[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
> >
> >
> > With TM...YOU HAVE TO MAKE UP YOUR OWN RELIGION! You know, a
> > little of this, and a little of that! :-)
> 
> With any luck, FFL will soon be blessed with the other half of the loaf, 
> because I just approved a subscription by someone who appears to be a 
> hardcore Christian fundamentalist.


Can't wait to hear his views ! :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > My point is that its not an either/or, or more importantly, that ease is 
> > the guideline rather than some specific goal.
> > 
> > 
> > L.
> > 
> 
> Good point, Lawson. In TM ease is the process. There is no goal. In non-TM is 
> the goal ease?
> 

The instruction Bhairatu gave was "go back to thinking the mantra" as though 
the details of the TM checking didn't matter.


ANd of course, there's nothing wrong with thinking the mantra AND solving 
problems/planning/etc if that happens to be the way your mind is working at 
that moment.

L

> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > > > >>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math 
> > > > > >>> problem or planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this 
> > > > > >>> particular situation epitomizes the difference between TM and 
> > > > > >>> not-TM.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> L.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of 
> > > > > >> saMprajnaata
> > > > > >> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
> > > > > >> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > > Not my point. My point is:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this 
> > > > > >> particular situation
> > > > > > epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for 
> > > > > clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess 
> > > > > we're 
> > > > > all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you 
> > > > > mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a 
> > > > > project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the 
> > > > > ambiguity.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during 
> > > > > meditation to just return to the mantra.  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > L.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Not sure what you're looking for Lawson, but according to my checking 
> > > notes in the general point "Over Powering Thoughts" when it's not 
> > > possible to pick up the mantra we let the mind be easy and the mind will 
> > > be naturally drawn to some physical sensation in the body. IOW "feel the 
> > > body." However, when the sensation subsides the you go back to the 
> > > mantra. 
> > > 
> > > "It is an important principle to note, that at any time that the mind is 
> > > capable of thinking any thought it is capable of thinking the mantra. 
> > > Another point of importance to remember is that to allow the mind to 
> > > continue feeling any faint sensation at the time the mind is capable of 
> > > thinking thoughts and therefore capable of thinking the mantra is not the 
> > > process of Transcendental Meditation and has the effect of making the 
> > > mind lazy and weakening the system." 
> > > 
> > > Hmmm. Do non-TM meditation techniques primarily involve feeling the body? 
> > >  TM does not involve feeling the body except in this general point? Is 
> > > this the distinction you're making?
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>
> My point is that its not an either/or, or more importantly, that ease is the 
> guideline rather than some specific goal.
> 
> 
> L.
> 

Good point, Lawson. In TM ease is the process. There is no goal. In non-TM is 
the goal ease?

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > > >>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math 
> > > > >>> problem or planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this 
> > > > >>> particular situation epitomizes the difference between TM and 
> > > > >>> not-TM.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> L.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of 
> > > > >> saMprajnaata
> > > > >> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
> > > > >> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
> > > > >>
> > > > > Not my point. My point is:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> > > > >> situation
> > > > > epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > > > 
> > > > The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for 
> > > > clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess 
> > > > we're 
> > > > all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you 
> > > > mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a 
> > > > project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the 
> > > > ambiguity.
> > > > 
> > > > Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during 
> > > > meditation to just return to the mantra.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > L.
> > >
> > 
> > Not sure what you're looking for Lawson, but according to my checking notes 
> > in the general point "Over Powering Thoughts" when it's not possible to 
> > pick up the mantra we let the mind be easy and the mind will be naturally 
> > drawn to some physical sensation in the body. IOW "feel the body." However, 
> > when the sensation subsides the you go back to the mantra. 
> > 
> > "It is an important principle to note, that at any time that the mind is 
> > capable of thinking any thought it is capable of thinking the mantra. 
> > Another point of importance to remember is that to allow the mind to 
> > continue feeling any faint sensation at the time the mind is capable of 
> > thinking thoughts and therefore capable of thinking the mantra is not the 
> > process of Transcendental Meditation and has the effect of making the mind 
> > lazy and weakening the system." 
> > 
> > Hmmm. Do non-TM meditation techniques primarily involve feeling the body?  
> > TM does not involve feeling the body except in this general point? Is this 
> > the distinction you're making?
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[sparaig]

My point is that its not an either/or, or more importantly, that ease is the 
guideline rather than some specific goal.


L.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> > >
> > > On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > >>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem 
> > > >>> or planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> > > >>> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> L.
> > > >>>
> > > >> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
> > > >> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
> > > >> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
> > > >>
> > > > Not my point. My point is:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> > > >> situation
> > > > epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > > 
> > > The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for 
> > > clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess we're 
> > > all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you 
> > > mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a 
> > > project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the 
> > > ambiguity.
> > > 
> > > Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during 
> > > meditation to just return to the mantra.  
> > 
> > 
> > But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?
> > 
> > 
> > L.
> >
> 
> Not sure what you're looking for Lawson, but according to my checking notes 
> in the general point "Over Powering Thoughts" when it's not possible to pick 
> up the mantra we let the mind be easy and the mind will be naturally drawn to 
> some physical sensation in the body. IOW "feel the body." However, when the 
> sensation subsides the you go back to the mantra. 
> 
> "It is an important principle to note, that at any time that the mind is 
> capable of thinking any thought it is capable of thinking the mantra. Another 
> point of importance to remember is that to allow the mind to continue feeling 
> any faint sensation at the time the mind is capable of thinking thoughts and 
> therefore capable of thinking the mantra is not the process of Transcendental 
> Meditation and has the effect of making the mind lazy and weakening the 
> system." 
> 
> Hmmm. Do non-TM meditation techniques primarily involve feeling the body?  TM 
> does not involve feeling the body except in this general point? Is this the 
> distinction you're making?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's Hilary B. Rosen-celebrated Lesbian.

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> Why is she 'celebrated'?I guess because she is a Lesbian?! Kind of like 
> the Gay parade, I guess?
>

Billy G, you pulled that headline right out of your ass. "Celebrated" means, 
widely known and esteemed. Rosen is respected and famous. Celebrated is not the 
same as *celebrating* as in celebrating Gay Pride.

All the conservative faux outrage defending "stay-at-home moms" and attacking 
Rosen for raising children as a Lesbian is simply an effort to hide what 
conservatives fear most:  The 99% might notice Rosen raised a valid point about 
class. Saying Ann Romney never worked a day in her life draws attention to her 
as a woman of privilege, out of touch with the everyday struggles of working 
folks trying to make ends meet.

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/04/12/463358/conservatives-attack-hilary-rosen-for-raising-children-as-a-lesbian/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's Hilary B. Rosen-celebrated Lesbian.

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> Why is she 'celebrated'?I guess because she is a Lesbian?! Kind of like 
> the Gay parade, I guess?
>

Billy G, you pulled that headline right out of your ass. "Celebrated" means, 
widely known and esteemed. Rosen is respected *and* famous...celebrated is not 
the same as *celebrating* and in celebrating Gay Pride, jackass. 

All the conservative faux outrage defending "stay-at-home moms" and attacking 
Rosen for raising children as a Lesbian is simply an effort to hide what 
conservatives fear most: The 99% might notice Rosen raised a valid issue about 
elite classes vs. working classes, the 1% vs. the 99%, by pointing out the 
obvious out of touch elitism of Ann Romney as a woman of privilege. 

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/04/12/463358/conservatives-attack-hilary-rosen-for-raising-children-as-a-lesbian/

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:

> > With TM...YOU HAVE TO MAKE UP YOUR OWN RELIGION! You know, a
> > little of this, and a little of that! :-)

> With any luck, FFL will soon be blessed with the other half of the loaf, 
> because I just approved a subscription by someone who appears to be a 
> hardcore Christian fundamentalist.

[Temporary Internet connexion during my travels]
I found at an early age that making up one's own religion saves a lot of work 
and results in a much more pleasant life. You can choose a god, or no god, and 
what you must do or not do. To quote Mark Twain: 'Nothing so needs reforming as 
other people’s habits.' It is especially useful to get other to following in 
one's wake. Alas, I was not successful in this, so must go it alone.

Without realising it, most make up their own religion anyway. That inner 
heretic of the mind is a busy bee. But in the end, you find out that whatever 
spiritual path you thought you followed or created, was wrong.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 04:52 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister   wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"   wrote:
> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
> planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
>
>
> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
>
> L.
>
 My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
 samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
 solutions of various problems, and stuff!

>>> Not my point. My point is:
>>>
>>>
 It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
 situation
>>> epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
>> The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for
>> clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess we're
>> all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you
>> mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a
>> project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the
>> ambiguity.
>>
>> Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during
>> meditation to just return to the mantra.
>
> But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?
>
>
> L.

There you go again.  What do you mean by "complete response"?  That's 
ambiguous.

What I said is certainly the gist of it.  Meditation, even the TM kind, 
isn't all that technical.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 05:31 PM, raunchydog wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>>> On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister   wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"   wrote:
>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
>> planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
>>
>>
>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
>> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
>>
>> L.
>>
> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
>
 Not my point. My point is:


> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> situation
 epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
>>> The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for
>>> clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess we're
>>> all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you
>>> mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a
>>> project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the
>>> ambiguity.
>>>
>>> Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during
>>> meditation to just return to the mantra.
>>
>> But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?
>>
>>
>> L.
>>
> Not sure what you're looking for Lawson, but according to my checking notes 
> in the general point "Over Powering Thoughts" when it's not possible to pick 
> up the mantra we let the mind be easy and the mind will be naturally drawn to 
> some physical sensation in the body. IOW "feel the body." However, when the 
> sensation subsides the you go back to the mantra.
>
> "It is an important principle to note, that at any time that the mind is 
> capable of thinking any thought it is capable of thinking the mantra. Another 
> point of importance to remember is that to allow the mind to continue feeling 
> any faint sensation at the time the mind is capable of thinking thoughts and 
> therefore capable of thinking the mantra is not the process of Transcendental 
> Meditation and has the effect of making the mind lazy and weakening the 
> system."
>
> Hmmm. Do non-TM meditation techniques primarily involve feeling the body?  TM 
> does not involve feeling the body except in this general point? Is this the 
> distinction you're making?

Raunchy, I don't think Lawson was ever a teacher and maybe never even a 
checker. ;-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
> > >>> planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> > >>> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > >>>
> > >>> L.
> > >>>
> > >> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
> > >> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
> > >> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
> > >>
> > > Not my point. My point is:
> > >
> > >
> > >> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> > >> situation
> > > epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > 
> > The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for 
> > clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess we're 
> > all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you 
> > mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a 
> > project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the 
> > ambiguity.
> > 
> > Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during 
> > meditation to just return to the mantra.  
> 
> 
> But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?
> 
> 
> L.
>

Not sure what you're looking for Lawson, but according to my checking notes in 
the general point "Over Powering Thoughts" when it's not possible to pick up 
the mantra we let the mind be easy and the mind will be naturally drawn to some 
physical sensation in the body. IOW "feel the body." However, when the 
sensation subsides the you go back to the mantra. 

"It is an important principle to note, that at any time that the mind is 
capable of thinking any thought it is capable of thinking the mantra. Another 
point of importance to remember is that to allow the mind to continue feeling 
any faint sensation at the time the mind is capable of thinking thoughts and 
therefore capable of thinking the mantra is not the process of Transcendental 
Meditation and has the effect of making the mind lazy and weakening the 
system." 

Hmmm. Do non-TM meditation techniques primarily involve feeling the body?  TM 
does not involve feeling the body except in this general point? Is this the 
distinction you're making? 

[FairfieldLife] Obama's Hilary B. Rosen-celebrated Lesbian.

[wgm4u]

Why is she 'celebrated'?I guess because she is a Lesbian?! Kind of like the 
Gay parade, I guess?

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Apr 07 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Apr 14 00:00:00 2012
411 messages as of (UTC) Thu Apr 12 23:52:00 2012

43 sparaig 
38 turquoiseb 
37 nablusoss1008 
36 authfriend 
25 Vaj 
25 Buck 
25 Bhairitu 
23 wgm4u 
23 Emily Reyn 
23 "Richard J. Williams" 
21 cardemaister 
18 raunchydog 
10 awoelflebater 
 9 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 6 Mike Dixon 
 5 John 
 3 stevelf 
 3 merudanda 
 3 merlin 
 3 marekreavis 
 3 iamyukta 
 3 curtisdeltablues 
 3 azgrey 
 3 Duveyoung 
 3 Alex Stanley 
 2 wleed3 
 2 Dick Mays 
 2 Carol 
 1 seventhray1 
 1 mumpotentialstudent 
 1 michael 
 1 meltem uzun 
 1 chris m 
 1 breickjonas 
 1 Yifu 
 1 wle...@aol.com
 1 Rick Archer 
 1 Mark 
 1 Frank 

Posters: 39
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
> >>> planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> >>> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> >>>
> >>> L.
> >>>
> >> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
> >> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
> >> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
> >>
> > Not my point. My point is:
> >
> >
> >> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> >> situation
> > epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> 
> The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for 
> clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess we're 
> all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you 
> mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a 
> project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the 
> ambiguity.
> 
> Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during 
> meditation to just return to the mantra.  


But that's not the complete response for TM, now is it?


L.

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
>
> With TM...YOU HAVE TO MAKE UP YOUR OWN RELIGION! You know, a
> little of this, and a little of that! :-)

With any luck, FFL will soon be blessed with the other half of the loaf, 
because I just approved a subscription by someone who appears to be a hardcore 
Christian fundamentalist.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[Emily Reyn]

And, then there are the grammar issues that surface when I am stressed, tired, 
or in need of food.  I'm heading out for some meditative swimming.



 From: Emily Reyn 
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic 
psychology" model
 

Richard, when I decided to comment point by point, I will use a different 
color.  But, bear in mind, what I say is not *that* important and often I 
comment off-the-cuff, so to speak, which doesn't require much effort or time.  
Remember, I don't have a serious background in meditation under any paradigm 
and I am so old, that even if I dedicated myself to any particular lineage, 
technique, or religious practice, or spiritual by the time I achieve "expert" 
status, I will likely be dead.  I don't speak with authority about much...

But, I am fascinated by what you slightly older farts contribute, in that your 
lives took very different paths then mine, and I was raised to respect my 
elders, so I try to listen up and enjoy, as time allows :) 



 From: Richard J. Williams 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 9:35 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" 
model
 

  


authfriend:
> Emily, just ignore this. Your post was fine.
> 
Thanks for , now it's clear who
and what is being commented on. But, what's
with the lazy 'top-posting'?

> > > Geez, I almost missed this exchange. 
> > > Very interesting and Ann, I thought 
> > > you were pretty clear. 
> > >
> > What's not clear, Emily, is which part
> > of the thread are you commenting on?
> > 
> > If you would just  out the parts
> > you're NOT commenting on, and then
> > post a reply to what you ARE commenting
> > on, would be really helpful. 
> > 
> > That way, other respondents would be able 
> > to follow alnog the conversation better 
> > and post their reply. Or, is this just 
> > another general Barry-bash? If so, then
> > just key in at the top:
> > 
> > "It's all about Barry". Thanks.
> > 
> > Judy and Barry get this because they are 
> > professionals who work with text formatting 
> > every day, but this is a mess!
>


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[Emily Reyn]

Richard, when I decided to comment point by point, I will use a different 
color.  But, bear in mind, what I say is not *that* important and often I 
comment off-the-cuff, so to speak, which doesn't require much effort or time.  
Remember, I don't have a serious background in meditation under any paradigm 
and I am so old, that even if I dedicated myself to any particular lineage, 
technique, or religious practice, or spiritual by the time I achieve "expert" 
status, I will likely be dead.  I don't speak with authority about much...

But, I am fascinated by what you slightly older farts contribute, in that your 
lives took very different paths then mine, and I was raised to respect my 
elders, so I try to listen up and enjoy, as time allows :) 



 From: Richard J. Williams 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 9:35 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" 
model
 

  


authfriend:
> Emily, just ignore this. Your post was fine.
> 
Thanks for , now it's clear who
and what is being commented on. But, what's
with the lazy 'top-posting'?

> > > Geez, I almost missed this exchange. 
> > > Very interesting and Ann, I thought 
> > > you were pretty clear. 
> > >
> > What's not clear, Emily, is which part
> > of the thread are you commenting on?
> > 
> > If you would just  out the parts
> > you're NOT commenting on, and then
> > post a reply to what you ARE commenting
> > on, would be really helpful. 
> > 
> > That way, other respondents would be able 
> > to follow alnog the conversation better 
> > and post their reply. Or, is this just 
> > another general Barry-bash? If so, then
> > just key in at the top:
> > 
> > "It's all about Barry". Thanks.
> > 
> > Judy and Barry get this because they are 
> > professionals who work with text formatting 
> > every day, but this is a mess!
>


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[Emily Reyn]

Sorry Richard, I was commenting on the post overall, not specifically.  Not a 
Barry bash - just an opinion :) 

I have noticed that on many occasions, snipping certain paragraphs or phrases 
out often changes the original context and then any subsequent comments on that 
snip may evolve into a completely different conversation than what was 
originally posted.  Hence all the posts with the same subject line that 
actually represent several different conversations - it can be kinda cool.  
Many angles and POVs emerge that way.  OTOH, sometimes it creates great 
confusion and misunderstanding of what the original poster actually said.  

Does this reply come across poorly?  I'm replying from Yahoo email.  Do I need 
to start hitting the enter/return button every 45 words or so?  I'm not sure 
that is going to happen.


 From: Richard J. Williams 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 6:38 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" 
model
 

  


Emily Reyn:
> Geez, I almost missed this exchange. 
> Very interesting and Ann, I thought 
> you were pretty clear. 
>
What's not clear, Emily, is which part
of the thread are you commenting on?

If you would just  out the parts
you're NOT commenting on, and then
post a reply to what you ARE commenting
on, would be really helpful. 

That way, other respondents would be able 
to follow alnog the conversation better 
and post their reply. Or, is this just 
another general Barry-bash? If so, then
just key in at the top:

"It's all about Barry". Thanks.

Judy and Barry get this because they are 
professionals who work with text formatting 
every day, but this is a mess! 

 You are also an excellent writer and a joy to read, btw.  After reading 
this, I am reminded that Barry doesn't *hear* others' well, particularly if 
they challenge his viewpoint or correct any assumption he's made about them.  
> 
> 
> 
>  From: awoelflebater 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:39 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic 
> psychology" model
> 
> 
>   
> Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. Granted, she is 
> smart, analytical, reasonable, meticulous and insightful. But surely the 
> average FFL'er could understand most of what I said. Of course, I also 
> realize most are not interested in this subject of mine but I was hoping 
> Barry could at least "grok" half of it. After all, I was "rapping" on about 
> it for him. (sigh)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > Earlier this morning I made a post in which I asked at
> > the end why anybody would consider anything Barry says
> > these days to be worthwhile. He's thoughtfully followed
> > up with another batch of even better examples of his
> > utter inanity:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > > > So there was an element of
> > > > > > > > sentimentality, because in the end the whole thing didn't
> > > > > > > > quite pan out with regard to MMY or even Robin's
> > > > > > > > enlightenment...
> > > > >
> > > > > Not to mention "in terms of reality." :-)
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, reality. Such a subjective and impossible-to-absolutely-define
> > > > concept. 
> > > 
> > > I don't actually see it as that difficult to define.
> > > 
> > > Reality is that which, after you die and cease to exist
> > > as an egoic entity, persists.
> > 
> > Is Barry suggesting he has died and ceased to exist as an
> > egoic entity? It would appear so, since he asserts above
> > that Robin's goals didn't pan out "in terms of reality." 
> > 
> > > > > With all due respect, Ann, what this sounds like to me
> > > > > is a bunch of moodmaking on *your* part, to "color" your
> > > > > memories such that *you* feel "noble."
> > > > 
> > > > Interesting that it comes across like this because this is 
> > > > not what I am about. 
> > > 
> > > I *get* that. Why I am commenting is that you're coming
> > > across as if that *was* what you were about.
> > 
> > Correction: This is how Barry perceives Ann to be coming
> > across. And that perception is not subject to any
> > modification.
> > 
> > > > First of all, what Robin did or did not do during my time around
> > > > him doesn't reflect the slightest on me, what I was hoping for 
> > > > or what I believed. He was pretty much guiding the ship and we 
> > > > were all tossed about, including him. 
> > > 
> > > So you abdicate all responsibility for walking up the 
> > > plank and boarding that ship? Just asking.
> > > 
> > > > Nobility is the least of it. I didn't give a dang about his 
> > > > "enlightenment", the movement, TM or any of the other spiritual 
> > > > trappings. I thought he was a wonderful shit disturbing rebel
> > > > with inter

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[wgm4u]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 04/12/2012 12:30 PM, wgm4u wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >> On 04/12/2012 08:12 AM, wgm4u wrote:
> >>> In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
> >>> have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and 
> >>> Krishna, etc. TM does NOT do this! Ostensibly there are mediators of 
> >>> every Religion practicing TM, but I doubt this, how many in Fairfield 
> >>> actually practice their Religion? or are they Catholics, etc. in name 
> >>> only?
> >>>
> >>> Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
> >>> this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs 
> >>> of Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY 
> >>> doesn't teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his 
> >>> Gita they were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
> >>>
> >>> This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.
> >> TM is a very narrow mass market teaching so as even you have mentioned
> >> before leaves out a lot of stuff (though somewhat discussed in MMY's
> >> version of the Gita but I guess no one has read it in years) that would
> >> be taught in other disciplines.  But for most yogis religion is just a
> >> fragment of spirituality and something often used as a mind control
> >> device to keep the masses "civil."
> >>
> >> Other traditions have paths to even becoming an archarya which would
> >> allow you to make other teachers.  I guess that didn't quite fit into
> >> the TMO "business plan." ;-)
> > Dollars to Donuts nobody on this forum formally practices any form of 
> > Religion (including myself).
> 
> Possibly if you limit it to FFL but I've met meditators that still 
> attended mass and temple.  Even one meditator and sidha that became one 
> of those "Universal Life" ministers and even had an office at a 
> Methodist church.  Most of these people had a MUCH broader definition of 
> religion and where spirituality fit in than the man on the street or 
> typical churchgoer.

With TM...YOU HAVE TO MAKE UP YOUR OWN RELIGION! You know, a little of this, 
and a little of that! :-)

[FairfieldLife] McCartney and Ringo: On-Stage Reunion Airs 4/29

[nablusoss1008]

FORMER BEATLES REUNITE FOR DAVID LYNCH BENEFIT CONCERT

  Paul McCartneyFormer Beatles Paul McCartney
  and Ringo
Starr  
reunited on an American stage for the first time in 17 years during this
historic April 2009 Radio City Music Hall benefit concert, which will be
broadcast in New York on THIRTEEN on Sunday, April 29, at 10:30 pm
(check local listings for broadcast dates and times in your area).
The Beatle reunion highlights the 90-minute "Change Begins Within"
concert to benefit the David Lynch Foundation
 , a charity set up in 2005 by the
iconic filmmaker David Lynch to fund Transcendental Meditation programs
for at-risk youth, veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder, and
women who suffer from domestic abuse and violence.
McCartney performs a set of Beatles, Wings and solo classics; Starr
sings his own set of Beatle and solo hits. McCartney and Starr join
together on stage for "With A Little Help from My Friends," Paul's
rarely performed "Cosmically Conscious," and Beatle fan favorite "I Saw
Her Standing There."
Also appearing on the broadcast are comedian Jerry Seinfeld as well as
musicians Sheryl Crow
  ("My Sweet
Lord"), Eddie Vedder
  and Ben
Harper  
("Under Pressure"), Moby
  and Bettye
LaVette  
("Natural Blues"), Paul Horn, newly-elected Rock-and-Roll-Hall of Famer
Donovan   and
Jim James  
("Hurdy Gurdy Man").
The concert was co-produced by Hoosick Falls Productions and David Lynch
Foundation Television with executive producers George Verschoor, David
Lynch, and Bob Roth.


http://www.davidlynchfoundation.org


[Published on: 4/9/12]

[FairfieldLife] Re: a dream help

[John]

Meltem,

Depending on your religious background, you should offer sacrifices for the 
repose of your son's soul.  In the vedic culture, a family typically requests a 
pundit to perform yagyas to appease the soul of the family member who had died.

Among Christians, a funeral rite is usually performed in the hope giving the 
soul a peaceful journey back home to the Source.  Among Roman Catholics, it is 
now believed the soul of a young child goes back to heaven.  The concept of a 
soul being marooned in Limbo is no longer acceptable.

JR




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, meltem uzun  wrote:
>
 
> 
> Hello dear friends, I told you before that i lost my 8 months baby boy.  i 
> have one more question; if you comment i ll be very happy...  my friend's 17 
> years old daughter saw my baby son in her dream yesterday night... first a 
> woman said them that my son wanted to see them and he needed our help because 
> a death spirit or being disturbed him al lot. they accepted and my son came 
> to see her and her mother... first he sit the mother's lap, the mother said 
> that they loved him so much, needed him a lot... and added that i loved him a 
> lot... after my son getting younger sat the girl's lap... suddenly my son 
> disappeared, the woman said the mother and the girl to hide cos the death 
> being was coming. the thing came nor human nor a creature shouted at the 
> woman why she had made my son to see the mother and the girl... and claimed 
> that it would find the mother and the girl... but the woman made th mother 
> and the girl disappeared like my son... everywhere was green in her dream 
> she never scared of my son but she scared the spirit thing...  what should i 
> do?  what does it mean? if he is really disturbed what precaution should i 
> take?  thank you so mch for your help... meltem
> 
> 
> 
>
> 
>   
>   
>   
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>   .
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 12:30 PM, wgm4u wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> On 04/12/2012 08:12 AM, wgm4u wrote:
>>> In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
>>> have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, 
>>> etc. TM does NOT do this! Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion 
>>> practicing TM, but I doubt this, how many in Fairfield actually practice 
>>> their Religion? or are they Catholics, etc. in name only?
>>>
>>> Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
>>> this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of 
>>> Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't 
>>> teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they 
>>> were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
>>>
>>> This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.
>> TM is a very narrow mass market teaching so as even you have mentioned
>> before leaves out a lot of stuff (though somewhat discussed in MMY's
>> version of the Gita but I guess no one has read it in years) that would
>> be taught in other disciplines.  But for most yogis religion is just a
>> fragment of spirituality and something often used as a mind control
>> device to keep the masses "civil."
>>
>> Other traditions have paths to even becoming an archarya which would
>> allow you to make other teachers.  I guess that didn't quite fit into
>> the TMO "business plan." ;-)
> Dollars to Donuts nobody on this forum formally practices any form of 
> Religion (including myself).

Possibly if you limit it to FFL but I've met meditators that still 
attended mass and temple.  Even one meditator and sidha that became one 
of those "Universal Life" ministers and even had an office at a 
Methodist church.  Most of these people had a MUCH broader definition of 
religion and where spirituality fit in than the man on the street or 
typical churchgoer.

[FairfieldLife] Real progressive talk radio

[Bhairitu]

A couple weeks back over the brouhaha of Thom Hartmann changing his show 
hours someone mentioned that Thom really isn't a progressive but just a 
Democrat.  There IS a difference.  Anyway that person recommended the 
Progressive Radio Network.  This morning I decided to put their stream 
on my Android streaming app.  Thom is sort of to the right of me and I 
found the hosts of PRN much more my POV.  Gary Null, whose writing on 
natural health and diet I've known since the 1970s has a wonderful show 
at 9 AM PDT (noon EDT) and was followed by host who stressed that we 
can't just let the 1% destroy democracy and stressing it far more than 
wimpy Hartmann does.  Here's the link if you want real progressive talk:

http://prn.fm/

[FairfieldLife] Which is the most afflictive emotion?

[turquoiseb]

As part of my ongoing attempts to infect TH (True Hindu) TBs on this
forum with  Buddhist thought :-), I return to the topic of the
"afflictive emotions." That term, in its low-vibe and
oh-so-inferior-to-Maharishi's opinion laughability, refers to the set of
emotions that -- in these  Buddhists' opinion -- have a
predictable *effect* on those who indulge in them long-term. That effect
is a lowering of their state of attention.

Indulge in anger for longer than a few moments, and your state of
attention drops. Like a rock. Indulge in any of the other afflictive
emotions for more than a few moments, ditto. That's the theory, anyway.

This said, there is an ongoing debate among those who debate such 
Buddhist esoterica :-) as to *which* of the afflictive emotions is the
*most* debilitating, in terms of its ability to lower one's state of
attention.

Many go with hatred. Others with anger, or jealousy, or envy. Some go
with fear. Others go with outrage, because that one tends to want to
entice other sentient beings into indulging in it, and thus carries with
it a karmic overhead. I'm gonna go with the desire to seek revenge.

That one for me kinda wraps up all the other afflictive emotions into
one big, shiny package. I mean, in order to want to seek revenge on
someone, you've got to be able to: 1) have had your emotional buttons
pushed by the revengee so badly as to want to do them harm, 2) be *so*
affronted by whatever the perceived insult or infraction was as to hold
onto it for extended periods of time, and 3) feel that doing things to
"seek revenge" for this perceived insult or infraction are *justified*,
possibly even something to be proud of.

Try to imagine what believing this *does* to the mind that lives in that
mindset for years. Scary, right?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Showtime's "The Borgias" is back

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 09:57 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> On 04/12/2012 07:51 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
>>> So finally the airwaves contain images of spiritual
>>> life that are almost as spiritual as Fairfield Life. :-)
>>>
>>> I don't think we've had any poisonings or murders
>>> here, so thus far the Borgia Popes are ahead w.r.t.
>>> body count, although it may be a tossup w.r.t. revenge
>>> fantasies.
>>>
>>> Seriously, it's a pretty good series, especially if
>>> you enjoy seeing the seamy underside of spirituality.
>>> Even the TMO and the Srivastavas seem tame compared
>>> to the Borgia Popes.
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ6Qr4kxc3U
>> You seem to have a thing for medieval times which I don't,
>> so I figured I wouldn't miss "The Borgias" even though I
>> tried an episode or two the first season.
> I completely understand this, and do not fault you
> for feeling this way. I am attracted to the medieval
> period because I feel that it provides the clearest
> parallel to our own times.

I can see the parallel but they often throw in the romanticism of the 
era which doesn't interest me.  I find the parallel to the late 19th 
century more relevant or even the 1920's with "Boardwalk Empire."  
Interesting that not much has been done about the late 1800s and the 
corruption that existed in the US then, at least as a series.  Too 
revealing or "close to home" I would guess.  We can look at films like 
"There Will Be Blood" for that.  And though you don't believe in 
astrology the US is going through similar patterns today that it went 
through with the corruption of 120 years ago (Vimshottari cycle being 
120 years and then repeats).

>> I might look at an episode of "Game of Thrones" though it
>> doesn't sound like my cuppa tea either.
> It's challenging. First, it's a fantasy series, which
> means that it's not everybody's cuppa tea. Second, it
> has an *enormous* cast, all with weird names, so most
> Americans almost by definition don't have the attention
> span to follow it.

For the same reason I dropped "Lost Girl" because it was more fantasy 
than occult.  I like occult and that is why I still watch "Supernatural" 
even though they drifted into Biblical fantasy for a while which I have 
no use for.  They're back at ghosts and occult phenomena.

And then there is just I have too much TV to watch.  Geez, I recall in 
the 1970s, 80s and 90s I hardly watched TV.  I found broadcast TV mostly 
droll and in the late 80s started watching more movies on rentals which 
has continued.  Then there is just the understanding that broadcast TV 
is a contrived medium mainly where a showrunner pitches a show and if 
bought by the network turns more into a meal ticket than a true form of 
entertainment.  We are "strung along" with many episodes of something 
that could have been condensed to a 4 or 6 hour mini series.  People 
feel that their time is cheated with the latter and that is why 
broadcast TV in the US is having a hard time these days.  The old 
formulas don't work anymore.  This may also be the reason that some of 
the cable nets and premium channels are turning to remakes of BBC series 
because most were originally shorter and better written.  If you string 
along BBC watchers you are playing with their subscriptions fees and 
they might not take too kindly to that.

That said, I was actually reluctant when offered the deal by Comcast to 
take it.  But I knew I would probably sign up for HBO, hopefully at 
promo come summer for "True Blood" (if It returns then) so it took care 
of that and I could see if the second tier is really worth anything.  
And the other part of the deal I didn't mention was that I could cancel 
in 30 days if I didn't want it at no charge.

And for those who wonder why I don't read a book instead, I spend the 
day doing close eye work programming.  Looking at a 53" screen 8' from 
me is actually relaxing on the eyes (and at least one optometrist agrees).

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[wgm4u]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 04/12/2012 08:12 AM, wgm4u wrote:
> > In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
> > have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, 
> > etc. TM does NOT do this! Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion 
> > practicing TM, but I doubt this, how many in Fairfield actually practice 
> > their Religion? or are they Catholics, etc. in name only?
> >
> > Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
> > this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of 
> > Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't 
> > teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they 
> > were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
> >
> > This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.
> 
> TM is a very narrow mass market teaching so as even you have mentioned 
> before leaves out a lot of stuff (though somewhat discussed in MMY's 
> version of the Gita but I guess no one has read it in years) that would 
> be taught in other disciplines.  But for most yogis religion is just a 
> fragment of spirituality and something often used as a mind control 
> device to keep the masses "civil."
> 
> Other traditions have paths to even becoming an archarya which would 
> allow you to make other teachers.  I guess that didn't quite fit into 
> the TMO "business plan." ;-)

Dollars to Donuts nobody on this forum formally practices any form of Religion 
(including myself).

Re: [FairfieldLife] With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 08:12 AM, wgm4u wrote:
> In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
> have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, 
> etc. TM does NOT do this! Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion 
> practicing TM, but I doubt this, how many in Fairfield actually practice 
> their Religion? or are they Catholics, etc. in name only?
>
> Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
> this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of 
> Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't 
> teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they 
> were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
>
> This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.

TM is a very narrow mass market teaching so as even you have mentioned 
before leaves out a lot of stuff (though somewhat discussed in MMY's 
version of the Gita but I guess no one has read it in years) that would 
be taught in other disciplines.  But for most yogis religion is just a 
fragment of spirituality and something often used as a mind control 
device to keep the masses "civil."

Other traditions have paths to even becoming an archarya which would 
allow you to make other teachers.  I guess that didn't quite fit into 
the TMO "business plan." ;-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 10:49 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>>> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
>>> planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
>>>
>>>
>>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
>>> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
>>>
>>> L.
>>>
>> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
>> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious"
>> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
>>
> Not my point. My point is:
>
>
>> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
>> situation
> epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.

The problem is your original statement is ambiguous.  I asked for 
clarification of what you meant and you just said "sigh."  I guess we're 
all not as psychic as you so we don't have to guess about what you 
mean.  I would also say if you made as ambiguous a statement in a 
project meeting of programmers you would get skewered because of the 
ambiguity.

Most mantra meditations teach that if you have a thought during 
meditation to just return to the mantra.  However I might add if you 
have a valuable insight it might be well to write it down or speak it 
into a recorder so you don't forget it before going back to the mantra.  
TM or any practice be damned.  And this is fine as long as you don't get 
into a habit doing it.  Any "mass market" practice is going to get 
reduced to simplicity for easy learning.  Common sense might dictate 
otherwise and be expected in practice.

You also got some responses from people who think simple basic math and 
not theoretical math which takes abstract thinking.  I like to mention 
mention that when I was managing programmers senior management would ask 
what my programmers were doing sunning themselves out in the quad.  I 
would answer "programming."  That is because not all programming is done 
at the computer.  And they would often come running back from that 
sunning session yelling "I've solved it!".  IOW, often getting away from 
a problem can make the solution pop into your head.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 09:51 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
>
>>> So, how many mantric phrases and hand gestures do
>>> you know, now that you're on the path to learning?
>>>
> Bhairitu:
>> A lot, but it's not quantitative but about knowledge
>> and experience. In comparison TM is "censored."
>>
> But, why would knowing a lot of mantras and lots of
> hand gestures give anyone more 'knowledge' experience
> than TM with it's single bija mantra?

Sorry but I've never found anyone who stuck to the narrow teachings of 
MMY who had much experience and knowledge anyway.  And those who did 
have some better experience often came from other disciplines or were 
learning other things on the side.  Sorry, TM is NOT a religion and 
please don't try to make it one.  It's just a very low level technique 
that is somewhat questionable among yogis and probably why I saw a 
certain number of people with roughness, not from straining, when I did 
checking sessions for TM.

If it is wonderful for you and the best you can do then fine. Other 
folks mileage may vary.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
> > planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> > 
> > 
> > It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> > situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> > 
> > L.
> >
> 
> My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
> samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious" 
> solutions of various problems, and stuff!
>

Not my point. My point is:


> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular situation
epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > No-one is addressing my point...
> 
> 
> Solving math/daily-problems requires long period of thoughts in meditation 
> which is possible mostly in the beginning times of TM. It is also highly 
> individual. 
> With time there is less time for mundane thoughts as the periods of thoughts 
> are replaced with transcendence.
>

My point is about the *instruction* concerning the situation, not about the 
situation itself.


L.

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[wgm4u]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
> >
> > In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
> > have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, 
> > etc. TM does NOT do this!
> 
> Ofcourse it does, but not spoken or written which is how religions today try 
> to survive.
> 
>  Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion practicing TM, but I doubt 
> this, how many in Fairfield actually practice their Religion? or are they 
> Catholics, etc. in name only?
> 
> All the religions we know today are stale, outdated and not needed.
> 
> > 
> > Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
> > this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of 
> > Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't 
> > teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they 
> > were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
> > 
> > This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.
> 
> 
> Nonsense, it's a strength and the reason why it will outlive the religions we 
> know today.

That certainly wasn't MMY's position on Religion!, he acknowledged the 
complimentary importance of Religion in the SOBAL. Unfortunate he and the tmorg 
more or less *outsourced* that particular important function of spiritual 
unfoldment.  Today, the tmorg merely gives *lip-service* to it! that's why you 
only get *half-a-loaf* in the TM program.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. 
> > 
> > My bad. It never occurred to me that the word "heroics"
> > could be used to refer to the soap opera events you had 
> > just described.

She put the term in scare quotes, so obviously she didn't
think it was an appropriate term either:

"And I don't feel noble about any of the 'heroics' at the
end if that is what you're thinking."

She used it because Barry was accusing her of trying to
paint *herself* as "noble":

"...decades later you're still trying to 'ennoble' it and
make it sound different..."

On the other hand, to describe her whistle-blowing as
"soap opera events" is extraordinarily shallow and
uncompassionate. This was very serious, life-altering,
devastating business for the folks involved.

And let's not forget how many times Barry has presented
himself as a real stand-up guy for having occasionally
opposed the rigidity of the TMO.

> > I thought you were referring to something 
> > else from the annals of Robin lore, something you assumed 
> > I knew about.
> 
> I also apologize for trying to riff on your reply "real
> time" in a noisy cafe after a couple of Belgian beers
> with high alcoholic content. In retrospect, I guess all
> I was really trying to accomplish was to find out why
> you (or anyone) were so taken by Robin, either "back 
> in the day" or more recently, on FFL. 
> 
> Your occasional descriptions of him as "noble" confound
> me

"Occasional" = once only, in this very exchange with
Barry:

"I thought it was rather noble actually, his desire to
uphold what he felt was the best of who MMY was and what
the Movement could have stood for."

That's it, just that once. And she made it clear in her
followup that even this, as far as she was concerned,
wasn't very significant.

> because I never saw that in the things he wrote here,

She didn't use the term to describe what he wrote here.

> back when I was still trying to read them. To me it was
> pretty much all stuck-in-one's-head intellectual egobabble,
> with generous helpings of abuse and over-emotionalism 
> served up on the side. 

Of course, he never "abused" anybody who hadn't abused
him first. And to those who believe having, let alone
expressing, emotions is evidence of unevolved
"attachment," any size helping of emotion will appear
excessive.

> The only feeling I've ever gotten from you as to what 
> attracted you to him in the first place was that he 
> represented some kind of "adventure" for you. I guess 
> that's as close as I'm ever going to get to understanding
> what you saw/see in him, so I'll leave it at that.

She's said a lot more than that about what attracted her.

Since Barry claims he wants to know "why [Ann] (or anyone)
were so taken by Robin, either 'back in the day' or more
recently, on FFL," I'll take a stab at explaining why I
was so taken with Robin on FFL. (Of course Barry will
refrain from reading what follows; so much for his desire
to know the "why" in question.)

I wasn't around "back in the day," but I think it was
pretty damned "noble" for Robin to have had the
determination and courage to spend 25 years by himself
doing his best to figure out why he had made such a
horrendous mess of things and to root out the flaws that
he perceived in himself that had made him see himself in
such a deluded light, to the detriment of his followers.
I believe him when he says it was agonizing. How could
it not have been?

It also took tremendous courage for him to emerge from
that process to face people who knew of his history--
the very people who were most likely to see him in a
negative light--and to give them a no-excuses account
of himself.

That aside, although at first I wasn't willing to plow
through all of what Barry characterizes as "egobabble,"
after awhile I began to find much more than just that
in his posts and ended up reading every word of what he
wrote here, much of it more than once. I told him back
in December that as a former cult leader who used to be
in Unity Consciousness, to the folks at FFL he was a
"perplexing critter." He responded, in part:

"I am aware that some of my posts are provocative, ironic, 
and even in a certain sense abstruse: so I am bound to lose 
a few—maybe more than a few—readers. After all, there are 
the Alexes as well as the Barrys of this world; and with 
Alex I am an acquired taste that he knows he will never 
have. With Barry, well, you know in what consists his 
aversion to my posts. There is a difference.

"What concerns me in posting at FFL, Judy, is to meet every 
challenge head-on; and to test out my philosophy, my 
understanding, my experience as I go to express myself. I 
am here for self-metatherapeutic reasons. I am not here to 
make FFL readers believe in what I believe in

"But the w

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> >
> > Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion practicing TM...
> 
> Ostensibly, the Age Of Enlightenment began in 1975.


I did not write the above sentence. If you want to snip, give credit where 
credit is due. And stop drinking beer for breakfast ! :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Showtime's "The Borgias" is back

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 04/12/2012 07:51 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> > So finally the airwaves contain images of spiritual
> > life that are almost as spiritual as Fairfield Life. :-)
> >
> > I don't think we've had any poisonings or murders
> > here, so thus far the Borgia Popes are ahead w.r.t.
> > body count, although it may be a tossup w.r.t. revenge
> > fantasies.
> >
> > Seriously, it's a pretty good series, especially if
> > you enjoy seeing the seamy underside of spirituality.
> > Even the TMO and the Srivastavas seem tame compared
> > to the Borgia Popes.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ6Qr4kxc3U
> 
> You seem to have a thing for medieval times which I don't, 
> so I figured I wouldn't miss "The Borgias" even though I 
> tried an episode or two the first season.  

I completely understand this, and do not fault you
for feeling this way. I am attracted to the medieval
period because I feel that it provides the clearest
parallel to our own times.

> I might look at an episode of "Game of Thrones" though it 
> doesn't sound like my cuppa tea either.  

It's challenging. First, it's a fantasy series, which
means that it's not everybody's cuppa tea. Second, it
has an *enormous* cast, all with weird names, so most
Americans almost by definition don't have the attention
span to follow it.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Richard J. Williams]

> > So, how many mantric phrases and hand gestures do
> > you know, now that you're on the path to learning?
> >
Bhairitu:
> A lot, but it's not quantitative but about knowledge 
> and experience. In comparison TM is "censored."
>
But, why would knowing a lot of mantras and lots of 
hand gestures give anyone more 'knowledge' experience
than TM with it's single bija mantra?

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[Richard J. Williams]

> > Ostensibly there are mediators of every
> > Religion practicing TM...
> >
turquoiseb:
> Ostensibly, the Age Of Enlightenment began
> in 1975.
>
1975 was Maharishi's Year of the Dawn of the
Age of Enlightenment - there's no 'ostensible'
to it.

http://tinyurl.com/775cn5v 

[FairfieldLife] a dream help

[meltem uzun]

 

















 



  



  
  
  



Hello dear friends, I told you before that i lost my 8 months baby boy.  i have 
one more question; if you comment i ll be very happy...  my friend's 17 years 
old daughter saw my baby son in her dream yesterday night... first a woman said 
them that my son wanted to see them and he needed our help because a death 
spirit or being disturbed him al lot. they accepted and my son came to see her 
and her mother... first he sit the mother's lap, the mother said that they 
loved him so much, needed him a lot... and added that i loved him a lot... 
after my son getting younger sat the girl's lap... suddenly my son disappeared, 
the woman said the mother and the girl to hide cos the death being was coming. 
the thing came nor human nor a creature shouted at the woman why she had made 
my son to see the mother and the girl... and claimed that it would find the 
mother and the girl... but the woman made th mother and the girl disappeared 
like my son... everywhere was green in her dream she never scared of my son 
but she scared the spirit thing...  what should i do?  what does it mean? if he 
is really disturbed what precaution should i take?  thank you so mch for your 
help... meltem



   

  
  
  



 




 

  .


   









  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 06:44 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
>
> I am starting to see why you don't practice TM
> any more, Bhairitu.
>
 Yeah, because I wanted to practice the real thing
 with a path to learning more not a dead end. ;-)

>>> So, how many mantric phrases and hand gestures do
>>> you have to know in order to be on the path to
>>> learning?
>>>
> Bhairitu:
>> Wrong question.
>>
> Don't want to talk about the mantric phrases and all
> the hand gestures? Go figure.
>
> So, how many mantric phrases and hand gestures do
> you know, now that you're on the path to learning?

A lot, but it's not quantitative but about knowledge and experience.  In 
comparison TM is "censored."

Re: [FairfieldLife] Showtime's "The Borgias" is back

[Bhairitu]

On 04/12/2012 07:51 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> So finally the airwaves contain images of spiritual
> life that are almost as spiritual as Fairfield Life. :-)
>
> I don't think we've had any poisonings or murders
> here, so thus far the Borgia Popes are ahead w.r.t.
> body count, although it may be a tossup w.r.t. revenge
> fantasies.
>
> Seriously, it's a pretty good series, especially if
> you enjoy seeing the seamy underside of spirituality.
> Even the TMO and the Srivastavas seem tame compared
> to the Borgia Popes.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ6Qr4kxc3U

You seem to have a thing for medieval times which I don't, so I figured 
I wouldn't miss "The Borgias" even though I tried an episode or two the 
first season.  I might look at an episode of "Game of Thrones" though it 
doesn't sound like my cuppa tea either.  FYI, Sean Bean is back in 
action on "Missing" which I figure you have probably given up on.

For those interested in quirky kiche stuff I watched "Norwegian Ninja" 
which is a spoof on cheap Corman style movies repleat with model 
aircraft with strings attached.  It's available on Netflix WI:
http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Norwegian_Ninja/70153425

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[Richard J. Williams]

authfriend:
> Emily, just ignore this. Your post was fine.
> 
Thanks for , now it's clear who
and what is being commented on. But, what's
with the lazy 'top-posting'?

> > > Geez, I almost missed this exchange. 
> > > Very interesting and Ann, I thought 
> > > you were pretty clear. 
> > >
> > What's not clear, Emily, is which part
> > of the thread are you commenting on?
> >  
> > If you would just  out the parts
> > you're NOT commenting on, and then
> > post a reply to what you ARE commenting
> > on, would be really helpful. 
> > 
> > That way, other respondents would be able 
> > to follow alnog the conversation better 
> > and post their reply. Or, is this just 
> > another general Barry-bash? If so, then
> > just key in at the top:
> > 
> > "It's all about Barry". Thanks.
> > 
> > Judy and Barry get this because they are 
> > professionals who work with text formatting 
> > every day, but this is a mess!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion practicing TM...

Ostensibly, the Age Of Enlightenment began in 1975.

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
> have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, 
> etc. TM does NOT do this!

Ofcourse it does, but not spoken or written which is how religions today try to 
survive.

 Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion practicing TM, but I doubt 
this, how many in Fairfield actually practice their Religion? or are they 
Catholics, etc. in name only?

All the religions we know today are stale, outdated and not needed.

> 
> Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
> this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of 
> Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't 
> teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they 
> were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
> 
> This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.


Nonsense, it's a strength and the reason why it will outlive the religions we 
know today.

[FairfieldLife] Re: With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would 
> have to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, 
> etc. TM does NOT do this! Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion 
> practicing TM, but I doubt this, how many in Fairfield actually practice 
> their Religion? or are they Catholics, etc. in name only?
> 
> Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think 
> this is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of 
> Yoga, the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't 
> teach these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they 
> were all meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!
> 
> This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.
>

For starters, most meditators would prolly feel annoyed, or whatever,
if they were supposed to feel disgust towards their own physical
bodies (shauca), and by the same token, I guess, t/w other people's bodies??

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[authfriend]

Emily, just ignore this. Your post was fine.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Emily Reyn:
> > Geez, I almost missed this exchange. 
> > Very interesting and Ann, I thought 
> > you were pretty clear. 
> >
> What's not clear, Emily, is which part
> of the thread are you commenting on?
>  
> If you would just  out the parts
> you're NOT commenting on, and then
> post a reply to what you ARE commenting
> on, would be really helpful. 
> 
> That way, other respondents would be able 
> to follow alnog the conversation better 
> and post their reply. Or, is this just 
> another general Barry-bash? If so, then
> just key in at the top:
> 
> "It's all about Barry". Thanks.
> 
> Judy and Barry get this because they are 
> professionals who work with text formatting 
> every day, but this is a mess! 

[FairfieldLife] Top vulnerable smart phones 2011...

[cardemaister]

http://www.bit9.com/orphan-android/

Orphan Android: Bit9 Announces the "Dirty Dozen" - Android Smartphones Security 
and Privacy Risk of 2011
Bit9's new research on "The Most Vulnerable Smartphones of 2011" lists the 
devices that pose the most serious security and privacy risk to consumers and 
corporations. In the Bit9 research report, Android phones overwhelmingly topped 
the list, accounting for the "dirty dozen" most vulnerable devices.
Manufacturers such as Samsung, HTC, Motorola, Sanyo, LG and SONY were slow to 
upgrade phones to the latest and most secure version of Android
56% of Android phones in marketplace today are running out of date and insecure 
Android operating system software
Why does it matter? Intellectual property is being stolen at a record pace from 
corporations. Hackers are looking to steal consumers' credit card numbers and 
private information. Is your company at risk?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Showtime's "The Borgias" is back

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> So finally the airwaves contain images of spiritual
> life that are almost as spiritual as Fairfield Life. :-)
> 
> I don't think we've had any poisonings or murders 
> here, so thus far the Borgia Popes are ahead w.r.t.
> body count, although it may be a tossup w.r.t. revenge
> fantasies. 
> 
> Seriously, it's a pretty good series, especially if
> you enjoy seeing the seamy underside of spirituality. 
> Even the TMO and the Srivastavas seem tame compared 
> to the Borgia Popes. 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ6Qr4kxc3U

I just *love* the tag line for this series:
"The original crime family." That just nails
it. The Sopranos and the Corleones were rank
amateurs compared to the Borgias.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6qOWiWu4Jk&feature=fvwrel

What I love about the series is its depiction
of how the history of revenge and treacherous
hypocrisy seems to be synonymous with the history 
of Christianity. It's a ballsy topic for Showtime
to take on, in this day and age. I commend them
for doing it.

[FairfieldLife] With TM you only get 'half a loaf'.

[wgm4u]

In order for TM to be a COMPLETE system of spiritual development it would have 
to incorporate all the ethical teaching of Jesus, Buddha and Krishna, etc. TM 
does NOT do this! Ostensibly there are mediators of every Religion practicing 
TM, but I doubt this, how many in Fairfield actually practice their Religion? 
or are they Catholics, etc. in name only?

Personally I think most have adopted TM *in lieu* of Religion and I think this 
is a personal dis-service to these people. Patanjali taught 8 limbs of Yoga, 
the first two are important ethical and moral guidelines, MMY doesn't teach 
these in spite of the fact he admits in the appendix of his Gita they were all 
meant to be practiced *simultaneously*!

This is going to be a continuing problem for the TMorg.

[FairfieldLife] Showtime's "The Borgias" is back

[turquoiseb]

So finally the airwaves contain images of spiritual
life that are almost as spiritual as Fairfield Life. :-)

I don't think we've had any poisonings or murders 
here, so thus far the Borgia Popes are ahead w.r.t.
body count, although it may be a tossup w.r.t. revenge
fantasies. 

Seriously, it's a pretty good series, especially if
you enjoy seeing the seamy underside of spirituality. 
Even the TMO and the Srivastavas seem tame compared 
to the Borgia Popes. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ6Qr4kxc3U

[FairfieldLife] So, it's all about Barry

[Richard J. Williams]

> > So, it's all about Barry. Lazy 'top-posters'!
> >
awoelflebater:
> No Richard, it's all about  me.
> >
Some people just don't want to learn, I guess.

So for them ,it's easier to just skim the posts
and then add their comment at the top without
any snipping. Go figure.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
 wrote:
>
>
>
> awoelflebater:
> > Raunchy, I have to acknowledge your kind post. Sometimes you just
want to give up on certain things, like trying to make unreasonable
people find reason. So, that is what I am going to do. That was my last
shot at that. At least now I know who is not either willing or able to 
open their minds let alone any other vital body part, like a heart, to
someone. At least I can check that one off my list.
> >
> So, it's all about Barry. Lazy 'top-posters'! Go figure.
No Richard, it's all about  me.
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" 
wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about.
Granted, she is smart, analytical, reasonable, meticulous and
insightful. But surely the average FFL'er could understand most of what
I said. Of course, I also realize most are not interested in this
subject of mine but I was hoping Barry could at least "grok" half of it.
After all, I was "rapping" on about it for him. (sigh)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Ann. I usually read Judy's post because she doesn't miss much
about anything that I might find interesting, otherwise I might have
missed your rap with Barry and his failure to understand a word of
anything you said and still less about you as a human being. I don't
have a "do not read list." I have a "usually read list" Judy, Em, Ann,
Lawson. Everyone else I glance at the topic and writer to see if I want
to chime in.
> > >
> > > What Barry fails to understand about you is your ability to
reflect honestly upon and express your feelings and motivations so
clearly, warts and all. I admire your courage and passion to seize the
moment. These are qualities I value in a friendship. My God! I would
have given anything to have seen you "storm the big house, grab your
best friend and throw his things into your horse trailer." What a gal!
If ever I'm in trouble, I'd want you on my side.
> > >
> > > Anyway, you gave it your best shot with Barry, but "pearls before
swine..." as they say.
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Earlier this morning I made a post in which I asked at
> > > > > the end why anybody would consider anything Barry says
> > > > > these days to be worthwhile. He's thoughtfully followed
> > > > > up with another batch of even better examples of his
> > > > > utter inanity:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb 
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater
 wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > So there was an element of
> > > > > > > > > > > sentimentality, because in the end the whole thing
didn't
> > > > > > > > > > > quite pan out with regard to MMY or even Robin's
> > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Not to mention "in terms of reality." :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Oh, reality. Such a subjective and
impossible-to-absolutely-define
> > > > > > > concept.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't actually see it as that difficult to define.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reality is that which, after you die and cease to exist
> > > > > > as an egoic entity, persists.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is Barry suggesting he has died and ceased to exist as an
> > > > > egoic entity? It would appear so, since he asserts above
> > > > > that Robin's goals didn't pan out "in terms of reality."
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > With all due respect, Ann, what this sounds like to me
> > > > > > > > is a bunch of moodmaking on *your* part, to "color" your
> > > > > > > > memories such that *you* feel "noble."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Interesting that it comes across like this because this is
> > > > > > > not what I am about.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I *get* that. Why I am commenting is that you're coming
> > > > > > across as if that *was* what you were about.
> > > > >
> > > > > Correction: This is how Barry perceives Ann to be coming
> > > > > across. And that perception is not subject to any
> > > > > modification.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > First of all, what Robin did or did not do during my time
around
> > > > > > > him doesn't reflect the slightest on me, what I was hoping
for
> > > > > > > or what I believed. He was pretty much guiding the ship
and we
> > > > > > > were all tossed about, including him.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So you abdicate all responsibility for walking up the
> > > > > > plank and boarding that ship? Just asking.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nobility is the least of it. I didn't give a dang about
his
> > > > > > > "enlightenment", the movement, TM or any of the other
spiritual
> > > > > > > trappings. I thought he was a wonderful shit disturbing
rebel
> > > > > > > with interesting ideas, he was attractive, smart and there
was
> > > > > > > never a dull moment around him (if you don't count the
chanting
> > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: "Titanic" redux

[Richard J. Williams]

turquoiseb:
> I just don't understand the furor over 
> the 3D re-release of "Titanic." 
>
Maybe it's because you've never seen a 3-D
movie at a local IMAX. Apparently you don't
even own a 3-D TV or a 3-D DVD player, so
how would you be seeing a 3-D movie anyway?

Go figure.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> Raunchy, I have to acknowledge your kind post. 

Just in case you failed to notice, Ann, it wasn't a "kind"
post, it was a "pile on Barry" post. :-)

> Sometimes you just want to give up on certain things, like 
> trying to make unreasonable people find reason. So, that 
> is what I am going to do. That was my last shot at that. 

You'll be the first here to manage that, if you pull
it off. Most just continue to cyberstalk for years.
Goodbye and good luck.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Richard J. Williams]

> > Yeah, because I wanted to practice the real thing 
> > with a path to learning more not a dead end. ;-)
> >
Lawson: 
> Heavy sigh.
> 
Apparently 'Power Touch Yoga' is secret; that's why
only about six people, world-wide, practice it. Most
people have never heard of it - you have to go all
the way to Oakland, CA, to get initiated and get the
secret mantras and the hand gestures. Otherwise, you're
at a 'dead end' out in Phoenix, AZ. You probably only
know a single bija mantra and one single hand gesture.

Go figure.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > > I am starting to see why you don't practice TM
> > > > any more, Bhairitu.
> > > >
> > > Yeah, because I wanted to practice the real thing
> > > with a path to learning more not a dead end. ;-)
> > >
> > So, how many mantric phrases and hand gestures do
> > you have to know in order to be on the path to
> > learning?
> >
Bhairitu:
> Wrong question.
>
Don't want to talk about the mantric phrases and all
the hand gestures? Go figure.

So, how many mantric phrases and hand gestures do
you know, now that you're on the path to learning?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[Richard J. Williams]

awoelflebater:
> Raunchy, I have to acknowledge your kind post. Sometimes you just want to 
> give up on certain things, like trying to make unreasonable people find 
> reason. So, that is what I am going to do. That was my last shot at that. At 
> least now I know who is not either willing or able to  open their minds let 
> alone any other vital body part, like a heart, to someone. At least I can 
> check that one off my list.
>
So, it's all about Barry. Lazy 'top-posters'! Go figure.

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. Granted, she 
> > > is smart, analytical, reasonable, meticulous and insightful. But surely 
> > > the average FFL'er could understand most of what I said. Of course, I 
> > > also realize most are not interested in this subject of mine but I was 
> > > hoping Barry could at least "grok" half of it. After all, I was "rapping" 
> > > on about it for him. (sigh)
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi Ann. I usually read Judy's post because she doesn't miss much about 
> > anything that I might find interesting, otherwise I might have missed your 
> > rap with Barry and his failure to understand a word of anything you said 
> > and still less about you as a human being. I don't have a "do not read 
> > list." I have a "usually read list" Judy, Em, Ann, Lawson. Everyone else I 
> > glance at the topic and writer to see if I want to chime in.
> > 
> > What Barry fails to understand about you is your ability to reflect 
> > honestly upon and express your feelings and motivations so clearly, warts 
> > and all. I admire your courage and passion to seize the moment. These are 
> > qualities I value in a friendship. My God! I would have given anything to 
> > have seen you "storm the big house, grab your best friend and throw his 
> > things into your horse trailer." What a gal! If ever I'm in trouble, I'd 
> > want you on my side. 
> > 
> > Anyway, you gave it your best shot with Barry, but "pearls before swine..." 
> > as they say.
> >  
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Earlier this morning I made a post in which I asked at
> > > > the end why anybody would consider anything Barry says
> > > > these days to be worthwhile. He's thoughtfully followed
> > > > up with another batch of even better examples of his
> > > > utter inanity:
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > So there was an element of
> > > > > > > > > > sentimentality, because in the end the whole thing didn't
> > > > > > > > > > quite pan out with regard to MMY or even Robin's
> > > > > > > > > > enlightenment...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not to mention "in terms of reality." :-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Oh, reality. Such a subjective and impossible-to-absolutely-define
> > > > > > concept. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't actually see it as that difficult to define.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Reality is that which, after you die and cease to exist
> > > > > as an egoic entity, persists.
> > > > 
> > > > Is Barry suggesting he has died and ceased to exist as an
> > > > egoic entity? It would appear so, since he asserts above
> > > > that Robin's goals didn't pan out "in terms of reality." 
> > > > 
> > > > > > > With all due respect, Ann, what this sounds like to me
> > > > > > > is a bunch of moodmaking on *your* part, to "color" your
> > > > > > > memories such that *you* feel "noble."
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Interesting that it comes across like this because this is 
> > > > > > not what I am about. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I *get* that. Why I am commenting is that you're coming
> > > > > across as if that *was* what you were about.
> > > > 
> > > > Correction: This is how Barry perceives Ann to be coming
> > > > across. And that perception is not subject to any
> > > > modification.
> > > > 
> > > > > > First of all, what Robin did or did not do during my time around
> > > > > > him doesn't reflect the slightest on me, what I was hoping for 
> > > > > > or what I believed. He was pretty much guiding the ship and we 
> > > > > > were all tossed about, including him. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > So you abdicate all responsibility for walking up the 
> > > > > plank and boarding that ship? Just asking.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Nobility is the least of it. I didn't give a dang about his 
> > > > > > "enlightenment", the movement, TM or any of the other spiritual 
> > > > > > trappings. I thought he was a wonderful shit disturbing rebel
> > > > > > with interesting ideas, he was attractive, smart and there was 
> > > > > > never a dull moment around him (if you don't count the chanting 
> > > > > > and manifestations). 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Cool. This is the most "real" I have yet heard you speak
> > > > > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[Richard J. Williams]

Emily Reyn:
> Geez, I almost missed this exchange. 
> Very interesting and Ann, I thought 
> you were pretty clear. 
>
What's not clear, Emily, is which part
of the thread are you commenting on?
 
If you would just  out the parts
you're NOT commenting on, and then
post a reply to what you ARE commenting
on, would be really helpful. 

That way, other respondents would be able 
to follow alnog the conversation better 
and post their reply. Or, is this just 
another general Barry-bash? If so, then
just key in at the top:

"It's all about Barry". Thanks.

Judy and Barry get this because they are 
professionals who work with text formatting 
every day, but this is a mess! 

 You are also an excellent writer and a joy to read, btw.  After reading 
this, I am reminded that Barry doesn't *hear* others' well, particularly if 
they challenge his viewpoint or correct any assumption he's made about them.  
> 
> 
> 
>  From: awoelflebater 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:39 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic 
> psychology" model
>  
> 
>   
> Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. Granted, she is 
> smart, analytical, reasonable, meticulous and insightful. But surely the 
> average FFL'er could understand most of what I said. Of course, I also 
> realize most are not interested in this subject of mine but I was hoping 
> Barry could at least "grok" half of it. After all, I was "rapping" on about 
> it for him. (sigh)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > Earlier this morning I made a post in which I asked at
> > the end why anybody would consider anything Barry says
> > these days to be worthwhile. He's thoughtfully followed
> > up with another batch of even better examples of his
> > utter inanity:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > > > So there was an element of
> > > > > > > > sentimentality, because in the end the whole thing didn't
> > > > > > > > quite pan out with regard to MMY or even Robin's
> > > > > > > > enlightenment...
> > > > >
> > > > > Not to mention "in terms of reality." :-)
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, reality. Such a subjective and impossible-to-absolutely-define
> > > > concept. 
> > > 
> > > I don't actually see it as that difficult to define.
> > > 
> > > Reality is that which, after you die and cease to exist
> > > as an egoic entity, persists.
> > 
> > Is Barry suggesting he has died and ceased to exist as an
> > egoic entity? It would appear so, since he asserts above
> > that Robin's goals didn't pan out "in terms of reality." 
> > 
> > > > > With all due respect, Ann, what this sounds like to me
> > > > > is a bunch of moodmaking on *your* part, to "color" your
> > > > > memories such that *you* feel "noble."
> > > > 
> > > > Interesting that it comes across like this because this is 
> > > > not what I am about. 
> > > 
> > > I *get* that. Why I am commenting is that you're coming
> > > across as if that *was* what you were about.
> > 
> > Correction: This is how Barry perceives Ann to be coming
> > across. And that perception is not subject to any
> > modification.
> > 
> > > > First of all, what Robin did or did not do during my time around
> > > > him doesn't reflect the slightest on me, what I was hoping for 
> > > > or what I believed. He was pretty much guiding the ship and we 
> > > > were all tossed about, including him. 
> > > 
> > > So you abdicate all responsibility for walking up the 
> > > plank and boarding that ship? Just asking.
> > > 
> > > > Nobility is the least of it. I didn't give a dang about his 
> > > > "enlightenment", the movement, TM or any of the other spiritual 
> > > > trappings. I thought he was a wonderful shit disturbing rebel
> > > > with interesting ideas, he was attractive, smart and there was 
> > > > never a dull moment around him (if you don't count the chanting 
> > > > and manifestations). 
> > > 
> > > Cool. This is the most "real" I have yet heard you speak
> > > about your time with Robin on this forum. That's what I
> > > have been after.
> > 
> > IOW, Barry didn't read all the other posts in which she's
> > said the same thing.
> > 
> > 
> > > > I told you, nobility isn't in the picture, way too over 
> > > > the top for me.
> > > 
> > > And, as I think I've told you and others here, I don't
> > > believe a word you say. I believe only what you do.
> > 
> > As has been pointed out to Barry before, there is no
> > "doing" on this forum, only "saying." The distinction
> > he attempts to make is just an excuse for calling people
> > liars, as he does Ann above.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Now come the really interesting parts of Barry's response:
> > 
> > > > You forget or maybe never read that post but I was the 
> > > > whistleblower at the end,
> > > 
> > > In my personal ex

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[awoelflebater]

Raunchy, I have to acknowledge your kind post. Sometimes you just want to give 
up on certain things, like trying to make unreasonable people find reason. So, 
that is what I am going to do. That was my last shot at that. At least now I 
know who is not either willing or able to  open their minds let alone any other 
vital body part, like a heart, to someone. At least I can check that one off my 
list.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. Granted, she 
> > is smart, analytical, reasonable, meticulous and insightful. But surely the 
> > average FFL'er could understand most of what I said. Of course, I also 
> > realize most are not interested in this subject of mine but I was hoping 
> > Barry could at least "grok" half of it. After all, I was "rapping" on about 
> > it for him. (sigh)
> > 
> 
> Hi Ann. I usually read Judy's post because she doesn't miss much about 
> anything that I might find interesting, otherwise I might have missed your 
> rap with Barry and his failure to understand a word of anything you said and 
> still less about you as a human being. I don't have a "do not read list." I 
> have a "usually read list" Judy, Em, Ann, Lawson. Everyone else I glance at 
> the topic and writer to see if I want to chime in.
> 
> What Barry fails to understand about you is your ability to reflect honestly 
> upon and express your feelings and motivations so clearly, warts and all. I 
> admire your courage and passion to seize the moment. These are qualities I 
> value in a friendship. My God! I would have given anything to have seen you 
> "storm the big house, grab your best friend and throw his things into your 
> horse trailer." What a gal! If ever I'm in trouble, I'd want you on my side. 
> 
> Anyway, you gave it your best shot with Barry, but "pearls before swine..." 
> as they say.
>  
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Earlier this morning I made a post in which I asked at
> > > the end why anybody would consider anything Barry says
> > > these days to be worthwhile. He's thoughtfully followed
> > > up with another batch of even better examples of his
> > > utter inanity:
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > > > > So there was an element of
> > > > > > > > > sentimentality, because in the end the whole thing didn't
> > > > > > > > > quite pan out with regard to MMY or even Robin's
> > > > > > > > > enlightenment...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not to mention "in terms of reality." :-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Oh, reality. Such a subjective and impossible-to-absolutely-define
> > > > > concept. 
> > > > 
> > > > I don't actually see it as that difficult to define.
> > > > 
> > > > Reality is that which, after you die and cease to exist
> > > > as an egoic entity, persists.
> > > 
> > > Is Barry suggesting he has died and ceased to exist as an
> > > egoic entity? It would appear so, since he asserts above
> > > that Robin's goals didn't pan out "in terms of reality." 
> > > 
> > > > > > With all due respect, Ann, what this sounds like to me
> > > > > > is a bunch of moodmaking on *your* part, to "color" your
> > > > > > memories such that *you* feel "noble."
> > > > > 
> > > > > Interesting that it comes across like this because this is 
> > > > > not what I am about. 
> > > > 
> > > > I *get* that. Why I am commenting is that you're coming
> > > > across as if that *was* what you were about.
> > > 
> > > Correction: This is how Barry perceives Ann to be coming
> > > across. And that perception is not subject to any
> > > modification.
> > > 
> > > > > First of all, what Robin did or did not do during my time around
> > > > > him doesn't reflect the slightest on me, what I was hoping for 
> > > > > or what I believed. He was pretty much guiding the ship and we 
> > > > > were all tossed about, including him. 
> > > > 
> > > > So you abdicate all responsibility for walking up the 
> > > > plank and boarding that ship? Just asking.
> > > > 
> > > > > Nobility is the least of it. I didn't give a dang about his 
> > > > > "enlightenment", the movement, TM or any of the other spiritual 
> > > > > trappings. I thought he was a wonderful shit disturbing rebel
> > > > > with interesting ideas, he was attractive, smart and there was 
> > > > > never a dull moment around him (if you don't count the chanting 
> > > > > and manifestations). 
> > > > 
> > > > Cool. This is the most "real" I have yet heard you speak
> > > > about your time with Robin on this forum. That's what I
> > > > have been after.
> > > 
> > > IOW, Barry didn't read all the other posts in which she's
> > > said the same thing.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > I told you, nobility isn't in the picture, way too over 
> > > > > the top f

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. 
> > 
> > My bad. It never occurred to me that the word "heroics"
> > could be used to refer to the soap opera events you had 
> > just described. I thought you were referring to something 
> > else from the annals of Robin lore, something you assumed 
> > I knew about.
> 
> I also apologize for trying to riff on your reply "real
> time" in a noisy cafe after a couple of Belgian beers
> with high alcoholic content. In retrospect, I guess all
> I was really trying to accomplish was to find out why
> you (or anyone) were so taken by Robin, either "back 
> in the day" or more recently, on FFL. 
> 

Actually, no. All Barry was trying to do was confirm his bias that Ann was 
moodmaking to "color" her memories of Robin to make herself feel "noble." Even 
after she explained "nobility isn't in the picture" he accuses her of lying, 
"I've told you and others here, I don't believe a word you say. I believe only 
what you do." That's not beer-fog talkn' folks. That's Barry's confirmation 
bias and his inability to have empathy for another human being. If anyone has 
any doubts about this, or as Emily says, "Barry doesn't *hear* others' well, 
particularly if they challenge his viewpoint or correct any assumption he's 
made about them," read Judy's comments about it:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/308250

> Your occasional descriptions of him as "noble" confound
> me because I never saw that in the things he wrote here,
> back when I was still trying to read them. To me it was
> pretty much all stuck-in-one's-head intellectual egobabble,
> with generous helpings of abuse and over-emotionalism 
> served up on the side. 
> 
> The only feeling I've ever gotten from you as to what 
> attracted you to him in the first place was that he 
> represented some kind of "adventure" for you. I guess 
> that's as close as I'm ever going to get to understanding
> what you saw/see in him, so I'll leave it at that.
>

Confirmation bias sure has its limitations, doesn't it?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  > >
> 
> Move along folks, nothing to see. It was just the beer fog talkn'.


Drinking beer at 10 am could be potentially dangerous in the long run Turq. 
Useful adress here: 
http://www.aa-europe.net/countries/amsterdam.htm

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. 
> > 
> > My bad. It never occurred to me that the word "heroics"
> > could be used to refer to the soap opera events you had 
> > just described. I thought you were referring to something 
> > else from the annals of Robin lore, something you assumed 
> > I knew about.
> 
> I also apologize for trying to riff on your reply "real
> time" in a noisy cafe after a couple of Belgian beers
> with high alcoholic content. In retrospect, I guess all
> I was really trying to accomplish was to find out why
> you (or anyone) were so taken by Robin, either "back 
> in the day" or more recently, on FFL. 
> 
> Your occasional descriptions of him as "noble" confound
> me because I never saw that in the things he wrote here,
> back when I was still trying to read them. To me it was
> pretty much all stuck-in-one's-head intellectual egobabble,
> with generous helpings of abuse and over-emotionalism 
> served up on the side. 
> 
> The only feeling I've ever gotten from you as to what 
> attracted you to him in the first place was that he 
> represented some kind of "adventure" for you. I guess 
> that's as close as I'm ever going to get to understanding
> what you saw/see in him, so I'll leave it at that.
>

Move along folks, nothing to see. It was just the beer fog talkn'.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. 
> 
> My bad. It never occurred to me that the word "heroics"
> could be used to refer to the soap opera events you had 
> just described. I thought you were referring to something 
> else from the annals of Robin lore, something you assumed 
> I knew about.
>

Nice try, Barry...no cigar.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Introduction to Transcendental Meditation / great C L I P

[michael]

FINE,
BUT YOU HAD THE ATTENTION ONLY ON THE WORDS.
A GOOD EXERCISE IS >>>  SWITCH OFF THE SOUND,
AND JUST SEE ALL THIS BEAUTIFULL HAPPY FACES,
 EXPERIENCING  THE  >> Z O N E <<
GOOD LUCK  ~~ ~~~ENJOY
~~  MERLIN :-))

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merlin  wrote:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dafVS326aZo
> > 
> > everything is said in 90 seconds ...
> >
> 
> Rosenthal's exposition is a bit superficial. But "no object of attention 
> whatsoever" sounds boring and makes for poor PR.
> 
> Of course, he may not quite "get" Pure Consciousness and think that the 
> aftereffect is the real deal.
> 
> L
>

[FairfieldLife] Dr. Tony Nader: Wholeness and Parts

[nablusoss1008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFSDWQp1Bu4

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Greek Transcendental Meditation Movement is happy to announce

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> >
> > Nablusoss, I'd really like to go.  This looks like it could be very nice in 
> > large spiritual ways.  I love the historical context.  Yes, there is 
> > content and then context.  I like the historical context there to meditate 
> > in.  
> > 
> > Now, they (the TM- administrative movement) have not granted me a valid 
> > Dome badge entirely yet, could I go to your course just as a meditator (?). 
> >  I'm one of the group of earliest people to have been taught TM in Iowa and 
> > I still can't go to Guru Purnima in Fairfield.  & haven't been able to go 
> > to Maharishi's January 12th birthday celebrations for probably 12 years 
> > too.  Even though my relationship to Maharishi goes way back.  I got kicked 
> > out of the domes here for the first time for having facial hair that was 
> > not 'trimmed' as a governor back around y-2000.
> > 
> > Do you think you could get me on this Greek course?
> > 
> > -Buck, out in the Dome parking lot in Fairfield.
> 
> 
> Dear Buck
> As you probably know the european attitude towards the things you bring up is 
> different from the US administration. It does vary a bit from country to 
> country according to the mood and mental setup of the natinal leader but to 
> my knowledge no-one are banned from group meditations for having seen saints.
> 
> "The course is open to all Meditators and Sidhas of Greece and all over the 
> World." 
> All you have to do is to apply here: "Please call Dr. Demetrios Glykas or 
> mail to him your intention to come (Demetrios Glykas jgurudeva108@... or 
> phone to 00306972922539)." 
>  
> Also you must keep a low profile in the meetings with Bevan. Just leave ALL 
> the problems in America behind and don't mention ANY of it. If you follow 
> this advice it will be smooth sailing and you should be able to go to 
> whatever courses you want in Europe later, included those in Vlodrop. 
> 
> Unless some of the un-friends of TM here on FFL, particularily the so-called 
> "Buddhist's", contacts Dr. Demetrios and warns him of you I see no reason at 
> all why you should not be able to go and enjoy this course which I'm sure 
> will be very nice.
> 
> Go there and enjoy !
> 
> http://mim.io/2cf062


Just to add one point. When you communicate with Greece don't problematize 
anything, don't even mention your status in the USA. This is because they only 
want as many as possible to come and enjoy the course, they are not interested 
in problems.

So, go and enjoy ! :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. 
> 
> My bad. It never occurred to me that the word "heroics"
> could be used to refer to the soap opera events you had 
> just described. I thought you were referring to something 
> else from the annals of Robin lore, something you assumed 
> I knew about.

I also apologize for trying to riff on your reply "real
time" in a noisy cafe after a couple of Belgian beers
with high alcoholic content. In retrospect, I guess all
I was really trying to accomplish was to find out why
you (or anyone) were so taken by Robin, either "back 
in the day" or more recently, on FFL. 

Your occasional descriptions of him as "noble" confound
me because I never saw that in the things he wrote here,
back when I was still trying to read them. To me it was
pretty much all stuck-in-one's-head intellectual egobabble,
with generous helpings of abuse and over-emotionalism 
served up on the side. 

The only feeling I've ever gotten from you as to what 
attracted you to him in the first place was that he 
represented some kind of "adventure" for you. I guess 
that's as close as I'm ever going to get to understanding
what you saw/see in him, so I'll leave it at that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Analyzing the TMO using the "economic psychology" model

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> Well at least ONE reader here knew what I was writing about. 

My bad. It never occurred to me that the word "heroics"
could be used to refer to the soap opera events you had 
just described. I thought you were referring to something 
else from the annals of Robin lore, something you assumed 
I knew about.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solving math problems (or whatever) while meditating

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
>
> Has anyone ever found that they are solving a puzzle or math problem or 
> planning their day, etc., during their TM period?
> 
> 
> It struck me just now that what is taught concerning this particular 
> situation epitomizes the difference between TM and not-TM.
> 
> L.
>

My wild guess is that's the vicaara (vichAra) stage(?) of saMprajnaata
samaadhi. I also quite often come up with some "ingenious" 
solutions of various problems, and stuff!