I liked the books quite a bit, having never had any problem with wizards myself, I like her style of writing too.
________________________________ From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodle...@mail.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 1:07 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@...> wrote: > > Oh my lord! That means you can't abide that English woman, Jo Rowling!!!!! Deary me no, Harry Potter and the Gob of Shite. Admittedly I haven't read any of the books and why my (female) friends used to recommend them to me I don't know, but I sat through one of the movies and wanted to gnaw my legs off after 5 minutes. I think I'm a bit too old for Voldemort being past puberty as I am... > ________________________________ > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 11:41 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > Awww, Come on Sal, why you don't like Deepak? > > I don't like any of these guru types who make a fortune out > of seekers, even if it is their own choice. I don't like the > reliance on quantum physics as a prop for woolly thinking > and undeliverable promises or pushing untested folk medicine. > I don't like the whole "veda is truth" thing. Basically my > same reasons for disliking the TMO. > > I am interested in his split from the TMO though, in our old > tape cupboard at the academy we had a huge box of videos > featuring Deepak with a "not to be played" sign on them. I > gather he went from quite the darling to public enemy number one > very swiftly but I never managed to get a straight answer about > why from anybody. > > Usually it was that he changed Marshy's teaching (I thought it > was him teaching Marshy about AV) or that he made some personal > money out of it which TM bigwigs saw as some sort of ultimate > crime. Bizarrely, as they still sell no end of courses in vedic #wisdom > promising a fruitful career. Maybe they were annoyed as > he was the only one who ever did make a buck out of the TMO. > I know precious few who ever got any "nature" support from that direction. > > > > > I know I have enjoyed his writing - especially his first fiction novel, > > Return of Merlin which he supposedly wrote the bulk of during the year when > > he was looking after the Big M subsequent to his being poisoned. I loved > > that novel. > > Didn't know he wrote fiction though, but I never liked fantasy > novels anyway, if I even get a sniff of a wizard I'm off - It's > sci-fi for me if I'm feeling speculative. > > ________________________________ > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 2:22 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Seraphita" <s3raphita@> wrote: > > > > > If you're interested in the debate with materialists, you > > > could do a lot better than Chopra. He's not what I would > > > call a rigorous thinker. > > > > He's an asshole. > > > > > You might try Thomas Nagel's "Mind and Cosmos: Why the > > > Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost > > > Certainly False." > > > > > > Nagel got in a lot of trouble with the big-time materialists; > > > the book really upset them, so he must have hit close to the > > > bone. > > > > LOL. > > >
