. The first paragraph is Barry's *opinion*, even though he states it as if it were established fact. He's totally wrong, but he's entitled to hold wrong opinions. The dishonesty is in the next line: She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since This is a lie in the narrowest sense of the term, in that Barry knows it isn't true. He has repeated it many times here and elsewhere. Here are the facts, of which Barry is very well aware: Barry and I have been on exactly three of the same groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, FairfieldLife, and Knapp's blog, TMFree. I encountered Barry for the first time on alt.m.t, so obviously I couldn't have stalked him there. I was a member of FairfieldLife before Barry ever joined it. I didn't read it regularly or post to it,
[FairfieldLife] Deckard -- replicant or not?
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the darkness near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments...will be lost in time... like tears in rain. Time to die. - Roy Batty, replicant One of the films premiering here at the Sitges Film Festival is the true director's cut of Blade Runner. Decades ago Ridley Scott lost the rights to his raw footage, and so the so-called director's cut that was released on DVD wasn't really. It was just what he could piece together from the available footage. But I guess the legal snafus got resolved, because he's cut what he now calls the definitive version of the film. Sadly, I didn't get to see it. Tickets for this one sold out the day it was announced. This is, after all, a Fantasy-SciFi-Horror Film Festival, and Blade Runner is one of the greatest SciFi films ever made, arguably *the* greatest. I hear that, like the fake director's cut, this one isn't different enough to make you feel as if you have missed out on an essential life experience if you don't see it :-), but that it does resolve the issue of whether Deckard was a replicant or not. Rutger Hauer was in town, and gave a master class that I also missed. That would have been fun. He adlibbed that famous line above -- it wasn't in the script. And it's one of the best lines in spiritual cinema IMO. It describes perfectly the plight of the mystic, the person who has taken the path less traveled and seen things. You *know* that others won't believe them, for the most part. And if you're smart you keep your big mouth shut about them, or you start getting men- tioned in the same breath as that footballer whose name came up recently. But sometimes you've just *gotta* talk about them, man. They were so *cool*, so magical, that you really can't take the chance that they'll die with you and be lost forever, like tears in rain. They will, of course, whether we talk about them or not. But the gotta factor wins anyway :-), and you talk about them anyway. And sure enough, most don't believe you. I wish I had gotten to see the new version. I would like to learn more about Deckard. He had a good attitude. I always liked his last line, as he's soaring off into an uncertain future: Gaff had been there, and let her live. Four years, he figured. He was wrong. Tyrell had told me Rachael was special. No termination date. I don't know how long we'll have together. Who does? Who indeed? But you gotta try, because if you don't you won't get to see things that others won't believe. And where's the fun in that?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. I think the addiction here is to imagining things to get angry about. Hypothetically stimulating your righteous anger gland alone in your room. What does this remind me of... Now *that* is an interesting insight, Curtis. It's like righteous anger is the closest that either of them can get to righteous, and they've got to continually...uh...stimulate themselves with imagined affronts so that they can get to that emotional state. How sad.
[FairfieldLife] First Show at the new Civic Center
Last Night's Show (Celebrate Sondheim!)..was a definite Hit! Do go see it! The voices were glorious, the cast (half of which come from Fairfield) was eminently talented, the staging was a delight, and the music was, well, award-winning, and now I see why. Besides being just plain entertaining, it was a great way to learn in more depth about the EXTENSIVE work of Stephen Sondheim. Even if not so familiar with his work, I guarantee you will recognize some of the songs, and be entranced by many more. I am so glad we went and would recommend it to anyone. I have to admit I was a little worried that they were holding it in the convention center part of the new Fairfield Arts Convention Center (formerly referred to as the civic center) because the acoustics would never be what they will be in the theatre. But they did a more than adequate job of making the lyrics understandable, and combining the beautiful tones of the different voices. The remaining performances are: Today at 2 pm, Oct. 18, 19 20 at 7:30 pm Oct. 21 at 2 pm Tickets $15, $12 Seniors and Students To Buy Tickets Call (641) 472-ARTS (2787) You know what else? That buiding is almost done and is impressively beautiful. I cannot but feel such a fulfillment of desire for this whole community the have that built. Hurray! Denyce No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.9/1069 - Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Even though this personality has waged a ten year 'war' on you, Those were not my words. Please don't put your paraphrases of something I said in quotes. you choose to support and defend and assume that his other intents in life are not equally tainted by this dynamic. He has reason to lie about me. He has no reason to lie about *not* making it into bed with a pretty young girl. If he were going to lie, it would be the other way around, especially since she isn't around to contradict him. snip If he can so coldly stalk you hoping for the least chink Those weren't my words either. snip After he utters hit that, Here's what he actually wrote: And yeah, she is 'way cute, and I would be the luckiest guy on earth if I were fortunate enough to be hittin' that. But that really wasn't on my mind. Stop claiming he said Hit that as some kind of an imperative. Either quote what he said in context, or quit quoting him at all. snip He's burned you not once, but hundreds of times, yet you'd trust his words here to be a correct description of his modus operandi in bars? We don't even know if his tales about the bar have anything to do with reality. Your fantasy about his being a predator depends on your taking his account of two beautiful young things hanging on his every word in a bar as the gospel truth. Why do you assume he got *that* far with them if you don't trust anything he says? Why do you assume they existed in the first place? snip And I reserve the right to be as wildly corrosive in my descriptions of anyone here as I want to be -- call them projection if you like, but I'm trying to encapsulate emotions, and the emotions just need big words and phrases. And the rest of us reserve the right to call you out when you go ridiculously overboard. If you can't encapsulate emotions without making shit up, that reflects poorly on your writing skills, as well as on your ethics. snip PS -- The Judy boy toy thing was due to your words that suggested that you would take a lover 20 years your junior. I don't recall saying that. I think you made that up too. On the other hand, I'm 65 years old, so a man 20 years younger would be 45--hardly a boy toy. I don't see you as a predator on a regular basis though -- just willing to be one if you got lucky. You're full of it, Edg.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy, I think he's just pushing your buttons for entertainment. Sometimes he tries to do that. (Do you believe it's perfectly OK to lie about people just for the sake of entertainment?) But this wasn't one of those times. This was an out-and-out attack grounded in fear and rage and hatred.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. I think the addiction here is to imagining things to get angry about. Hypothetically stimulating your righteous anger gland alone in your room. What does this remind me of... Now *that* is an interesting insight, Curtis. It's like righteous anger is the closest that either of them can get to righteous, and they've got to continually...uh...stimulate themselves with imagined affronts so that they can get to that emotional state. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since is not an imagined affront. It's a bare-faced, vicious, knowing lie. Edg can speak for himself. How sad.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. I think the addiction here is to imagining things to get angry about. Hypothetically stimulating your righteous anger gland alone in your room. What does this remind me of... Now *that* is an interesting insight, Curtis. It's like righteous anger is the closest that either of them can get to righteous, and they've got to continually...uh...stimulate themselves with imagined affronts so that they can get to that emotional state. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since is not an imagined affront. It's a bare-faced, vicious, knowing lie. Edg can speak for himself. It is my honest, considered opinion. And you can prove that opinion wrong. You have a marvelous opportunity to do so. You have one more post and, as it turns out, *only* one more post this week in which to show what you're really about. Will you spend it writing about some- thing positive, something to do with enlightenment or meditation or spirit- ual practice or even something that inspired the heck out of you today, or will you spend it attacking me? I think the answer kinda settles things.
[FairfieldLife] My take on Judy and Turq
There are all kinds of misunderstandings that can slip into real-life relationships, just as in cyber ones, if they aren't talked out at the time. When this happens in real life, people build resentments, and in marriages, an accumulation of enough of these leads to a divorce. It's hard on a divorced couple, though, if they work in the same place or in some other way have to keep seeing each other. Judy and Turq are kind of like that couple who have to keep seeing each other. They keep getting triggered by each other, because there's so much past between them that never got resolved. It's hard on the co-workers who hate to see the fighting all the time, but the fighting is understandable. It's a tough situation. I see you two guys as polar opposites, with Turq being broad, freewheeling and expansive, never liking to nail things down because of his primary value for complete freedom. I see Judy as careful, exact, precise and astute -- accuracy as in truth for her is a primary value. These tendencies are both beautiful but they're polar opposites. Precision curtails expansion. Expansiveness breaks the bounds of precision. Both complement and qualify each other, keeping one another in harmony with all that is. People with primary values like Turq's and Judy's usually wind up being bitter enemies or passionate lovers, often both. I like the both of you, because I adore both sets of qualities. We all have them, but you two demonstrate them to the max, which is what makes you so appealing and colorful. You'll probably never be able to de-personalize the conflict and take it philosophically, on the level of polar opposites in the universe, but maybe thinking about it from that perspective can ease the pain a little that you sometimes feel from each other. You guys rock. Both of you! - Bronte - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 1:40 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest And you can prove that opinion wrong. You have a marvelous opportunity to do so. You have one more post and, as it turns out, *only* one more post this week in which to show what you're really about. Will you spend it writing about some- thing positive, something to do with enlightenment or meditation or spirit- ual practice or even something that inspired the heck out of you today, or will you spend it attacking me? I think the answer kinda settles things. My count matches yours. She writes good stuff when she applies herself to it. It’s a pity she wastes so many posts trying to prove you’re a liar. You’d think most people would have reached some sort of conclusion by now and wouldn’t need further convincing. Most of us have learned to skip the Barry-Judy fight posts, so those posts are literally being thrown away. Maybe Judy should start a chat group for those who really care to follow this feud. Then she could dedicate one post a week here to reminding people that that group exists and providing a link for people to visit it to read her latest thoughts about you, and yours about her, if you care to express them. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.9/1069 - Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
On Oct 14, 2007, at 10:17 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Here we go, the slander from Vaj has just begun... Actually that was from Rick Ross's site. I liked some of the guy's writings years ago and I always loved Carlos Santana's and John McLaughlin's Love, Devotion and Surrender album (great Coltrane cover on it too). So I was surprised as anyone years later when I found out he was doing the Perv-O-Rishi thang too. It's a bizarre twist that the guy was a total health nut and emphasized meditation on the heart and then he dies of friggin' heart attack! How's that for irony? ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
Our newest member, Angela, who just joined FFL yesterday when she left the
Wednesday night satsang group in disgust, posted this cool and profoundly
thoughtful email that I'll bet everyone missed because the title was
misleading. Take a look! She hails from Nazii Germany and is observing some
interesting stuff in the Fairfield community.
(Note:Pompous shit is a reference to something posted yesterday about an
alleged attitude manifested by some members of her previous group.)
Angela writes:
YAHOO.Shortcuts.hasSensitiveText = true; YAHOO.Shortcuts.sensitivityType =
[sensitive_news_terms, adult]; YAHOO.Shortcuts.doUlt = false;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.location = us; YAHOO.Shortcuts.lang = us;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_id = 0; YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_type = ;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_title = ; YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_publish_date =
; YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_author = ; YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_url = ;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_tags = ; YAHOO.Shortcuts.annotationSet = {
lw_1192388050_0: { text: Goethe, extended: 0, startchar: 2495,
endchar: 2500, start: 2495, end: 2500, extendedFrom: ,
predictedCategory: PERSON, predictionProbability: 0.828185, weight:
0.35, type: [shortcuts:/us/instance/person/author], category: [PERSON],
context: happened in the land of Goethe how did it happen that },
lw_1192388050_1: { text: yahoo.com, extended: 0, startchar: 3103,
endchar: 3111, start: 3103, end: 3111,
extendedFrom: , predictedCategory: , predictionProbability: 0,
weight: 1, type: [shortcuts:/us/place/virtual/web_site], category:
[IDENTIFIER], context: a a Bronte Baxter brontebaxter8 yahoo.com wrote
From Angela of the }, lw_1192388050_2: { text: Play Monopoly Here and
Now, extended: 0, startchar: 5254, endchar: 5280, start: 5254, end:
5280, extendedFrom: , predictedCategory: , predictionProbability:
0, weight: 1, type: [shortcuts:/us/instance/identifier/hyperlink/http],
category: [IDENTIFIER], context: for 500 In 2007 Ha Play Monopoly Here
and Now it\x27s updated for today\x27s economy, metaData: { linkHref:
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48223/*http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow;,
linkProtocol: http, linkRel: nofollow, linkTarget: _blank } },
lw_1192388050_3: { text: Yahoo! Games, extended: 0, startchar: 5332,
endchar: 5343, start: 5332, end: 5343,
extendedFrom: , predictedCategory: PLACE, predictionProbability:
0.668415, weight: 0.35, type:
[shortcuts:/us/instance/organization/company/yahoo_property], category:
[ORGANIZATION], context: updated for today\x27s economy at Yahoo Games
Send instant messages to your, metaData: { yprop_name: Yahoo! Games,
yprop_url: http://games.yahoo.com/; } }, lw_1192388050_4: { text:
yahoo.com, extended: 0, startchar: 5470, endchar: 5478, start: 5470,
end: 5478, extendedFrom: , predictedCategory: ,
predictionProbability: 0, weight: 1, type:
[shortcuts:/us/place/virtual/web_site], category: [IDENTIFIER],
context: to your online friends http://uk.messenger yahoo.com Messages in
this topic 0 }, lw_1192388050_5: { text: Messages in this topic,
extended: 0, startchar: 5938, endchar: 5959, start: 5938, end: 5959,
extendedFrom: , predictedCategory: , predictionProbability: 0,
weight: 1,
type: [shortcuts:/us/instance/identifier/hyperlink/http], category:
[IDENTIFIER], context: , metaData: { linkHref:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/151463;_ylc=X3oDMTM4Y2NsZWRtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM5MjAxOTYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDc3MDc2BG1zZ0lkAzE1MTUxNwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzExOTIzNzMxOTcEdHBjSWQDMTUxNDYz;,
linkProtocol: http, linkRel: nofollow, linkTarget: _blank } },
lw_1192388050_6: { text: Start a new topic, extended: 0, startchar:
6640, endchar: 6656, start: 6640, end: 6656, extendedFrom: ,
predictedCategory: , predictionProbability: 0, weight: 1, type:
[shortcuts:/us/instance/identifier/hyperlink/http], category:
[IDENTIFIER], context: , metaData: { linkClass: bld, linkHref:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaDhpcTg1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM5MjAxOTYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDc3MDc2BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE5MjM3MzE5Nw--;,
linkProtocol: http, linkRel: nofollow, linkTarget: _blank } },
lw_1192388050_7: { text: Messages, extended: 0, startchar: 6965,
endchar: 6972, start: 6965, end: 6972, extendedFrom: ,
predictedCategory: , predictionProbability: 0, weight: 1, type:
[shortcuts:/us/instance/identifier/hyperlink/http], category:
[IDENTIFIER], context: post Start a new topic Messages Files Photos Links
Database Polls, metaData: { linkHref:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNDc2ZWNvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM5MjAxOTYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDc3MDc2BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA21zZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTE5MjM3MzE5Nw--;,
linkProtocol: http, linkRel: nofollow, linkTarget: _blank } },
lw_1192388050_8: { text: Files, extended: 0, startchar: 7218,
endchar: 7222, start: 7218, end: 7222, extendedFrom: ,
predictedCategory: , predictionProbability: 0, weight: 1,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why I say Barry is dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. I think the addiction here is to imagining things to get angry about. Hypothetically stimulating your righteous anger gland alone in your room. What does this remind me of... Now *that* is an interesting insight, Curtis. It's like righteous anger is the closest that either of them can get to righteous, and they've got to continually...uh...stimulate themselves with imagined affronts so that they can get to that emotional state. She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since is not an imagined affront. It's a bare-faced, vicious, knowing lie. Edg can speak for himself. It is my honest, considered opinion. And that is also a bare-faced, vicious, knowing lie. And you can prove that opinion wrong. I've already proved your lie was a lie, thanks. You have a marvelous opportunity to do so. You have one more post and, as it turns out, *only* one more post this week in which to show what you're really about. Actually I have one more besides this one. I'm going to be away this coming week, so I didn't have to worry about how many posts I made this weekend, sorry to burst your pathetic bubble. Will you spend it writing about some- thing positive, something to do with enlightenment or meditation or spirit- ual practice or even something that inspired the heck out of you today, or will you spend it attacking me? You mean, attacking you the way you've been attacking me? I don't get my jollies pretending to be oh-so- much-more-spiritual than everybody else, then turning around and telling vicious lies about other people. I do think one of the contributions I make here is exposing spiritual phonies like you. I think the answer kinda settles things. You've already done that, just not quite in the way you planned.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Diksha Initiation vs. regular Initiation.
BillyG. wrote: In Diksha Initiation a Sat-Guru (true god-man) gives you some of his God Consciousness, in regular Initiation any human teacher can give you a meditation technique. The difference is in Diksha Initiation the initiate must *qualify* for the experience by his past spiritual sadhana (practice), and be able to sustain the tremendous spiritual power brought on by the Guru, obviously only a true realized Master can do this and an advanced disciple. That would only be true if the person is being initiated into a tradition such as a tantric tradition. However diksha (shaktipat) can also be used to teach yogic meditation for people who just want learn to meditate. That, in most cases, can be given to anyone. Shaktipat can be used as a jump start so the mind is oriented towards the goal of the meditation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mainstream20016 Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 11:59 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris Regarding the reassurance that SatYug is nigh at hand, through the inevitability and necessity of India's role to bring all good to all of us - Great ! Wonderful ! I look forward to cathcing the rays of a global bath of beneficent light. Yet, as a practicality, it would be a good thing, and wise, to have a direct hand in raising one's consciousness. So I advocate for wide-spread individual TM practice in the West, yet that cannot happen if TMO remains an overtly religious organization. TM has, and can again, be taught honestly and effectively as a secular technique. As the last thirty-two years has shown, unless TM is taught as a secular technique, it's impact will be nill, notwithstanding the coming glories of SatYug. Seems to me Pandora's box has been opened. Even if the TMO were to try to scale back and present TM as a secular technique, critics would be able to present all sorts of evidence that for decades, it has been associated with Hindu and various wacky things. The TMO would be accused of trying to hide all that for marketing purposes. Since it is unlikely that the TMO will return to its roots, I'm advocating that a totally separate organization re-establish the secular teaching of the TM technique. For the next decade or so, the opportunity to quickly establish a new separate secular TM organization, formed from the legion of un-recertifide teachers currently out-of-the-mix of the current TMO, and of retirement age, can quickly and broadly re-establish the secular teaching of the TM technique. Establishment of the new secular organization need not diminish the current TMO, which can continue along its path of providing products and services for the extremely discerning among us who have the desire for exclusivity and means of paying for it. Perhaps a licensing agreement between the current TMO and the future secular organization can smooth things over. I see tons of goodwill flowing to the new secularized organization, and media support for the return to roots, for the greater good of the common man, etc., etc. It can be done, and done well.
Re: [FairfieldLife] But Then It Was Too Late
This starts out with a little of that history and then veers off into eugenics. I believe there was a better documentary on this but I don't have it and don't recall it's title. My favorite book on the subject is The Occult and the Third Reich by Jean Michel-Angebert which is well researched and detailed. The author even claims that Hitler had a Tibetan Buddhist guru who was flown out of Germany just before it surrendered. http://www.amazon.com/occult-Third-Reich-McGraw-Hill-paperbacks/dp/0070018502 Vaj wrote: Did you ever see the documentary The Occult History of the Third Reich that aired on PBS years ago? This may be the same one: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3014581497309209211 It was amazing how similar the era leading up to the Third Reich was to our own time: interest in meditation, paganism, nudism, vegetarianism--essentially a New Age movement starting after the first WW in Germany. A large part was a nationalistic interest in traditional, German forms of paganism as part of their cultural and spiritual heritage. Most of the documentary consists of vintage B/W archival footage. A real eye-opener. On Oct 10, 2007, at 10:27 AM, do.rflex wrote: But Then It Was Too Late ~~ In his book, They Thought They Were Free, Milton Mayer interviewed Germans who discussed how their society changed right before their eyes, and how, despite Hitler's rhetoric, God was nowhere to be found. As one interviewee put it: And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying Jew swine, collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in – your nation, your people – is not the world you were in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way... More here: http://www.thirdreich.net/Thought_They_Were_Free.html To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
Bronte Baxter wrote: Another reason I left, though, was that they really were completely unwilling to deal with the questions I, personally, have about the whole enlightenment trip. I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. My physics teacher in High School had been a famous scientist and a member of the SS and, because early one morning he caught me meditating, we became friends as well. To him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism. A vegetarian, Hitler was guru to the SS, in every sense of the word, and he did group meditations with the top brass. I would say the Nazi's hijacked the New Age (which is really the old age) for their purposes. And yes when we have the NeoCons saying they are creating reality then we really do have some nut cases using some new age type philosophy. But we know that meditation does not equal fascism and is in fact totally the opposite as it's goal is liberation. Meditation organizations can equal fascism though, especially if they are more of a cult and members very judgmental.
[FairfieldLife] Righeous Anger As A Form Of Jacking Off
Curtis posted an insight today, in his wonderful Hemingwayesque do-it-in-as-few-words-as-possible style, that still has me reeling from its profundity. It just explains so MUCH, man. Think Rush Limbaugh. Think Bill McNeil. Think Ann Coulter. Think any number of equally angry leftist shock pundits. Their whole *schtick* is righteous anger. That's what pumps their ratings up and keeps them on top. Because that's what the audience wants to hear. So *think* about that. A TV audience whose lives are so empty that they get off on righteous anger. Is that sad, or what? I really think I might have been onto something with my quipped-without-thinking-it-through righteous anger is the closest they can get to feeling righteous one-liner. That may really be the issue, both for the TV pundits who feed the need for righteous anger, and for the TV audiences who feed on it. It's real Old Testament stuff, man. That book was just *full* of righteous anger. And it's still a Best Seller today. So is the Gita, if you are flexible enough to look at it that way. I mean, Krishna is up there trying to convince Arjuna to go out and waste his relatives by inspiring his sense of righteous anger. Or his sense of duty, which in my book is about the same thing when it comes to war. :-) Righteous anger is a RUSH. It gets yer heart pumpin' and yer blood rushin' around in yer veins and yer adrenaline pumpin' and it gets you HIGH, man. Be HONEST, people! The last time you lost it to a fit of righteous anger, didn't it feel GOOD, at the time? Wasn't it a RUSH? Almost as good as the other kinds of rushes you've experienced in life. Almost. If the other kind -- like samadhi, or the smile on someone's face after you help them when you didn't have to, or just the joy of watching a sunset -- aren't really happening for you. And, like the other kind of rushes, the rush of righteous anger is addicting. It *shifts your assemblage point*. It *alters your state of consciousness*. It *changes your state of attention*. One moment you are bored shitless with your life, and then you read something or see some- thing on the News and wham! -- it provokes that awesome sense of righteous anger in you. How could anyone DO this? How could anyone SAY this? And about ME, or people like me? I've got to strike back, or everyone will think I'm a wuss. If you strike back, you're a wuss. In Buddhist thought, that is. In Hindu thought, as expressed so eloquently by Krishna, you should go out and waste the people whose words or actions affronted you. Shoot them full of arrows and leave them to die in a pool of their own blood. Yeah... that's the ticket. *That* will sure prove that we Pandavas have the market on morality and righteousness and knowing what's what, won't it? Well, will it? Or will it just prove that the righteous who go to war out of righteous anger are just puny-assed little egos who are so out of touch with their feelings that they mistake righteous anger for righteousness? This person *deserves* to be flamed, because he's a liar. This nation *deserves* to be invaded, because they're saying that they aren't developing nukes, and they're liars. As above, so below. Fairfield Life is a micro- cosm of the world, working out the angst of the world. And just as nations declare war on each other for no better reason than righteous anger, so do individuals here at Fairfield Life. And it goes on and on, no matter who mentions it and no matter what approach they take to trying to change things. The recent push to make flaming a Bad Thing, and punishable by the worst fate that some of the righteously angry can imagine -- a week without being able to be righteously angry in public -- a dismal failure. Nothing has changed, despite all the well-intentioned wishes and less well-intentioned posturing. All of them were like pouring lighter fluid on a fire to put it out. The problem, as I see it, is to somehow convey to the folks who get off on righteous anger that there are other ways of getting off. You really don't *have* to sit there at your computer, jerk- ing your mouse furiously and pounding, pounding, pounding away at that keyboard to attain a sense of...uh...release, and fulfillment. You could do the same thing by just writing something positive and uplifting for a change.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
Bharitu, I didn't write that piece about growing up in Nazi Germany. Angela did. You attributed it to me. Regarding your comment, But we know that meditation does not equal fascism and is in fact totally the opposite as it's goal is liberation, I would say you're dismissing Angela's probe too casually. Of course the stated goal of meditation, according to to those who promote it, is liberation. But is that what it delivers? The stated goal of Naziism was to make Germany strong and good. Is that what it delivered? Angela, I wish you'd elaborate on the connections you see between New Age and Naziism, so we could discuss them. - Bronte Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bronte Baxter wrote: Another reason I left, though, was that they really were completely unwilling to deal with the questions I, personally, have about the whole enlightenment trip. I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. My physics teacher in High School had been a famous scientist and a member of the SS and, because early one morning he caught me meditating, we became friends as well. To him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism. A vegetarian, Hitler was guru to the SS, in every sense of the word, and he did group meditations with the top brass. I would say the Nazi's hijacked the New Age (which is really the old age) for their purposes. And yes when we have the NeoCons saying they are creating reality then we really do have some nut cases using some new age type philosophy. But we know that meditation does not equal fascism and is in fact totally the opposite as it's goal is liberation. Meditation organizations can equal fascism though, especially if they are more of a cult and members very judgmental. - Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our newest member, Angela, who just joined FFL yesterday when she left the Wednesday night satsang group in disgust, posted this cool and profoundly thoughtful email that I'll bet everyone missed because the title was misleading. Take a look! She hails from Nazii Germany and is observing some interesting stuff in the Fairfield community. (Note:Pompous shit is a reference to something posted yesterday about an alleged attitude manifested by some members of her previous group.) Angela writes: Pompous shit is a somewhat condensed locution, so I'll be a little more discursive about it. Anything at all can be constructed with words (and deconstructed) , including the semblance of enlightenment. Anyone with half a brain can learn the lingo pretty quickly, and this is not just about us, but about any group that calls itself us. After you learn the lingo, it becomes a game of one-upmanship among the guys and a petting zoo among the girls. And I didn't like the general attitude: More enlightened than thou is no improvement on Holier than thou. I saw too much of that in the Wednesday night satsang group after observing it for about a year, and had too many experiences of folks who didn't want ideas challenged in any way. So I left somewhat precipitously. Another reason I left, though, was that they really were completely unwilling to deal with the questions I, personally, have about the whole enlightenment trip. I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. My physics teacher in High School had been a famous scientist and a member of the SS and, because early one morning he caught me meditating, we became friends as well. To him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism. A vegetarian, Hitler was guru to the SS, in every sense of the word, and he did group meditations with the top brass. imo Hitler was insane, and a real asshole to boot. For possibly a second point of view, I worked and lived very closely with a fellow, Egon, who was an archeologist and spent a year at the Kansas City Capitals Project. He too had been born in Nazi Germany-- his dad was a soldier in the regular army and after his city was bombed to dust, ate the equivalent of roadkill to stay alive. He was no fan of the Nazis, to say the least. Now this wasn't Fairfield, but we were working directly for the TMO, so many of the same dynamics were possibly at play. There was something of a defacto class system between the Governors as they were known, and us, the worker bees earning our Siddhis course. Whatever. Egon expressed dislike for one of the Guvs especially but I didn't hear him ever say that the TMO were Nazis, or anything else comparing the Nazi regime to the surroundings, or what we were learning, or the attitudes of those on the Project.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:58 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote: Angela, I wish you'd elaborate on the connections you see between New Age and Naziism, so we could discuss them. - Bronte Did you ever check out the video I mentioned the documentary I mentioned the other day, The Occult History of the Third Reich? You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I believe he even had people dress up at one point. Rick had at one time posted this (I don't know if he ever got a response): A Jewish friend who used to be on Purusha told me some interesting stories about German Purusha celebrating Hitler's birthday, wearing swastikas under their ties, etc. I can't find it on my computers, but I'll email him to see if he still has what he sent me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sexy Brahmachari Chinmoy, was RIP...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 10:17 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 3:47 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. Notorious guru as well: Here we go, the slander from Vaj has just begun... Actually that was from Rick Ross's site. I liked some of the guy's writings years ago and I always loved Carlos Santana's and John McLaughlin's Love, Devotion and Surrender album (great Coltrane cover on it too). So I was surprised as anyone years later when I found out he was doing the Perv-O-Rishi thang too. It's a bizarre twist that the guy was a total health nut and emphasized meditation on the heart and then he dies of friggin' heart attack! How's that for irony? ;-) Yes, this post pretty much sums up the depth of your understanding on this and related topics. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I challenge you to verify these claims. You are a f. lier ! I believe he even had people dress up at one point. Rick had at one time posted this (I don't know if he ever got a response): Of course Rick had some rumours posted, thats his nature, he can't help it though he seems to need help. Perhaps Suptken could take him on since they are more or less on the same level. That's why he created FFL, for nitwits like yourself to post sick garbage. The dress you refer to, and in your deeply troubeled mind connects to nazism was suits with differnt colours for different states of consciousness. It was just an idea and one that was quickly dropped.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
I know Angela wrote it. That the quote section came out to you is irrelevant but sorry anyway. I could have left the whole thing in which would have clarified it but the snip police would have been all over me. :) But I am not causally dismissing the probe at all. She is stating that to him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism and is therefore inferring it does not mean that to her. An anti-fascist, anti-authoritarian like myself who has even been criticized on this forum for comparing Bush to Hitler obviously does not in any way dismiss Nazism. And if you read again you will notice I say it is cults (and Nazism was designed to be a cult) that are the problem not meditation. Now maybe your only experience with meditation is TM and therefore might be a rather narrow cultish perspective though since even as a teacher I found it easy to walk away from the movement whereas real cults tend to come after you. OTOH, political groups and their controllers can use things like meditation and vegetarianism to create a weak and submissive populace which for them would be a dream to rule and turn into slaves. It's always interesting to hear from people who grew up under totalitarians regimes especially when they note that this country seems to be headed right down that same road. I recently heard that from someone who grew up in Argentina as well as another friend who had to live under fascism in Portugal. The American nightmare is not over by a long shot. Bronte Baxter wrote: Bharitu, I didn't write that piece about growing up in Nazi Germany. Angela did. You attributed it to me. Regarding your comment, But we know that meditation does not equal fascism and is in fact totally the opposite as it's goal is liberation, I would say you're dismissing Angela's probe too casually. Of course the stated goal of meditation, according to to those who promote it, is liberation. But is that what it delivers? The stated goal of Naziism was to make Germany strong and good. Is that what it delivered? Angela, I wish you'd elaborate on the connections you see between New Age and Naziism, so we could discuss them. - Bronte Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bronte Baxter wrote: Another reason I left, though, was that they really were completely unwilling to deal with the questions I, personally, have about the whole enlightenment trip. I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. My physics teacher in High School had been a famous scientist and a member of the SS and, because early one morning he caught me meditating, we became friends as well. To him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism. A vegetarian, Hitler was guru to the SS, in every sense of the word, and he did group meditations with the top brass. I would say the Nazi's hijacked the New Age (which is really the old age) for their purposes. And yes when we have the NeoCons saying they are creating reality then we really do have some nut cases using some new age type philosophy. But we know that meditation does not equal fascism and is in fact totally the opposite as it's goal is liberation. Meditation organizations can equal fascism though, especially if they are more of a cult and members very judgmental. - Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. And ? The music is obviously not the point in his performances. Did you ever see him Jim ? Hi, no I didn't-- I just watched the youtube clip. Exactly, so you missed the whole point of these performances. I've seen two of them live with lots of people simply leaving not getting that it was a wonderful darshan of an obviously highly enlightenened soul.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
On Oct 14, 2007, at 4:55 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I challenge you to verify these claims. You are a f. lier ! I'll post what I can find. Here's the first one: Maharishi said, on a radio show in Scandinavia, that Hitler was highly evolved. Msg. #51983
[FairfieldLife] Re: Hysteria, the UCLA Study, and other memes about women
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Now don't you worry your pretty little head about this man talk. You will just get overwrought trying to keep up with the conversation and it'll give ya the vapors! Or even worse, hysteria! In the same vein, I pass along one of the few things I've read recently that made me spit my drink out onto the screen with laughter. It did the same for everyone I've shared it with, both men and women. So if anyone here gets offended or hysterical about it, you're atypical. UCLA Study A study conducted by UCLA's Department of Psychiatry has revealed that the kind of face a woman finds attractive on a man can differ depending on where she is in her menstrual cycle. For example: If she is ovulating, she is attracted to men with rugged and masculine features. However, if she is menstruating, or menopausal, she tends to be more attracted to a man with duct tape over his mouth and a spear lodged in his chest while he is on fire. No further studies are expected. ** Y'all know that hysteria is not exactly politically correct: Hippocrates taught that the cause of what came to be called hysteria was irregular movement of blood from the uterus to the brain. ...remember the Victorian British of only a century ago who, before Freud, termed hysteria an attack of the vapours. According to Victorian and Edwardian physicians, just what were the vapours? Uterine emanations seeping up from the vagina into milady's brain where they overwhelmed the female body! http://tinyurl.com/3y6se8
[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mainstream20016 Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 11:59 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris Regarding the reassurance that SatYug is nigh at hand, through the inevitability and necessity of India's role to bring all good to all of us - Great ! Wonderful ! I look forward to cathcing the rays of a global bath of beneficent light. Yet, as a practicality, it would be a good thing, and wise, to have a direct hand in raising one's consciousness. So I advocate for wide-spread individual TM practice in the West, yet that cannot happen if TMO remains an overtly religious organization. TM has, and can again, be taught honestly and effectively as a secular technique. As the last thirty-two years has shown, unless TM is taught as a secular technique, it's impact will be nill, notwithstanding the coming glories of SatYug. Seems to me Pandora's box has been opened. Even if the TMO were to try to scale back and present TM as a secular technique, critics would be able to present all sorts of evidence that for decades, it has been associated with Hindu and various wacky things. The TMO would be accused of trying to hide all that for marketing purposes. ** You are, naturally, missing the point of what's happening completely. It does not matter how people in the West perceive TM -- it's enough that a few people, aided by the presence of pundits, are doing TM in the West -- it's only necessary that a few candles have been lit throughout the world, and that has been accomplished. India alone can be responsible for the transition to a Vedic culture, Sat Yuga, and in India semantics about TM as religion are meaningless.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Righeous Anger As A Form Of Jacking Off
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis posted an insight today, in his wonderful Hemingwayesque do-it-in-as-few-words-as-possible style, that still has me reeling from its profundity. It just explains so MUCH, man. Think Rush Limbaugh. Think Bill McNeil. Think Ann Coulter. Think any number of equally angry leftist shock pundits. Their whole *schtick* is righteous anger. That's what pumps their ratings up and keeps them on top. Because that's what the audience wants to hear. So *think* about that. A TV audience whose lives are so empty that they get off on righteous anger. Is that sad, or what? I really think I might have been onto something with my quipped-without-thinking-it-through righteous anger is the closest they can get to feeling righteous one-liner. That may really be the issue, both for the TV pundits who feed the need for righteous anger, and for the TV audiences who feed on it. It's real Old Testament stuff, man. That book was just *full* of righteous anger. And it's still a Best Seller today. So is the Gita, if you are flexible enough to look at it that way. I mean, Krishna is up there trying to convince Arjuna to go out and waste his relatives by inspiring his sense of righteous anger. Or his sense of duty, which in my book is about the same thing when it comes to war. :-) Righteous anger is a RUSH. It gets yer heart pumpin' and yer blood rushin' around in yer veins and yer adrenaline pumpin' and it gets you HIGH, man. Be HONEST, people! The last time you lost it to a fit of righteous anger, didn't it feel GOOD, at the time? Wasn't it a RUSH? Almost as good as the other kinds of rushes you've experienced in life. Almost. If the other kind -- like samadhi, or the smile on someone's face after you help them when you didn't have to, or just the joy of watching a sunset -- aren't really happening for you. And, like the other kind of rushes, the rush of righteous anger is addicting. It *shifts your assemblage point*. It *alters your state of consciousness*. It *changes your state of attention*. One moment you are bored shitless with your life, and then you read something or see some- thing on the News and wham! -- it provokes that awesome sense of righteous anger in you. How could anyone DO this? How could anyone SAY this? And about ME, or people like me? I've got to strike back, or everyone will think I'm a wuss. If you strike back, you're a wuss. In Buddhist thought, that is. In Hindu thought, as expressed so eloquently by Krishna, you should go out and waste the people whose words or actions affronted you. Shoot them full of arrows and leave them to die in a pool of their own blood. Yeah... that's the ticket. *That* will sure prove that we Pandavas have the market on morality and righteousness and knowing what's what, won't it? Well, will it? Or will it just prove that the righteous who go to war out of righteous anger are just puny-assed little egos who are so out of touch with their feelings that they mistake righteous anger for righteousness? This person *deserves* to be flamed, because he's a liar. This nation *deserves* to be invaded, because they're saying that they aren't developing nukes, and they're liars. As above, so below. Fairfield Life is a micro- cosm of the world, working out the angst of the world. And just as nations declare war on each other for no better reason than righteous anger, so do individuals here at Fairfield Life. And it goes on and on, no matter who mentions it and no matter what approach they take to trying to change things. The recent push to make flaming a Bad Thing, and punishable by the worst fate that some of the righteously angry can imagine -- a week without being able to be righteously angry in public -- a dismal failure. Nothing has changed, despite all the well-intentioned wishes and less well-intentioned posturing. All of them were like pouring lighter fluid on a fire to put it out. The problem, as I see it, is to somehow convey to the folks who get off on righteous anger that there are other ways of getting off. You really don't *have* to sit there at your computer, jerk- ing your mouse furiously and pounding, pounding, pounding away at that keyboard to attain a sense of...uh...release, and fulfillment. You could do the same thing by just writing something positive and uplifting for a change. Let the new world begin with Thee, and then we'll see, the depth of your sincerity.
[FairfieldLife] Mahesh and Hitler
Dedicated to Nablososs Jai Guru Dev Love, Sri Sri Vaj Illuminati Headquarters Brocken Mountain, Germany from Msg.# 16079 Maharishi on Hitler This is from a Jewish friend who was full-time in the TMO for many years, including Purusha and International Staff in Vlodrop and elsewhere. He’s now with a different teacher. We had a private discussion about this a couple of months ago and I asked if I could post this. He said I could but asked that I not mention his name. Some time after being on Purusha, I discovered, to my great amazement, that some German Purusha were wearing swastikas under their ties, celebrating Hitler's birthday, and generally feeling very bully about the whole thing. I remembered what Frank Pappentine told me a few years back during our 6-month course in Arosa (we were good friends during that course): that Maharishi had met with the Germans in Seelisberg and told them that the Allies presented Hitler as a great demon to suppress the German morale, that the facts were different and that Hitler was, in fact, a good strong leader. I heard that from Maharishi myself, in Washington DC in 1983, when a reporter asked him what he thought of Hitler. He said, that Hitler was actually a good strong leader who unified Germany, it's just too bad that he did so much indiscriminate killing. All these caused me quite a shock at the time, and finally I decided to confront a question that had bothered me from childhood: how could intelligent, sophisticated Germans (and some of the leaders of his party and the SS were indeed sophisticated and intelligent) follow him? Some of them were reputed to be lovers of classical music, devoted husbands, doting fathers, fond of animals and loved to tend their rose gardens -- but had no problem going to work in the morning, work being the extermination of yet another transport of thousands of Jews. I asked one of my German friends to get me some Nazi literature about Hitler, that I was interested in learning more about how THEY viewed him. One of them got me a few magazines which were published on high-quality paper, with no ads (so a lot of money was involved). The magazines were all in German. I struggled through the articles, and was particularly struck by two of them: one about Hitler's love affairs, and another an account by his driver, who was the last person to see Hitler alive. The one about the love affairs was interesting: it turned out, that although he was partially impotent -- some of his aids were constantly on the lookout for any medical doctor who could provide him with a preparation to increase his potency -- once he had an affair with a woman, that woman was so enamored with him, that when he left her she committed suicide. This has happened a number of times. It even happened in the case of a British woman, who was in England when Churchill declared war, so she could not return to Germany and committed suicide from agony. Such was his charisma and power over people. But what was much more revealing to me was the account of his driver. As he was describing Hitler's last hours, he was speaking about the terrible loss and bereavement that he experienced -- and there was something heartbreaking about his devotion to Hitler. I'm serious: I completely identified with his intense emotions. I was only familiar with such powerful emotions in relationship to God or to one's Guru -- but here was a person who was relating to Hitler in this way, and was still lamenting his death so many years later, knowing all that he had done! I later on saw a BBC 6-hr documentary program on the rise of Nazism. They interviewed a person who worked with him closely at one point. And that person spoke about Hitler with the same passion that one speaks of one's Guru. He described his experience of interacting with Hitler -- there's no other way to describe it, except a spiritual experience -- and said, in this regard: I saw this side of Hitler, Hitler's most beautiful side; and no one can take it away from me. That is the Hitler I know and cherish. Why am I saying all this? Because that was the first time I understood how Hitler could have done what he had done. People who came in contact with him had a spiritual experience, and you know how such a profound experience often makes you surrender your discriminating ability. And you can even do atrocities. It was also the first time I realized that the power of spiritual people to give experience is potentially dangerous. It made me realize, that had I been a non-Jewish German at the time of Hitler, I could have potentially joined to Nazi party -- if that was the transmission that came out of Hitler. My response to this was: This is interesting stuff. As you know, the Vedas depict many great demons, such as Ravana, as being extremely charismatic, learned, and
[FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 4:55 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I challenge you to verify these claims. You are a f. lier ! I'll post what I can find. Here's the first one: Maharishi said, on a radio show in Scandinavia, that Hitler was highly evolved. Msg. #51983 Of course he was-- how else could he have ammassed all of his power; conquering many countries, implementing his unspeakable atrocities, if it wasn't a manifestation of his own personal power? Those mechanics don't change whether a person is good or evil.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
On Oct 14, 2007, at 5:44 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 14, 2007, at 4:55 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I challenge you to verify these claims. You are a f. lier ! I'll post what I can find. Here's the first one: Maharishi said, on a radio show in Scandinavia, that Hitler was highly evolved. Msg. #51983 Of course he was-- how else could he have ammassed all of his power; conquering many countries, implementing his unspeakable atrocities, if it wasn't a manifestation of his own personal power? Those mechanics don't change whether a person is good or evil. I don't think that's the question. The question is 'why was Mahesh so darn fascinated by the guy'? Could it be he is an Asuriac guru just lookin' for some tips?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Mahesh and Hitler
Vaj wrote: Dedicated to Nablososs Jai Guru Dev Love, Sri Sri Vaj Illuminati Headquarters Brocken Mountain, Germany from Msg.# 16079 Maharishi on Hitler This is from a Jewish friend who was full-time in the TMO for many years, including Purusha and International Staff in Vlodrop and elsewhere. He’s now with a different teacher. We had a private discussion about this a couple of months ago and I asked if I could post this. He said I could but asked that I not mention his name. Some time after being on Purusha, I discovered, to my great amazement, that some German Purusha were wearing swastikas under their ties, celebrating Hitler's birthday, and generally feeling very bully about the whole thing. I remembered what Frank Pappentine told me a few years back during our 6-month course in Arosa (we were good friends during that course): that Maharishi had met with the Germans in Seelisberg and told them that the Allies presented Hitler as a great demon to suppress the German morale, that the facts were different and that Hitler was, in fact, a good strong leader. I heard that from Maharishi myself, in Washington DC in 1983, when a reporter asked him what he thought of Hitler. He said, that Hitler was actually a good strong leader who unified Germany, it's just too bad that he did so much indiscriminate killing. All these caused me quite a shock at the time, and finally I decided to confront a question that had bothered me from childhood: how could intelligent, sophisticated Germans (and some of the leaders of his party and the SS were indeed sophisticated and intelligent) follow him? Some of them were reputed to be lovers of classical music, devoted husbands, doting fathers, fond of animals and loved to tend their rose gardens -- but had no problem going to work in the morning, work being the extermination of yet another transport of thousands of Jews. snip -- My friend’s response was that that attitude was a cop-out which allowed people to rationalize all sorts of mischief by gurus and other leaders. One has to look beyond Hitler and follow the money. He was trained and used by those who wanted to control the world and still want to today. Nazism was designed to appeal to the country folk (I've heard Hitler was not so popular in the cities) who usually wind up in the armies anyway. It was a failed first attempt at a New World Order or Global Society. Exterminating the Jews was just a start as they wanted to get rid of everyone who didn't fit their ideal society. I've read Mein Kampf and saw why the first 50 pages would have hooked people but then it fell into an disgusting badly written rant. As long as they got people to read the first few pages they hooked their supporters. Likewise Bush's speeches are designed to evoke emotional control in all but the brightest in this country who see right through them. Fortunately they seem to have underestimated the intelligence of the majority though. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Mahesh and Hitler
Yes, I totally agree. Hitler was used by those who still want to establish the New World Order. In fact, he was told in those exact terms, New World Order, that he would be instrumental in establishing it. He wasn't told that he'd only be a step along the way, though. He believed he was to be the big enchilada---the thousand-year Reich was to be sat-yuga. The antisemitism was not real in the same sense that the terrorists we're all afraid of today are not real. Hitler needed a single enemy to focus the people's attention on. There is even some evidence that Jews supplied him with the notion that they could be that single enemy. It's not conclusive evidence, but certainly the Warburgs were involved in it, in spite of the fact that Paul Warburg lost two close relatives in the death camps. a Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vaj wrote: Dedicated to Nablososs Jai Guru Dev Love, Sri Sri Vaj Illuminati Headquarters Brocken Mountain, Germany from Msg.# 16079 Maharishi on Hitler This is from a Jewish friend who was full-time in the TMO for many years, including Purusha and International Staff in Vlodrop and elsewhere. Hes now with a different teacher. We had a private discussion about this a couple of months ago and I asked if I could post this. He said I could but asked that I not mention his name. Some time after being on Purusha, I discovered, to my great amazement, that some German Purusha were wearing swastikas under their ties, celebrating Hitler's birthday, and generally feeling very bully about the whole thing. I remembered what Frank Pappentine told me a few years back during our 6-month course in Arosa (we were good friends during that course): that Maharishi had met with the Germans in Seelisberg and told them that the Allies presented Hitler as a great demon to suppress the German morale, that the facts were different and that Hitler was, in fact, a good strong leader. I heard that from Maharishi myself, in Washington DC in 1983, when a reporter asked him what he thought of Hitler. He said, that Hitler was actually a good strong leader who unified Germany, it's just too bad that he did so much indiscriminate killing. All these caused me quite a shock at the time, and finally I decided to confront a question that had bothered me from childhood: how could intelligent, sophisticated Germans (and some of the leaders of his party and the SS were indeed sophisticated and intelligent) follow him? Some of them were reputed to be lovers of classical music, devoted husbands, doting fathers, fond of animals and loved to tend their rose gardens -- but had no problem going to work in the morning, work being the extermination of yet another transport of thousands of Jews. -- My friends response was that that attitude was a cop-out which allowed people to rationalize all sorts of mischief by gurus and other leaders. One has to look beyond Hitler and follow the money. He was trained and used by those who wanted to control the world and still want to today. Nazism was designed to appeal to the country folk (I've heard Hitler was not so popular in the cities) who usually wind up in the armies anyway. It was a failed first attempt at a New World Order or Global Society. Exterminating the Jews was just a start as they wanted to get rid of everyone who didn't fit their ideal society. I've read Mein Kampf and saw why the first 50 pages would have hooked people but then it fell into an disgusting badly written rant. As long as they got people to read the first few pages they hooked their supporters. Likewise Bush's speeches are designed to evoke emotional control in all but the brightest in this country who see right through them. Fortunately they seem to have underestimated the intelligence of the majority though. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Mahesh and Hitler
On Oct 14, 2007, at 5:56 PM, Bhairitu wrote: One has to look beyond Hitler and follow the money. He was trained and used by those who wanted to control the world and still want to today. Nazism was designed to appeal to the country folk (I've heard Hitler was not so popular in the cities) who usually wind up in the armies anyway. It was a failed first attempt at a New World Order or Global Society. Exterminating the Jews was just a start as they wanted to get rid of everyone who didn't fit their ideal society. I've read Mein Kampf and saw why the first 50 pages would have hooked people but then it fell into an disgusting badly written rant. As long as they got people to read the first few pages they hooked their supporters. Likewise Bush's speeches are designed to evoke emotional control in all but the brightest in this country who see right through them. Fortunately they seem to have underestimated the intelligence of the majority though. :) The BBC documentary (available free on Google Video) The Occult History of the Third Reich really does a good job overall of summarizing the religious and nationalistic tendencies that were happening back then. Most shocking to me when I first saw it, was how it was all proceeded by a New Age movement not unlike what started in 1960's USA. Perhaps it will disabuse you from Alex Jones conspiracy ideas :-). Honestly I was waiting for you to tie this all into war industrialists stemming from Dubya's grandfather!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mahesh and Hitler
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As you know, the Vedas depict many great demons, such as Ravana, as being extremely charismatic, learned, and highly evolved. In some cases the story is told that the demon had the choice of being born into a series of righteous lives or one demonic life in which they would be killed by the Lord and thus liberated. They chose the demonic life. I don't presume to know the karmic mechanics behind the holocaust. The perpetrators of it, and especially Hitler, certainly seemed evil by all normal standards, but the universe is a strange place. Who can say with certainty where Hitler's soul is now? Is he suffering in hell or was he really some great soul that chose to play a role very distasteful by civilized standards? I would like to think he's suffering in hell, but who really knows? It seems the light and dark forces are always balancing each other out. There need to be great souls on both sides. In the ultimate analysis, is one side really good and the other bad, or is it all just a big Lila? I'd say yes, in the relative, good and bad both exist and I'd rather be on the good side. But is that God's perspective, or just my limited relative viewpoint? Ultimately, isn't it all just God playing all the roles to entertain Himself? Obviously I have more questions than answers. -- My friend's response was that that attitude was a cop-out which allowed people to rationalize all sorts of mischief by gurus and other leaders. Thanks for sharing this-- Its a great piece of writing! I'd agree that good and evil, light and dark, balance each other out in a universal Dharma. All I think we can do is live as simply as possible, with our wits about us, being ourselves. and the more we are simply ourselves, surrendering to our universal nature, with our wits about us, the more easily we can sustain a universal point of perfect personal balance, regardless of what occurs in time and space. Fewer problems both short and long term. See the job, do the job. I agree that it *is* God playing all the roles to entertain Himself, in the lap of Mother Divine.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
Angela Wrote: I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. Lurk: Neat,if that's the right word. When I graduated MIU back in '81, and entered our family business, one of my first customers was a German immigrant, Steve Esslinger-chief engineer at a local hotel. Somehow we hit it off, and became friends. Ocassionaly he would open up about wartime Germany, and how he would go down to the river a seek refuge under a bridge. A few years after we met, he died of a heart attack. There were other interesting facts about him,(won a scholorship to study in US), but most probably not of interest here. We also had an accountant in our business - Milton Shearer, holocaust survivor. He still had his tatoo. Totally gentle person. Don't know if he was a pacifist. Never went into those issues with him. Just some thoughts triggered by you introduction. _ - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
There is a misunderstanding that I'd like to clear up right from the start. Hitler was not responsible for fascism. Hitler was a tool that was used. They did a talent search for a dictator, very openly. Then, when they found their man, they groomed him and educated him, gave him new clothes, new pronunciation, new ways to think, groovy yogic techniques, etc. They manufactured Hitler in their ashram, quite literally. a nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I challenge you to verify these claims. You are a f. lier ! I believe he even had people dress up at one point. Rick had at one time posted this (I don't know if he ever got a response): Of course Rick had some rumours posted, thats his nature, he can't help it though he seems to need help. Perhaps Suptken could take him on since they are more or less on the same level. That's why he created FFL, for nitwits like yourself to post sick garbage. The dress you refer to, and in your deeply troubeled mind connects to nazism was suits with differnt colours for different states of consciousness. It was just an idea and one that was quickly dropped. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you ever check out the video I mentioned the documentary I mentioned the other day, The Occult History of the Third Reich? You also may not be aware, Mahesh was a real Hitler fan according to some movement insiders. I believe he even had people dress up at one point. Lurk Don't know about that. I would be pretty careful about making such a statement without SOMETHING to back it up, BUT, was anyone else in the fieldhouse when Walter Koch was adressing the student body and said, German youth, instead of student youth, which I believe he meant to say? That was a funny moment.
[FairfieldLife] Re: RIP Sri Chinmoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: his music is a joke! We are s lucky MMY didn't torture us with this crap! Thank you for posting this. The Sitar or Bean instrument was my favorite. I'm not sure which it was but he was such a douche for making people listen to him play that badly. I can't believe musical geniuses like Santana and John McLaughlin followed this guy. This guy had an ego problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAgD2VVo3A http://www.srichinmoy.tv/tv/70/view Embarrassingly bad music-- no musical talent at all. What an odd display of random playing of instruments. I do like the lazy-susan thing though! Yeah, the only thing I could surmise from his no talent performance was that he was demonstrating to his disciples how perfect he was at everything (!?). I just bought some music composing software with a bunch of samples that can be put together to form music, so I was listening to him play with an ear for any sort of structure or melody in what he was doing. zip. Many do not hear the structure and beauty in the music of Stockhausen either. He is a genius but not appreciated by the masses. Perhaps you just have the musical ear then Jim. I know contemporary composers that have been totally blown away by the work of Sri Chimnoy, hearing structure all the way.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
I might not have time to elaborate too much this week since I've got a house guest from China staying with me. But I'll do what I can. Also, it's a big subject that can't be dealt with in a few emails. It definitely can't be dismissed with a facile phrase like the Nazis highjacked the New Age. I've done long and serious scholarship and research on the topic. The New Age (for lack of a better term) aspect of German fascism was swept under the rug beginning with the Nuremberg war crimes trials, so this Egon guy probably never heard of it. I would never have heard of it either if I hadn't been meditating by some real fluke. Nazi Germany was crawling with all kinds of gurus--not just Indian, but also Tibetan, Chinese and Japanese. But as soon as the war was over in 45, they all vanished over night. I mean totally vanished in one swell foop so radical that it must have been orchestrated through a single source. The guy who taught me when I was six was a left over who was hiding out under a shepherd's cloak. Whatever else meditation may be, it certainly is also a fabulous social engineering tool. Consider: Maharishi took a bunch of freedom and democracy loving hippies, and, in the space of twenty years, turned them into firm believers in the divine right of kings, appointed by a superior priest caste, naturally--one with the power, no doubt, to off unruly rulers. There isn't a single article of faith that's current in the meditating community in Fairfield that wasn't also current among the initiated in Germany under Hitler. All the phrases we use here were familiar to me beginning with Established in Being, perform action. In that state, you do not incur bad karma, even when the action involves medical experiments, painful and often lethal, on other human beings. After all, they had chosen that life; moreover, they were performing a service to help bring heaven on earth for a thousand years. a jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our newest member, Angela, who just joined FFL yesterday when she left the Wednesday night satsang group in disgust, posted this cool and profoundly thoughtful email that I'll bet everyone missed because the title was misleading. Take a look! She hails from Nazii Germany and is observing some interesting stuff in the Fairfield community. (Note:Pompous shit is a reference to something posted yesterday about an alleged attitude manifested by some members of her previous group.) Angela writes: Pompous shit is a somewhat condensed locution, so I'll be a little more discursive about it. Anything at all can be constructed with words (and deconstructed) , including the semblance of enlightenment. Anyone with half a brain can learn the lingo pretty quickly, and this is not just about us, but about any group that calls itself us. After you learn the lingo, it becomes a game of one-upmanship among the guys and a petting zoo among the girls. And I didn't like the general attitude: More enlightened than thou is no improvement on Holier than thou. I saw too much of that in the Wednesday night satsang group after observing it for about a year, and had too many experiences of folks who didn't want ideas challenged in any way. So I left somewhat precipitously. Another reason I left, though, was that they really were completely unwilling to deal with the questions I, personally, have about the whole enlightenment trip. I was born in Nazi Germany, saw the tail end of the war myself, and then grew up in an environment in which all kinds of Nazis (including bliss-Nazis) tried to come to terms with the experience of the Third Reich. My physics teacher in High School had been a famous scientist and a member of the SS and, because early one morning he caught me meditating, we became friends as well. To him, and to my mother, meditation meant fascism. A vegetarian, Hitler was guru to the SS, in every sense of the word, and he did group meditations with the top brass. imo Hitler was insane, and a real asshole to boot. For possibly a second point of view, I worked and lived very closely with a fellow, Egon, who was an archeologist and spent a year at the Kansas City Capitals Project. He too had been born in Nazi Germany-- his dad was a soldier in the regular army and after his city was bombed to dust, ate the equivalent of roadkill to stay alive. He was no fan of the Nazis, to say the least. Now this wasn't Fairfield, but we were working directly for the TMO, so many of the same dynamics were possibly at play. There was something of a defacto class system between the Governors as they were known, and us, the worker bees earning our Siddhis course. Whatever. Egon expressed dislike for one of the Guvs especially but I didn't hear him
Re: [FairfieldLife] Mahesh and Hitler
On Oct 14, 2007, at 6:06 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: Yes, I totally agree. Hitler was used by those who still want to establish the New World Order. In fact, he was told in those exact terms, New World Order, that he would be instrumental in establishing it. He wasn't told that he'd only be a step along the way, though. He believed he was to be the big enchilada---the thousand-year Reich was to be sat-yuga. The antisemitism was not real in the same sense that the terrorists we're all afraid of today are not real. Hitler needed a single enemy to focus the people's attention on. There is even some evidence that Jews supplied him with the notion that they could be that single enemy. It's not conclusive evidence, but certainly the Warburgs were involved in it, in spite of the fact that Paul Warburg lost two close relatives in the death camps. a Are there really significant parallels between the Third Reich and Mahesh yogis spiritual movement though? And are these same ideas being cloned onto splinter satsang groups? Rick posted a very interesting link to a video which purported to be by an ex-KGB agent which claimed groups like the KGB were observing the TMO for ideas in undermining nations.
[FairfieldLife] The year of Lynch
The year of Lynch by Yvonne Puig Anthem magazine 14 October 2007 On 14 October 2007 Anthem magazine reported: The famously elusive movie director David Lynch has been more high-profile this year with the success of his best-selling book on Transcendental Meditation titled 'Catching the Big Fish: Meditation, Consciousness, and Creativity', and his sold-out benefits across the US promoting the David Lynch Foundation for Consciousness- Based Education and World Peace. Soon his admirers will get to view more of his life as a new reality show, currently in production, follows the director as he tours the country speaking about TM. It is a joy for Global Good News service to feature this news, which indicates the success of the life-supporting programmes Maharishi has designed to bring fulfilment to the field of culture. The article stated, 'This year alone, his foundation, the David Lynch Foundation for Consciousness-Based Education and World Peace, now in its second year, hosted sold-out benefits at Lincoln Center in New York City and Kennedy Center in Washington and a concert with Donovan at the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood. Sixty-five schools now boast Transcendental Meditation programs because of the foundation's work. Catching the Big Fish spent twelve weeks on the best-seller list and will soon be out in paperback; one-hundred percent of the book's proceeds go to the foundation.' Lynch was quoted as saying, 'Transcendental Meditation is not a religion. It's a mental technique that unfolds the human being's full potential. We have a full potential, and it's so gloriously huge. And when the penny drops and people realize that, then they say, 'We want it, we gotta have it.'' Currently in production is a new reality show that features the director crisscrossing the United States speaking about Transcendental Meditation. Filming for the show first started in May of this year during the David Lynch Weekend, which is an annual event at Maharishi University of Management in Fairfield, Iowa. The article stated, 'Lynch is also executive-producing a feature-length documentary about the science and benefits of TM entitled The Square Root of One Percent, tentatively set to be complete in the fall of 2008.' The documentary will feature a two-month study that showed when a large group practises Transcendental Meditation together, crime rates go down significantly. It will also feature an advanced meditation practice known as Yogic Flying. The article stated, 'The impact meditation has had on Lynch's creative life cannot be underestimated, but beyond the personal effects, he sees it as a force for positive change in the larger world. And he's nothing if not optimistic.' The article concluded with a quote by Lynch, 'It's so unbelievable what's going on, but that's going to end. It's a new thing coming. A beautiful, beautiful, beautiful world is coming.' Global Good News comment: For information about Maharishi's seven-point programme to create a healthy, happy, prosperous society, and a peaceful world, please visit: Global Financial Capital of New York. Every day Global Good News documents the rise of a better quality of life dawning in the world and highlights the need for introducing Natural Law basedTotal Knowledge basedprogrammes to bring the support of Nature to every individual, raise the quality of life of every society, and create a lasting state of world peace. Copyright © 2007 Global Good News(sm) Service. - Jetzt Mails schnell in einem Vorschaufenster überfliegen. Dies und viel mehr bietet das neue Yahoo! Mail.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Links between New Age and Naziism -- in Fairfield?
On Oct 14, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: There is a misunderstanding that I'd like to clear up right from the start. Hitler was not responsible for fascism. Hitler was a tool that was used. They did a talent search for a dictator, very openly. Then, when they found their man, they groomed him and educated him, gave him new clothes, new pronunciation, new ways to think, groovy yogic techniques, etc. They manufactured Hitler in their ashram, quite literally. a Who's they Angela? The Thule society? The Theosophical Society?
