[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
. . . Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh?
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher bhrma@ wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Yes, the story that it was written by a bunch of Brits is total BS. No doubt some dumb Yanks made that up. (from a Brit.) OffWorld Yeah. Everybody knows that scorpions can't write.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. You think Skolnick has moved on? The second I showed up he started accusing me of everything that went wrong in the wikipedia article. It's not easy to move on from a $194 million lawsuit. He DID finally bow out claiming that he couldn't take the vandalism, but in fact, his bowing out coincided with requests by TMers for mediation. And for that matter, you and judy have been sparring for over a decade now and you haven't moved on either.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. You think Skolnick has moved on? The second I showed up he started accusing me of everything that went wrong in the wikipedia article. With some reason. It's not easy to move on from a $194 million lawsuit. Or from an obsession with destroying your enemies, it would seem. What else can you call your crusade? He DID finally bow out claiming that he couldn't take the vandalism... Which is EXACTLY what some of the things you and other idiots were doing. ...but in fact, his bowing out coincided with requests by TMers for mediation. And for that matter, you and judy have been sparring for over a decade now and you haven't moved on either. Mea culpa. I have a strange fascination with insanity. And now for something completely different, I reinsert the part of my post that you snipped out, obviously not wishing to deal with: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. You think Skolnick has moved on? The second I showed up he started accusing me of everything that went wrong in the wikipedia article. With some reason. ? It's not easy to move on from a $194 million lawsuit. Or from an obsession with destroying your enemies, it would seem. What else can you call your crusade? He DID finally bow out claiming that he couldn't take the vandalism... Which is EXACTLY what some of the things you and other idiots were doing. Really? You were watching from the sideliens, I assume? In fact, Skolnick eventually apologized to me for accusing me of things I had nothing to do with. ...but in fact, his bowing out coincided with requests by TMers for mediation. And for that matter, you and judy have been sparring for over a decade now and you haven't moved on either. Mea culpa. I have a strange fascination with insanity. And now for something completely different, I reinsert the part of my post that you snipped out, obviously not wishing to deal with: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Eh. we all have our lapses.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher bhrma@ wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Well, its like saying that MMY didn't do his Gita translation and commentary. While it is true that someone else did the translation, MMY approved every phrase and if he didn't like it, it was changed, even if the translator thought it was a bad idea. Huh!? Any examples?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I mean, Dude, didn't you even NOTICE that the only person here who you could lure into your insane revenge fantasies against Andrew Skolnick was *Peter Klutz*? You three stand out like sore thumbs among the more sane and balanced proponents of TM here, who actually seem to have LIVES. I mean, YOU are so obsessed that you went diving into old court records in an attempt to get something on the person who you have your decade-old revenge obsession about. And then the other two just played pile on the latest victim. I repeat my name for all 3 of you -- stalkers, and my assertion that your insanity is not only well established, but because that insanity tends to revolve around attempting to destroy the critics of TM and Maharishi and the TMO, the sanity of the more balanced and sane followers of all three has ALSO been brought into question, by association. The three of you -- between here, a.m.t., sci. skeptic, alt.meditation, and Wikipedia -- have probably done more to turn off people to the value of TM and meditation in general than John Lennon ever did, and *certainly* more than Andrew Skolnick ever did. And yet you think of yourselves as defenders of the faith. Go figure. And what do the three of you have in common that most of the more balanced and sane and obviously more happy TMers here do not? They became TM teachers and you did not. They actually put their lives on the line and worked to spread light, whereas the three of you only dedicate your lives to spreading darkness and perpetuating the hold that your puny selves have over you. A little selfless service would have done wonders for all three of you, as it seems to have done for those here who had the humility to practice it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I think someone needs to get a 1-900 number and donate the money to the Maharishi's World Piece.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritually hot , real priests chanting in FF
This week, 3 (Maharisihi) priests at the FF Shri Devi Mandir Temple Daily pujas, chanting, program 3 vedic priests chanting together in the 'Maharishi' cadence. These are some of the priests who trained the maharishi pujaris. They were the teachers brought by private effort to FF separate from the TMorg. These guys are real vedic priests, not just pujaris like on campus. They are the teachers of a number of the pujaris (pandits) on campus. Daily programs of recitation 9:30am 7pm week days. Other pujas daily too. Weekend, Saturday 9:30am Rudra Abhishekam pujas. 6:30pm evening pujas Sunday 10am Rudra Abhishekam, Vishnu Sahasranama. 3pm 7pm. at FF Devi Mandir Temple All events are free and open to the public Please bring fruit and flowers Sri Devi Mandir 800 West Burlington, Fairfield, IA 641- 469-6041 Sri Devi Mandir is a non profit 501(c)(3) organization. All donations are tax-deductible to the fullest extent allowable by law
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. If you like coherence, check out Willytex's comment to Paul's latest blog entry over on TM-Free. In it he says, So, Paul, you're saying that Mahesh was in Calcutta with the Shankaracharya, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, when the Guru sat up in bed with his legs crossed and took his last breath. And, you're saying that after the Swami expired, Mahesh took the body and put it on a train and sent it to Kashi. Then Mahesh put the upright-sitting body in a concrete trunk and sank it in the Ganges River in front of a large group of people. And you're saying that after that, the Mahesh took the Guru's sandals, his high chair, his umbrella, and other official accoutrements, including all the land and buildings at Jyotirmath and gave them to Shantanand, who he then installed on the Gaddi at Jyotirmath. The hilarious thing is that Paul said NONE of those things in the blog entry Willytex is responding to. Not one of them. Now I think we all know that Willy's got a few linger- ing mental problems from all that prairie dog poontang he's been tasting, but he does present himself as an On The Program TMer. So doesn't THAT just give you a warm feeling of peace and serenity? OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? Damn straight. Laughter is always a good thing. I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL, she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's contributions to the film, and how her TM-inspired...uh...perkiness added to its overall coherence and general sense of family values. * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar positive reviews will be made for Aliens from Spaceship Earth (1977) and Romeo und Julia 70 (1969), for the same reason. There can, after all, be no better recommendation for a film than it containing a cameo by not only an enlightened being, but the MOST enlightened, BESTEST spiritual teacher in all of recorded history, on any planet anywhere in this universe or any other. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: FF meets with Bevan
In a message dated 2/21/2007 9:12:46 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah, word out on the street: he is making his periodic visit for purity testing the skimming and draining of the tuition accounts at Maharishi School and MUM. Let the blood-letting begin anew. --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] com) , dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well,evidently some un-repentant non-re-certified badge-less Fairfield meditators were not invited. However, here's what they miss: FW: We are happy to pass along this message from M.U.M. Jai Guru Dev. 8000 NOW Dr. Bevan Morris is now here in Maharishi Vedic City and would like to meet with everyone on the Invincible America Assembly - all the Yogic Flyers in the Golden Domes. Time: Sunday, February 18, 1:30 p.m. Place: Maharishi Patanjali Golden Dome Please bring your valid Golden Dome badge. Jai Guru Dev Would he come off campus and talk with yogic flyers not on the course? A focus group of interested FF meditators? Does anyone know what went on Feb 18th between Bevan and the America Invincible group? 8,000 now- does this mean MMY wants 8,000? I recently wrote on the forum that 10,000 is the number and why is it that MMY wanted 7,000 in 1987 and now feels he only needs 1,700 or so.? Or does he want 8,000.? It's no wonder he never got the ME established. He can't make up his mind and he continues to let Bevin kick people out of the dome for whatever reasons. And while he tries to make up his mind and Bevan continues to judge everyone with his strick guidelines the world is blowing up. What a bunch of idiots. I would tell MMY if Bevan cannot relax the guidelines then he should be fired now. As a visionary I predict Bevan will be fired by the end of this year. If he is not the TMO in America will fall apart to the point where all of MMY peace palaces will be filled with silence because his organization in America will be in great financial trouble. And if you think India will save America's ass-forget it. Lsoma. BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritually hot , real priests chanting in FF
In a message dated 2/22/2007 7:14:03 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This week, 3 (Maharisihi) priests at the FF Shri Devi Mandir Temple Daily pujas, chanting, program 3 vedic priests chanting together in the 'Maharishi' cadence. These are some of the priests who trained the maharishi pujaris. They were the teachers brought by private effort to FF separate from the TMorg. These guys are real vedic priests, not just pujaris like on campus. They are the teachers of a number of the pujaris (pandits) on campus. Daily programs of recitation 9:30am 7pm week days. Other pujas daily too. Weekend, Saturday 9:30am Rudra Abhishekam pujas. 6:30pm evening pujas Sunday 10am Rudra Abhishekam, Vishnu Sahasranama. 3pm 7pm. at FF Devi Mandir Temple All events are free and open to the public Please bring fruit and flowers Sri Devi Mandir 800 West Burlington, Fairfield, IA 641- 469-6041 Sri Devi Mandir is a non profit 501(c)(3) organization. All donations are tax-deductible to the fullest extent allowable by law This sounds so wonderful. I can't wait to move to Fairfield so I can be a part of this. Lsoma. The plan is i will be moving up by the end of April. JGD. Lsoma. BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Important Quiet Train Update!!!!
In a message dated 2/21/2007 5:58:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Bill Blackmore [mailto:bblackmore@ Bill Blackmore Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 4:33 PM To: Undisclosed- Undi Undisclosed Subject: Important Quiet Train Update Dear Friends, (Please forward this email to Potential Supporters) I want to thank all of your for your support and inspiration. We have formed a formal action committee, which you can still join, to achieve safer and quieter railroad crossings by Dec. 2007. It includes a non profit subsidiary called the Fairfield Train Safety and Quiet Zone. Based on private conversations and individual meetings with City Council members, we strongly believe that if we can raise the funds to pay for crossing improvements, that we can achieve our goal. This goal is to have safer crossings without the need for loud train horns before the civic center is completed later this year. To begin we need to raise between $50,000 and $60,000 by May 30th, 2007. This amount is about half of the estimated cost of the required improvements. Then we will appear again before the City Council with initial funds in hand, letters of support from civic groups, and additional scientific documentation to receive full approval for a quiet zone. The Local BNSF representative says the Railroad is now 100% behind creating this Quiet Zone because quiet zone crossings have been found to be much safer crossings! Now this is an issue every resident can now agree upon. We have about 400 people on our e-mail list of supporters. If everyone gives a minimum of $125 we can achieve our first benchmark. We do count on larger donations to help with the balance to complete the project this year. It is important for this be a grass roots fund raising effort to clearly demonstrate overwhelming support for safer and quieter crossings. Every donation no matter how much makes a big difference. With your help we will soon have a safe Quiet Zone! All money donated will go into a special savings account at Iowa State Bank. Withdrawals require multiple signatures from Fairfield Safety and Quiet Zone board members. No expenses other than crossing improvements will be paid out of money collected. Send Your Tax Deductible Contribution to: Fairfield Train Safety Quiet Zone PO Box 2302, Fairfield, Iowa 52556 Make your check out to ALF Fairfield Train Safety and Quiet Zone 641-919-1118 _www.fairfieldquietzwww.fai_ (http://www.fairfieldquietzone.org/) Please forward this email to everyone you believe would support this important project. Thanks, Bill Blackmore Rick, has anyone ever thought of collecting money to build a dome or have our own building for meditators, Sidha's and other groups to participate in spiritual programs. We would be able to invite SSRS, Mother Meera, Amachi or anyone who is wanted to Fairfield. Many teachers from India and local teachers of spirituality would be welcome. After MMY passing in July or August, many teachers from India may be more open to coming to town. If we can collect 50,000 dollars to silence the trains then we could collect money to create our own domes of enlightenment where everyone is welcome including Amachi. Just a thought. Lsoma. Lou Valentino BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
On Feb 22, 2007, at 2:16 AM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Well, its like saying that MMY didn't do his Gita translation and commentary. 1/3 of a gita translation actually.
Re: [FairfieldLife] What is the origin of SCI?
On Feb 21, 2007, at 11:12 PM, pranamoocher wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. It's a great question. Ask Sudarsha on the blog: he was there for the whole thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Nyah. Usenet groups are considered impossible to verify, so you can't use them as primary/secondary sources. You could certainly use alt.m.t posts from Andrew as a primary source to show that he lied *in those posts*. Nope. Unless he quoted those posts on his own website without comment, there's no proof that he wrote them. At best, you could make a case that his quoting my RESPONSE to him implied that those were his own words, but wikipedia's been burned too many times to allow including usenet stuff unless it explicitly appears on Skolnick's website. Is there a difference in using a printed or electronic source? No. Both are valid. If Skolnick publishes stuff under a logon name people know is his the proof of burden rest on him (or the sys admins of the site he publishes on) if he decides to disavow individual postings made under that name as the work of an impostor (the sys admins can easily do this by checking the IP of the poster). Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued :-) Regardless, its hardly a big issue. I posted both Andrew's newsgroup quotes to the talk section. The mediator's response was: I guess we can close the case then. Of course, this didn't comment on Andrew's remarks directly at all, which was quite politically astute of the guy, IMHO. It's just of the script. Does anyone think that a beautiful idea like wikipedia could withstand Freemasonry / NWO infiltration longer than ten seconds? Seriously?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: snip Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued :-) Check out this para: QUOTE NASW members may not identify themselves as members of the organization in connection with any writing that takes a political position, endorses a candidate, supports specific legislation, or is related to fundraising activities or the promotion of a product, policy, or company or other organization. /QUOTE SOURCE http://www.nasw.org/about/ethics.htm /SOURCE ... then search for this on google: nasw.org/users/ASkolnick ... evident from the return list is that Skolnick has not only flashed his NASW membership whilst crusading against the TMO and so-called Holocaust deniers, but also put up material related to these crusades on NASW his membership page: http://nasw.org/users/ASkolnick/mav.html http://nasw.org/users/ASkolnick/naswmav.htm ... now, try to access the root of the guy's membership page: http://nasw.org/users/ASkolnick ... or this, in case he has dropped the 'A': http://nasw.org/users/Skolnick What has happened? Did NASW kick out Andrew Skolnick for violating their code of ethics? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Sounds like we have the makings of another article. I forget who is going to write an article on the Checking Notes, but this would be even more interesting. At any rate, this demonstrates to me the loss of knowledge. Whatever you think about the teaching, you can see that even in the twilight of the TMO, creeping confusion begins. lurk
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. Cf. observation below. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. You have evidently 'missed' A Skolnick's crusade against anything TMO at wikipedia. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
I am highly suspect regarding the motives of this Sudarsha dude (or dudette). He trashes MMY and on another blog he trashes SSRS claiming to have spent much time in close personal contact with him. I know SSRS too, and the picture he paints of him is not the man I know. He's just working his agenda/obsession which undermines any intellectual credibility he might have. --- lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Sounds like we have the makings of another article. I forget who is going to write an article on the Checking Notes, but this would be even more interesting. At any rate, this demonstrates to me the loss of knowledge. Whatever you think about the teaching, you can see that even in the twilight of the TMO, creeping confusion begins. lurk Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/0It09A/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/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 - Join or create groups, clubs, forums amp; communities. Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
What is the blog regarding SSRS? Are we sure this is the same Sudarsha? On Feb 22, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Peter wrote: I am highly suspect regarding the motives of this Sudarsha dude (or dudette). He trashes MMY and on another blog he trashes SSRS claiming to have spent much time in close personal contact with him. I know SSRS too, and the picture he paints of him is not the man I know. He's just working his agenda/obsession which undermines any intellectual credibility he might have.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher bhrma@ wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Yes, the story that it was written by a bunch of Brits is total BS. No doubt some dumb Yanks made that up. (from a Brit.) OffWorld Yeah. Everybody knows that scorpions can't write. We can type a bit with these pincers though...
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
* Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar Click on MMY's name and the blurb about him begins with Indian cult leader. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0948343/ --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. If you like coherence, check out Willytex's comment to Paul's latest blog entry over on TM-Free. In it he says, So, Paul, you're saying that Mahesh was in Calcutta with the Shankaracharya, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, when the Guru sat up in bed with his legs crossed and took his last breath. And, you're saying that after the Swami expired, Mahesh took the body and put it on a train and sent it to Kashi. Then Mahesh put the upright-sitting body in a concrete trunk and sank it in the Ganges River in front of a large group of people. And you're saying that after that, the Mahesh took the Guru's sandals, his high chair, his umbrella, and other official accoutrements, including all the land and buildings at Jyotirmath and gave them to Shantanand, who he then installed on the Gaddi at Jyotirmath. The hilarious thing is that Paul said NONE of those things in the blog entry Willytex is responding to. Not one of them. Now I think we all know that Willy's got a few linger- ing mental problems from all that prairie dog poontang he's been tasting, but he does present himself as an On The Program TMer. So doesn't THAT just give you a warm feeling of peace and serenity? OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? Damn straight. Laughter is always a good thing. I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL, she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's contributions to the film, and how her TM-inspired...uh...perkiness added to its overall coherence and general sense of family values. * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at:
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offworld is without doubt the most ignorant fool when it comes to supernovae. I'm astounded that I had to bother to announce this -- what the hell are the rest of you folks thinking to let Offworld spew absolute nonsense at you like that and not one of you had the idea to, like, what?, maybe Google the word supernova? This group doesn't deserve me setting it straight about Offworld's misinformation. Look it up yourselves and stop being so uninformed, and do something about the spouting of pure crappola from creeps like Offworld -- an amazingly dense block of ignorance. There's some good thought posted here, but sometimes, it just isn't worth the scrolling past all the posts of the idiots to find them. I feel a loss of personal integrity to see these dangerous pricks running amuck in our culture and just sit here like the rest of you and do nothing about it -- like, never come back here again and be exposed to such low mentalities. I wish the good writers here would pack up and leave -- then I could stop coming here. Astronomerforidiots This has got to be a spoof right?, so much hate. You are good with words like: ignorant fool, creeps, dense block of ignorance, low mentalities, dangerous pricks You label me a Dangerous because I make a hypothesis. You must be a nutjob in an asylum. Do they have internet in the insane asylums? EIther that or you sholdn't be posting after you have been drinking again. Off World's Prediction #2: Within one year of this date, Supernovae will be confirmed or postulated in science journals to have the possible characteristics of sudden flare-up, and diminishment, lasting only seconds. Then, at that moment, Duveyoung, when those studies are trumpeted, you will remember my name. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . [Peter wrote:] Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) [I wrote:] I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more Uh, Barry, it seems you haven't been paying attention. Skolnick has been actively working to turn the Wikipedia entry on TM into a Skeptical Inquirer-type expose. His participation in the group editing process is the only reason this came up in the first place. Lawson's made several posts about what's been happening over at Wikipedia, but you appear to have missed them all. , especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. Hilarious. Barry was very much present during a good part of Skolnick's tenure on alt.m.t. Unless he's managed to do a memory wipe of those years, he knows how far from the truth his description above is. In fact, Barry was an active participant himself in attacking Skolnick for his chronic and malicious dishonesty. (Not only that, Barry was one of Skolnick's favorite targets.) It wasn't just a matter, of course, of Skolnick having written a few things we didn't like about Chopra. It was that Skolnick wrote a documentably deceptive expose of the entire movement that maliciously attacked many of the people in it. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. Actually, what we're gleeful about is the revelation that Skolnick *did*, in fact, lie through his teeth about the issue of whether there was a settlement in the court case, as we always suspected he had. Don't know about Peter, but I'm just having fun fantasizing about what we might do with this information. Skolnick would almost certainly sue us if we tried to follow through, so I'm not about to risk it. And Lawson has explicitly said he doesn't think it's worth it. Somehow you managed to miss that too. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Uh, no, that's not true either. We grouse about Chopra, but we haven't even been *fantasizing* about destroying him and his reputation. In fact, whenever Skolnick's article trashing him has come up, we've defended him. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? What you've written above speaks volumes about your memory and/or your honesty, but most clearly about *your* obsession with Lawson and me.
[FairfieldLife] Who is Duveyoung ?
Dude, you've never posted here in your life before, and you are saying you will stop coming here? In addition, you obviously have a very poor understanding of astro-physics, and in addition are in the lagging portion of the evolving human species. OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offworld is without doubt the most ignorant fool when it comes to supernovae. I'm astounded that I had to bother to announce this -- what the hell are the rest of you folks thinking to let Offworld spew absolute nonsense at you like that and not one of you had the idea to, like, what?, maybe Google the word supernova? This group doesn't deserve me setting it straight about Offworld's misinformation. Look it up yourselves and stop being so uninformed, and do something about the spouting of pure crappola from creeps like Offworld -- an amazingly dense block of ignorance. There's some good thought posted here, but sometimes, it just isn't worth the scrolling past all the posts of the idiots to find them. I feel a loss of personal integrity to see these dangerous pricks running amuck in our culture and just sit here like the rest of you and do nothing about it -- like, never come back here again and be exposed to such low mentalities. I wish the good writers here would pack up and leave -- then I could stop coming here. Astronomerforidiots
[FairfieldLife] Transcendental meditation (dhyana) is true Religion....
If MMY had come to the west teaching all of Patanjali's *eight* limbs of Yoga, TM would have never gained the popularity it did! MMY sought to 'seduce' the west by giving them a taste of the simplest form of their own awareness, and teach one limb of yoga, TM, as a science! It almost worked..till the lawsuits started!~ It did work for me however!
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I mean, Dude, didn't you even NOTICE that the only person here who you could lure into your insane revenge fantasies against Andrew Skolnick was *Peter Klutz*? Nobody was trying to lure anybody into anything. And Peter, of course, was a participant in the whole editing kerfuffle at Wikipedia and a target of Skolnick's attacks in that process, so of course he was interested. You three stand out like sore thumbs among the more sane and balanced proponents of TM here, who actually seem to have LIVES. I mean, YOU are so obsessed that you went diving into old court records in an attempt to get something on the person Was it Lawson who dived into old court records? who you have your decade-old revenge obsession about. And then the other two just played pile on the latest victim. Skolnick *made his reputation* with his maliciously deceptive article on TM in JAMA, and he's continued to pursue *his* obsession with his participation in editing the Wikipedia article on TM. He's hardly the victim here. I repeat my name for all 3 of you -- stalkers Which, as you know, is entirely inappropriate. , and my assertion that your insanity is not only well established, but because that insanity tends to revolve around attempting to destroy the critics of TM and Maharishi and the TMO Only those who aren't *honest* in their criticisms. And destroy is just a *wee* bit hyperbolic, don't you think? Skolnick was and is out to *literally* destroy the TM movement, and to do so dishonestly. Skolnick is a menace. As a journalist, he has a great deal of credibility he doesn't deserve. It's hardly likely that TM is the only target he's pursued with no concern for fairness or accuracy. (In fact, we know it isn't; his hit piece on the Chinese educational system was discussed in detail on alt.m.t.) , the sanity of the more balanced and sane followers of all three has ALSO been brought into question, by association. The three of you -- between here, a.m.t., sci. skeptic, alt.meditation, and Wikipedia -- have probably done more to turn off people to the value of TM and meditation in general than John Lennon ever did, and *certainly* more than Andrew Skolnick ever did. And yet you think of yourselves as defenders of the faith. Go figure. And what do the three of you have in common that most of the more balanced and sane and obviously more happy TMers here do not? They became TM teachers and you did not. They actually put their lives on the line and worked to spread light, whereas the three of you only dedicate your lives to spreading darkness and perpetuating the hold that your puny selves have over you. Dedicated our *lives* to critiquing the critics?? Whereas you, in contrast, have left your criticism of TM, MMY, the TMO, and MMY behind long since and spend absolutely *no* time indulging in it. Right? A little selfless service would have done wonders for all three of you, as it seems to have done for those here who had the humility to practice it. Speaking for myself, I've chosen to do my selfless service elsewhere.
[FairfieldLife] Do the Laws of Physics change?
Do the laws of nature last forever? 21 September 2006 Lee Smolin Magazine issue 2570 The universe might make more sense if they don't, argues leading theorist Lee Smolin In science we aim for a picture of nature as it really is, unencumbered by any philosophical or theological prejudice. Some see the search for scientific truth as a search for an unchanging reality behind the ever- changing spectacle we observe with our senses. The ultimate prize in that search would be to grasp a law of nature - a part of a transcendent reality that governs all change, but itself never changes. The idea of eternally true laws of nature is a beautiful vision, but is it really an escape from philosophy and theology? For, as philosophers have argued, we can test the predictions of a law of nature and see if they are verified or contradicted, but we can never prove a law must always be true. So if we believe a law of nature is eternally true, we are believing in something that logic and evidence cannot establish. ... http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/quantum- world/mg19125701.100-do-the-laws-of-nature-last-forever.html OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Laws of physics may change over time.
If this is correct, it will radically change our view of the Universe. We have to be cautious but it could be revolutionary. The Universe may be a stranger place than we imagined because of new evidence that appears to show the very laws of physics have changed since the cosmos was young. Analysis of the light coming from distant quasars suggests that a fundamental physical constant may have been increasing slightly over the past six billion years. The so-called fine structure constant - which measures the strength with which subatomic particles interact with one another and with light - may have been smaller at earlier times in the history of the Universe. This has major implications for our understanding of physics, Dr John Webb of New South Wales University, Australia, told BBC News Online. If this is correct, it will radically change our view of the Universe. We have to be cautious but it could be revolutionary. We have seen something in our data - but is it what we think? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1991223.stm OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: FF meets with Bevan
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Does anyone know what went on Feb 18th between Bevan and the America Invincible group? 8,000 now-does this mean MMY wants 8,000? I recently wrote on the forum that 10,000 is the number and why is it that MMY wanted 7,000 in 1987 and now feels he only needs 1,700 or so.? The 1,700 figure is for the United States; 7,000 in 1987 and 8,000 currently are for the whole world (which has increased in population in the interim between the two dates).
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. snip I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. As both Barry and Vaj know, I never reviewed Apocalypto. Unlike Barry, who in fact did exactly that by calling Lynch's film a stupid movie, I don't review films I haven't seen. What I did was make some comments on the film's *content*, as reported by many reviewers. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL There were no such elements, as Barry well knows. , she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, Unlike Barry's stupid movie review... Barry, you're really slipping. This is about the weakest attempt at parody you've ever come up with, not least because it bears no relationship whatsoever to reality. As I've attempted to explain to you before, satire and parody work only when they're quasi-realistic. This doesn't even rise to the level of *burlesque*. stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's contributions to the film, and how her TM-inspired...uh...perkiness added to its overall coherence and general sense of family values. * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar positive reviews will be made for Aliens from Spaceship Earth (1977) and Romeo und Julia 70 (1969), for the same reason. There can, after all, be no better recommendation for a film than it containing a cameo by not only an enlightened being, but the MOST enlightened, BESTEST spiritual teacher in all of recorded history, on any planet anywhere in this universe or any other. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I suppose the guy also can be sued :-) Check out this para: QUOTE NASW members may not identify themselves as members of the organization in connection with any writing that takes a political position, endorses a candidate, supports specific legislation, or is related to fundraising activities or the promotion of a product, policy, or company or other organization. /QUOTE SOURCE http://www.nasw.org/about/ethics.htm /SOURCE Skolnick published an article in NASW's own newsletter about his JAMA piece on TM and the fallout therefrom, so it's not exactly as if NASW didn't approve of his activities along these lines. Apparently there are some exceptions or loopholes in the ethics requirement you quote.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar Click on MMY's name and the blurb about him begins with Indian cult leader. Oh, well, that settles it, then. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0948343/ --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. If you like coherence, check out Willytex's comment to Paul's latest blog entry over on TM-Free. In it he says, So, Paul, you're saying that Mahesh was in Calcutta with the Shankaracharya, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, when the Guru sat up in bed with his legs crossed and took his last breath. And, you're saying that after the Swami expired, Mahesh took the body and put it on a train and sent it to Kashi. Then Mahesh put the upright-sitting body in a concrete trunk and sank it in the Ganges River in front of a large group of people. And you're saying that after that, the Mahesh took the Guru's sandals, his high chair, his umbrella, and other official accoutrements, including all the land and buildings at Jyotirmath and gave them to Shantanand, who he then installed on the Gaddi at Jyotirmath. The hilarious thing is that Paul said NONE of those things in the blog entry Willytex is responding to. Not one of them. Now I think we all know that Willy's got a few linger- ing mental problems from all that prairie dog poontang he's been tasting, but he does present himself as an On The Program TMer. So doesn't THAT just give you a warm feeling of peace and serenity? OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? Damn straight. Laughter is always a good thing. I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL, she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's
[FairfieldLife] Cosmologists should keep an open mind
Cosmologists should keep an open mind 10 June 2006 Magazine issue 2555 THERE'S an oft-repeated story, probably an urban myth, of a cosmologist accosted by an old woman after a lecture. The universe, insisted the woman, is flat and rests on the back of a turtle. The cosmologist asked what the turtle rests on. You can't make a fool of me that easily, said the woman. It's turtles all the way down. It is easy to mock any cosmological thinking that strays from the mainstream as turtles all the way down, but that is short-sighted. Our best attempt at describing the history of the universe - a big bang followed by a super-fast expansion - has observational support, but it creates many questions, and we can't be sure it is the last word. The idea that the universe was born inside a dying star (see Do the cosmic twist) is far from mainstream, and it remains to be seen how it ... http://space.newscientist.com/channel/astronomy/cosmology/mg19025552.8 00 OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45? Put simply, each Sanskrit name used in the story is represetative only! If you look at the root of the sanskrit name you will find the true meaning of the verse... The ancient sacred writings do not clearly distinguish history from symbology; rather, they often intermix the two in the tradition of scriptural revelation...Yogananda's Gita Introduction. One verse would not do justice to the contention that MMY's is exoteric only, however I could say as an example the Pandavas represent the 5 'spinal' chakras and the blind King Dhritarashtra the 'blind sense mind'.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time. Maharishi wants to write a commentary in the BG from the level of ignorance, from CC and from BC. Time did not allow since Heaven is already knocking on our door. For more information, please see: http://www.shareintl.org
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am highly suspect regarding the motives of this Sudarsha dude (or dudette). He trashes MMY and on another blog he trashes SSRS claiming to have spent much time in close personal contact with him. I know SSRS too, and the picture he paints of him is not the man I know. He's just working his agenda/obsession which undermines any intellectual credibility he might have. CIA won't have any of it, being Maharishi, SSRS or Rajneesh. One simple comment from Amma now and she is a target too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45? Maharishi's translation: The Veda's concern is with the three gunas. Be without the three gunas, O Arjuna, freed from duality, ever firm in purity, independent of possessions, possessed of the Self. Yogananda's translation: The Vedas are concerned with the three universal qualities or gunas. O Arjuna, free thyself from the triple qualities and from the pairs of opposites! Ever calm, harboring no thoughts of receiving and keeping, become thou settled in the Self.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45? Maharishi's translation: The Veda's concern is with the three gunas. Be without the three gunas, O Arjuna, freed from duality, ever firm in purity, independent of possessions, possessed of the Self. Yogananda's translation: The Vedas are concerned with the three universal qualities or gunas. O Arjuna, free thyself from the triple qualities and from the pairs of opposites! Ever calm, harboring no thoughts of receiving and keeping, become thou settled in the Self. Maharishi once said; Before this Knowledge (TM) was made available, Yoganandas teaching was the most effective. You know Yogananda, huh ? There was a soft glow of love and respect in the way Maharishi spoke of Yogananda. This quote speaks volumes, though I think Maharishis translation is a tad more acccurate.
[FairfieldLife] Esoteric meaning of 'Kurukshetra' in Gita allegory...
(Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45? Maharishi's translation: The Veda's concern is with the three gunas. Be without the three gunas, O Arjuna, freed from duality, ever firm in purity, independent of possessions, possessed of the Self. Yogananda's translation: The Vedas are concerned with the three universal qualities or gunas. O Arjuna, free thyself from the triple qualities and from the pairs of opposites! Ever calm, harboring no thoughts of receiving and keeping, become thou settled in the Self. Nice comparison, but it does not address the overall question and contention.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45? Maharishi's translation: The Veda's concern is with the three gunas. Be without the three gunas, O Arjuna, freed from duality, ever firm in purity, independent of possessions, possessed of the Self. Yogananda's translation: The Vedas are concerned with the three universal qualities or gunas. O Arjuna, free thyself from the triple qualities and from the pairs of opposites! Ever calm, harboring no thoughts of receiving and keeping, become thou settled in the Self. Maharishi once said; Before this Knowledge (TM) was made available, Yoganandas teaching was the most effective. You know Yogananda, huh ? There was a soft glow of love and respect in the way Maharishi spoke of Yogananda. This quote speaks volumes, though I think Maharishis translation is a tad more acccurate. Interesting that Yogananda exhorts the reader to free thyself from the three gunas, implying effort, whereas Maharishi says be without the three gunas, implying effortlessness.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip... Maharishi once said; Before this Knowledge (TM) was made available, Yoganandas teaching was the most effective. You know Yogananda, huh ? There was a soft glow of love and respect in the way Maharishi spoke of Yogananda. This quote speaks volumes, though I think Maharishis translation is a tad more acccurate. OK, I give, how so? Yogananda's Gita, you must remember was not published until 1995, MMY had not even read it or was aware of it. MMY's came out in 1967! Although I like your quote from MMY about Yogananda.
RE: [FairfieldLife] What is the origin of SCI?
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of pranamoocher Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:12 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] What is the origin of SCI? I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. I haven't read posts subsequent to this so maybe this has been covered, but various scientists and scholars around MMY at the time helped him write it. His style was usually to work collaboratively on things like this. Max Fleisher was very involved in the SCI course. Maybe Domash. Jack Forem edited the work books that accompany it.
[FairfieldLife] A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge...
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! How does he translate for instance II 45? Maharishi's translation: The Veda's concern is with the three gunas. Be without the three gunas, O Arjuna, freed from duality, ever firm in purity, independent of possessions, possessed of the Self. Yogananda's translation: The Vedas are concerned with the three universal qualities or gunas. O Arjuna, free thyself from the triple qualities and from the pairs of opposites! Ever calm, harboring no thoughts of receiving and keeping, become thou settled in the Self. They're pretty close, but MMY's is more succinct. Also, Be without the three gunas (which MMY interprets in his commentary as the injunction Transcend!) is free of any suggestion of effort or even intention, whereas Yogananda's free thyself from the triple qualities appears to describe a process of *doing* something. Likewise, Yogananda's version suggests a doing process with regard to becoming settled in the Self, but in MMY's version possessed of the Self seems to be simply what happens when you transcend. In other words, paraphrasing MMY: If you are without the three gunas, you are freed from duality, ever firm in purity, independent of possessions, and possessed of the Self. Paraphrasing Yogananda: Free thyself from the triple qualities and the pairs of opposites, always be calm, never harbor thoughts of receiving and keeping, and then you will become settled in the Self. I'd be willing to bet Vernon Katz and MMY worked on this verse a for quite a long time. I'd also guess that its succinctness is Katz's contribution.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Interesting that Yogananda exhorts the reader to free thyself from the three gunas, implying effort, whereas Maharishi says be without the three gunas, implying effortlessness. Great minds... I just said the same thing (albeit without your Katzian succinctness!).
[FairfieldLife] Dolphins
What can you expect from a religion and a country that exludes the suffering of animals? -Richard Wagner- The first link is perhaps the most disturbing thing I have ever seen. It is gruesome, but it needs to be watched. If you want to make your feelings known, then do what 230414 + people have done (including I) and click the second link and sign the on line petition. Once you have done so then please send this to as many people you know. http://www.glumbert.com/media/dolphin http://www.petitiononline.com/golfinho/ Rick Archer SearchSummit 1108 South B Street Fairfield, IA 52556 Phone: (641) 472-9336 Fax: (914) 470-9336 http: http://searchsummit.com //searchsummit.com http://[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[FairfieldLife] Vedic Secularization
function openPopUp(url,name,wt,ht) {
ht=parseInt(ht)+50; wt=parseInt(wt)+50; window.open(url, name,
'toolbar=no,location=no,
directories=no,status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,copyhistory=yes,
top=0,left=0,width='+wt + ',height='+ht);} function
openJspPopUp(url,name,wt,ht) {var
caption=escape(document.secImage.caption.value);var
shortcaption=escape(document.secImage.shortcaption.value);url=url +
'caption=' +caption + 'shortcaption=' + shortcaption;
ht=parseInt(ht)+50; wt=parseInt(wt)+50; window.open(url,
name, 'toolbar=no,location=no,
directories=no,status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,copyhistory=yes,
top=0,left=0,width='+wt + ',height='+ht); }
HindustanTimes.com
Projecting secular character of VedasSmriti Malaviya
Allahabad, February 17 --
var href= window.location.href; href =
href.substring(7); var idx = href.indexOf(/); var relpath =
href.substring(idx); document.write( +
);
Advertisement
0.gif width=1 var zflag_nid=294; var zflag_cid=1; var
zflag_sid=0; var zflag_width=180; var zflag_height=150; var
zflag_sz=13;THE VEDIC teachings will no longer be the
same. A seer has launched a drive to project to the world the secular character
of Vedas and Hindu rituals which are actually performed for the protection of
environment and the welfare of human beings and animal resources.
Long before we decided to take some measures to save the environment, our
seers gave some valuable teachings to conserve natural resources and protect
the country from man-made calamities, said Founder and director of Jagatguru
Adya Shankaracharya Vedic Shodh Sansthan, Varanasi, Swami Gyananand Saraswati.
In an interview to HT Allahabad Live, Swami Gyananand Saraswati said as the
time passed, the people distorted the teachings of Vedas and gave their own
versions to suit their convenience. Similarly the Vedic rituals performed
during the festivals should not be connected with any religion, he added.
For instance thousands of people celebrated the festival of Mahashivratri
all over the country but without understanding the true meaning of it.
Mahashivratri is not only the last religious celebration of the Hindu
calendar year but it is also celebrated to pray for the world peace and sustain
agrarian economy, he pointed out.
Swami Gyananand Saraswati said five offerings made to the Shivlinga during
the Rudrabhishek symbolises five different aspects of life on earth.
The milk is offered to pray for protection of the human asset, which should
remain in abundance in the country. The curd is offered to pray for the
protection of animal resources which is the basis of the country's agrarian
economy. The ghee is offered to pray to Lord Shiva that the country remains
free of natural calamities like flood and drought. The honey is offered to pray
for the environmental balance and the sugar to promote peace, harmony and love
among people, he said.
Swami Gyananand Saraswati said that thousands of people made offerings of
milk and water to Lord Shiva through 'Shringi', which actually acts as a stress
buster. The people concentrate on the flow of milk slowly coming out of the
silver and gold tip of the Shringi which relieves their tension, he added.
Swami Gyananand Saraswati said with a feeling of world peace, he performed
the Rudrabhishek of 31-kg mercury Shivlinga on the banks of Ganga on the
occasion of Mahashivratri.
-
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
-
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting that Yogananda exhorts the reader to free thyself from the three gunas, implying effort, whereas Maharishi says be without the three gunas, implying effortlessness. Yes, I believe bhava (nistraiguNyo bhavaarjuna [bhava + arjuna]) is the second person imperative form from bhu (to be). It's not a transitive (sort of; more accurately, parasmaipada) verb, as Yogananda's free thyself would imply.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: snip Interesting that Yogananda exhorts the reader to free thyself from the three gunas, implying effort, whereas Maharishi says be without the three gunas, implying effortlessness. Great minds... I just said the same thing (albeit without your Katzian succinctness!). The Katz meow, so to speak?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge... I judge that when you take this part of MMY's commentary on the verse out of context, it's highly misleading. MMY has already gone into considerable detail about the metaphorical context of the battle. In this last part of his commentary on the verse, he's simply providing the (quasi-?) historical referents. Is there more to Yogananda's commentary on this verse? Have you taken it out of context too, or is this all he says?
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: snip Interesting that Yogananda exhorts the reader to free thyself from the three gunas, implying effort, whereas Maharishi says be without the three gunas, implying effortlessness. Great minds... I just said the same thing (albeit without your Katzian succinctness!). The Katz meow, so to speak? g
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yogananda on contacting your guru after he has died
Nice...but MMY is NOT a guru! But then maybe you know that, MMY had a Guru, but alas WE do not have a guru, but may want one some day when the time is right!! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In chapter 4, verse 34, in the second to last paragraph of his commentary on this verse, Paramahansa Yogananda writes about contacting a master after he has died: A disciple residing far away from the guru may practice a spiritual method of communion. The guru, one with God, is present everywhere including the wisdom-center (the point between the eyebrows) of all men. At the end of meditation each day the disciple should concentrate at the point between the eyebrows and visualize his guru. Thinking of him with love and devotion, the disciple should ask the questions he wants answered. If visualization of and concentration on the guru are deep, the chela will inevitably receive silent answers to his questions in the form of accruing inner perceptions. In this way the advanced disciple can contact the guru even after the master has left the mortal flesh for invisible Omnipresence.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic Secularization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: } HindustanTimes.com Projecting secular character of VedasSmriti Malaviya Allahabad, February 17 THE VEDIC teachings will no longer be the same. A seer has launched a drive to project to the world the secular character of Vedas and Hindu rituals which are actually performed for the protection of environment and the welfare of human beings and animal resources.snip Nice to see the performance of the Vedas as practical and essential elements of life, vs. viewing them from the common POV as esoteric religious artifacts.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge... I judge that when you take this part of MMY's commentary on the verse out of context, it's highly misleading. MMY has already gone into considerable detail about the metaphorical context of the battle. In this last part of his commentary on the verse, he's simply providing the (quasi-?) historical referents. Is there more to Yogananda's commentary on this verse? Have you taken it out of context too, or is this all he says? I think the post speaks for itself Judy, that type of translation difference is prevalent 'throughout' the books, one is *esoteric* and the other, MMY's, largely *exoteric*. They both have merit, but Yogananda's more clearly captures the heart and soul of the allegory.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
Denise Denniston-Gerace was the Course Coordinator for the Symposia on the Science of Creative Intelligence at Univeristy of Massachusetts, and at Humboldt State College. She went on to earn a Ph.D. in education at the University of California at Berkeley under Hubert Dreyfus with a dissertation entitled Martin Heidegger's Understanding of Language and its Significance for Education. Dr. Vernon Katz is Adjunct Professor of Maharishi Vedic Science. He earned a B.A. and Ph.D. from Oxford University. Dr. Katz, a Vedic scholar from Great Britain, worked closely with Maharishi for five years on the translation and editing of the commentary of the Bhagavad Gita, Chapters 16. Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 2:16 AM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Well, its like saying that MMY didn't do his Gita translation and commentary. 1/3 of a gita translation actually. - We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yogananda on contacting your guru after he has died
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nice...but MMY is NOT a guru! But then maybe you know that, MMY had a Guru, but alas WE do not have a guru, but may want one some day when the time is right!! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: In chapter 4, verse 34, in the second to last paragraph of his commentary on this verse, Paramahansa Yogananda writes about contacting a master after he has died: A disciple residing far away from the guru may practice a spiritual method of communion. The guru, one with God, is present everywhere including the wisdom-center (the point between the eyebrows) of all men. At the end of meditation each day the disciple should concentrate at the point between the eyebrows and visualize his guru. Thinking of him with love and devotion, the disciple should ask the questions he wants answered. If visualization of and concentration on the guru are deep, the chela will inevitably receive silent answers to his questions in the form of accruing inner perceptions. In this way the advanced disciple can contact the guru even after the master has left the mortal flesh for invisible Omnipresence. I had my experiences with Brahmananda Saraswati in mind when I posted this.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yogananda on contacting your guru after he has died
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I had my experiences with Brahmananda Saraswati in mind when I posted this. A friend of mine does this toohe keeps a picture of Guru Dev in front of him and sometimes asks it questions, (he may even pray to it) I think he got the idea from the book The whole thing, the real thing on Guru Dev. He calls Guru Dev our Paramguru, which I think is ridiculous since MMY isn't even our Guru, but, to each his own!
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's That's interesting. Yeah, kuru certainly is a form from the root kR, but like bhava, it's the second person imperative singular form of that verb, as in: yogasthaH kuru karmaaNi IMO, interpreting kuru in kurukSetra to mean simply action sounds a bit, well, folk etymological! The appropriate noun would of course be karma(n): karmakSetra. But I've learned that as to Sanskrit, one can seldom know for sure! :) From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge...
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge... I judge that when you take this part of MMY's commentary on the verse out of context, it's highly misleading. MMY has already gone into considerable detail about the metaphorical context of the battle. In this last part of his commentary on the verse, he's simply providing the (quasi-?) historical referents. Is there more to Yogananda's commentary on this verse? Have you taken it out of context too, or is this all he says? In his Introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, Yogananda goes into considerable detail and explanation regarding the historical date of the Kurukshetra war, with dates ranging from 6,000 to 500 BC. He mentions 936 BC as the date his guru, Sri Yukteswar, calculated. His Chapter 1 focuses on the Inner Psychological and Spiritual Battlefield that the Bhagavad Gita represents.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yogananda on contacting your guru after he has died
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: snip I had my experiences with Brahmananda Saraswati in mind when I posted this. A friend of mine does this toohe keeps a picture of Guru Dev in front of him and sometimes asks it questions, (he may even pray to it) I think he got the idea from the book The whole thing, the real thing on Guru Dev. He calls Guru Dev our Paramguru, which I think is ridiculous since MMY isn't even our Guru, but, to each his own! Whatever occurs naturally is the best way, imo. I just think it is interesting to have an experience spontaneously at one point in life and later read about it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
On Feb 22, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time. It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's commentary was to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. Rather disappointing once you know it's origin.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge... I judge that when you take this part of MMY's commentary on the verse out of context, it's highly misleading. MMY has already gone into considerable detail about the metaphorical context of the battle. In this last part of his commentary on the verse, he's simply providing the (quasi-?) historical referents. Is there more to Yogananda's commentary on this verse? Have you taken it out of context too, or is this all he says? I think the post speaks for itself Judy, that type of translation difference is prevalent 'throughout' the books, one is *esoteric* and the other, MMY's, largely *exoteric*. They both have merit, but Yogananda's more clearly captures the heart and soul of the allegory. Did you not read what I wrote? In the first place, what you quoted is from the two guys' *commentaries*, not their translations. In the second place, MMY's commentary goes into great detail on the esoteric aspects in his commentary; what you quoted is from the very last part of his commentary on this verse, and it does indeed deal with the exoteric aspects--but not because that's *all* he deals with! I'm asking if you have similarly taken the quote from Yogananda out of context. If that's all the commentary he has on the verse, it isn't anywhere near as comprehensive as MMY's.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I think the post speaks for itself Judy, that type of translation difference is prevalent 'throughout' the books, one is *esoteric* and the other, MMY's, largely *exoteric*. And no, two isolated quotes most certainly do *not* speak for themselves in terms of what is prevalent throughout the books--especially when one of them, at least, is not at all representative.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's commentary was to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. Rather disappointing once you know it's origin. Only if what you know is actually so, however.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip That's interesting. Yeah, kuru certainly is a form from the root kR, but like bhava, it's the second person imperative singular form of that verb, as in: yogasthaH kuru karmaaNi IMO, interpreting kuru in kurukSetra to mean simply action sounds a bit, well, folk etymological! The appropriate noun would of course be karma(n): karmakSetra. But I've learned that as to Sanskrit, one can seldom know for sure! :) And that, my friend, is a brilliant observation. One that Yogananda addresses in his book as, The true way to understand scripture is through intuition, 'attuning' oneself to the inner realization of truth.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time. It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's commentary was to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. Rather disappointing once you know it's origin. Perhaps..
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: FF meets with Bevan
Bevan...fired? What's his salary anyway? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/21/2007 9:12:46 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah, word out on the street: he is making his periodic visit for purity testing the skimming and draining of the tuition accounts at Maharishi School and MUM. Let the blood-letting begin anew. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well,evidently some un-repentant non-re-certified badge-less Fairfield meditators were not invited. However, here's what they miss: FW: We are happy to pass along this message from M.U.M. Jai Guru Dev. 8000 NOW Dr. Bevan Morris is now here in Maharishi Vedic City and would like to meet with everyone on the Invincible America Assembly - all the Yogic Flyers in the Golden Domes. Time: Sunday, February 18, 1:30 p.m. Place: Maharishi Patanjali Golden Dome Please bring your valid Golden Dome badge. Jai Guru Dev Would he come off campus and talk with yogic flyers not on the course? A focus group of interested FF meditators? Does anyone know what went on Feb 18th between Bevan and the America Invincible group? 8,000 now- does this mean MMY wants 8,000? I recently wrote on the forum that 10,000 is the number and why is it that MMY wanted 7,000 in 1987 and now feels he only needs 1,700 or so.? Or does he want 8,000.? It's no wonder he never got the ME established. He can't make up his mind and he continues to let Bevin kick people out of the dome for whatever reasons. And while he tries to make up his mind and Bevan continues to judge everyone with his strick guidelines the world is blowing up. What a bunch of idiots. I would tell MMY if Bevan cannot relax the guidelines then he should be fired now. As a visionary I predict Bevan will be fired by the end of this year. If he is not the TMO in America will fall apart to the point where all of MMY peace palaces will be filled with silence because his organization in America will be in great financial trouble. And if you think India will save America's ass-forget it. Lsoma. - AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. - 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
On Feb 22, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip... Maharishi once said; Before this Knowledge (TM) was made available, Yoganandas teaching was the most effective. You know Yogananda, huh ? There was a soft glow of love and respect in the way Maharishi spoke of Yogananda. This quote speaks volumes, though I think Maharishis translation is a tad more acccurate. OK, I give, how so? Yogananda's Gita, you must remember was not published until 1995, MMY had not even read it or was aware of it. MMY's came out in 1967! Although I like your quote from MMY about Yogananda. In English it was not out till then, how about Hindi? Paramahansa Yogananda died in '52!
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you not read what I wrote? Yeah...and don't take my word for it, it was just a teaser, so to speak, see for yourself. In the first place, what you quoted is from the two guys' *commentaries*, not their translations. In the second place, MMY's commentary goes into great detail on the esoteric aspects in his commentary; No he doesn't what you quoted is from the very last part of his commentary on this verse, and it does indeed deal with the exoteric aspects--but not because that's *all* he deals with! Like I said, the *both* have merit!! I'm asking if you have similarly taken the quote from Yogananda out of context. If that's all the commentary he has on the verse, it isn't anywhere near as comprehensive as MMY's. Heavens no! The entire book, Judy, the entire book is like that, to the very last detail. If you've only read MMY's commentary and were going to leave it at that (like I was going to) you're short changing yourself, seriously. MMY really only mentions it as an allegory...he never unfolds it!! Vyasa was a genious and the book deserves better than what MMY turned out, but he felt it was needed to fulfill an urgent need of the time vis-a-vis CH2vs45. Read his disqualifier in the introduction!!
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Yogananda's Gita, you must remember was not published until 1995, MMY had not even read it or was aware of it. MMY's came out in 1967! Although I like your quote from MMY about Yogananda. In English it was not out till then, how about Hindi? Paramahansa Yogananda died in '52! Nope, don't think so, it was tied up in editing for that long, believe it or not! Well worth the wait though, the best book on Yoga I've ever read!
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: snip I think the post speaks for itself Judy, that type of translation difference is prevalent 'throughout' the books, one is *esoteric* and the other, MMY's, largely *exoteric*. And no, two isolated quotes most certainly do *not* speak for themselves in terms of what is prevalent throughout the books--especially when one of them, at least, is not at all representative. Did you want me to cut and paste the entire books here? :-) Then I could go...see!
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher bhrma@ wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Well, its like saying that MMY didn't do his Gita translation and commentary. While it is true that someone else did the translation, MMY approved every phrase and if he didn't like it, it was changed, even if the translator thought it was a bad idea. Huh!? Any examples? Nope. I just remember a video lecture by the translator where he mentioned that he and MMY would get into an argument and MMY would finally unveil who He was and look at him and the translator would shut up.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation su
Local Ru author Jed McKenna (pseudoname) points out in his book Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment that the story of the Gita is the story of the Break Out Archetype. The story of you, the seeker on the path. He actually points out the Krishna lies and cheats and that Arjuna got a free ride. Refreshing look at a classic from the standpoint of an awakend soul. A lot of fun actually. Good challenge to accepted dogma. Tom
[FairfieldLife] Re: Important Quiet Train Update!!!!
We have about 400 people on our e-mail list of supporters. If everyone gives a minimum of $125 we can achieve our first benchmark. We do count on larger donations to help with the balance to complete the project this year. It is important for this be a grass roots fund raising effort to clearly demonstrate overwhelming support for safer and quieter crossings. Every donation no matter how much makes a big difference. With your help we will soon have a safe Quiet Zone! Come on supporters, this is your big chance--ante up! Time to put your $$ where your keyboards are. And I would imagine--ha-ha--that Rick will be one of the first to step forward with his donation. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 2:16 AM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher bhrma@ wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. Well, its like saying that MMY didn't do his Gita translation and commentary. 1/3 of a gita translation actually. More than you have done, and published, I'm betting...
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 21, 2007, at 11:12 PM, pranamoocher wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. It's a great question. Ask Sudarsha on the blog: he was there for the whole thing. Which SCI lessons are these? The ones where MMY rambles on and on for hours at a time?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Nyah. Usenet groups are considered impossible to verify, so you can't use them as primary/secondary sources. You could certainly use alt.m.t posts from Andrew as a primary source to show that he lied *in those posts*. Nope. Unless he quoted those posts on his own website without comment, there's no proof that he wrote them. At best, you could make a case that his quoting my RESPONSE to him implied that those were his own words, but wikipedia's been burned too many times to allow including usenet stuff unless it explicitly appears on Skolnick's website. Is there a difference in using a printed or electronic source? No. Both are valid. If Skolnick publishes stuff under a logon name people know is his the proof of burden rest on him (or the sys admins of the site he publishes on) if he decides to disavow individual postings made under that name as the work of an impostor (the sys admins can easily do this by checking the IP of the poster). Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued :-) Regardless, its hardly a big issue. I posted both Andrew's newsgroup quotes to the talk section. The mediator's response was: I guess we can close the case then. Of course, this didn't comment on Andrew's remarks directly at all, which was quite politically astute of the guy, IMHO. It's just of the script. Does anyone think that a beautiful idea like wikipedia could withstand Freemasonry / NWO infiltration longer than ten seconds? Seriously? U
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: FF meets with Bevan
In a message dated 2/22/2007 1:15:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bevan...fired? What's his salary anyway? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/21/2007 9:12:46 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a message date Yeah, word out on the street: he is making his periodic visit for purity testing the skimming and draining of the tuition accounts at Maharishi School and MUM. Let the blood-letting begin anew. --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well,evidently some un-repentant non-re-certified badge-less Fairfield meditators were not invited. However, here's what they miss: FW: We are happy to pass along this message from M.U.M. Jai Guru Dev. 8000 NOW Dr. Bevan Morris is now here in Maharishi Vedic City and would like to meet with everyone on the Invincible America Assembly - all the Yogic Flyers in the Golden Domes. Time: Sunday, February 18, 1:30 p.m. Place: Maharishi Patanjali Golden Dome Please bring your valid Golden Dome badge. Jai Guru Dev Would he come off campus and talk with yogic flyers not on the course? A focus group of interested FF meditators? Does anyone know what went on Feb 18th between Bevan and the America Invincible group? 8,000 now- does this mean MMY wants 8,000? I recently wrote on the forum that 10,000 is the number and why is it that MMY wanted 7,000 in 1987 and now feels he only needs 1,700 or so.? Or does he want 8,000.? It's no wonder he never got the ME established. He can't make up his mind and he continues to let Bevin kick people out of the dome for whatever reasons. And while he tries to make up his mind and Bevan continues to judge everyone with his strick guidelines the world is blowing up. What a bunch of idiots. I would tell MMY if Bevan cannot relax the guidelines then he should be fired now. As a visionary I predict Bevan will be fired by the end of this year. If he is not the TMO in America will fall apart to the point where all of MMY peace palaces will be filled with silence because his organization in America will be in great financial trouble. And if you think India will save America's ass-forget it. Lsoma. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at _AOL.com_ (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http://www.aol.com) . 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? _Find a flick_ (http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/?fr=oni_on_mail#news) in no time with the_Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut._ (http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/?fr=oni_on_mail#news) When Bevan accompishies the ME in America MMY will pay him a salary. BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
On Feb 22, 2007, at 1:37 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 21, 2007, at 11:12 PM, pranamoocher wrote: I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. It's a great question. Ask Sudarsha on the blog: he was there for the whole thing. Which SCI lessons are these? The ones where MMY rambles on and on for hours at a time? He was just leaving for a retreat when I asked him about SSRS (he knows nothing about the guy, so I'm really unsure about Dr. Pete's comments) so we'll have to find out when he returns.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Did you not read what I wrote? Yeah...and don't take my word for it, it was just a teaser, so to speak, see for yourself. In the first place, what you quoted is from the two guys' *commentaries*, not their translations. In the second place, MMY's commentary goes into great detail on the esoteric aspects in his commentary; No he doesn't Uh, yes, he does. what you quoted is from the very last part of his commentary on this verse, and it does indeed deal with the exoteric aspects--but not because that's *all* he deals with! Like I said, the *both* have merit!! I'm asking if you have similarly taken the quote from Yogananda out of context. If that's all the commentary he has on the verse, it isn't anywhere near as comprehensive as MMY's. Heavens no! The entire book, Judy, the entire book is like that, to the very last detail. If you've only read MMY's commentary and were going to leave it at that (like I was going to) you're short changing yourself, seriously. I have no doubt Yogananda's commentary is worth reading. I'll see if I can get hold of it. I've just never thought of it when I've been in a bookstore or on Amazon's site. I'm commenting on your post, not on the book. MMY really only mentions it as an allegory...he never unfolds it!! Vyasa was a genious and the book deserves better than what MMY turned out, but he felt it was needed to fulfill an urgent need of the time vis-a-vis CH2vs45. Read his disqualifier in the introduction!!
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time. It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's commentary was to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. Rather disappointing once you know it's origin. So, how do you provide synthesis without innate knowledge? You make it sound like he did nothing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge... He also points out the multi-level possibilities and later mentions the allegorical connections between the field of the Kurus and the field of dharma.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is the origin of SCI?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of pranamoocher Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:12 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] What is the origin of SCI? I just read on the TM Free Blog a post by Sudarshan, that claims SCI was written by a bunch of Brits. Was anyone involved in the writing of the SCI course and if so, would this mean the course was developed by others without Maharishi's direct input? Who did the writing? Somebody had to be a great writer or group of writers to author this series of lessons IMO if they were written w/out MMY's direction. I haven't read posts subsequent to this so maybe this has been covered, but various scientists and scholars around MMY at the time helped him write it. His style was usually to work collaboratively on things like this. Max Fleisher was very involved in the SCI course. Maybe Domash. Jack Forem edited the work books that accompany it. What? YOu mean MMY didn't draw every illustration, set every letter, and bind every book by hand?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic Secularization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Chadwick jochadw1@ wrote: } HindustanTimes.com Projecting secular character of VedasSmriti Malaviya Allahabad, February 17 THE VEDIC teachings will no longer be the same. A seer has launched a drive to project to the world the secular character of Vedas and Hindu rituals which are actually performed for the protection of environment and the welfare of human beings and animal resources.snip Nice to see the performance of the Vedas as practical and essential elements of life, vs. viewing them from the common POV as esoteric religious artifacts. And then goes on to empty 70 lbs of mecury into the river, if I read things correctly...
[FairfieldLife] Re: A good illustration of the dramatic difference between the two Gita's...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mr. Magoo wgm4u@ wrote: From Yogananda's Gita: (Kuru, from the Sanskrit root kri=work, material action and ksetra= field). This field of action is the human body with its physical, mental and soul faculties, the field (kurukshetra) on which all activities of one's life take place. Gita/Yogananda's From Maharishi's Gita: The field of the Kuru's, is a vast plain near Histinapur in the neighbourhood of Delhi. As it belonged to the Kurus at the time of this battle it is called Kurukshetra. Gita/MMY You be the judge... I judge that when you take this part of MMY's commentary on the verse out of context, it's highly misleading. MMY has already gone into considerable detail about the metaphorical context of the battle. In this last part of his commentary on the verse, he's simply providing the (quasi-?) historical referents. Is there more to Yogananda's commentary on this verse? Have you taken it out of context too, or is this all he says? I think the post speaks for itself Judy, that type of translation difference is prevalent 'throughout' the books, one is *esoteric* and the other, MMY's, largely *exoteric*. They both have merit, but Yogananda's more clearly captures the heart and soul of the allegory. Guffaw. MMY's translation is dry. The commentary isn't. Did you mean to refer to the commentary?
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 nablusos108@ wrote: snip... Maharishi once said; Before this Knowledge (TM) was made available, Yoganandas teaching was the most effective. You know Yogananda, huh ? There was a soft glow of love and respect in the way Maharishi spoke of Yogananda. This quote speaks volumes, though I think Maharishis translation is a tad more acccurate. OK, I give, how so? Yogananda's Gita, you must remember was not published until 1995, MMY had not even read it or was aware of it. MMY's came out in 1967! Although I like your quote from MMY about Yogananda. In English it was not out till then, how about Hindi? Paramahansa Yogananda died in '52! Though it was largely finished by 1948, and parts of it had appeared as early as 1932, the complete work was not published in any language until 1995. I have a second edition published in 1999.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time. It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's commentary was to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. Rather disappointing once you know it's origin. Not what Vernon Katz said, and he was there.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 nablusos108@ wrote: snip... Maharishi once said; Before this Knowledge (TM) was made available, Yoganandas teaching was the most effective. You know Yogananda, huh ? There was a soft glow of love and respect in the way Maharishi spoke of Yogananda. This quote speaks volumes, though I think Maharishis translation is a tad more acccurate. OK, I give, how so? Yogananda's Gita, you must remember was not published until 1995, MMY had not even read it or was aware of it. MMY's came out in 1967! Although I like your quote from MMY about Yogananda. In English it was not out till then, how about Hindi? Paramahansa Yogananda died in '52! Are u asking or stating? My copy of Yogananda's BG is the 2nd ed. It gives the first copyright and ed as 1995. Not a word on it being a translation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FF meets with Bevan
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bevan...fired? What's his salary anyway? $7,000 per year.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: snip I suppose the guy also can be sued :-) Check out this para: QUOTE NASW members may not identify themselves as members of the organization in connection with any writing that takes a political position, endorses a candidate, supports specific legislation, or is related to fundraising activities or the promotion of a product, policy, or company or other organization. /QUOTE SOURCE http://www.nasw.org/about/ethics.htm /SOURCE Skolnick published an article in NASW's own newsletter about his JAMA piece on TM and the fallout therefrom, so it's not exactly as if NASW didn't approve of his activities along these lines. Do you know that or are you specualting? It's entirely possible that the guy kept his dick reasonbly zipped up inside his pants when writing an 'objective' piece about this 'experience' and then - as the plot deepened and his zipper came unglued, thye tossed terminated his account. I am sure there plenty of theoretical alternatives around but this is thought that pleases me the most, so that's what I am sticking to. Apparently there are some exceptions or loopholes in the ethics requirement you quote. Where?
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami Yogananda's two volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, think again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of this great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in context. MMY himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an urgent need and a general basis for further commentaries but deemed it necessary...without further loss of time. It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's commentary was to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. Rather disappointing once you know it's origin. Not what Vernon Katz said, and he was there. Hey, you aren't repeating Vaj's brainwashed mantra- TM bad, Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, Buddhism good, TM bad, Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, Buddhism good, TM bad, Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, Buddhism good, TM bad, Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, Buddhism good Simple, huh? If you repeat it mentally as many times as Vaj has, the truth of it will finally sink in. So, what are you waiting for?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic Secularization
On Feb 22, 2007, at 1:55 PM, sparaig wrote: And then goes on to empty 70 lbs of mecury into the river, if I read things correctly... Incorrectly. He was using a shiva-lingam of *solidified* mercury for worship. These use humanized forms of mercury. They are considered non-toxic.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Gita merely a cursory translation surrounding Ch2vs45......
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Interesting that Yogananda exhorts the reader to free thyself from the three gunas, implying effort, whereas Maharishi says be without the three gunas, implying effortlessness. Yes, I believe bhava (nistraiguNyo bhavaarjuna [bhava + arjuna]) is the second person imperative form from bhu (to be). It's not a transitive (sort of; more accurately, parasmaipada) verb, as Yogananda's free thyself would imply. Glad to hear it.
