Oh, Goddamn, Edg. Please stop with the faux outrage.
But, but, as you are, IMO, one of the most interesting people here, I can't say I regret bring you back into the dialog with my mild barb. I mean, you realize this is one of the few times you have actually responded to a post in about two years. But, in all honesty Edg, I think your post to Doug, holding him accountable for the credentials of this scientist, was also, IMO, downright silly, and of course an impossible thing to do, and might qualify as its own type of trolling. So, that's my take. Gotta get ready to go to work. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : Steve, You are labeling me as someone with stored up anger....."to whatever degree"....and for a large part of my adult life. This is an ad hominem -- in a public forum. How so? Quite simply I have not reported (here at FFL or elsewhere online) my inner emotional states throughout my life with any detail such that a, what?, couch psychiatrist?, can insinuate about my past or present or future emotional states.....let alone present a logical assembly of my posts that would demonstrate to a scientific prognosticator enough information for that "decider" to say, "Oh, yeah, that kind of mind, piss on it, that anger just clouds his judgment and it's just not worth dealing with this fuckwad." Yet this is exactly the intent of your post. You with no credentials are asserting something untrue about me. This is a foul accusation about me. I protest to Doug. Doug? There are not enough facts in evidence that I am someone with stored up anger -- which is merely code for "might blow at any minute." My online history is checkered with every manner of emotionalism, because I'm a writer and give myself permission to be silly, satirical, rude, outrageous, poetic, raw, real, fake OR WHATEVER. To interpret who I am from my online posts would require a PhD jury to authenticate some candidate's findings. AS FUCKING IF. This is an outrageous smear job by any decent minded regard. Aaaaaaaaand, further, the question: "Does that make sense?" is clearly another attempt to present the concept "Edg is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo fucking stupid, you have to treat him like child, and always double check what's going on in that little noggin' of his." It is this sort of tactic that everyone here understands for what it is: plain old trolling -- with a smirk that assumes there's denial ability to shield all protests. "What? I never meant that. Why how dare you accuse me of having such a low intent." -- like that. Like fucking that. That's the tactic -- to me, it's Gestapol shit. Now, in the past, I would enter into a delightful tirade of withering statements about you, personally, that would leave stains on your soul, but DOUG IS WATCHING, so I won't. But you have violated the intent and spirit of the guidelines -- IN MY OPINION, and I call for Doug to arbitrate this issue and give us the benefit of his wisdom -- here in the public forum where the "act" occurred. Let's see if you have, indeed, befouled our pristine and new intent to be civil here, or if I'm mistaken and, truly, everyone thinks I'm way over the top in my interpretation of your below text. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote : He's a moderator Edg, not responsible for vetting all the content that passes through here in terms of its future efficacy. Or present efficacy for that matter. Nor is he a therapist to help you process whatever anger you have stored up from what appears to be a large part of your adult life participating in this movement. Does that make sense? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : So, Doug, are you personally vouching for this guy? You're sure he's not like, say, Harold Bloomfield? Or Herbert Benson? Or, any of the various experts that have come into the movement spotlight and were never to be heard from again? There's lots and lots of ex-TM-heroes that are now scandalous zeroes, correct? So what makes us trust this guy if credentials and charisma are so easily faked that the TM Movment has repeatedly been fooled into honoring individuals who then went on TO DISGRACE -- EVEN INCLUDING PRISON FOR HEINOUS CRIMES? The TM Movement is DICTATORIALLY MUM about Girish's legal troubles in India, and about all the past heroes now in ruins. How is it, then, that you DARE TO RISK YOUR PRECIOUS INTEGRITY by putting your imprimatur upon him? Have you not yourself been FOOLED into honoring the above mentioned zeroes and many others? How has your ability to pick a hero improved? How can we believe you with such a track record -- even including ongoing crimes that are being hushed up and NOT mentioned by you as you have mentioned this announcement? Where is your fair and balanced integrity as a reporter if you are not investigating what you bring to us? Seems to me that you need to shore up this ADVERTISEMENT with a personal testimony that shows the depth of your scholarship in putting forth this "doctor" as if he should be saluted. And if you're merely passing along some MUM promotional announcement, don't you think you're BOTHERING JUST ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE HERE WITH SUCH AN OFFENSIVE OFFERING THAT HAS NO BASIS IN RESEARCHED FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN ELSEWHERE DUPLICATED BY NON-MOVEMENT SCIENTISTS? Are you not, Sir, I ask you directly, trolling MOST of the minds here? What say you? What is your true intent to do this to us when we have so vociferously and for A DECADE shown that we have only a wicked disdain for this kind of information? Pony up, Dude. Be real. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Om by the way, I went to the lecture and it was really a fine and fair synthesis of material. When you step back the lecture is a charting to what evidently is coming as the future fusion of allopathic and wholistic medicine anyway. Trained as a Medical Doctor, a career-long research scientist with a long list of active funded research, a long record of published work, and a senior faculty member of MUM he is quite well qualified enough to lecture on topics of the health of the mind and body, which synthesized becomes psychiatry as the mind relates to cardiology, the heart. The implications are cross-discipline great. “One’s state of mental health is as important a risk factor for heart disease as high blood pressure, cholesterol, and diabetes,” said Dr. Schneider, dean of the Maharishi College of Perfect Health. Lecture on 'Vedic Psychiatry'.. 416339Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: FF Mental Health Alliance: Shifting Cultural Attitudes https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/416339 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/416339 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : MJ, FFL being categorized with Yahoo-groups as a spiritual group one would hope that people could come in here and express their own spiritual experience without the harassing suppression of threats being made against them. You seem to have some parochial way in threatening people here by 'slap'. Would pushing the 'moderate' button over your membership status here better provide safe space for spiritual people to come forward on FFL with their experiences? For instance I should think it valuable to also have Robert Schneider or someone from his office come on here and express their feelings in conversation here, without threat of abuse. Threat exampled within FFL post #416341 as what evidently was a slurring rant and an invasion of someone's privacy, using FFL as a vehicle. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : And let's face it, if I came on like gangbusters here and touted my spiritual experiences, the mob would tear my descriptions asunder.....as has been done to every single person who has come here to report suchlike. I am only aware of Brother Jim aka Dr. Dumbass - who else claimed spiritual awareness/awakening/enlightenment and received a stout thrashing as a result? From: Duveyoung <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 4:21 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fancy that! I'm thinking over here that having had an "experience" does not validate "as necessarily true" the thoughts that arise afterwards. We see most folks here thinking otherwise -- that is: they think that their thoughts MUST be resonant with the ultimate reality of their recent experience. To have seen someone levitate doesn't make one's subsequent thoughts about levitation necessarily true. Even the person who levitates can be expected to have but a mere abstraction for an explanation that is open to every sort of nay-saying. Relativity being such a dynamic, if one knows this, hypocrisy of a deeper degree is needed to validate one's thoughts and yet invalidate the subsequent thoughts of others -- others that had differing experiences. Nabby is a very very sincere poster, for instance, yet we found him being bonked by those who claim to not personally have such blinkeredness when it is obvious to all that everyone is blinkered in some IMPORTANT and PROFOUND manner. Stone, glass house and all that. No one gets to toss the first stone. Or the second. I would expect that someone who found fault in others for being a true believer and "running with it," would be especially careful to underline ones obvious conflict of interests. As for me being inside my head and not having had experiences. Harrumph. While this assertion is not couched in the normal cruel-troll manner of FFL-past, it does seem to accuse me of being spiritually bereft of the basic information needed to be clear about spirituality. Only I could know if that's true -- to assert it as true is to do a one-upman-ship deal. I claim that this kind of insinuation is AGAINST THE GUIDELINES. And let's face it, if I came on like gangbusters here and touted my spiritual experiences, the mob would tear my descriptions asunder.....as has been done to every single person who has come here to report suchlike. This is the place where prophets come to not be honored....heh heh. And, by the way, I have had and continue to have some very profound moments when all my abstractions align -- with a wonderful congruence -- with my heart and thought stream. Moment by moment, if I wish to do so, I can suss out from my flow of consciousness perfect examples of the concepts I hold dear. Doesn't make me correct, but I sure do have experiences. I'll walk this back: everyone has great experiences -- even if they've never personally noted such. Given the human karma of the ego daily dying-into-sleep, being reborn in dreams, and then coming back to life in the morning, what isn't magical? To diss others for not describing it "well" or "logically" or "intuitively acceptably," is at least juvenile and probably an act of aggression.....and AGAINST THE GUIDELINES. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : Edg, because you're so...uh...edgy and all, I suspect you'll take my quickie response below as if it was intended as some kind of affront, and it really wasn't. I was just taking advantage of these "revalidated FFL guidelines" vibes to just be honest. To expand on this a bit, to be honest I've always gotten the impression from your writing that your approach to most spiritual topics is intellectual, as opposed to experiential. When you get into how much you know about Advaita, for example, my impression is that this is stuff that you "know" -- intellectually -- about Advaita, but without ever having experienced the states of consciousness that are being written about. Correct me if I'm wrong about this. I say this not to take a dig at you but to point out a possible distinction between the two of us. I haven't just read about and thought about the basic principle of Tantra -- the peaceful co-existence of complete opposites -- I've *lived* it. I've spent fourteen years with Rama -- and all the time since -- living it. Please try to remember who you're talking to here. I write science articles for a living. I have a strong feel for what science considers "real" in this world and what it does not. At the same time, *I cannot deny my own experience*. While knowing all of this about science, I have personally witnessed many of the siddhis you have only read about. I have sat in the desert -- or in a Dennys along a California highway -- and watched someone just gently lift up off the ground (or the naugahyde Dennys benches) and float in the air for a while. The morning after experiencing something like that, if you are a bit of a cynical scientist like myself, you tend to wake up thinking, "OK, what the fuck was that?" I still don't know. All I know is that I experienced it, in states of mind that were as high and clear as I have ever experienced in this incarnation, and that were completely free from the effects of any kinds of drugs, and that for me it all really fuckin' happened. I am NOT saying that I know exactly *what* happened. What I'm saying is that *something* fairly extraordinary happened, and that until someone proves to me exactly what it was, I'm going to go easy on myself for not getting all anal about what is "real" and what isn't. That "real" enough for you, dude? :-) From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 8:53 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fancy that! I have *absolutely no problem* with such seeming contradictions. If you do, I would suggest that they just might be *your* problems. :-) From: Duveyoung <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 8:49 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fancy that! Barry -- you are on record here being quite against most "magical thinking," but here we find you being quite the believer. "That explained quite a few of my dreams during the period I lived there. :-)" Would this be hypocrisy or you just playing loose with "what's real?" I ask this in the fullest sincerity to honor the recently re-validated FFL guidelines. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : Excellent. A few years ago, before we actually moved from Spain to the Netherlands, my odd extended family and I spent a month living in Amsterdam in a house we'd rented there. It was a really cool house, with multiple floors and a grand piano and a great kitchen, but at the same time there was always something "off" about it. So I asked around the neighborhood and found that it had in previous centuries been an asylum for crazy women. That explained quite a few of my dreams during the period I lived there. :-) From: salyavin808 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2015 8:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Fancy that! In the late '90's the TMO acquired a mansion in a highly sought after part of London. Namely Kensington palace gardens. It was a fabulous house, right opposite Kensington palace. Huge place with double iron gates and a massive ballroom. It faced east too. The heads of the movement all lived there and all said how amazing the perfect vastu felt. I lived there too for a while, just helping out the media department. Great place to stay as the big knobs sure knew how to live, bespoke silk carpets and the best food eaten off mahogany tables. The idea was that they'd use it to wine and dine the rich and famous thus spreading TM to the top of society, as was Marshy's wish at the time. "The rich won't eat in a poor house" he said, they sure didn't here! Not that all that many came. Hardly any in fact, but the intention was a good one if you approve of that sort of elitism. I didn't but staying there made a nice change from our draughty, cold and empty mansion in the Bedfordshire countryside. But as I was finishing my book on The Great Escape I was reminded that the house had a rather more chequered history than expected. It was owned and used by MI6 to interrogate captured Nazi officers during and after WW2. Including the masterminds of the massacre that wiped out 50 allied airmen in 1944. Fancy that, I might have slept in a room that was once occupied by a terrified Gestapo murderer who sat awake all night dreading his fate at the hands of a war crimes tribunal. I wonder if they appreciated the vastu at all?
