On 3/28/2014 12:51 PM, emilymae...@yahoo.com wrote: > > Re: I try to remember the good parts of the ride. > Clearly, you've moved on. Richard, on the other hand, hasn't. Smile. > What you need to understand. Emily, is that nobody saw Rama levitate for REAL - it was all smoke and mirrors. Levitation is the ability to suspend an object by a physical force against gravity, in a stable position without solid physical contact. According to my sources, the reason behind flooding the lecture hall with golden light and various other colored lights was a distraction so that Rama could APPEAR to levitate up into the air. At one point he used real smoke as a cover. Go figure.
Here is how it works: You get a bunch of guys and a few gals to pay you $1000 to meet up in a sweat lodge out in the desert at night. Inside the lodge it's about 100 degrees with about five wood fire pits burning and dozens of lighted incense sticks stuck in the sand all around. Notice how they turn the lights down real low. Then, you bring out the mescal beans and the tequila and pass it around with the peace pipe filled with the cannabis. Then they start the slow chanting and bring in the bass drum. At about this time Rama begins to speak: "I am the Zen Master Rama..." In fact, all the Rama was doing was what cult members call Stage 1 - "bun hopping." Stage 2 is simple "hovering", according to advanced cult members. But, it's not REAL levitation, which is total suspension with no physical support. However, there is this one report that is seriously being investigated: [image: Inline image 1] So, who would you believe? A Harvard-trained scientist of physics and rocket science, who said there was no proven levitation event in any peer-reviewed learned journal in the last 100 years. Or: A ex-cult member, hippie writer living in Amsterdam whose leader graduated from Stony Brook U in English literature, who wrote Surfing the Himalayas and committed suicide by jumping in a lake and drowning himself? On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:51 PM, <emilymae...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Re: I try to remember the good parts of the ride. > Clearly, you've moved on. Richard, on the other hand, hasn't. Smile. > > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : > > *From:* "emilymaenot@..." <emilymaenot@...> > > *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Friday, March 28, 2014 6:14 PM > *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Post Count Fri 21-Mar-14 00:15:03 UTC > > > I agree that there was definitely something about Rama. I don't really > have a theory and come from a place of ignorance on the topic of > "enlightenment" - having never studied, read about, or pursued such a > state. However, people are born with different levels of sensitivity - that > I believe, so I rested there in what I said..look at the writeup of Rick's > latest interview. > Emily, I was there. At Ground Zero. And while I agree with you that there > was something about Rama, I have no more theories than you do as to what > that "something" was. > > It was what it was, and that was at times a marvelous Disneyland E-ticket > ride. If I remember him at all (which honestly, I don't do all that much), > I try to remember the good parts of the ride. > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote : > > As I said previously, I've read autobiographies, and biographies of people > who were said to be enlightened. A few that come to mind are Yogananda, > Muktananda, Ramakrishna, Vivekenanda, with a very notable mention for > Elizibeth Haich. I've read books by them, or about them, and I came way > feeling that they were enlightened. Whatever enlightenment means. But > whatever it is, I felt they had it. > > I had the same feeling when I read the transcripts of the interviews with > Fred Lenz. > > What you speculate below makes as much sense as anything else. That of > course is your take away. > > Now whether the enlightenment of a teacher gives way sex with students, or > other activities not normally associated with being enlightened, I don't > have an answer for it, and it doesn't negate the fact that they may be > enlightened, at least for me. > > For me, I feel I've made the most progress spiritually when I don't > attempt to judge people, places, or things. I try to look at things in a > cool manner, and by doing so, I feel I sometimes gain particular insights. > I think that may be something I picked up from the Carlos Castenades > books. I'm a little tired so I can't remember accurately. > > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emilymaenot@...> wrote : > > Re: I happen to be in the camp that thinks Fred had achieved a > remarkable level of consciousnesses. > > I have no idea what that means, honestly...."a remarkable level of > consciousness." My sense is that he had skills and abilities that not > everyone has...perhaps he was born with them, perhaps he discovered them > along the way. Kind of like those people that have skills to communicate > with animals, for example, they are just wired that way, or particularly > sensitive in that certain way and able to recognize it. But, in Fred > Lenz's case, he fell prey to his own narcissism and illusions and drug > addictions, etc. and....it didn't go well for him or for those who invested > themselves in or with him as their "teacher" and "leader." > > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote : > > Sure, I understand. I happen to be in the camp that thinks Fred had > achieved a remarkable level of consciousnesses. For me it is based on the > transcripts of two interviews he gave. Maybe going back, I might feel > differently. But I've read my share of books on, or about, supposed > enlightened people. Sometimes that quality really shines through. That was > the feeling I was left with after reading the interviews. > > His practice of different siddhis? No idea But as you say, they were > observed by many people. > > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emilymaenot@...> wrote : > > Nope, I can't. But, I believe that Mark L. and others had the early > experiences they did with Fred. I am not weighing in on the how or why of > it all. Notice Steve, that I've left myself an enormous amount of wiggle > room here using the phrase "altered perception." Many things can create an > experience of altered perception - hypnosis, drugs, meditation, etc. > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote : > > Emily, can you elaborate on how this typically works? > > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emilymaenot@...> wrote : > > Why Richard, why....do you continue to obsess on Fred Lenz? Why oh why oh > why? Rama had the ability to alter one's perception...well before the > drugs took over. He's not the only one who had/has this ability. Get over > it. > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <punditster@...> wrote : > > On 3/25/2014 8:44 AM, TurquoiseBee wrote: > > I have no interest in "engaging" with you, Jim, for any reason whatsoever. > You're a mental midget with psychological problems so severe that you feel > the need to pretend that you're enlightened. What could there possibly be > to talk about? > > The only person here "dodging and weaving" and "hiding" is you. I think > you're doing so because you don't want to reveal that your marriage is as > rocky as your hold on sanity. > > > > Speaking of "dodging and weaving", it looks to me like Barry doesn't want > to talk about the Rama levitation event. Go figure. > > > > >
