I find it interesting when people talk of past lives, no matter what group, they always seem to be someone important, or close to those who are close to someone important within the culture of the people they are speaking to. They are never a no-name beggar dying in some unknown town. Or a fish in the sea, or a potato plant, or a devious lawyer, or an insect squashed by the flick of some animal's tail, or a scheming despot. It is always something edifying to an ego and the collective ego of the audience.
How nice to have been near Jesus, or whatever, rather than some grunt who laboured in the fields and barely made it through each day. Human memory of even this single life past is malleable, and memories change with recalling, often being completely wrong as far as actual fact. I think Curtis' observation that Hammond seemed 'fragile', might be a telling point. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : IMO, Hammond is delusional. It's apparent that he likes the TM movement and its tradition to the point of believing that he was once Bhrigu. He appears to be synthesizing his knowledge of the various religions and philosophies and came to the conclusion that he was once involved with the leading figures of these religions in his previous life. I'm sure he believes in what he is saying. But people will realize that his stories are coming from a delusional mind. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote : He claimed that as Brighu, he was Maharishi's dad, one of his four sons. He also claimed that Maharishi sat on a dais with two people on his right and left to imitate his father, himself. He told us that before he revealed who he was. Oddly he said that Maharishi was instructing him to do it. It is odd to me cuz I would think that as a former Brighu he should be able to make such decisions for himself, right? He had been Plato and a disciple of Jesus and he still needed daddy Maharishi's permission? That part was a bit slippery as if he was offloading the responsibility for making such an outrageous claim onto Maharishi. "The guru made me do it!" (Said in Flip Wilson's Laugh In voice!) Shankara was the incarnation of Vyasa who wrote lots of the Vedic literature including the Gita. In Hinduism, Veda Vyasa was considered to be part Vishnu with Krishna being all Vishnu all the time. But I don't think we can begrudge the guy his success. He made a bundle of cash as a lawyer and he has a hobby, being whatever it was he was laying down. It shows how complicated people are and how really energetic driven people can kick ass in business, while not being exactly consistent through their whole personality. Also think of the hutzpa this guy could direct for his own gain. It doesn't surprise me that he kinda believed in himself a little throughout his career. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : how successful can he be when he is in essence claiming to be the spiritual father of the whole TM Movement and the so called holy tradition from whence TM supposedly came by being Shankara's daddy in the ancient times? Talk about wanting attention - man oh man. His sister's passing seems to have unhinged him. From: "wayback71@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 1, 2014 7:11 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: George critique from my own POV apassionforwisdom.com upper right corner has a books tab. Books on Andrew the Apostle, Pythagorus, Plato, God, physics, He has been super interested in all this for years. Gives speeches. Sounds like a very successful and smart man with interesting interests.