Unfortunately, I can't remember the names and dates, but there are reports of levitation in the Neo-Platonic tradition, so the mysterious East is not the only source for such stories. a
curtisdeltablues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "You somehow, along with Curtis seem to be under the impression that whenever I cite scriptures I am appealing to their authority. Thats also wrong. I just used them to make a reference to a more general belief in flying in religious scriptures." Noted! Interesting post. --- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], t3rinity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > Heck, even Jesus Christ allowed himself to be seen > > > > ascending to heaven and sitting at the right hand > > > > of God. There are all *kinds* of portraits of him > > > > doing precisely that. > > > > > > ROFLOL > > > You nailed it Judy, thats so funny, this whole line of argument. The > > > bottom line is, who is sitting in a glasshouse shouldn't throw stones. > > > People who believe in flying - no scientific proof so far, but equally > > > unfalsifiable - make fun of people who believe in flying. > > > > > > People who believe in flying, because they have the experience of > > > having seen it - which doesn't represent any proof, make fun of > > > people who believe in flying because of their own experience, and > > > call them TBBs, while they themselves are TBBs. > > > > Uh, that's TBs, Michael. Did you develop a stutter? :-) > > Ok, I thought True Blue Believer, would be TBB? > > > And I never referred to Nabby as a TB for believing > > that TM people can fly, merely for parroting what > > he's been told by Maharishi as if it were some kind > > of sacrosanct truth. > > Quite possibly Nabby sees this different. He might think that he > adhers to what he has experienced - just like you. > > > > People make fun of other peoples adherence to beliefs, while their > > > own belief system is rock-solid. When challenged about their own > > > beliefs of witnessing the very same phenomenon, and their > > > psychological reactions to it, that is when the validity or > > > seriousness of such a show was challenged in one case wished > > > (literally): 'Fuck off and die' > > > > > > Why is it so difficult for some people, to graciously overlook their > > > own vulnerabilities and mock at the other whose belief is no > > > different at all? Does not the whole vedic literature suggests > > > strongly a belief in siddhis, do not the whole Puranas recount them > > > and all of the Yogic and tantric literature is full of references > > > to supernormal powers, so anybody basing his/her teachings on such > > > scriptures sits in the same boat, and that includes of course > > > Ammaji. While I believe She is really doing good work, and is a > > > great being, her whole biography is full of references to the > > > supernormal, and the Sri Lalita Sahasranam describes the Devi in > > > not unclear terms as the master of Siddhis. (The daily recitation > > > of this text is highly recommended by Ammaji). I don't want to put > > > Ammaji or Dr. Lenz down with this, I'm just pointing out, that you > > > can't believe in one thing and at the same time disbelieve in the > > > very same thing. In this argument there is a very profound > > > dishonesty. > > > > In other words, you've never seen flying either, > > right? > > Not that I knew. I mean I saw some magic tricks being performed by a > stage magician on youtube > > > > But you believe in it, because of some words you > > read in books that most people consider fiction, > > right. :-) > > No, not right, I don't believe in it ;-) Surprise? I defend somebodies > right to believe whatever he wants without believing it myself. My > non-belief is not very strong though. I just don't know, and I don't > really care either. You somehow, along with Curtis seem to be under > the impression that whenever I cite scriptures I am appealing to their > authority. Thats also wrong. I just used them to make a reference to a > more general belief in flying in religious scriptures. > > > All I'm saying is, "Prove it." > > Why? I don't believe it myself. You believe it, so why don't you prove > it. Why should I prove your beliefs? > > > I've seen flying, or at least what appeared to > > be someone not only levitating for long periods > > of time in one place but moving through the air. > > You haven't seen flying, rather you saw something you believe was > flying. Maybe it was maybe it was just a stage magic or a sort of > hypnosis. Nabby also refers to his experience of levitating. I have no > reason to believe that your experience was in any way superior than > his. Yet this is what you seem to say. Your experience seems to > constitute somekind of proof or substitute proof for you, while Nabby > according to you is only a TB and uncritically follows MMY. Somebody > could claim the same thing about you, that you at the time you saw it > were uncritically following Dr. Lenz, and never questioned the nature > of your experience. Believe it or not, in this question I am more near > to Curtis position than you. > > > > Many times. And yet I wouldn't claim that it > > *was* flying, only that I saw it, and many > > times. In that particular case, the guy didn't > > even claim he could do it; he was more Nike > > about the whole thing, and Just Did It. > > Well, just in case, a stage performer wouldn't have to claim it either > and still could people make believe that he did it, and he could > repeat it many times and many people would see it. As some videos on > youtube prove. > > > > All I'm suggesting to Nabby is "Just Do It." If > > you want us to believe that the TM-siddhi prog- > > ram has produced people who can really fly, > > <putting on my best Cuba Gooding voice> "Show > > us the flying." > > Well, that he doesn't show or doesn't want to doesn't prove he can't > of course :-) Maybe he feels that a sceptic could disturb his inner > state of samadhi, what do I know and I don't really care either. > Personally I believe you are in the same boat anyway, and Dr. Lenz > didn't prove flying. Why, one may ask if it was so easy to him and he > could do it in front of thousands? Why did he resist a performance > under scientific conditions? > > > *Then* we'd all be in the same boat, having > > seen something with our own eyes, but never > > knowing for sure whether it was real or not, > > or whether cameras would have recorded > > On the videos in youtube cameras could record it. Why couldn't Dr. > Lenzes performance? > > > > I'd suggest the same thing to you, Michael. > > The day you can come to me and say, "I've > > seen this phenomenon with my own eyes, *then* > > we can discuss flying on an equal basis. > > Wrong. I don't believe in it, and seeing for example David Copperfield > doing it on stage wouldn't give me any advantage in judging the > phenomenon. Your belief is just on the same basis as Nabbys. I have no > idea why you want to be special. > > > Until > > then, you're merely citing references to books > > and teachers that you believe are credible. > > Wrong again, misunderstanding from your side. I don't believe in their > credability, I just use them to illustrate peoples beliefs. > > > And > > you call *me* dishonest? At least I'm speaking > > from my own personal experience. > > And so is Nabby. > > > Nabby too claims to have seen it, and even > > claims to have done it. Then again, he's the > > guy who keeps telling us that the Maitreya guy > > he believes in, who was first promised to appear > > Any Day Now over 30 years ago, is gonna show up > > Any Moment Now, and when he does he'll speak to > > everyone on earth simultaneously in a language > > they can all understand. So you'll have to > > forgive me if I don't consider him quite as > > authoritative as you seem to. > > I consider neither of you authoritative. > > > Besides, dude...you're still pissed off about > > some conversation I don't even *remember*. > > How evolved does that make you? :-) > > No, I am not pissed off about it. I just give it as an example about > your involvement in personal beliefs. I have nothing against those > beliefs. I just think that you - and many others- are applying a > double standard. My own beliefs and opinions are perfectly in accord > with my own experiences - I don't believe in flying, but I believe in > God (not necessarily as creator), I don't believe in individual > doer-ship, or an independent ego running the body-mind, and I have no > need to be more evolved or more smart than anybody else. Any more > questions? > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
