Spraig: "MMY claims yes. I remain neutral. You project MMY's beliefs onto me because you like to assume that someone who disagrees withyou is a blissninny."
Me: I've gotten to know your views better on this group. I don't think that about you at all. If I projected MMY's beliefs onto you, that is wrong, sorry. As far as how the gods act in Hindu scriptures, they seem pretty volitional to me, not at all like the laws of nature in Western science. They have all sorts of emotions and motives that make a cause and effect prediction impossible. That is what makes them good literature. > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > Spraig: "> Sigh, talk about projecting western ideas. The devas are > > NOT gods in the western sense of the word. They are anthromorphisms of > > laws of nature." > > > > > > Me: MMY has never denied the more anthropomorphic view of the gods > > and devas contained in the Hindu scriptures. I sat with him as he > > waved flowers and made offerings to pictures of Goddesses while using > > terms like "I bow down to the glorious...", a phrase that is also > > invoked when riding on the back of a deva back to its source, > > according to MMY describing TM. If you want to ascribe some > > scientific value to making offerings to statues and pictures then you > > have a little work to do in the proof area. > > I never claimed the rituals worked. I said when the concept of devas says that when the > rituals are not performed, the devas are no different than the laws of nature found in > Western Science: they perform EXACTLY the same way. > > > > > The analogies made by movement scientists between modern scientific > > concepts and Vedic Gods are just that, analogies. That is not proof > > that any of these concepts are actually descriptions of the laws of > > nature. It is the imposition of our country's values onto a cultural > > tradition of India. And the reason it is being imposed is laid out in > > the Science of Being by MMY, marketing to the West. > > > > Heh. MMY's theories are just standard high-end Hindu philosophy put into western terms. > Brilliantly espoused, IMHO, but still the standard stuff. In fact, thisis exactly what HE > claims anyway. > > > This view that somehow Indian culture thousands of years ago was > > uniquely brilliant, so that its scriptures are the most capable in the > > world to instruct man about how nature works in detail, is just > > Indio-centric bragging by MMY. > > Did I ever say differently? I was pointing out the HINDU system of beliefs, which people > were taking and projecting onto western values like how devas would suck energy from > you in some way. > > At the same time Indians were cooking > > up their religious ideas they were also waring with each other. The > > Aryans dominated the Dravidians and incorporated their pantheon into > > there own. So which culture was the one who knew all about how > > nature worked, the Dravidians lingum worshipers or the Arayan's > > Krishna worshipers? Or were both cultures equally brilliant? And how > > about the Greek gods and the Egyptian gods, where they just describing > > laws of nature or are you buying into the "India is unequally gifted" > > nonsense of an Indian man? > > What did I say about anything about which culture was better. I was talking about the > standard high-end Hindu philosophical interpretation of devas and so on. You can find > most of what I said in wikipedia for heavens sake. > > > > > There is much wisdom in the world's scriptures, especially concerning > > human nature, but it is also full of a lot of nonsense that we have > > sorted out since they were written. None of the scriptures East or > > West take a stand against slavery, although we have decided that this > > practice is wrong. Both Eastern and Western scriptures are full of > > mysonginistic and racist nonsense, so lets not get carried away about > > what they "really" represent. The gods of the Hindu religion act in > > the same capricious ways as the stories of gods in other cultures. > > Sure, but the standard ("sophsticated") interpretation of their behavior for at least the last > 1000+ years and probably far longer, given what you can find in the upanishads, is just > what I said: the devas aren't gods: they are forces of nature. And they don't sap energy, > according to that interpretation. > > It > > is all fascinating stuff, and part of our human heritage, but it is > > not some magic guide book for how the world works. It is insulting to > > other culture's mythologies to suggest that India is so special in > > their deep insight into nature. MMY is a product of his Indio-centric > > culture. His vision of world peace involves the world accepting the > > superiority of his religious views. This religious arrogance, which > > is so common all over the world, is a major cause of man's problems > > achieving world peace. A bunch of waring tribes, all claiming to have > > the best version of the God idea. So you are buying into that by > > supporting MMY's ethnocentric view that his gods are really describing > > how the world actually works and everybody else's gods are just a part > > of mythology? > > The Hindu interpretation (if I can pretend that there is only one of those) is that the devas > are forces of nature. When the vedic rituals and mantras are used improperly, they behave > EXACTLY like the western idea of forces of nature.The question remains: is there a proper > use of ritual and/or meditation that can change this? > > MMY claims yes. I remain neutral. You project MMY's beliefs onto me because you like to > assume that someone who disagrees withyou is a blissninny. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <groups@> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > On Behalf Of Patrick Gillam > > > > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 9:48 AM > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Three things I heard > > > > > > > > 3. My chiropractor uses muscle testing to > > > > rank the efficacy of a given supplement or > > > > program on a scale of 10, 10 being worth > > > > doing and anything less being a waste of > > > > time. I finally asked him to rank TM for me. > > > > He said it's a seven on the plus side, with a > > > > "negative three aspect." This notion of a > > > > negative aspect was new to me. When I > > > > asked what it meant, he said TM's mantras > > > > are Hindu gods that sap some energy from > > > > people using the mantras, hence the user > > > > gets some good but pays some price. He > > > > said just about any Indian practice is going > > > > to have this characteristic. My doctor said > > > > last year TM had a negative two aspect, but > > > > lately the price of practice is going up - the > > > > mantras are taking more from their users. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm absorbed in setting up a new computer this weekend, transferring > > > > everything from my Mac and old PC. Big job. But this point caught > > my eye. > > > > The Kaplan letter sort of made this point, but referred to some > > sort of > > > > astral energy suckers that MMY allegedly employed. A friend of > > mine has been > > > > telling me this. I think she gets her ideas from David Icke. I see > > that some > > > > discussion has ensued since you posted this and I'll check it out, > > but if it > > > > hasn't been discussed, I'd be interested in people's thoughts on > > this point. > > > > Is meditation using a mantra associated with a "Hindu god" a sort > > of cosmic > > > > MLM program, where you get something in exchange for enriching > > those in your > > > > upline? If gods are sapping energy, why does meditation make one more > > > > energetic? Is it that the meditator and the god collaborate (by the > > > > meditator using the god's name in his mantra) and thus accomplish > > something > > > > neither could accomplish on their own? If so, is the god taking the > > > > meditator's energy, or is the meditator serving as a conduit > > enabling both > > > > to draw from an inexhaustible energy source? The Gita calls > > meditation a > > > > yagya, and mentions that through yagya, you support the gods and they > > > > support you. > > > > > > > > > > Sigh, talk about projecting western ideas. The devas are NOT gods in > > the western sense of > > > the word. They are anthromorphisms of laws of nature. According to > > the more > > > sophisticated forms of hinduism, one can influence their activity by > > performing the proper > > > rituals like yagyas or by using their bija mantras during TM > > practice (dhyan) but they are > > > NOT gods ala the Greek Zeus and so on. > > > > > > They have no free will available to them beyond the ability to > > incarnate as living creatures > > > (we were once all Indra, to paraphrase an old story) and without the > > proper rituals, they > > > are completely predictable using western scientific means. The > > stories of their romantic > > > relationships are allegorical and are supposed to describe their > > relationship with other > > > laws of nature. > > > > > > Think of the devas as being the Q ala star trek but less whimsical. > > I feel odd saying that > > > since the Q are actually the star trek presentation of the hindu > > devas, but oh well... > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
