[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suppose it could all be seen as an enlightening example of the down side of democracy - the leat intelligent and morally most corrupt common denominator sets the standard :-) Either that or a bunch of dueling egos waving their dicks at each other and acting like preadolescents... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lik1AB/fOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd rather descirbe myself as the sole catalyst, though I'd prefer to think of it in terms of shining some light in a very dark place - with the result that a variety of nocturnal ? bugs in panic realized daybreak is come :-) You really don't realize that this is exactly how the fanatics on the 'other side' view what they're doing, and you, do you? You share a mindset of fanaticism, just on different sides of the issue... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Your favorite religious organization? Make a donation at Network for Good. http://us.click.yahoo.com/EOl1HB/LPaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] B12, once again
(Jaan Suurküla [= big (suur) village (küla; cf. Sanskrit kula)] is an M.D. of apparently Estonian ancestry.) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:51:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Jaan Suurkula [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: You may have vitamin B12-deficiency Introduction Dear Friends, B12 is very important for the normal functioning of the brain. For example, over half of people with Alzheimers dementia have been found to have B12 deficiency. Research has reported B12-deficiency among one third of vegetarians studied. This may be an underestimation as the tests are insensitive. The reason for the deficiency is that vegetarian food is poor in B12, unless one regularly eats mungbean and chickbean sprouts (a cup virtually every day is required to provide enough). So it is good to take some B12 if one has been a vegetarian for a long time. Even when there is a harmful deficiency in the Brain, it is not always very evident. Although the tests are unreliable, they should still be taken because, if positive you have a strong reason to be careful about taking B12 in the future. Wrong cooking may cause deficiency. This is, because all the B- vitamins are very heatsensitive so they are commonly destroyed with cooking. They are very watersoluble so they should not be boiled in water. B-vitamin rich vegetables should be steamed (not boiled in water), until they get a little soft. So unless this is done, there are not much B-vitamins left in the food. Then take B-vitamins - Brewers yeast is a good supplement. I have found pronounced deficiency in several vegetarian TM-people NOTE: Do forward this to your vegetarian friends especially as well as elderly relatives. Please mention that I intend, if time and resources allow, to create a website also informing about other important health issues. The idea is to sort out, among all the more or less well underpinned rumours in the health field, what are really important and common health issues in our modern society and to explain in a way laymen can understand. I will let you know when/if it is published. Jai Guru Dev Jaan As this text is quite long I have split it in a few parts. B12 part 1 Symptoms Silent vitamin B12 deficiency common among vegetarians By Jaan Suurküla, M.D. Recent research has shown that vitamin B12 deficiency is very common among vegetarians. In addition, at least 10-15 % of all people above 60 are deficient. Measuring the vitamin in blood is not reliable. Some can have a pronounced deficiency with normal B12 in blood. Therefore the extent of B12 deficiency has long been underestimated. Even young people may be deficient. The youngest vegetarian with a clearcut deficiency I know about was 17 years. I have found that many vegetarian meditators have B12 deficiency. Deficiency symptoms may be vague Vitamin B12 is very important for the normal functioning of the nervous system. Early and even fairly pronounced deficiency does not always cause distinct or specific symptoms. Common early symptoms are tiredness or a decreased mental work capacity. Decreased concentration and decreased memory (brain Vata). Irritability and depression. Sleep disturbances may occur, because B12 is important for the regulation of the sleep wake cycle by the pineal gland (through melatonin)[1]. Treatment with B12 normalizes the melatonin level, and thereby the sleep disturbance. Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), with severe seasonal depressions has a known connection with disturbed pineal (melatonin) functioning including disturbed sleep-wake rhythm[2]. But I have had cases with pronounced deficiency but still no subjective symptoms perhaps some sleep disturbance. It is my experience that many doctors miss the diagnosis. Severe deficiency may harm the brain. For example about 50 percent of Alzheimer's dementia cases had low B12 in a recent Swedish study. The damage is suspected to be caused by an increase of the neurotoxic amino acid homocystein which requires B12 for its breakdown. Also the peripheral nervous system is affected. The first symptoms are tingling, needle-prick or burning sensations in the toes and later in the fingertips. Later numbness in the hands and feet like walking on clouds and balance disturbances. The muscles get weak and shaky. The bladder and bowel control gets increasingly impaired. Impotence may occur. The sense of smell may decrease. Many other disturbances, not yet known to be connected to B12 may be there. But you can have pronounced brain deficiency without any of these peripheral symptoms. Vitamin B12-deficiency may also cause anemia and this was formerly thought to be a good indicator of B12-deficiency. But recent research has found that there may be pronounced brain affection without anemia. Especially in pernicious anemia (see below) there may also be symptoms from the Gastro-intestinal channel, including soreness of the tongue that may be smooth, at least on the sides, flatulence, heartburn, diarrhea
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: I'd rather descirbe myself as the sole catalyst, though I'd prefer to think of it in terms of shining some light in a very dark place - with the result that a variety of nocturnal ? bugs in panic realized daybreak is come :-) You really don't realize that this is exactly how the fanatics on the 'other side' view what they're doing, and you, do you? You share a mindset of fanaticism, just on different sides of the issue... In other words, IMO the Wikipedia was correct in declaring the articles on TM off-limits to fanatics on either side. I'm currently involved with projects that have to do with user-maintained technical document- ation, which is prey to the same sorts of things. Most of the time it works out, and people limit themselves to correcting an inaccuracy or clari- fying a point that was less than clear in the original. (Such as the Linux user community.) But every so often flame wars develop, as users bring their egos into the equation, and then all the less-fanatical users have to suffer as dueling egos take turns erasing one comment and replacing it with their (supposedly) better comment. It's a damned shame. Whatever happened to the concept of it being OK to have different opinions on a subject, and allowing both opinions to be seen? The alternative seems to me to be a kind of white man's burden mentality that says, I cannot allow the poor, helpless masses to be exposed to less than the Truth (which I know, of course), so I have to get rid of the positive (or negative) view of this issue and replace it with the proper negative (or positive) view of the issue. Silly, and embarrassing for all concerned IMO... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/mDk17A/lOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] There she BLowe's! (YFing mahole[?] cover?)
http://tinyurl.com/k2wkn Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: I'd rather descirbe myself as the sole catalyst, though I'd prefer to think of it in terms of shining some light in a very dark place - with the result that a variety of nocturnal ? bugs in panic realized daybreak is come :-) You really don't realize that this is exactly how the fanatics on the 'other side' view what they're doing, and you, do you? You share a mindset of fanaticism, just on different sides of the issue... Guessed you missed the :-) :-) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: I suppose it could all be seen as an enlightening example of the down side of democracy - the leat intelligent and morally most corrupt common denominator sets the standard :-) Either that or a bunch of dueling egos waving their dicks at each other and acting like preadolescents... No, that's not it - the grey eminences of the hijacking are operating in a seemingly detached and calculating manner. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: I'd rather descirbe myself as the sole catalyst, though I'd prefer to think of it in terms of shining some light in a very dark place - with the result that a variety of nocturnal ? bugs in panic realized daybreak is come :-) You really don't realize that this is exactly how the fanatics on the 'other side' view what they're doing, and you, do you? You share a mindset of fanaticism, just on different sides of the issue... In other words, IMO the Wikipedia was correct in declaring the articles on TM off-limits to fanatics on either side. [mercy snip] Have you checked the article? The fact is that the article have bene hijacked by enemimes of TM. Here's a link to the TM talk page which explains more.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Transcendental_Meditation#Article_and_WIkipedia_rules Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: I'd rather descirbe myself as the sole catalyst, though I'd prefer to think of it in terms of shining some light in a very dark place - with the result that a variety of nocturnal ? bugs in panic realized daybreak is come :-) You really don't realize that this is exactly how the fanatics on the 'other side' view what they're doing, and you, do you? You share a mindset of fanaticism, just on different sides of the issue... In other words, IMO the Wikipedia was correct in declaring the articles on TM off-limits to fanatics on either side. [mercy snip] Have you checked the article? The fact is that the article have bene hijacked by enemimes of TM. Here's a link to the TM talk page which explains more.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Talk:Transcendental_Meditation#Article_and_WIkipedia_rules Your paranoia is showing. Enemies of TM? Sheesh. While it is true that many/most/all of the people you cite have certain agendas that aren't exactly favorable to TM, the way you word your own contributions comes off as far more biased than any of the people you are complaining about. Whether or not this is actually the case is immaterial: YOU are the one whose rhetoric and actions scream bias. That you may actually have made some good points buried in all your ranting is likely the only reason why the Wikipedia editors are still allowing some level of participation on your part. If you want to have more influence on the content of the article, you need to take a step or three back, take a deep breath, and calm down. As it stands, at last in the context of the Wikipedia article you're more of an enemy of TM than Andrew Skolnick or Mike Doughney or Steve Hassan. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM makes Wikipedia list of semi-protected articles
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: I'd rather descirbe myself as the sole catalyst, though I'd prefer to think of it in terms of shining some light in a very dark place - with the result that a variety of nocturnal ? bugs in panic realized daybreak is come :-) You really don't realize that this is exactly how the fanatics on the 'other side' view what they're doing, and you, do you? You share a mindset of fanaticism, just on different sides of the issue... In other words, IMO the Wikipedia was correct in declaring the articles on TM off-limits to fanatics on either side. [mercy snip] Have you checked the article? The fact is that the article have bene hijacked by enemimes of TM. Here's a link to the TM talk page which explains more.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Talk:Transcendental_Meditation#Article_and_WIkipedia_rules Your paranoia is showing. Enemies of TM? Sheesh. While it is true that many/most/all of the people you cite have certain agendas that aren't exactly favorable to TM, the way you word your own contributions comes off as far more biased than any of the people you are complaining about. Whether or not this is actually the case is immaterial: YOU are the one whose rhetoric and actions scream bias. That you may actually have made some good points buried in all your ranting is likely the only reason why the Wikipedia editors are still allowing some level of participation on your part. If you want to have more influence on the content of the article, you need to take a step or three back, take a deep breath, and calm down. As it stands, at last in the context of the Wikipedia article you're more of an enemy of TM than Andrew Skolnick or Mike Doughney or Steve Hassan. Read - won't comment :-) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/jDk17A/gOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Remember that old bone we were chewing on? Judy: The contradiction is that according to science, your constraints, your sense of exercising an act of will to overcome them, and your enjoyment of all that are all *determined*, because the behavior of the elementary particles that make your mind, as well as your body, function operates via mathematically predictable statistical probabilities; there are no surprises. Me: Maybe this is the heart of our different ways of seeing it. I don't understand how elementary particles make up my mind? Most neuo-scientists view a separate mind body making the distinction like Descarte, don't they? I think Wilber makes this point that these sub atomic particles have nothing to do with conscioudness, they are physical. But is does clarify my own assumptions about the mind body connections. I follow the primacy of matter point of view. Consciousness emerges from the functioning of the parts. I don't think that matter acting strangely at sub-atomic leves changes this split. Judy: Theoretically, if we could compute the billions of bits of behavior of those gazillions of elementary particles, we could predict precisely the chances of your choosing to exercise versus choosing to watch football on TV. Me: Yes, this is our difference. The particles can't determine the content of thought for me. The emergent awareness of I think therefore I am level is the beautiful mystery of life. Our choices are not pre-determined, but they are often predicable. Judy: There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of clinical evidence, as it happens, for free will, whereas there's quite a bit *against* it. I was just reading an article in the Times today about how more and more personality traits are being traced to genetics, for example. And Lawson mentioned the famous (infamous?) studies that appear to show that if you're asked to raise your arm, say, the motor neurons that govern the movement of the arm muscles are activated *before* the area of the brain in which decisions to act are made. (I think I have that straight; Lawson will correct me if I don't, I'm sure!) The quote just states free will as a given of our experience. These studies are fascinating. Personally I feel that free will must be practiced. To act in a new original way is very difficult, but when achieved, it is wonderful. I am ready to take my experience of free will as a given. I think we will find more an more influences on us from genetics etc, which only makes it more heroic when we do will our lives in a new direction. Let alone the daily choices that build our future in one direction or other! Nowhere is that more obvious than in personal health. (This is out the sequence of your post) Judy: It's experiencing the *free will* of the group 'I' and interpreting it as its own free will. Me: This point of view seems to reduce what I love most about being alive and turns it into an illusion. If it is true, the evidence will have to rub my nose in it. I certainly would not jump to this conclusion anymore than I would adopt the Matrix movie series POV by choice. They are both depressing to me. I don't really understand how the group free will can want to express itself through me getting a drink of water. It seems far fetched. Since neuro science describes the link between our mind an nervous system, it seems like we are missing a nervous system here to support the group I. Is it a mind without a body? I was going to skip exercise today but now I will be damned if I will! Oh wait, that was predictable as a counter to this post, so I am going to watch the World Cup...no ..., I will put my Nordic Track in front of the tube and do both! That is what I usually do, what a slave I am! I'm pretty sure that I need to read his whole essay at this point. There is too much not clear in his quote. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Your favorite religious organization? Make a donation at Network for Good. http://us.click.yahoo.com/EOl1HB/LPaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Zen and the Art of Creating Rube Goldberg Devices
Run the video at: http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2006/06/make_podcast_rube_goldberg_con_2.html or http://tinyurl.com/h3p5f Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Remember that old bone we were chewing on? Indeed I do. I just got back home, and almost the first thing I did was haul out Quantum Questions to reread the entire The 'I' That Is God essay from which I took the quote. Wilber includes three other Schroedinger essays as well, which I also reread. The upshot is that I find myself hugely embarrassed by how much grander his thinking is than I had been able to express--or even recall--when I was posting about the quote. Even now with the essays in front of me, I'm just barely able to follow his train of thought. At this point I don't think it makes any sense for me to try to encapsulate it all here; I surely wouldn't succeed in doing it justice. I'm pretty confident, though, that you would find the essays--and the rest of the book, particularly including Wilber's introductory essay--absorbing. Not necessarily *convincing*, but I suspect dealing with the concepts in relation to your own thinking would significantly expand the reach and precision of your philosophy, even if you ultimately came to entirely different conclusions. Here's Amazon's page for the book: http://tinyurl.com/kycgg Note that in the Editorial Reviews section, the Book Description--which is part of the flap copy-- states the point of the book incorrectly: Brings together for the 1st time the mystical writings of the world's great physicists - all of whom express a deep belief that physics and mysticism are somehow fraternal twins. In fact, this is precisely the *opposite* of the point of the book, which is that physics and mysticism are most emphatically NOT fraternal twins. Wilber must have had a fit. I'd guess he'd have insisted it be revised for subsequent editions of the book, so if you get hold of a more recent edition, it may say something different, and hopefully more accurate. Anyway...I'll just respond to a few of your points here, and if you're able to read the book, perhaps we can continue later. Judy: The contradiction is that according to science, your constraints, your sense of exercising an act of will to overcome them, and your enjoyment of all that are all *determined*, because the behavior of the elementary particles that make your mind, as well as your body, function operates via mathematically predictable statistical probabilities; there are no surprises. Me: Maybe this is the heart of our different ways of seeing it. I don't understand how elementary particles make up my mind? Most neuo-scientists view a separate mind body making the distinction like Descarte, don't they? Yes and no. In their work they certainly have to deal with the mind *as if* it were separate, simply because we don't understand the nature of the relationship between body and mind. That is an unsettled issue, so as far as the science is concerned, they have to study what the mind *does*, the manifestations of mind, rather than what mind *is*, if you see the distinction I'm making. Or to put it another way, what they study would be the same no matter which were the case. I think Wilber makes this point that these sub atomic particles have nothing to do with conscioudness, they are physical. But is does clarify my own assumptions about the mind body connections. I follow the primacy of matter point of view. Consciousness emerges from the functioning of the parts. I don't think that matter acting strangely at sub-atomic leves changes this split. Well, we don't know. Which side you take is a matter of philosophy, not of science. There's no more proof that consciousness is emergent from matter than that matter is emergent from consciousness. Either way, here magic happens. Schroedinger isn't claiming per se that science demonstrates that there is no free will; he's simply highlighting the fact that science cannot tell us whether free will exists, nor where our sense of free will comes from, and then suggesting a possible metaphysical solution that has the advantage of not contradicting either science or our sense of free will. snip Judy: It's experiencing the *free will* of the group 'I' and interpreting it as its own free will. Me: This point of view seems to reduce what I love most about being alive and turns it into an illusion. The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! I did remember correctly, by the way, that Schroedinger had been delving into the Vedic literature, specifically the Upanishads; and I was correct in equating the essay's title, The 'I' That Is God, with the Upanishadic dictum Atman is Brahman.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A great example of this was when he came here, sometime in the late 70s I think, he apparently made the offhand remark that someone's sari was really nice, or something to that effect. Next time he came--most of the women were wearing saris, and he couldn't believe it and wanted to know why. Sal I heard the same thing. As nice a saris are, when I started seeing a lot of women associated with the TMO wearing them, I remember thinking it was mood making, and went against what I had always heard about TM, that it strengthens cultural identity and integrity. On Jun 15, 2006, at 10:42 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Another related issue is that people often take what a teacher says out of context. A statement is made in a particular room in a particular situation to a particular person and in front of a particular audience, and some people want to interpret that statement as universally true for all rooms, situations, people and audiences. Big mistake. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lik1AB/fOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Great points. Thanks for taking the time. I will take a little time to make sure I let them sink in. I can't resist this one to start: The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. Since I handed over my eternal soul at the crossroads for a few guitar licks I may be stuck with my limits! This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! Expansion beyond limitations seemed so inspiring to me at one time. Now the words leave me cold. I know it will sound like MMY's My hut, my hut, but the joy of my life all comes from the details and limitations. Do you relate to this more as a concept or is it tied to the expansive sense of euphoria in the program for you? I can remember it in both contexts. Funny how something that seemed so overwhelmingly powerful and important at the time has vanished as a value in my life. Curious really. Consciousness really is amazing almost any way you look at it. I do want to spend some time thinking about the limits of science you presented. That is fascinating. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 6/15/06 10:58 AM, jim_flanegin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife% 40yahoogroups.com , curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: This is a frequent mistake people make, *assuming* that Maharishi [or another guru] is enlightened (I think psychologists refer to this phenomenon as transference), and then based on that assumption, interpret what Maharishi says as true, often misintepreting and misunderstanding what the guru says. I am pretty sure we got this idea about his state from him. I don't think it is assumptive on our part. If you treat him in any way other then as enlightened master you are quickly escorted out of the room. It is not assumed, it is enforced. I can't say, never met him, except once in a dream and that doesn't count. My point above was the *assumption* that many (all?) of his followers make. Just because he said he was enlightened, why did they believe it? And also regarding getting escorted out, were those that this happened to respectful? Just curious, because we'd be treated similarly in any company meeting if openly challenging a CEO disrespecfully- not making any assumptions here, just gethering info. Thanks From what I¹ve heard, there have been instances in Vlodrop where people have questioned Maharishi respectfully about course fees, MUM policies, etc., and have found their bags packed for them by the time they returned to their room. Ah, so his followers have been asked to practice the 'my way or the highway' sutra. Gee that place must be lot's o' laughs!...not... Well thank God it isn't my karma or dharma to live in such an environment- I'd go nuts. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/mDk17A/lOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great points. Thanks for taking the time. I will take a little time to make sure I let them sink in. I can't resist this one to start: The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. Since I handed over my eternal soul at the crossroads for a few guitar licks I may be stuck with my limits! This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! Expansion beyond limitations seemed so inspiring to me at one time. Now the words leave me cold. I know it will sound like MMY's My hut, my hut, but the joy of my life all comes from the details and limitations. Do you relate to this more as a concept or is it tied to the expansive sense of euphoria in the program for you? I can remember it in both contexts. Funny how something that seemed so overwhelmingly powerful and important at the time has vanished as a value in my life. Curious really. Consciousness really is amazing almost any way you look at it. I do want to spend some time thinking about the limits of science you presented. That is fascinating. With the caveat that expansion beyond limitations is an action more of ongoing comprehension and appreciation, I agree that it is the details that give sweetness to life (leading me to conclude that whoever said, the devil is in the details was the devil himself). Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/mDk17A/lOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
With the caveat that expansion beyond limitations is an action more of ongoing comprehension and appreciation, I agree that it is the details that give sweetness to life (leading me to conclude that whoever said, the devil is in the details was the devil himself). It is pretty obvious to me that the posters on this group are enjoying everything I am in addition to their spiritual pursuits. If you have one more thing to give your life meaning and joy, more power to you! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Great points. Thanks for taking the time. I will take a little time to make sure I let them sink in. I can't resist this one to start: The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. Since I handed over my eternal soul at the crossroads for a few guitar licks I may be stuck with my limits! This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! Expansion beyond limitations seemed so inspiring to me at one time. Now the words leave me cold. I know it will sound like MMY's My hut, my hut, but the joy of my life all comes from the details and limitations. Do you relate to this more as a concept or is it tied to the expansive sense of euphoria in the program for you? I can remember it in both contexts. Funny how something that seemed so overwhelmingly powerful and important at the time has vanished as a value in my life. Curious really. Consciousness really is amazing almost any way you look at it. I do want to spend some time thinking about the limits of science you presented. That is fascinating. With the caveat that expansion beyond limitations is an action more of ongoing comprehension and appreciation, I agree that it is the details that give sweetness to life (leading me to conclude that whoever said, the devil is in the details was the devil himself). Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great points. Thanks for taking the time. I will take a little time to make sure I let them sink in. I can't resist this one to start: The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. Since I handed over my eternal soul at the crossroads for a few guitar licks I may be stuck with my limits! Maybe there are some more licks still out there? This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! Expansion beyond limitations seemed so inspiring to me at one time. Now the words leave me cold. I know it will sound like MMY's My hut, my hut, but the joy of my life all comes from the details and limitations. Do you relate to this more as a concept or is it tied to the expansive sense of euphoria in the program for you? I can remember it in both contexts. Both, as you remember it, and more. What appeals to me is the expanded *range of choice*. Working with details and within limitations is one of the choices; the ability to do that doesn't get withdrawn. But you can set the limitations wherever you want to, or drop them altogether if you feel like doing that. You aren't limited to one set of limitations, in other words, nor are you limited as to how far you can go in exploring one particular set. This is so abstract it's hard to get across, but do you remember I said my experience of development of consciousness was one of increasing transparency? Part of that is that limitations become transparent. They're still there, but they don't block what's beyond them. Funny how something that seemed so overwhelmingly powerful and important at the time has vanished as a value in my life. I can't resist suggesting that perhaps the concept that seemed so powerful and important *was itself limited* as it existed in your mind at the time, and that at a certain point you had grown beyond what it meant to you then--but for various reasons, instead of letting the concept expand along with you, you left it where it was and went off in a different direction. To put it another way, you had a whole lot of bathwater you had to dump in terms of having been heavily involved with the organization and its dogmas and having a personal need to separate yourself from all that in order to breathe. And the baby swimming around therein was still just a baby, so underdeveloped intellectually you couldn't easily connect it to the growth you were experiencing in your life. If my concept of expansion beyond limitations was the same now as it was a few decades ago, I would no longer find it very appealing either. But I didn't have any bathwater to dump, because my involvement with the organization has never been more than peripheral; so I didn't have any problem taking the concept along with me and letting it grow in accord with my experience. Curious really. Consciousness really is amazing almost any way you look at it. Ain't nothing more enthralling, by me. And the more you look at it, the more enthralling it gets. I do want to spend some time thinking about the limits of science you presented. That is fascinating. Enjoy! Heh heh. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip This is so abstract it's hard to get across, but do you remember I said my experience of development of consciousness was one of increasing transparency? Part of that is that limitations become transparent. They're still there, but they don't block what's beyond them. (I hasten to add this process is very far from complete in my case; I'm describing what seems to me to be a *trend* in my experience, not a fait accompli.) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Do-it-yourself Star Trek
From the New York Times; June 18, 2006 'Star Trek' Fans, Deprived of a Show, Recreate the Franchise on Digital Video By DANNY HAKIM MASON NECK STATE PARK, Va. Paul Sieber was wearing a Star Trek uniform in the deep Virginia woods when he found himself surrounded by a leathery-looking gang. Fortunately, the ruffians were dressed up as Klingons, and Mr. Sieber, with a cigarette dangling from his mouth, was preparing to film them with a $6,000 digital video camera. At times like this, Mr. Sieber, the writer and director of Starship Farragut, must come to grips with the obvious not all Klingons are trained actors and bellow, Quiet on the set! From these Virginia woods to the Scottish Highlands, Star Trek fans are filling the void left by a galaxy that has lost Star Trek. For the first time in nearly two decades, television spinoffs from the original 1960's Star Trek series have ended, so fans are banding together to make their own episodes. Fan films have been around for years, particularly those related to the Star Wars movies. But now they can be downloaded from the Web, and modern computer graphics technology has lent them surprising special effects. And as long as no one is profiting from the work, Paramount, which owns the rights to Star Trek, has been tolerant. (Its executives declined to comment.) Up to two dozen of these fan-made Star Trek projects are in various stages of completion, depending what you count as a full-fledged production. Dutch and Belgian fans are filming an episode; there is a Scottish production in the works at www.ussintrepid.org.uk. There is a group in Los Angeles that has filmed more than 40 episodes, according to its Web site, www.hiddenfrontier.com, and has explored gay themes that the original series never imagined. Episodes by a group in Austin, Tex., at www.starshipexeter.com, feature a ship whose crew had the misfortune of being turned into salt in an episode of the original Star Trek, but has now been repopulated by Texans. I think the networks Paramount, CBS I don't think they're giving the fans the 'Trek' they're looking for, said Mr. Sieber, a 40-year- old engineer for a government contractor who likens his Star Trek project, at www.starshipfarragut.com, to online community theater. The fans are saying, look, if we can't get what we want on television, the technology is out there for us to do it ourselves, he added. And viewers are responding. One series, at www.newvoyages.com, and based in Ticonderoga, N.Y., boasts of 30 million downloads. It has become so popular that Walter Koenig, the actor who played Chekov in the original Star Trek, is guest starring in an episode, and George Takei, who played Sulu, is slated to shoot another one later this year. D. C. Fontana, a writer from the original Star Trek series, has written a script. Read more at: http://tinyurl.com/h5nxk Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/mDk17A/lOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
I can't resist suggesting that perhaps the concept that seemed so powerful and important *was itself limited* as it existed in your mind at the time, and that at a certain point you had grown beyond what it meant to you then--but for various reasons, instead of letting the concept expand along with you, you left it where it was and went off in a different direction. To put it another way, you had a whole lot of bathwater you had to dump in terms of having been heavily involved with the organization and its dogmas and having a personal need to separate yourself from all that in order to breathe. And the baby swimming around therein was still just a baby, so underdeveloped intellectually you couldn't easily connect it to the growth you were experiencing in your life. It seems from people posting on this group that many have grown and expanded their relationship with MMY in the way you describe. Seeing the changes in how people relate to the movement and spirituality in general has been interesting. I was happy to move on when I did, although it did surprise me at first. I don't regret that my involvement was very intense. I know it is a different perspective for someone like yourself who always had a separate identity outside the group. Your way sounds more psychologically healthy from my present point of view. It doesn't surprise me that you have found a balance that you enjoy and value. For me it was very different, and not only in a negative way. Since I did take MMY at his word, pursuing his programs as he laid them out seemed a rational choice for me. I am glad that I took it to the limit and tested his ideas as throughly as I did. I certainly don't look back and think if only I had... Now I can't claim to speak for anyone else in this regard. We all have to pursue our own style of living. I loved being in TM intensely, and I love my current non-spiritual life. My reasons for leaving TM were different from many others who left TM and spoke about it. I was not a disgruntled member. I had wonderful experiences and insights and had balanced my personal and professional life when I decided to leave. I was teaching part-time and enjoying a great real estate market, so I thought I had it all. I had the bucks to enjoy the privileged side of TMO with its better access to MMY than I had as a full-time member. As I mentioned many times, it was an unexpected cognitive shift that changed everything for me. But I do respect other people's choices with spirituality. I don't forget the value it had for me. I just see it all differently now for my own life. So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important no talk rule of any dysfunctional family! But in the end the exchange of ideas and perspectives is valuable and more important fun. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Great points. Thanks for taking the time. I will take a little time to make sure I let them sink in. I can't resist this one to start: The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. Since I handed over my eternal soul at the crossroads for a few guitar licks I may be stuck with my limits! Maybe there are some more licks still out there? This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! Expansion beyond limitations seemed so inspiring to me at one time. Now the words leave me cold. I know it will sound like MMY's My hut, my hut, but the joy of my life all comes from the details and limitations. Do you relate to this more as a concept or is it tied to the expansive sense of euphoria in the program for you? I can remember it in both contexts. Both, as you remember it, and more. What appeals to me is the expanded *range of choice*. Working with details and within limitations is one of the choices; the ability to do that doesn't get withdrawn. But you can set the limitations wherever you want to, or drop them altogether if you feel like
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Does this mean that I can take my time digitally adding you to the Holy Tradition portrait? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip This is so abstract it's hard to get across, but do you remember I said my experience of development of consciousness was one of increasing transparency? Part of that is that limitations become transparent. They're still there, but they don't block what's beyond them. (I hasten to add this process is very far from complete in my case; I'm describing what seems to me to be a *trend* in my experience, not a fait accompli.) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lik1AB/fOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't resist suggesting that perhaps the concept that seemed so powerful and important *was itself limited* as it existed in your mind at the time, and that at a certain point you had grown beyond what it meant to you then--but for various reasons, instead of letting the concept expand along with you, you left it where it was and went off in a different direction. To put it another way, you had a whole lot of bathwater you had to dump in terms of having been heavily involved with the organization and its dogmas and having a personal need to separate yourself from all that in order to breathe. And the baby swimming around therein was still just a baby, so underdeveloped intellectually you couldn't easily connect it to the growth you were experiencing in your life. It seems from people posting on this group that many have grown and expanded their relationship with MMY in the way you describe. Seeing the changes in how people relate to the movement and spirituality in general has been interesting. I was happy to move on when I did, although it did surprise me at first. I don't regret that my involvement was very intense. I know it is a different perspective for someone like yourself who always had a separate identity outside the group. Your way sounds more psychologically healthy from my present point of view. It doesn't surprise me that you have found a balance that you enjoy and value. For me it was very different, and not only in a negative way. Since I did take MMY at his word, pursuing his programs as he laid them out seemed a rational choice for me. I am glad that I took it to the limit and tested his ideas as throughly as I did. I certainly don't look back and think if only I had... Now I can't claim to speak for anyone else in this regard. We all have to pursue our own style of living. I loved being in TM intensely, and I love my current non-spiritual life. My reasons for leaving TM were different from many others who left TM and spoke about it. I was not a disgruntled member. I had wonderful experiences and insights and had balanced my personal and professional life when I decided to leave. I was teaching part-time and enjoying a great real estate market, so I thought I had it all. I had the bucks to enjoy the privileged side of TMO with its better access to MMY than I had as a full-time member. As I mentioned many times, it was an unexpected cognitive shift that changed everything for me. OK. Whatever the basis for your leaving the movement, what I find curious is that the way you talk about what you say no longer appeals to you, it wouldn't appeal to me either. It seems sort of stunted and shallow and two-dimensional and colorless, just a lot of empty words. But I guess that's just a function of your current lack of interest, and that at one time it must have been more fully developed. But I do respect other people's choices with spirituality. I don't forget the value it had for me. I just see it all differently now for my own life. So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I didn't mean to suggest any lack in your intellectual capacity, just for the record. In fact, it's the contrast between the vibrancy and depth of your intellect as it shows up here discussing various topics, and the pallidity and flatness when you talk about spirituality (in the TM sense), that led me to make the suggestion in the first place. Yet you like that Kabir poem, which is anything *but* pallid. Is a puzzlement... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this mean that I can take my time digitally adding you to the Holy Tradition portrait? sheesh Yeah, I think you can back-burner it for the next few lives... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip This is so abstract it's hard to get across, but do you remember I said my experience of development of consciousness was one of increasing transparency? Part of that is that limitations become transparent. They're still there, but they don't block what's beyond them. (I hasten to add this process is very far from complete in my case; I'm describing what seems to me to be a *trend* in my experience, not a fait accompli.) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/jDk17A/gOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
OK. Whatever the basis for your leaving the movement, what I find curious is that the way you talk about what you say no longer appeals to you, it wouldn't appeal to me either. It seems sort of stunted and shallow and two-dimensional and colorless, just a lot of empty words. I will have to give this some thought. I'll bet there is some interesting feedback here if I can unpack it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I can't resist suggesting that perhaps the concept that seemed so powerful and important *was itself limited* as it existed in your mind at the time, and that at a certain point you had grown beyond what it meant to you then--but for various reasons, instead of letting the concept expand along with you, you left it where it was and went off in a different direction. To put it another way, you had a whole lot of bathwater you had to dump in terms of having been heavily involved with the organization and its dogmas and having a personal need to separate yourself from all that in order to breathe. And the baby swimming around therein was still just a baby, so underdeveloped intellectually you couldn't easily connect it to the growth you were experiencing in your life. It seems from people posting on this group that many have grown and expanded their relationship with MMY in the way you describe. Seeing the changes in how people relate to the movement and spirituality in general has been interesting. I was happy to move on when I did, although it did surprise me at first. I don't regret that my involvement was very intense. I know it is a different perspective for someone like yourself who always had a separate identity outside the group. Your way sounds more psychologically healthy from my present point of view. It doesn't surprise me that you have found a balance that you enjoy and value. For me it was very different, and not only in a negative way. Since I did take MMY at his word, pursuing his programs as he laid them out seemed a rational choice for me. I am glad that I took it to the limit and tested his ideas as throughly as I did. I certainly don't look back and think if only I had... Now I can't claim to speak for anyone else in this regard. We all have to pursue our own style of living. I loved being in TM intensely, and I love my current non-spiritual life. My reasons for leaving TM were different from many others who left TM and spoke about it. I was not a disgruntled member. I had wonderful experiences and insights and had balanced my personal and professional life when I decided to leave. I was teaching part-time and enjoying a great real estate market, so I thought I had it all. I had the bucks to enjoy the privileged side of TMO with its better access to MMY than I had as a full-time member. As I mentioned many times, it was an unexpected cognitive shift that changed everything for me. OK. Whatever the basis for your leaving the movement, what I find curious is that the way you talk about what you say no longer appeals to you, it wouldn't appeal to me either. It seems sort of stunted and shallow and two-dimensional and colorless, just a lot of empty words. But I guess that's just a function of your current lack of interest, and that at one time it must have been more fully developed. But I do respect other people's choices with spirituality. I don't forget the value it had for me. I just see it all differently now for my own life. So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I didn't mean to suggest any lack in your intellectual capacity, just for the record. In fact, it's the contrast between the vibrancy and depth of your intellect as it shows up here discussing various topics, and the pallidity and flatness when you talk about spirituality (in the TM sense), that led me to make the suggestion in the first place. Yet you like that Kabir poem, which is anything *but* pallid. Is a puzzlement... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important no talk rule of any dysfunctional family! Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm [...] 'Ex-members say that the movement widely practices a style of deception some call the SIMS shuffle. Curtis Mailloux, a former member who lives in Fairfax, Va, says the name is derived from the Student International Meditation Society, one of the Maharishi's front groups, where many members develop this skill. Mailloux says he left the cult in 1989 after 15 years. As a former TM teacher and chair of the TM center in Washington, DC, the largest in the United States, he is one of the highest ranking members to defect. I was taught to lie and to get around the pretty rules of the 'unenlightened' in order to get favorable reports into the media, says Maillous. We were taught how to exploit the reporters' gullibility and fascination with the exotic, especially what comes from the East. We thought we weren't doing anything wrong, because we were told it was often necessary to deceive the unenlightened to advance our guru's plan to save the world.' Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/mDk17A/lOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
On Jun 18, 2006, at 5:18 PM, sparaig wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important "no talk" rule of any dysfunctional family! Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm [...] 'Ex-members say that the movement widely practices a style of deception some call the "SIMS shuffle." Curtis Mailloux, a former member who lives in Fairfax, Va, says the name is derived from the Student International Meditation Society, one of the Maharishi's front groups, where many members develop this skill. Mailloux says he "left the cult" in 1989 after 15 years. As a former TM teacher and chair of the TM center in Washington, DC, the largest in the United States, he is one of the highest ranking members to defect. "I was taught to lie and to get around the pretty rules of the 'unenlightened' in order to get favorable reports into the media," says Maillous. "We were taught how to exploit the reporters' gullibility and fascination with the exotic, especially what comes from the East. We thought we weren't doing anything wrong, because we were told it was often necessary to deceive the unenlightened to advance our guru's plan to save the world."' No, that's not what this reveals, what is seems to reveal is a pattern of corruption and deception at the higher levels, not the rank and file. It also implies this mandate came from *somewhere or someone*--someone pulling the financial and PR strings. Given the history of extreme micromanagement, who do ya think that might be? It's sad to me that someone who is so spiritual would be turned away because of these experiences. __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: [...] So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important no talk rule of any dysfunctional family! Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm [...] 'Ex-members say that the movement widely practices a style of deception some call the SIMS shuffle. Curtis Mailloux, a former member who lives in Fairfax, Va, says the name is derived from the Student International Meditation Society, one of the Maharishi's front groups, where many members develop this skill. Mailloux says he left the cult in 1989 after 15 years. As a former TM teacher and chair of the TM center in Washington, DC, the largest in the United States, he is one of the highest ranking members to defect. I was taught to lie and to get around the pretty rules of the 'unenlightened' in order to get favorable reports into the media, says Maillous. We were taught how to exploit the reporters' gullibility and fascination with the exotic, especially what comes from the East. We thought we weren't doing anything wrong, because we were told it was often necessary to deceive the unenlightened to advance our guru's plan to save the world.' Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 18, 2006, at 5:18 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: [...] So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important no talk rule of any dysfunctional family! Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm [...] 'Ex-members say that the movement widely practices a style of deception some call the SIMS shuffle. Curtis Mailloux, a former member who lives in Fairfax, Va, says the name is derived from the Student International Meditation Society, one of the Maharishi's front groups, where many members develop this skill. Mailloux says he left the cult in 1989 after 15 years. As a former TM teacher and chair of the TM center in Washington, DC, the largest in the United States, he is one of the highest ranking members to defect. I was taught to lie and to get around the pretty rules of the 'unenlightened' in order to get favorable reports into the media, says Maillous. We were taught how to exploit the reporters' gullibility and fascination with the exotic, especially what comes from the East. We thought we weren't doing anything wrong, because we were told it was often necessary to deceive the unenlightened to advance our guru's plan to save the world.' No, that's not what this reveals, what is seems to reveal is a pattern of corruption and deception at the higher levels, not the rank and file. a SIMS teacher is higher level? A center chairman is higher level? It also implies this mandate came from *somewhere or someone*--someone pulling the financial and PR strings. Given the history of extreme micromanagement, who do ya think that might be? It's sad to me that someone who is so spiritual would be turned away because of these experiences. Uh Just today on this board, Curtis seems to have contradicted what he said to Skolnick... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/mDk17A/lOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? What specific lies were you told to tell? What lies DID you tell? Spinning things favorably, while distateful, isn't the same as out and out lieing... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? So, you say that you were taught to lie and yet you also say: My reasons for leaving TM were different from many others who left TM and spoke about it. I was not a disgruntled member. I had wonderful experiences and insights and had balanced my personal and professional life when I decided to leave. I was teaching part-time and enjoying a great real estate market, so I thought I had it all. I had the bucks to enjoy the privileged side of TMO with its better access to MMY than I had as a full-time member. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: [...] So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important no talk rule of any dysfunctional family! Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm [...] 'Ex-members say that the movement widely practices a style of deception some call the SIMS shuffle. Curtis Mailloux, a former member who lives in Fairfax, Va, says the name is derived from the Student International Meditation Society, one of the Maharishi's front groups, where many members develop this skill. Mailloux says he left the cult in 1989 after 15 years. As a former TM teacher and chair of the TM center in Washington, DC, the largest in the United States, he is one of the highest ranking members to defect. I was taught to lie and to get around the pretty rules of the 'unenlightened' in order to get favorable reports into the media, says Maillous. We were taught how to exploit the reporters' gullibility and fascination with the exotic, especially what comes from the East. We thought we weren't doing anything wrong, because we were told it was often necessary to deceive the unenlightened to advance our guru's plan to save the world.' Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
On Jun 18, 2006, at 5:34 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:"Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article:" Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? Were you privy to any lies on TMO research? __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
No, I was not a researcher. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 18, 2006, at 5:34 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? Were you privy to any lies on TMO research? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Well, no I assumed you weren't. What I was asking was there any hint that some of the research had been "fudged" for PR purposes?On Jun 18, 2006, at 6:42 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:No, I was not a researcher. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 18, 2006, at 5:34 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: "Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article:" Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? Were you privy to any lies on TMO research? __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Great points. Thanks for taking the time. I will take a little time to make sure I let them sink in. I can't resist this one to start: The irony is that if what you're calling the group 'I' is in fact the case, it means you are infinitely more than just the currently living bodymind called Curtis. From that perspective, what you love most about being alive is absurdly limited. Since I handed over my eternal soul at the crossroads for a few guitar licks I may be stuck with my limits! Maybe there are some more licks still out there? This notion doesn't *reduce* what you love most about being alive; it *expands* it beyond any limitation. All you have to give up is the limitations! Expansion beyond limitations seemed so inspiring to me at one time. Now the words leave me cold. I know it will sound like MMY's My hut, my hut, but the joy of my life all comes from the details and limitations. Do you relate to this more as a concept or is it tied to the expansive sense of euphoria in the program for you? I can remember it in both contexts. Both, as you remember it, and more. What appeals to me is the expanded *range of choice*. Working with details and within limitations is one of the choices; the ability to do that doesn't get withdrawn. But you can set the limitations wherever you want to, or drop them altogether if you feel like doing that. You aren't limited to one set of limitations, in other words, nor are you limited as to how far you can go in exploring one particular set. This is so abstract it's hard to get across, but do you remember I said my experience of development of consciousness was one of increasing transparency? Part of that is that limitations become transparent. They're still there, but they don't block what's beyond them. Funny how something that seemed so overwhelmingly powerful and important at the time has vanished as a value in my life. I can't resist suggesting that perhaps the concept that seemed so powerful and important *was itself limited* as it existed in your mind at the time, and that at a certain point you had grown beyond what it meant to you then--but for various reasons, instead of letting the concept expand along with you, you left it where it was and went off in a different direction. To put it another way, you had a whole lot of bathwater you had to dump in terms of having been heavily involved with the organization and its dogmas and having a personal need to separate yourself from all that in order to breathe. And the baby swimming around therein was still just a baby, so underdeveloped intellectually you couldn't easily connect it to the growth you were experiencing in your life. If my concept of expansion beyond limitations was the same now as it was a few decades ago, I would no longer find it very appealing either. But I didn't have any bathwater to dump, because my involvement with the organization has never been more than peripheral; so I didn't have any problem taking the concept along with me and letting it grow in accord with my experience. Curious really. Consciousness really is amazing almost any way you look at it. Ain't nothing more enthralling, by me. And the more you look at it, the more enthralling it gets. I do want to spend some time thinking about the limits of science you presented. That is fascinating. Enjoy! Heh heh. Brilliant! Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Your favorite religious organization? Make a donation at Network for Good. http://us.click.yahoo.com/EOl1HB/LPaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Both statements are accurate to my experience. Protecting the group's more controversial beliefs from outsiders did not usually cause me conflict. The end justified the means. This point was important to Andrew because he couldn't understand how a person could willfully deceive JAMA about their relationship to TM for an article. Criticisms like this one was not the reason I left the movement. I understand why TM people were pissed at me. I don't know how else it could have gone down and been true to my experience. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? So, you say that you were taught to lie and yet you also say: My reasons for leaving TM were different from many others who left TM and spoke about it. I was not a disgruntled member. I had wonderful experiences and insights and had balanced my personal and professional life when I decided to leave. I was teaching part-time and enjoying a great real estate market, so I thought I had it all. I had the bucks to enjoy the privileged side of TMO with its better access to MMY than I had as a full-time member. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: [...] So much of what you said seems to be a natural pattern of growing up with our ideas whatever they are. I suspect that I am neither uniquely flawed nor gifted in intellectual awareness, in or out of TMO. I also recognize that this group is far from TMO is so many important ways. Ways that make this group a much nicer and more interesting group to interact with. I have not been able to have a mutually respectful conversation with anyone still in the group mindset. I suspect some of the people here have similar experiences although mine may be a little more intense because I publicly spoke out against the TMO, breaking the most important no talk rule of any dysfunctional family! Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm [...] 'Ex-members say that the movement widely practices a style of deception some call the SIMS shuffle. Curtis Mailloux, a former member who lives in Fairfax, Va, says the name is derived from the Student International Meditation Society, one of the Maharishi's front groups, where many members develop this skill. Mailloux says he left the cult in 1989 after 15 years. As a former TM teacher and chair of the TM center in Washington, DC, the largest in the United States, he is one of the highest ranking members to defect. I was taught to lie and to get around the pretty rules of the 'unenlightened' in order to get favorable reports into the media, says Maillous. We were taught how to exploit the reporters' gullibility and fascination with the exotic, especially what comes from the East. We thought we weren't doing anything wrong, because we were told it was often necessary to deceive the unenlightened to advance our guru's plan to save the world.' Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lik1AB/fOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
I can't think of any examples of that because I believed the research was valid. Since then I have read perspectives of the research that exposes the weaknesses, but while in the group I was not interested in this perspective at all. There was never a sincere commitment to the scientific method, so we used the charts superficially and we waved the whole collected studies in the air to give the impression that it was all scientifically verified. If a person nailed me on any details of a chart, which sometimes happened, I would manage them with crowd techniques like getting the audience to shush them down. Was that your experience? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, no I assumed you weren't. What I was asking was there any hint that some of the research had been fudged for PR purposes? On Jun 18, 2006, at 6:42 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: No, I was not a researcher. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Jun 18, 2006, at 5:34 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Well, you also made it sound as though anyone and everyone in the TMO was a liar as Andrew Skolnick quoted you in his JAMA article: Are you a teacher? Is it news for you that people in the movement lie, especially to reporters? I was speaking about my experience. Is it different for you? Were you privy to any lies on TMO research? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Your favorite religious organization? Make a donation at Network for Good. http://us.click.yahoo.com/EOl1HB/LPaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Free Will, you only think you have it!
Thanks, previous contributors, for posting your respective opinions on the relationship between free will and determinism; a topic in a recent New Scientist article. Regarding the question as to whether the mind aspect to free will is or can be somehow separate from the determinism of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles; this controversy was not alluded to specifically, in the article. My impresssion is however, that among the two protagonists (pro vs con free will); there's a tacit agreement that mind would definitely be included as a subset in the supposed determinism of the physical particles. Even from a Buddhist perspective, I don't see how such a dualist agenda could be supported. In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. But let's put this question aside for the moment, and assume that IF matter is determined, THEN mind and the alleged free will within/as mind is also determined by prior causes. This (at this time) is an unprovable assumption, but that's the assumption(IMO) the scientists have agreed upon in laying out the framework for their hypotheses. I left the article at home and forgot my password, so I can only copy what's in the Newscientist website: the first paragraph. Before pasting it in, I will briefly summarize the basic issues. The article is entitled Free Will, you only think you have it.; and alludes to the against free will, pro determinism researcher, Nobel Prize winner Gerhard d'Hooft (or something like that -- can't remember how to spell his name). On the pro-free-will (against determinism) side, we have John Horton Conway, a famous mathematician at Princeton, inventor of the Game of Life cellular automaton. Interestingly, these two giants of science are going at it not with philosophy, but rather with mathematical formulas; but at this time, d'Hooft only believes he's on the right track. Conway differs, and believes that the QM reality of existence is indeterminate. However, I would add that in math, there are many hypotheses that remain unproven, and there's no guarantee that there will ever be a proof pro or con. At any rate, the basic assumption among the two combatants is that mind is only a subset of matter; so the question boils down to determinism vs indeterminism (thus, no free will vs free will). Last point, the article writer brought up the interesting point of the downside to the pro side. (Conway believes QM - and thus the gross level of reality...in fact: existence itself) is fundamentally indeterminate, thus allowing for free will. The downside is that to an extreme, in the absence of determinism, RANDOMNESS is the prodominant status of QM: quantum particles and thus all of existence as an emergent property, is inherently random. So, is a rather bleak tradeoff: if QM reality is indeterminant, free will existence exists, but at a big price: it's free but is fundamentally random. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/jDk17A/gOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Will, you only think you have it!
---Forgot to paste in the paragraph. Here it is: Free will - you only think you have it 04 May 2006 Zeeya Merali Magazine issue 2550 Underneath the uncertainty of quantum mechanics could lie a deeper reality in which, shockingly, all our actions are predetermined WE MUST believe in free will, we have no choice, the novelist Isaac Bashevis Singer once said. He might as well have said, We must believe in quantum mechanics, we have no choice, if two new studies are anything to go by. Early last month, a Nobel laureate physicist finished polishing up his theory that a deeper, deterministic reality underlies the apparent uncertainty of quantum mechanics. A week after he announced it, two eminent mathematicians showed that the theory has profound implications beyond physics: abandoning the uncertainty of quantum physics means we must give up the cherished notion that we have free will. The mathematicians believe the physicist is wrong. It's striking that we have one of the greatest scientists of our generation pitted against two of the world's greatest mathematicians, says Hans Halvorson, a philosopher of physics at Princeton University. Quantum mechanics is widely accepted by physicists, but is ... The complete article is 1310 words long. Thanks, previous contributors, for posting your respective opinions on the relationship between free will and determinism; a topic in a recent New Scientist article. Regarding the question as to whether the mind aspect to free will is or can be somehow separate from the determinism of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles; this controversy was not alluded to specifically, in the article. My impresssion is however, that among the two protagonists (pro vs con free will); there's a tacit agreement that mind would definitely be included as a subset in the supposed determinism of the physical particles. Even from a Buddhist perspective, I don't see how such a dualist agenda could be supported. In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. But let's put this question aside for the moment, and assume that IF matter is determined, THEN mind and the alleged free will within/as mind is also determined by prior causes. This (at this time) is an unprovable assumption, but that's the assumption(IMO) the scientists have agreed upon in laying out the framework for their hypotheses. I left the article at home and forgot my password, so I can only copy what's in the Newscientist website: the first paragraph. Before pasting it in, I will briefly summarize the basic issues. The article is entitled Free Will, you only think you have it.; and alludes to the against free will, pro determinism researcher, Nobel Prize winner Gerhard d'Hooft (or something like that -- can't remember how to spell his name). On the pro-free-will (against determinism) side, we have John Horton Conway, a famous mathematician at Princeton, inventor of the Game of Life cellular automaton. Interestingly, these two giants of science are going at it not with philosophy, but rather with mathematical formulas; but at this time, d'Hooft only believes he's on the right track. Conway differs, and believes that the QM reality of existence is indeterminate. However, I would add that in math, there are many hypotheses that remain unproven, and there's no guarantee that there will ever be a proof pro or con. At any rate, the basic assumption among the two combatants is that mind is only a subset of matter; so the question boils down to determinism vs indeterminism (thus, no free will vs free will). Last point, the article writer brought up the interesting point of the downside to the pro side. (Conway believes QM - and thus the gross level of reality...in fact: existence itself) is fundamentally indeterminate, thus allowing for free will. The downside is that to an extreme, in the absence of determinism, RANDOMNESS is the prodominant status of QM: quantum particles and thus all of existence as an emergent property, is inherently random. So, is a rather bleak tradeoff: if QM reality is indeterminant, free will existence exists, but at a big price: it's free but is fundamentally random. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/jDk17A/gOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Will, you only think you have it!
Interesting, I would like to read the rest. Can you help me with the mind body question? In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. Do they think of it like the traditions that posit a mental body? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---Forgot to paste in the paragraph. Here it is: Free will - you only think you have it 04 May 2006 Zeeya Merali Magazine issue 2550 Underneath the uncertainty of quantum mechanics could lie a deeper reality in which, shockingly, all our actions are predetermined WE MUST believe in free will, we have no choice, the novelist Isaac Bashevis Singer once said. He might as well have said, We must believe in quantum mechanics, we have no choice, if two new studies are anything to go by. Early last month, a Nobel laureate physicist finished polishing up his theory that a deeper, deterministic reality underlies the apparent uncertainty of quantum mechanics. A week after he announced it, two eminent mathematicians showed that the theory has profound implications beyond physics: abandoning the uncertainty of quantum physics means we must give up the cherished notion that we have free will. The mathematicians believe the physicist is wrong. It's striking that we have one of the greatest scientists of our generation pitted against two of the world's greatest mathematicians, says Hans Halvorson, a philosopher of physics at Princeton University. Quantum mechanics is widely accepted by physicists, but is ... The complete article is 1310 words long. Thanks, previous contributors, for posting your respective opinions on the relationship between free will and determinism; a topic in a recent New Scientist article. Regarding the question as to whether the mind aspect to free will is or can be somehow separate from the determinism of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles; this controversy was not alluded to specifically, in the article. My impresssion is however, that among the two protagonists (pro vs con free will); there's a tacit agreement that mind would definitely be included as a subset in the supposed determinism of the physical particles. Even from a Buddhist perspective, I don't see how such a dualist agenda could be supported. In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. But let's put this question aside for the moment, and assume that IF matter is determined, THEN mind and the alleged free will within/as mind is also determined by prior causes. This (at this time) is an unprovable assumption, but that's the assumption(IMO) the scientists have agreed upon in laying out the framework for their hypotheses. I left the article at home and forgot my password, so I can only copy what's in the Newscientist website: the first paragraph. Before pasting it in, I will briefly summarize the basic issues. The article is entitled Free Will, you only think you have it.; and alludes to the against free will, pro determinism researcher, Nobel Prize winner Gerhard d'Hooft (or something like that -- can't remember how to spell his name). On the pro-free-will (against determinism) side, we have John Horton Conway, a famous mathematician at Princeton, inventor of the Game of Life cellular automaton. Interestingly, these two giants of science are going at it not with philosophy, but rather with mathematical formulas; but at this time, d'Hooft only believes he's on the right track. Conway differs, and believes that the QM reality of existence is indeterminate. However, I would add that in math, there are many hypotheses that remain unproven, and there's no guarantee that there will ever be a proof pro or con. At any rate, the basic assumption among the two combatants is that mind is only a subset of matter; so the question boils down to determinism vs indeterminism (thus, no free will vs free will). Last point, the article writer brought up the interesting point of the downside to the pro side. (Conway believes QM - and thus the gross level of reality...in fact: existence itself) is fundamentally indeterminate, thus allowing for free will. The downside is that to an extreme, in the absence of determinism, RANDOMNESS is the prodominant status of QM: quantum particles and thus all of existence as an emergent property, is inherently random. So, is a rather bleak tradeoff: if QM reality is indeterminant, free will existence exists, but at a big price: it's free but is fundamentally random. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Will, you only think you have it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues . Can you help me with the mind body question? In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. Do they think of it like the traditions that posit a mental body? Ans: just IMHOperhaps Vaj can answer this in a more technical fashion; but being a Buddhist; mind = what we - ordinary folks - call (mind + matter); but I would imagine that in Buddhism, just as in Hinduism, there are elaborate treatises on the nature of the subtle bodies. It (philosophical and religious orientations) may often be a matter of emphasis. Buddhism even more than most branches of Hinduism, emphasizes the continuum of existence without even bothering (say, when you read the works of the Dalai Lama) to mention a separation between Being, not-Being; mind and matter. Toward the other extreme of dualism, we can get into the Greak dichotomy between Soul and matter (incorporated into Midieval Christianity); or, if one refers to the Judaic Hebrew texts (Ec: 9:5), the Soul IS the body, since when you're dead, you're in the grave, eaten by worms (but awaiting the Resurrection of the body). Personally, I find the continuum aspect to Buddhism refreshing: although I will hasten to add that I have had numerous contacts with dead people such as my parents, who obviously still exist (having subtle non-physical bodies). But subtle or physical, bodies are mind along with everything else. Thus, the determinism of matter such as molecules would not be distinguished from the determinism of mind in Buddhism. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor matrixmonitor@ wrote: ---Forgot to paste in the paragraph. Here it is: Free will - you only think you have it 04 May 2006 Zeeya Merali Magazine issue 2550 Underneath the uncertainty of quantum mechanics could lie a deeper reality in which, shockingly, all our actions are predetermined WE MUST believe in free will, we have no choice, the novelist Isaac Bashevis Singer once said. He might as well have said, We must believe in quantum mechanics, we have no choice, if two new studies are anything to go by. Early last month, a Nobel laureate physicist finished polishing up his theory that a deeper, deterministic reality underlies the apparent uncertainty of quantum mechanics. A week after he announced it, two eminent mathematicians showed that the theory has profound implications beyond physics: abandoning the uncertainty of quantum physics means we must give up the cherished notion that we have free will. The mathematicians believe the physicist is wrong. It's striking that we have one of the greatest scientists of our generation pitted against two of the world's greatest mathematicians, says Hans Halvorson, a philosopher of physics at Princeton University. Quantum mechanics is widely accepted by physicists, but is ... The complete article is 1310 words long. Thanks, previous contributors, for posting your respective opinions on the relationship between free will and determinism; a topic in a recent New Scientist article. Regarding the question as to whether the mind aspect to free will is or can be somehow separate from the determinism of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles; this controversy was not alluded to specifically, in the article. My impresssion is however, that among the two protagonists (pro vs con free will); there's a tacit agreement that mind would definitely be included as a subset in the supposed determinism of the physical particles. Even from a Buddhist perspective, I don't see how such a dualist agenda could be supported. In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. But let's put this question aside for the moment, and assume that IF matter is determined, THEN mind and the alleged free will within/as mind is also determined by prior causes. This (at this time) is an unprovable assumption, but that's the assumption(IMO) the scientists have agreed upon in laying out the framework for their hypotheses. I left the article at home and forgot my password, so I can only copy what's in the Newscientist website: the first paragraph. Before pasting it in, I will briefly summarize the basic issues. The article is entitled Free Will, you only think you have it.; and alludes to the against free will, pro determinism researcher, Nobel Prize winner Gerhard d'Hooft (or something like that -- can't remember how to spell his name). On the pro-free-will (against determinism) side, we have John Horton Conway, a famous mathematician at Princeton, inventor of the Game of Life
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Will, you only think you have it!
Thanks man, that was really interesting. or, if one refers to the Judaic Hebrew texts (Ec: 9:5), the Soul IS the body, since when you're dead, you're in the grave, eaten by worms So now I'm Jewish above the waist too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues . Can you help me with the mind body question? In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. Do they think of it like the traditions that posit a mental body? Ans: just IMHOperhaps Vaj can answer this in a more technical fashion; but being a Buddhist; mind = what we - ordinary folks - call (mind + matter); but I would imagine that in Buddhism, just as in Hinduism, there are elaborate treatises on the nature of the subtle bodies. It (philosophical and religious orientations) may often be a matter of emphasis. Buddhism even more than most branches of Hinduism, emphasizes the continuum of existence without even bothering (say, when you read the works of the Dalai Lama) to mention a separation between Being, not-Being; mind and matter. Toward the other extreme of dualism, we can get into the Greak dichotomy between Soul and matter (incorporated into Midieval Christianity); or, if one refers to the Judaic Hebrew texts (Ec: 9:5), the Soul IS the body, since when you're dead, you're in the grave, eaten by worms (but awaiting the Resurrection of the body). Personally, I find the continuum aspect to Buddhism refreshing: although I will hasten to add that I have had numerous contacts with dead people such as my parents, who obviously still exist (having subtle non-physical bodies). But subtle or physical, bodies are mind along with everything else. Thus, the determinism of matter such as molecules would not be distinguished from the determinism of mind in Buddhism. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor matrixmonitor@ wrote: ---Forgot to paste in the paragraph. Here it is: Free will - you only think you have it 04 May 2006 Zeeya Merali Magazine issue 2550 Underneath the uncertainty of quantum mechanics could lie a deeper reality in which, shockingly, all our actions are predetermined WE MUST believe in free will, we have no choice, the novelist Isaac Bashevis Singer once said. He might as well have said, We must believe in quantum mechanics, we have no choice, if two new studies are anything to go by. Early last month, a Nobel laureate physicist finished polishing up his theory that a deeper, deterministic reality underlies the apparent uncertainty of quantum mechanics. A week after he announced it, two eminent mathematicians showed that the theory has profound implications beyond physics: abandoning the uncertainty of quantum physics means we must give up the cherished notion that we have free will. The mathematicians believe the physicist is wrong. It's striking that we have one of the greatest scientists of our generation pitted against two of the world's greatest mathematicians, says Hans Halvorson, a philosopher of physics at Princeton University. Quantum mechanics is widely accepted by physicists, but is ... The complete article is 1310 words long. Thanks, previous contributors, for posting your respective opinions on the relationship between free will and determinism; a topic in a recent New Scientist article. Regarding the question as to whether the mind aspect to free will is or can be somehow separate from the determinism of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles; this controversy was not alluded to specifically, in the article. My impresssion is however, that among the two protagonists (pro vs con free will); there's a tacit agreement that mind would definitely be included as a subset in the supposed determinism of the physical particles. Even from a Buddhist perspective, I don't see how such a dualist agenda could be supported. In Essence, Buddhist is Naturalist but not necessarily materialist; but Buddhists are not inclined to separate mind from matter. But let's put this question aside for the moment, and assume that IF matter is determined, THEN mind and the alleged free will within/as mind is also determined by prior causes. This (at this time) is an unprovable assumption, but that's the assumption(IMO) the scientists have agreed upon in laying out the framework for their hypotheses. I left the article at home and forgot my password, so I can only copy what's in the Newscientist website: the first paragraph. Before pasting it in, I will briefly summarize
[FairfieldLife] Converting analog audio to digital
Title: Converting analog audio to digital Im taking tabla lessons and I record them. How can I patch a regular analog tape recorder into my Mac or PC so as to create mp3s of each separate rhythm Im studying? What hardware and software do I need? Would I be better off getting a digital tape recorder? Can in iPod serve as a digital tape recorder? Id prefer to just use a regular tape recorder, as high fidelity is not a priority. __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I¹m taking tabla lessons and I record them. How can I patch a regular analog tape recorder into my Mac or PC so as to create mp3¹s of each separate rhythm I¹m studying? What hardware and software do I need? Would I be better off getting a digital tape recorder? Can in iPod serve as a digital tape recorder? I¹d prefer to just use a regular tape recorder, as high fidelity is not a priority. You can use an iPod to record audio. It's not exactly great sound (its meant for taking memos), but it can be done. The main advantages are that its relatively cheap ($30 for the microphone and no other equipment needed) and it plugs straight into a Mac or PC via the firewire/USB iPod link and iTunes software. With any other solution, you need either an audio connector from the tape recorder to the audio-in jack or jacks with the right voltage/ohm rating, or a USB/firewire connector. Most/all modern tape recorders come with one or more of these though the Mac's microphone input may not be the consumer standard since Apple designs often assume that professional equipment is being used. You can also get USB/MIDI converters, etc. If you already have an iPod, I'd get the belkin microphone (or whatever else is available) and see if that suits your needs since it's plug and play and one-step to get it to work (iTunes will automatically upload any new audio files you've created on the iPod when you plug it into your Mac (or PC?)). Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Will, you only think you have it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I left the article at home and forgot my password, so I can only copy what's in the Newscientist website: the first paragraph. I sure would love it if you could copy in more when you have access to the article again--at least if it's not too technical. Many thanks for the summary. Somehow I doubt dueling mathematical formulas are going to lead to a definitive resolution of the issue, but the arguments ought to be fun! Definitive scientific proof of determinism would most likely be disastrous for the psyche of the human race, absent some larger concept along the lines of that advanced by Schroedinger to validate the *sense* of free will in the Atman = Brahman type of context. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lik1AB/fOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
Vaj wrote: What I was asking was there any hint that some of the research had been fudged for PR purposes? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't think of any examples of that because I believed the research was valid. Since then I have read perspectives of the research that exposes the weaknesses, but while in the group I was not interested in this perspective at all. There was never a sincere commitment to the scientific method, so we used the charts superficially and we waved the whole collected studies in the air to give the impression that it was all scientifically verified. If a person nailed me on any details of a chart, which sometimes happened, I would manage them with crowd techniques like getting the audience to shush them down. For the record, here's what you wrote on alt.m.t in 1997: As far as TM using science as marketing instead of as true science, what I mean by this is that the claims of TM are not presented in a form that can be falsifified if the evidence goes the other way. During my 4 years at MIU I was very close to the TM studies in progress and never saw a desire to see if TM works. It was always assumed that it did and the interpretations from the data were adjusted to fit the results. Most claims are not stated in a form that can be falsified by evidence. For example if a new meditator feels good from TM, this is TM working, and if they feel bad, it is un stressing, again TM working. This is not acceptable scientific practice. I experienced that the people around maharishi were so eager to please that data that did not support claims was never brought up. More importantly the spirit of scientific integrity was never respected by a man who by his own admission has a contempt for the scientific method. That is what Andrew was conveying in my perhaps glib but still I believe accurate 3 out of 4 dentists surveyed quote. If the spirit of science was really alive in the movement it would not blacklist people like Benson who published unpopular results. (The 3 out of 4 dentists surveyed refers to a quote from you in the Washington Post--not from Andrew Skolnick in his JAMA article--that Maharishi uses science as a marketing tool, in the same way that 'three out of four dentists surveyed' sells toothpaste but is not science.) There are actually quite a few factual inaccuracies in that earlier alt.m.t quote. Are there any of them you'd like to correct now? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clarifying The Energy Field'
There are actually quite a few factual inaccuracies in that earlier alt.m.t quote. Are there any of them you'd like to correct now? Nope. But thanks for asking. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vaj wrote: What I was asking was there any hint that some of the research had been fudged for PR purposes? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I can't think of any examples of that because I believed the research was valid. Since then I have read perspectives of the research that exposes the weaknesses, but while in the group I was not interested in this perspective at all. There was never a sincere commitment to the scientific method, so we used the charts superficially and we waved the whole collected studies in the air to give the impression that it was all scientifically verified. If a person nailed me on any details of a chart, which sometimes happened, I would manage them with crowd techniques like getting the audience to shush them down. For the record, here's what you wrote on alt.m.t in 1997: As far as TM using science as marketing instead of as true science, what I mean by this is that the claims of TM are not presented in a form that can be falsifified if the evidence goes the other way. During my 4 years at MIU I was very close to the TM studies in progress and never saw a desire to see if TM works. It was always assumed that it did and the interpretations from the data were adjusted to fit the results. Most claims are not stated in a form that can be falsified by evidence. For example if a new meditator feels good from TM, this is TM working, and if they feel bad, it is un stressing, again TM working. This is not acceptable scientific practice. I experienced that the people around maharishi were so eager to please that data that did not support claims was never brought up. More importantly the spirit of scientific integrity was never respected by a man who by his own admission has a contempt for the scientific method. That is what Andrew was conveying in my perhaps glib but still I believe accurate 3 out of 4 dentists surveyed quote. If the spirit of science was really alive in the movement it would not blacklist people like Benson who published unpopular results. (The 3 out of 4 dentists surveyed refers to a quote from you in the Washington Post--not from Andrew Skolnick in his JAMA article--that Maharishi uses science as a marketing tool, in the same way that 'three out of four dentists surveyed' sells toothpaste but is not science.) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iDk17A/hOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] The Corruptibles!
Fun little video from the Electronic Freedom Foundation. http://www.eff.org/corrupt/ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/jDk17A/gOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital Thanks. I dont have an iPod and Id rather no buy one. Can I just go to Radio Shack and buy something that would let me patch my cheap tape recorder into my Mac or PC? If I accomplished that step, what software would I need to edit the audio tracks? QuickTime? Garage Band? Something else on the PC? on 6/18/06 9:09 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Im taking tabla lessons and I record them. How can I patch a regular analog tape recorder into my Mac or PC so as to create mp3s of each separate rhythm Im studying? What hardware and software do I need? Would I be better off getting a digital tape recorder? Can in iPod serve as a digital tape recorder? Id prefer to just use a regular tape recorder, as high fidelity is not a priority. You can use an iPod to record audio. It's not exactly great sound (its meant for taking memos), but it can be done. The main advantages are that its relatively cheap ($30 for the microphone and no other equipment needed) and it plugs straight into a Mac or PC via the firewire/USB iPod link and iTunes software. With any other solution, you need either an audio connector from the tape recorder to the audio-in jack or jacks with the right voltage/ohm rating, or a USB/firewire connector. Most/all modern tape recorders come with one or more of these though the Mac's microphone input may not be the consumer standard since Apple designs often assume that professional equipment is being used. You can also get USB/MIDI converters, etc. If you already have an iPod, I'd get the belkin microphone (or whatever else is available) and see if that suits your needs since it's plug and play and one-step to get it to work (iTunes will automatically upload any new audio files you've created on the iPod when you plug it into your Mac (or PC?)). __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital
I think you can use a line in cable that connects your headphone jack of your recorder, to the mic jack on your computer. You use your PC recorder to make a wave file. Most computer soundcards can record.It will be a wave file though so you need a converter if you need it to be MP3. But for your purpose of listening to it on computer that wont matter. Has Vaj weighed in on this? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks. I don¹t have an iPod and I¹d rather no buy one. Can I just go to Radio Shack and buy something that would let me patch my cheap tape recorder into my Mac or PC? If I accomplished that step, what software would I need to edit the audio tracks? QuickTime? Garage Band? Something else on the PC? on 6/18/06 9:09 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer groups@ wrote: I¹m taking tabla lessons and I record them. How can I patch a regular analog tape recorder into my Mac or PC so as to create mp3¹s of each separate rhythm I¹m studying? What hardware and software do I need? Would I be better off getting a digital tape recorder? Can in iPod serve as a digital tape recorder? I¹d prefer to just use a regular tape recorder, as high fidelity is not a priority. You can use an iPod to record audio. It's not exactly great sound (its meant for taking memos), but it can be done. The main advantages are that its relatively cheap ($30 for the microphone and no other equipment needed) and it plugs straight into a Mac or PC via the firewire/USB iPod link and iTunes software. With any other solution, you need either an audio connector from the tape recorder to the audio-in jack or jacks with the right voltage/ohm rating, or a USB/firewire connector. Most/all modern tape recorders come with one or more of these though the Mac's microphone input may not be the consumer standard since Apple designs often assume that professional equipment is being used. You can also get USB/MIDI converters, etc. If you already have an iPod, I'd get the belkin microphone (or whatever else is available) and see if that suits your needs since it's plug and play and one-step to get it to work (iTunes will automatically upload any new audio files you've created on the iPod when you plug it into your Mac (or PC?)). Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital on 6/18/06 10:42 PM, curtisdeltablues at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you can use a line in cable that connects your headphone jack of your recorder, to the mic jack on your computer. You use your PC recorder to make a wave file. Most computer soundcards can record.It will be a wave file though so you need a converter if you need it to be MP3. But for your purpose of listening to it on computer that wont matter. Has Vaj weighed in on this? Not yet. So just a simple cable. The signal doesnt have to be converted in any way? What software can I use to chop the recording up into segments (separate rhythms Im learning)? __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital
Have you ever used the PC recorder from your built-in computer mic? The line in uses the same system. But is may be too short a recording for your needs. To split it up you do need some audio editing software. I use Sound Forge but that is overkill for your needs here. There must be some shareware that does it. Not much help, sorry! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 6/18/06 10:42 PM, curtisdeltablues at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you can use a line in cable that connects your headphone jack of your recorder, to the mic jack on your computer. You use your PC recorder to make a wave file. Most computer soundcards can record.It will be a wave file though so you need a converter if you need it to be MP3. But for your purpose of listening to it on computer that wont matter. Has Vaj weighed in on this? Not yet. So just a simple cable. The signal doesn¹t have to be converted in any way? What software can I use to chop the recording up into segments (separate rhythms I¹m learning)? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Hik1AB/bOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Converting analog audio to digital
Get Amadeus, first off. Then, a quick-n-dirty a/d converter is the iMic. I use a superior Edirol UA-1A connected to a mixing board. On your Mac, create a new user that has no haxies running. Run Amadeus from that personality so that your hard drive is as unbusy as possible while you are recording. You'll get the cleanest result if you can record onto a reformatted hard drive other than the one with your OS, ideally with 8M of ram cache. Normalize your Amadeus recording and then break it up into segments for conversion to separate mp3s. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 6/18/06 10:42 PM, curtisdeltablues at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you can use a line in cable that connects your headphone jack of your recorder, to the mic jack on your computer. You use your PC recorder to make a wave file. Most computer soundcards can record.It will be a wave file though so you need a converter if you need it to be MP3. But for your purpose of listening to it on computer that wont matter. Has Vaj weighed in on this? Not yet. So just a simple cable. The signal doesn¹t have to be converted in any way? What software can I use to chop the recording up into segments (separate rhythms I¹m learning)? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lik1AB/fOaOAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
