[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Sounds like I am missing a great discussion and night with the bros. Barcelona sounds pretty sweet too! Thanks for including me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I would have but there was something organic on his hand. Curtis, I just wanted you to know that I was thinking of you fondly tonight. I was having dinner with my next-door neighbor, and we were talking about all this GREAT stuff -- anything from The Lost Tomb Of Jesus to the project he's working on right now (The Old Testament) to music (of course) to weird, kinky sex stuff, to women and how to live with them, to music, to gurus and about how many people go searching for them to find themselves and end up losing themselves, to music, to life in the south of France, to street stories from New York and Tulsa and other weird places, to music, and back to music again. If you ever get to France, and I am still living here (I made the terrible mistake not long ago of discovering Barcelona), you really have to drop by so I can introduce the two of you. He has one of the world's largest collections of 78s. Every- thing from classic blues to early country to ethnic stuff from all over the world, tens of thousands of them. You'd be in Hog Heaven.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
On Mar 9, 2007, at 6:58 PM, sparaig wrote: Lutz, incidentally, is a pretty prestigious scientist. His papers regularly appear in places like the Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences. And yet, his bias shown by his willingness to an entire 24-year segment of published research on TM suggests that one need not by balanced in one's science to publish in highly respected journals. FYI, when a researcher or groups of researchers don't mention research it is sometimes because they do not find anything of value in it. It's common etiquette in research circles to ignore insignificant findings rather than to bring them to light--esp. if it is likely to be obvious to most professionals in a given field that a body of research is in error or somehow tainted. I think in the case of TM research, which already has a dubious reputation among some higher-up TMers, what they showed, in a very polite manner, was how exaggeration, misleading statements, metaphysical speculation and wishful thinking was prevalent in their research. Essentially it is throwing up a red flag which says 'be careful with trusting what these people claim.' Now, knowing this, serious researchers will be able to get on with the business of researching ALL styles of meditation, not just relaxation techniques.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Spraig, new bumper stickers: I'm not being negligent, my kid's a saint! Your kid is on honor role, my kid saved the world from sin. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Curtis, you have such an impoverished imagination. I don't mean your ability to fantasize stuff that isn't real, I mean your ability to entertain alternate possibilities. OK help me out. Under what conditions is it OK for parents to let their 9 year old wander off alone? Ask the parents of Jesus.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
On Mar 9, 2007, at 6:28 PM, authfriend wrote: Try this, Sal. Go here-- http://www.hindu.com/ --and type Shankaracharya in the search box at the top of the page. Then go to-- http://www.hinduismtoday.com/ --and do the same search. Well, about 300+ for the first, many on the recent shooting, and barely 100 for the second. Yeah, those Shanks sure are on everybody's front burners. For a tradition supposedly over 1000 years old, that's not only a poor showing, it's about rock bottom. Thanks, Judy, you proved my point. And I saw virtually nothing on any of their duties. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak Chopra on Bill Maher Tonight
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I hope he's on the panel. http://www.hbo.com/billmaher/?ntrack_para1=feat_main_image Oh Gawd, tha man is such a bore and a cliche. OffWorld I have a bunch of his old MIU lectures on video tape. I've always been tempted to put them on youtube because they are such a contrast to how he is now. Wow, great idea. He used to be so articulate and on the ball about consciousness and matter. I wonder who has the rights to the tapes though. Might not be allowed on YT? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 6:58 PM, sparaig wrote: Lutz, incidentally, is a pretty prestigious scientist. His papers regularly appear in places like the Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences. And yet, his bias shown by his willingness to an entire 24-year segment of published research on TM suggests that one need not by balanced in one's science to publish in highly respected journals. FYI, when a researcher or groups of researchers don't mention research it is sometimes because they do not find anything of value in it. It's common etiquette in research circles to ignore insignificant findings rather than to bring them to light--esp. if it is likely to be obvious to most professionals in a given field that a body of research is in error or somehow tainted. I think in the case of TM research, which already has a dubious reputation among some higher-up TMers, what they showed, in a very polite manner, was how exaggeration, misleading statements, metaphysical speculation and wishful thinking was prevalent in their research. Essentially it is throwing up a red flag which says 'be careful with trusting what these people claim.' Now, knowing this, serious researchers will be able to get on with the business of researching ALL styles of meditation, not just relaxation techniques. Heh. Sorry, Vaj. Internal politics in the TMO isn't supposed to influence how scientists deal with published research. The research has to be evaluated on its own merits. And to ignore the research, rather than to evaluate it, shows that they simply don't want to deal with the implications.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak Chopra on Bill Maher Tonight
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I hope he's on the panel. http://www.hbo.com/billmaher/?ntrack_para1=feat_main_image Oh Gawd, tha man is such a bore and a cliche. OffWorld I have a bunch of his old MIU lectures on video tape. I've always been tempted to put them on youtube because they are such a contrast to how he is now. Wow, great idea. He used to be so articulate and on the ball about consciousness and matter. I wonder who has the rights to the tapes though. Might not be allowed on YT? I put them on public access TV for years, with full knowledge of the MIU folks. They never got around to asking me not to do it and eventually (20 years late since public access TV is virtually dead now) started doing it themselves in Fairfield. Chopra has no legal standing since the tapes were distributed with his knowledge, Copyright MIU.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but you're starting from the assumption that he was a mentally ill homeless dude. My point is that to run a Shankaracharya outfit, he couldn't possibly have been. Shankaracharyas aren't chosen for their administrative and political competence, but they're under a tremendous amount of scrutiny, and if they foul up in those respects, you'll hear about it. Mental illness or personality disorders run a gambit (run the gamut) from non functional to very functional. snip The main thing is that leaving home at 9 is not normal But you don't think *anyone* with a religious calling is normal. As far as you're concerned, millions of highly productive people throughout history haven't been normal. Martin Luther King wasn't normal. and I don't see any reason to view it as a super normal quality in him. I never suggested he had a supernormal quality in the sense of anything supernatural. But he was clearly an overachiever; most people who become leaders are. I am just forming my opinion on the facts that we have, just like you. You are focusing on his achievement as Shankaracharya and I am looking at him more personally. There is something wrong with a guy leaving home at 9 and spending his life away from society. There's something *different* about such a person, no question. I don't know how you can categorically state that this difference is wrong. That just strikes me as incredibly arrogant, as well as ethnocentric. Even when he rejoined society he would not be in the presence of women. We are all drawing our own conclusions from these simple facts of his life. I am saying that this is just my opinion about the guy. Any attempt to be more right about this topic than I am will not get any traction with me. Well, I know that. My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts. What I'm pointing out is that your conclusions just aren't logical. I think we are just both expressing different ways of looking at an interesting life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 10:37 AM, authfriend wrote: How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? Sounds like the rajas--don't forget the fancy hats and bagpipes. False comparison--they didn't grow up that way, Judy. GD obviously was exposed to that if he was from the Brahmin class, as I believe you and others have maintained. And what expectations did he fulfill? You're once again just projecting. Is there some kind of laundry list of things a guru is supposed to do? Of course not, they just make it up as they go along, and then one of their followers calls whatever it is they've done, accomplishments. Exactly. The problem with the literature of spirituality is that almost all of it, in every era, has been written by the unrealized writing *their* impressions of the realized. Of course, guru is a red herring in the context of this particular discussion. There most certainly is a laundry list of things that are expected from a Shankaracharyas, just as there is for an archbishop or any other major leader of a large religious organization. I know you don't feel you need to be familiar with the context of a discussion to make pronouncements about it, Barry, but *this* branch of the discussion was about Guru Dev's general competence as a human bean compared to that of your standard homeless person.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Er...this is a silly argument. Go back to the 19th century in India, when a woman would have as 16 or 20 kids in a lifetime, many of them died, or still born, or disappeared, or even sold, maybe having 6 or 7 survive. As far as I know preople got married at 13. It was commonplace. So, one kid of 9 going off into the VERY established tradition of seeking knowledge from a monestary or spiritual master, would not be viewed the same as it is in our modern western world. Add to that, I believe the story is that Guru Dev ran away twice. The first time they searched and brought him back. The second time they must have accepted that he was destined to seek for knowledge. Or, maybe they really did have the experiences described that he seemed like an Avatar from day one. Who knows. OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Spraig, new bumper stickers: I'm not being negligent, my kid's a saint! Your kid is on honor role, my kid saved the world from sin. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Curtis, you have such an impoverished imagination. I don't mean your ability to fantasize stuff that isn't real, I mean your ability to entertain alternate possibilities. OK help me out. Under what conditions is it OK for parents to let their 9 year old wander off alone? Ask the parents of Jesus.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak Chopra on Bill Maher Tonight
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I hope he's on the panel. http://www.hbo.com/billmaher/?ntrack_para1=feat_main_image Oh Gawd, tha man is such a bore and a cliche. OffWorld I have a bunch of his old MIU lectures on video tape. I've always been tempted to put them on youtube because they are such a contrast to how he is now. Wow, great idea. He used to be so articulate and on the ball about consciousness and matter. I wonder who has the rights to the tapes though. Might not be allowed on YT? I put them on public access TV for years, with full knowledge of the MIU folks. They never got around to asking me not to do it and eventually (20 years late since public access TV is virtually dead now) started doing it themselves in Fairfield. Chopra has no legal standing since the tapes were distributed with his knowledge, Copyright MIU. Put 'em up on YT ! Let me know if you do. OffWorld
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:53 PM, sparaig wrote: Heh. Sorry, Vaj. Internal politics in the TMO isn't supposed to influence how scientists deal with published research. The research has to be evaluated on its own merits. Well, yes, of course, but that is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is reports of Mahesh *telling* researchers 'this is what you'll find' and threatening them if they don't. This would be like tobacco companies or a college president looming over your research result interpretation before it's reported. Except in this case the researchers are being loomed over by someone they (despite being scientists) accept as perfect, omniscient and enlightened. Even cigarette company researchers or oil company climatologists aren't under that much pressure. And to ignore the research, rather than to evaluate it, shows that they simply don't want to deal with the implications. I don't feel that is the case. I just don't think they're impressed nor do they consider it significant.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't allege that he was homeless, that is a fact. He was *houseless*, not necessarily homeless. I have my own opinion about his mental state just as you do. I sincerely believe that he needed medical attention as a boy. I think his folks needed a check up from the neck up also. Whatever he was able to achieve with such a deplorable beginning in life is amazing. Don't forget that his achievement began while he was still 9 years old. How many 9-year-olds do you know who could go off on their own and wander through India for years without running into big trouble somewhere along the way? That was one incredibly competent and resourceful 9-year-old right from the start. As for needing medical attention, how do you know he didn't get whatever the equivalent was in India at the time? I rather doubt it would have occurred to anybody to send him to a psychiatrist even if one was available, which I also doubt. But for all we know, his parents may have taken him to the local Ayur-Vedic physician, or a priest, or the village sage for evaluation. That's what I mean about your lack of imagination. You're not able to imagine what the available resources were, or that his parents may have done everything they possibly could to get him the help they perceived he needed. What were they going to do when nothing could sway him, chain him to the radiator? The aspect that you raise considering his humble beginnings, that he rose to such heights in the Hindu religion is amazing. It is a heroic tale of survival worthy of a movie. The fact that his position of power we instrumental in upholding social values that I find repugnant is another issue. But I appreciate your perspective that he was a spiritual Horatio Alger story. That is an aspect I was not appreciating fully. Yeah, except it wasn't a Horatio Alger story. Horatio Alger wrote about people from disadvantaged beginnings who clawed their way up the ladder to success in society via hard work and persistence. Guru Dev, in contrast, didn't *want* success in society, and he made no effort to get there. He was lifted up by others from some obscure place on the ladder to the very top in one step and despite his protests. Admirable or not, Guru Dev was sui generis.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 4:08 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: And, at the same time, that aspect is Just Another My-Guru-Is-Special Story. And by extension, *I'm* special as well. Exactly. Of course, TM critics, unlike those nasty, fanatical TMers, would never descend to piling on.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you're missing the point, Curtis. Judy IS right. And you're wrong. That's just the way things are. Thanks man, I just get confused sometimes, it started when I was nine years old... Of course, TM critics, unlike those nasty, fanatical TMers, would *never* descend to piling on.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 6:28 PM, authfriend wrote: Try this, Sal. Go here-- http://www.hindu.com/ --and type Shankaracharya in the search box at the top of the page. Then go to-- http://www.hinduismtoday.com/ --and do the same search. Well, about 300+ for the first, many on the recent shooting, and barely 100 for the second. Yeah, those Shanks sure are on everybody's front burners. For a tradition supposedly over 1000 years old, that's not only a poor showing, it's about rock bottom. Thanks, Judy, you proved my point. And I saw virtually nothing on any of their duties. ROTFL!! Sal, you are just hilarious. If I thought you really believed the nonsense you spout, I'd be worried about you.
[FairfieldLife] Garab Dorje's Namkha Che
Garab Dorje is considered a manifestation of Buddha Sakyamuni... Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. http://www.tinyurl.com/33tvxm
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Er...this is a silly argument. Go back to the 19th century in India, when a woman would have as 16 or 20 kids in a lifetime, many of them died, or still born, or disappeared, or even sold, maybe having 6 or 7 survive. As far as I know preople got married at 13. It was commonplace. So, one kid of 9 going off into the VERY established tradition of seeking knowledge from a monestary or spiritual master, would not be viewed the same as it is in our modern western world. Add to that, I believe the story is that Guru Dev ran away twice. The first time they searched and brought him back. The second time they must have accepted that he was destined to seek for knowledge. Or, maybe they really did have the experiences described that he seemed like an Avatar from day one. Who knows. OffWorld Seems likely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Spraig, new bumper stickers: I'm not being negligent, my kid's a saint! Your kid is on honor role, my kid saved the world from sin. These are great!
[FairfieldLife] Buddha abandoned his pregnant wife.....was/A really silly comment...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Spraig, new bumper stickers: I'm not being negligent, my kid's a saint! Your kid is on honor role, my kid saved the world from sin. As I said before, it was 19th century India, women had 16 kids in those days (half of whom never made it). Now, you want to talk about negligence and dishonor. What do you think of someone who adandons his pregnant wife, and goes off into the forest to save the world, then starts an existentialist movement that soon becomes a religion mostly about him? Just curious about people's thoughts. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 2:27 PM, authfriend wrote: And what expectations did he fulfill? You're once again just projecting. Well, no, I seem to have a little more familiarity with the duties and responsibilities of a Shankaracharya than you do. See another post to Curtis for more details. I did, Judy, and all you did was project what you feel must go on in a Shankaracharya outfit, as you called it. When was the last time you read in any kind of legitimate publication that any of what you assume actually went on? You know, Sal, I confess, I forgot to write down the date of the last time I looked at Hinduism Today or the Hindu Times, but it was probably a couple of months ago. If you actually look at the lists of Shankaracharya hits for the Hindu Times and Hinduism Today, you'll find articles reporting on most of the agenda items I suggested earlier were among the responsibilities of Shankaracharyas. What you mostly seem to be familiar with is your fervent imagination. Is there some kind of laundry list of things a guru is supposed to do? Shankaracharya, not just guru, Sal. Again, it's like being an archbishop. According to whom? The Catholic Church is a worldwide organization that runs schools and provides food to millions all over the world, amongst many other things. If you're seriously suggesting a comparison, I'd say lay off the LSD. All of these musings are simply more and more projecting. Damn, Sal, you're right, the Roman Catholic Church just isn't precisely equivalent to the official Hindu establishment in India in every single respect. However, unfortunately, there is no organization that is precisely parallel, so, you know, we have to do the best we can. The archbishops of U.S. dioceses are generally concerned with running things in the U.S., not the Church's international programs; and I'd be very surprised if the Hindu establishment in India didn't provide food and run schools in India, if not elsewhere. So the comparison actually does work for what I was suggesting about the duties and responsibilities of the Shankaracharya. Do yourself a favor, Judy, and try a Google search on Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math and see what you come up with. There's about 200+ mentions, all of them related to--surprise!-- either MMY or the TMO. I guess they must have had trouble filling the position after GD died. Another little lesson for Sal here... First, a search tip: if you want to *exclude* certain types of hits, such as those related to MMY or the TMO, type the keywords you want to exclude preceded by a minus sign. I did a search on several different spellings of the name of the current Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math (Swaroopananda, Swarupananda, Swaroopanand, Swarupanand--there are probably others) and got about 500 hits. And If you do a search on just Shankaracharya what you mostly get is info on that shooting. Not if you do them on the two newspaper sites I cited. Apparently apart from you and a few other devotees As noted, not a devotee. nobody much else considers GD or whatever goes on at Shankaracharya outfits to be either of much importance or interest. It would be unlikely you'd find current news items about Guru Dev on the Web, since he was active before most newspapers started keeping electronic archives. And finding pages about Guru Dev that aren't related to MMY or the TMO is difficult, because even independent articles tend to mention one or the other or both on the basis of the association. I know I've seen them, but damn, Sal, I didn't grab the URLs at the time so I could document them for you now. But there's plenty about the activities of the current Shankaracharyas, including the Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math, that doesn't relate to the murder.
[FairfieldLife] More Vedic Pandits Coming,
http://mum.edu/TheReview/#4
RE: [FairfieldLife] Garab Dorje's Namkha Che
Furthermore: Kirk's note: Younge Khachab is of the same lineage both as a terton and family as Terton Mingyur Dorge who is responsible for the most huge Dorge Drollo cycle so this empowerment is the very essence of essence of the Guru from the Guru of Gurus. The Garab Dorje Nyingtig The Heart Essence Teachings of Garab Dorje April 13-15th 2007 Younge Khachab Rinpoche Rinpoche will teach on the rare Dzogchen text discovered by Terton Chogyur Lingpa Madison, Wisconsin Friday: 7-9pm Saturday -Sunday 10-12/2-4pm Location: Quarry Arts Building 715 Hill St. Room 150 (location change on Saturday morning will be noted at event) . The Garab Dorje Nyingtig was revealed by Chogyur Lingpa (1829-1870) in collaboration with his guru Pema Osel Dongak Lingpa (aka Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo, 1820-1892), who did most of the writing. It was part of a series of terma discoveries in which Chogyur Lingpa acted as the reincarnation of Murab Tsepo and Khyentse acted as the reincarnation of Murab's father the Dharma King Trisong Detsen. In that capacity they transmitted these teachings of the founder of dzokchen, Garab Dorje. A complete cycle belonging to the third divison, the innermost secret practice of dzokchen, it focusses upon the peaceful deity Vajrasattva and the wrathful deity Yangdak Heruka. For information: 608-243-8055 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cost: Suggested Donation of $150/sliding fee In order to attend one must have Buddhist Refuge Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/0It09A/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/GkEylB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links -Original Message- From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of matrixmonitor Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 7:40 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Garab Dorje's Namkha Che Garab Dorje is considered a manifestation of Buddha Sakyamuni... Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. http://www.tinyurl.com/33tvxm To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:53 PM, sparaig wrote: Heh. Sorry, Vaj. Internal politics in the TMO isn't supposed to influence how scientists deal with published research. The research has to be evaluated on its own merits. Well, yes, of course, but that is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is reports of Mahesh *telling* researchers 'this is what you'll find' and threatening them if they don't. Documentation? And where did MMY tell researchers that they would find reductions in thalamic activity? This would be like tobacco companies or a college president looming over your research result interpretation before it's reported. Except in this case the researchers are being loomed over by someone they (despite being scientists) accept as perfect, omniscient and enlightened. Even cigarette company researchers or oil company climatologists aren't under that much pressure. And to ignore the research, rather than to evaluate it, shows that they simply don't want to deal with the implications. I don't feel that is the case. I just don't think they're impressed nor do they consider it significant. In the context of a paper purporting to give a general overview of meditation and meditation research, they are REQUIRED to say why they don't feel it significant. Instead, they pretend the research doesn't exist.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bush's bad ju-ju...
How many human sacrifices has George bush made in Iraq and elsewhere in the name of revenge and oil profits or racketeering for the Cheney Haliburton Cabal? And how many american lives lost when you spent a trillion dollars on an unjustifiable war rather than on health care for civilian and military , education and job training, pensions and the many mentally ill homeless, the environment? Human Sacrifice was never so popular as it is in modern america, but the god sacrificed to is the god of mindless overconsumption, megamansions, pornography, liquor, garbage entertainment that glorifies violence and the maintenance of a huge military and state security machine to manipulate and intimidate others. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 3/9/07 11:44:00 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tiney said the spirit guides of the Mayan community decided it would be necessary to cleanse the sacred site of bad spirits after Bush's visit so that their ancestors could rest in peace. Yeah ,maybe a few Human hearts ripped out and bloody bodies thrown down a pyramid will *cleanse* the sacred sites of the ancestors. 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: Bush's bad ju-ju...
In a message dated 3/9/07 10:23:06 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How many human sacrifices has George bush made in Iraq and elsewhere in the name of revenge and oil profits or racketeering for the Cheney Haliburton Cabal? And how many american lives lost when you spent a trillion dollars on an unjustifiable war rather than on health care for civilian and military , education and job training, pensions and the many mentally ill homeless, the environment? Answer to question 1 is Zero. Answer to question 2 is also Zero. And this is what really pisses off the left, not that Soldiers are risking life and limb for them but the money being used could be buying all kinds of Socialist programs. Stephen you must be really pissed George Bush has spent your, excuse me, somebody else's, tax dollars on Security instead of on freebies for you and any other slackers who depend on the government to take care of themselves. 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: TM claims quite premature
On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:06 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:53 PM, sparaig wrote: Heh. Sorry, Vaj. Internal politics in the TMO isn't supposed to influence how scientists deal with published research. The research has to be evaluated on its own merits. Well, yes, of course, but that is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is reports of Mahesh *telling* researchers 'this is what you'll find' and threatening them if they don't. Documentation? And where did MMY tell researchers that they would find reductions in thalamic activity? Read the archives of this list dude. Darth Rishi has a long history of forced micromanagement. This would be like tobacco companies or a college president looming over your research result interpretation before it's reported. Except in this case the researchers are being loomed over by someone they (despite being scientists) accept as perfect, omniscient and enlightened. Even cigarette company researchers or oil company climatologists aren't under that much pressure. And to ignore the research, rather than to evaluate it, shows that they simply don't want to deal with the implications. I don't feel that is the case. I just don't think they're impressed nor do they consider it significant. In the context of a paper purporting to give a general overview of meditation and meditation research, they are REQUIRED to say why they don't feel it significant. Instead, they pretend the research doesn't exist. See the previous post on why this is the case.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- While the authenticity of research papers done by TM TB'ers is questionable, the fact remains that TM is far superior to any single Buddhist technique available. In the distant future, Buddhists in droves (including all the monks you see in those TV ads where they gather around a laptop) will embrace TM. That's a fact!. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:06 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:53 PM, sparaig wrote: Heh. Sorry, Vaj. Internal politics in the TMO isn't supposed to influence how scientists deal with published research. The research has to be evaluated on its own merits. Well, yes, of course, but that is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is reports of Mahesh *telling* researchers 'this is what you'll find' and threatening them if they don't. Documentation? And where did MMY tell researchers that they would find reductions in thalamic activity? Read the archives of this list dude. Darth Rishi has a long history of forced micromanagement. This would be like tobacco companies or a college president looming over your research result interpretation before it's reported. Except in this case the researchers are being loomed over by someone they (despite being scientists) accept as perfect, omniscient and enlightened. Even cigarette company researchers or oil company climatologists aren't under that much pressure. And to ignore the research, rather than to evaluate it, shows that they simply don't want to deal with the implications. I don't feel that is the case. I just don't think they're impressed nor do they consider it significant. In the context of a paper purporting to give a general overview of meditation and meditation research, they are REQUIRED to say why they don't feel it significant. Instead, they pretend the research doesn't exist. See the previous post on why this is the case.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tertonzeno Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 11:14 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature --- While the authenticity of research papers done by TM TB'ers is questionable, the fact remains that TM is far superior to any single Buddhist technique available. In the distant future, Buddhists in droves (including all the monks you see in those TV ads where they gather around a laptop) will embrace TM. That's a fact!. A fact? How can you claim as fact something so speculative?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Bush's bad ju-ju...
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 10:43 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Bush's bad ju-ju... In a message dated 3/9/07 10:23:06 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How many human sacrifices has George bush made in Iraq and elsewhere in the name of revenge and oil profits or racketeering for the Cheney Haliburton Cabal? And how many american lives lost when you spent a trillion dollars on an unjustifiable war rather than on health care for civilian and military , education and job training, pensions and the many mentally ill homeless, the environment? Answer to question 1 is Zero. Answer to question 2 is also Zero. And this is what really pisses off the left, not that Soldiers are risking life and limb for them but the money being used could be buying all kinds of Socialist programs. Education, the environment, and health are socialist programs? Stephen you must be really pissed George Bush has spent your, excuse me, somebody else's, tax dollars on Security instead of on freebies for you and any other slackers who depend on the government to take care of themselves. Translation: he has bankrupted our nation's future and eroded other countries' respect for us while worsening the terrorist problem many times over. He is a shallow little drone who has played his part perfectly in orchestrating the downfall of America.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:06 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:53 PM, sparaig wrote: Heh. Sorry, Vaj. Internal politics in the TMO isn't supposed to influence how scientists deal with published research. The research has to be evaluated on its own merits. Well, yes, of course, but that is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is reports of Mahesh *telling* researchers 'this is what you'll find' and threatening them if they don't. Documentation? And where did MMY tell researchers that they would find reductions in thalamic activity? Read the archives of this list dude. Darth Rishi has a long history of forced micromanagement. I have. please furnish something more specific than a long history. This would be like tobacco companies or a college president looming over your research result interpretation before it's reported. Except in this case the researchers are being loomed over by someone they (despite being scientists) accept as perfect, omniscient and enlightened. Even cigarette company researchers or oil company climatologists aren't under that much pressure. And to ignore the research, rather than to evaluate it, shows that they simply don't want to deal with the implications. I don't feel that is the case. I just don't think they're impressed nor do they consider it significant. In the context of a paper purporting to give a general overview of meditation and meditation research, they are REQUIRED to say why they don't feel it significant. Instead, they pretend the research doesn't exist. See the previous post on why this is the case. Again, that's not how scientists are supposed to address the issue.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- While the authenticity of research papers done by TM TB'ers is questionable, the fact remains that TM is far superior to any single Buddhist technique available. In the distant future, Buddhists in droves (including all the monks you see in those TV ads where they gather around a laptop) will embrace TM. That's a fact!. Oh really? What makes you say that? There's a difference between forging research, and making questionable PR claims.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip What I'm referring to is reports of Mahesh *telling* researchers 'this is what you'll find' and threatening them if they don't. Documentation? And where did MMY tell researchers that they would find reductions in thalamic activity? Read the archives of this list dude. Darth Rishi has a long history of forced micromanagement. I have. please furnish something more specific than a long history. I know what he's referring to. He won't tell you what it is because it doesn't come within 100 miles of documenting the charge he makes above, and he knows it. snip Instead, they pretend the research doesn't exist. See the previous post on why this is the case. Again, that's not how scientists are supposed to address the issue. Vaj's intellectual dishonesty is just astonishing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Possession and the Movement
Message being channelled.. .You have been posessed by Satwa. Stop ..Too late now. Stop ..Resistance is Futile. Stop ..Aaaah ! ! ! !. ...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Possession and the Movement
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Message being channelled .. .You have been posessed by Satwa. Stop.. .. ..Too late now. Stop.. .. ..Resistance is Futile. Stop.. .. ..Aaaah ! ! ! !. ... .OffWorld. Stop.. .. ..
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: ...there is a big difference between someone like Guru Dev and someone like Turpuiose B. Out of curiosity, what do you consider that difference to be? The former lived in the forest and exhibited acumen and conviction, the latter is homeless, scattered, and directionless. I would have thought those facts were obvious. You forgot to call me a drunk, but thanks for clarifying. Please see my latest post, the one on how people react to ideas that run counter to their own. :-)
[FairfieldLife] live in new jersey - Meditating with the Beatles
Meditating with the Beatles -- The Beatles in India with Paul Saltzman will be held in Conference Room B at the Robert Wood Johnson Hamilton Center for Health and Wellness, 3100 Quakerbridge Road, Hamilton, New Jersey March 15, 2007 @ 7 p.m. Admission is $5. Advance registration required. For information, call (609) 584-5900. On the Web: www.rwjhamilton.org. Mr. Saltzman on the Web: www.thebeatlesinindia.com -- article source: http://www.pacpub.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=1091dept_id=343157newsid=18050966 Meditating with the Beatles By: Susan Van Dongen, TIMEOFF 03/09/2007 Filmmaker/photographer Paul Saltzman will talk about his path to inner peace during his time with John, Paul, George and Ringo. Author, filmmaker and photographer Paul Saltzman has been passionate about exploring his inner life — and giving back to the community — as far back as he can remember. In 1965 he left Canada to do voter registration work in Mississippi with Stokely Carmichael and the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee. While he was there, he was attacked and jailed. President of Sunrise Films Limited in Oakville, Ontario, he began his media career at the National Film Board of Canada as a production manager and assistant director, then later at the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. as a public affairs story editor and on-air host. In 1967 he interviewed American inventor and visionary Buckminster Fuller, who would later say that Mr. Saltzman changed his assessment of the '60s generation. But he wasn't immune to heartache. It was the breakup of a romantic relationship that sent him thousands of miles from home to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's spiritual retreat center in Rishikesh, India, in 1968. Little did he know that among the other guests at the retreat were four guys from Liverpool named Paul, John, George and Ringo. An amateur but gifted photographer, Mr. Saltzman had unprecedented access to the Beatles in Rishikesh, as well as other guests at the retreat, including Mike Love of the Beach Boys, Mia Farrow and folk-rock legend Donovan. Upon returning home to Canada, Mr. Saltzman placed his work in a box and forgot about it for nearly 30 years. His 18-year-old daughter became interested in the Beatles and asked him about the photos, suggesting they would make a great book. Eventually, the images were gathered in Mr. Saltzman's self-published book, The Beatles in Rishikesh. Since launching the book in 2000, Mr. Saltzman has been invited to speak around the world about his experience. He will be at the Robert Wood Johnson Hamilton Center for Health and Wellness March 15 to present his pictures and stories of those weeks with the Beatles. Mr. Saltzman also will have his photos and limited edition books available for purchase. The much-ballyhooed Beatles time with the Maharishi changed their lives and sparked a creative period in which they wrote 48 songs in eight weeks. Seventeen of those songs turned up on The Beatles (commonly referred to as The White Album), including Sexy Sadie, excoriating the Maharishi. It was equally pivotal for Mr. Saltzman. But before he could be enlightened, however, he had to actually get into the retreat. He says the Beatles' presence in Rishikesh almost prevented him from being allowed in. When I came to the gate I was told by a young man that the ashram was closed, says Mr. Saltzman, speaking from his home in Ontario. I told him what was going on inside of me and said, 'You have to teach me meditation.' So he went back and asked the Maharishi, but the Maharishi said, 'I'm sorry, not at this time.' So I waited. I slept in a tent for eight days waiting to get in. Once he was allowed into the ashram and had his first half-hour meditation, Mr. Saltzman was amazed at the transformation. Just 30 minutes of meditation relieved the agony he had been feeling. I was buzzed, he says. George (Harrison) later told me that he got higher meditating than he ever did on drugs — he felt more bliss. That's what it was like for me. The retreat was divided into several sections, including a group of very serious students who were there to learn and teach transcendental meditation. They had a much stricter schedule of meditation, classes and lectures. Among the students was Mia's Farrow's sister Prudence, who spent so much time in her room meditating that the Maharishi became concerned. He asked Lennon if he might entice her to come out and be with the others and Lennon was inspired to write Dear Prudence, famous for the line ... won't you come out to play. But the Beatles and Mr. Saltzman were in a group with much less pressure. They meditated for maybe an hour or two a day, and the rest of the time was spent journaling, writing music and hanging out. The gathering point was a long table underneath a trellis on a cliff side that overlooked the Ganges below, Mr. Saltzman says. The Beatles took me into their group and I found them to be playful, at ease, warm,
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To summarize, alpha global increases and alpha coherence mostly over frontal electrodes are associated with TM practice when meditating compared to baseline (Morse, Martin, Furst, Dubin, 1977). This global alpha increase is similar to other relaxation techniques. The passive absorption during the recitation of the mantra, as practiced in this technique, produces a brain pattern that suggests a decrease of processing of sensory or motor information and of mental activity in general. Because alpha rhythms are ubiquitous and functionally non-specific, the claim that alpha oscillations and alpha coherence are desirable or are linked to an original and higher state of consciousness seem quite premature. -The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness And of course, we don't know how, if at all, the following relates to TM-related synchronous alpha waves, but itis interesting to note that research published AFTER the research cited in the book, but before the book went to press, contradicts what the book claims. Shoddy overall, is my impression: they have an agenda and just ignore any and all research that conflicts with that agenda. This is like the worst aspects of TM research, but due to the prestige of the researchers, no-one is paying any attention to their blatant bias. Int J Psychophysiol. 2003 Jan;47(1):65-74. Paradox lost? Exploring the role of alpha oscillations during externally vs. internally directed attention and the implications for idling and inhibition hypotheses. Cooper NR, Croft RJ, Dominey SJ, Burgess AP, Gruzelier JH. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Cognitive Neuroscience and Behaviour, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Charing Cross Hospital, St Dunstans Road, London W6 8RP, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Although slow waves of the electroencephalogram (EEG) have been associated with attentional processes, the functional significance of the alpha component in the EEG (8.1-12 Hz) remains uncertain. Conventionally, synchronisation in the alpha frequency range is taken to be a marker of cognitive inactivity, i.e. 'cortical idling'. However, it has been suggested that alpha may index the active inhibition of sensory information during internally directed attentional tasks such as mental imagery. More recently, this idea has been amended to encompass the notion of alpha synchronisation as a means of inhibition of non-task relevant cortical areas irrespective of the direction of attention. Here we test the adequacy of the one idling and two inhibition hypotheses about alpha. In two experiments we investigated the relation between alpha and internally vs. externally directed attention using mental imagery vs. sensory-intake paradigms. Results from both experiments showed a clear relationship between alpha and both attentional factors and increased task demands. At various scalp sites alpha amplitudes were greater during internally directed attention and during increased load, results incompatible with alpha reflecting cortical idling and more in keeping with suggestions of active inhibition necessary for internally driven mental operations.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:05 AM, sparaig wrote: And of course, we don't know how, if at all, the following relates to TM-related synchronous alpha waves, but itis interesting to note that research published AFTER the research cited in the book, but before the book went to press, contradicts what the book claims. Shoddy overall, is my impression: they have an agenda and just ignore any and all research that conflicts with that agenda. This is like the worst aspects of TM research, but due to the prestige of the researchers, no-one is paying any attention to their blatant bias. If they were biased I doubt they'd be so excited about some of the other forms of meditation they report in the article. It is not just about one kind or one brand of meditation. Seemed a well-rounded article to me. It's important to understand that in research science, there are constantly new papers being published which may or may not affect future opinion. The latest and greatest research is the Shamatha Project which is underway with the first retreat as we speak. It should be an exciting year for meditation research.
[FairfieldLife] Multiple IDs (was Re: Coherence schmoherence)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 8, 2007, at 2:58 PM, Alex Stanley wrote: I'm curious, nabby, why is it that you have so much trouble keeping track of how you're subscribed to FFL? I just approved your latest subscription, and I was able to find three other IDs of yours that are still subscribed: Multiple personal identity disorder Seeing as how this is FFL, there's probably a more logical explanation: The Illuminati are using mind-control to make Benjamin Creme hack into nabby's Yahoo accounts and change his passwords.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do people react to beliefs that are counter to their own?
In what I see as a sequitur :-), since it happened immediately after I wrote the starter post in this thread, I've finally gotten to see the Discovery Channel documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus. Is the reaction to this film *related* to the issue I'm talking about in my first post? Well, duh! To me it seemed to be a pretty well-done documentary, making a case for their working assumption that this actually *is* the tomb of Jesus and his family, and doing a pretty good job of it. But it was *reacted to* as if it were heresy incarnate, an affront to Christian beliefs and an attack on them. The film was condemned without ever having been seen by the Greek Orthodox Church, and the filmmakers were described on blogs and in print as demons and minions of Satan, or as pawns of a global Jewish conspiracy. Both producer and director received death threats and wishes that they burn in Hell. Sound familiar? It should. It's the *same* phenomenon I was talking about in my first post, the one in which True Believers tend to react to ideas that are counter to their own with anger and with hostility. I don't know about the rest of you here, but I think that this reaction is far from highly evolved, and even far from sane. The level of *attachment* that such a True Believer fanatic has to have for his or her beliefs must be pretty strong for them to get angry at someone who, after all, has committed no greater sin than Believing Something Else. And yet that's the world we live in. True Believers try to make it seem as if the people who have different ideas than they do are in the wrong, and that *they* somehow hold the moral high ground because they're defending their faith as they become angry and hostile. If there *is* a God, may He, She, or It protect us all from these defenders of the faith.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do people react to beliefs that are counter to th...
In a message dated 3/9/07 7:23:54 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To me it seemed to be a pretty well-done documentary, making a case for their working assumption that this actually *is* the tomb of Jesus and his family, and doing a pretty good job of it. I thought the film was also well done , but the content was not only rejected by Christians as heresy, but also viewed as Archeo-porn by people in the scientific community. There were too many *ifs* and jumped to conclusions according to the scientific critics of the film. Even some of the scientists quoted in the film protested saying their comments were taken out of context.The Discovery Channel has since buried the film and aren't showing it as much as they had originally intended. The reaction from the Christian community has been one of ,well... this is just one more hit on Christianity. What's new? But no great outrage. The outrage, if any, was more from the scientific community._TV Week_ (http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11681) BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] This morning's sunrise
http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise1.jpg http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise2.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do people react to beliefs that are counter to their own?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip The thing that I see as a tipoff that someone is not very evolved is when they react to ideas and beliefs that run counter to their own -- or that challenge their own -- by being ANGRY at the person who spoke or wrote these heretical ideas, and by wanting to HURT the person who spoke or wrote them. And as we all know, Barry never, *ever* reacts with anger to anybody who holds beliefs different from his own, never EVER lashes out with the intent to hurt them. Perish forbid, as my grandmother would have said. snip Others expressed their anger by trying to make a case for the person who said some things that run counter to their beliefs as being a person who has no credibility. He's a chronic liar, his motives are to make money, he's stupid or non-logical, etc. Interestingly, that's the same argument the right-wingers make when it's pointed out that *they* are chronic liars, beholden to the corporations that fund their politicians, are stupid or non-logical, etc. snip But then, as Barry says: Me, I'm all over the spectrum, but then I make no claims to be either highly evolved or enlightened or Self Realized. And is, therefore, fully qualified to make judgments about whether other people are Self- realized.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
On Mar 9, 2007, at 1:17 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 8, 2007, at 8:59 PM, authfriend wrote: The bulk of the evidence is that he *was* revered for his personal qualities. That's called a cult of personality, Judy, and is usually not considered very healthy. Reverence for him and others like him based on personal qualities might be one of the reasons India is such a mess. Exactly. *George W. Bush* is revered by millions of Americans for his personal qualities. Most of which are merely projections, of course. And it doesn't have to apply only to politicians either, as Judy would probably say it does. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: This morning's sunrise
WOW! Thanks for capturing a wonderful moment. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise1.jpg http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise2.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Predictably I disagree with Schilpp's assessment of what the world needs, including his opposition to the US entering WWII. I strongly disagree with his assertion that Guru Dev was a valuable source of values since his support of the caste system's oppressiveness puts him at the ethical level of Strom Thurman. Any guy who is going to ask to be taken seriously as a moral authority is gunna at least have to clear the bar of our lowest social values. That is not repressing people due to their birth. It is immoral and wrong. Appealing to the tradition of oppression does not get him off the hook any more than it did for good ol' boy Strom. There is no evidence I have found that Guru Dev supported the misguided and repressive elements of the caste system, only that he saw the caste structure as a natural outgrowth of society's dharma. The caste system is not there to repress others, though it can be used to do that. By itself it is a natural way that society orgainzes itself, so that each of evolves quickly and comfortably. It was compassion that drove Guru Dev's actions, not a desire for control.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think my example are fine. They show that people's reverence for another person has more to do with their own needs than the person they revere. What happened afterwards is irrelevant except that it dramatizes that people are often wrong about the person's qualities. Now in Guru Dev's case I can see people thinking highly of him the way people give the Pope a lot of credit. Even though the Pope, IMO supports some ideas that don't serve our time well. But to be generous to Guru Dev, I can see him as a Pope like figure who did his job well and supported the ideas of his antiquated tradition. As far as why people revered him I don't think either of us has any better evidence. Gandhi followers did not join in this high regard because they were fighting institutions like the one Guru Dev represented in order to bring some more justice to India. So he was not universally revered, he was revered by people who agreed with the orthodox Hindu perspective he represented. I am only a materialist compared to many posters here. I am not any pure ideology. Your skepticism about my evidence is warranted. When it comes to my take on Guru Dev I am just spouting my opinion based on very little information about him. This lack of information is also the state for people who make a big deal about his life. They are claiming that he was really special and I am saying I don't see any evidence for that yet. All the conjecture about him is just that. Personal presence is a quality universally quoted from Mao's followers. It means nothing to me. I don't doubt that people who revered Guru Dev felt loads of it. This is an area that people suck in. People are terrible at judging a person from afar and it gets worse in groups. So why make any conjecture about his mental state pro or con? It is just a piece for discussion, and it has worked. There have been some good responses including yours. I was sincere in my opinions as others have been in theirs. I judge Guru Dev's behavior from a few facts of his life if we accept them. He left home at an incredibly early age. I asked my social worker friend what kind of kid leaves home at age 9. Abused kids are the only ones she has ever come across. Kids naturally want the support of their family. It is highly unnatural to want to leave. His supposed spiritual mission is something that requires a lot of beliefs that I don't share. It is also possible that he had an attachment disorder. He did not feel anything for his family. In this possibility he may have been treated well, but was unable to feel anything towards his family. The idea of a child being allowed to leave the house and fend for himself is horrific and a crime in this country. Think about his parents for a moment. This was not normal in India either. So I am just stating my opinion that I think he had social problems. He seemed to do OK being treated as a God, but he couldn't just hang as an equal with other people before he was elevated to that status. Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Kn...
In a message dated 3/9/2007 10:08:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Predictably I disagree with Schilpp's assessment of what the world needs, including his opposition to the US entering WWII. I strongly disagree with his assertion that Guru Dev was a valuable source of values since his support of the caste system's oppressiveness puts him at the ethical level of Strom Thurman. Any guy who is going to ask to be taken seriously as a moral authority is gunna at least have to clear the bar of our lowest social values. That is not repressing people due to their birth. It is immoral and wrong. Appealing to the tradition of oppression does not get him off the hook any more than it did for good ol' boy Strom. There is no evidence I have found that Guru Dev supported the misguided and repressive elements of the caste system, only that he saw the caste structure as a natural outgrowth of society's dharma. The caste system is not there to repress others, though it can be used to do that. By itself it is a natural way that society organizes itself, so that each of evolves quickly and comfortably. It was compassion that drove Guru Dev's actions, not a desire for control. The cast system was developed so that people could evolve comfortably? Please, if your an untouchable you spend most of your time cleaning up the Brahmans shit by putting it in a bowl and finding a place to dispose of it. Regardless of the level of development in an organization Bishop, Cardinal, Brahman, etc, Governor of the Age of Enlightenment it tends to create de evolution rather than evolution due to the fact that most people *not all* feel justified to preen themselves as above others. It is no wonder Guru Dev avoided taking the seat for 20 years. And most are caught up in the game of money. Recently when I went to Fairfield I was told I could not fly in the dome. During my weeks stay i went to a meeting of a few people interested in the UFO sightings and the person next to me was friends with the co-director of the development for the department of Cons. He said if you want to get into the dome make a money contribution. My reply: I have done enough for MMY organization. The world is at war and the Sidha's should be in the dome. My point: The arrogance that has taken over the TMO in the name of who is higher up is a perfect example of how higher ups can screw the whole world over and over again. Not recognizing the spiritual value of one's soul regardless of what culture they come from or how many special people they are connected to is pure ignorance on the part of those who are owned by a caste system or some other form of structure that approves and judges their spiritual growth through their standards. Love and Light. Lou Valentino Lsoma. BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 8, 2007, at 8:59 PM, authfriend wrote: The bulk of the evidence is that he *was* revered for his personal qualities. That's called a cult of personality, Judy, and is usually not considered very healthy. Reverence for him and others like him based on personal qualities might be one of the reasons India is such a mess. Exactly. *George W. Bush* is revered by millions of Americans for his personal qualities. Reverence for a leader on the basis of his or her personal qualities does not, of course, automatically constitute a cult of personality. A cult of personality exists when the reverence for the leader is based on alleged personal qualities that he or she either does not actually possess, or that are irrelevant in evaluating his or her actions as a leader (as Shakespeare has Hamlet describe the fratridical King Claudius, That one can smile, and smile, and be a villain). The term therefore is an expression of opinion about the leader's character and/or the nature of his/her actions, not a statement of established fact. And obviously, that the majority of Americans would now say support for Bush constitutes a cult of personality says absolutely zero about whether the reverence for Guru Dev entailed a cult of personality. Each case must be evaluated on its own merits. The equivalence Barry draws is a little like saying that because the fans of Andrea Bocelli revere him despite his lack of genuine musical talent, therefore reverence for Placido Domingo is equally misplaced. Also, it's not always one or the other. Bill Clinton was revered for his personal qualities at least as much as Bush is, despite some serious failures of character; but their respective failings, both personally and politically, are hardly comparable in terms of their effects on national and global well- being. (Well, one might say Clinton's inability to keep his zipper up had the effect of putting George Bush in office, but that just highlights the complexities involved in applying the cult of personality label.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
society's dharma In the South it was called Jim Crow. It states that by the circumstances of your birth you are destined to live within specific boundaries. There are no good Jim Crow laws and there are no good reasons for a caste system if you are in the groups whose lives are restricted by it. One of the strongest arguments against dropping the Jim Crow laws in the South was that Blacks were by nature, unable to control their animal impulses and it was unsafe to have them mix with white women. This attitude continued though the history of blues and rock music. It goes against nature was just as false an argument then. In the same time period as Guru Dev, Gandhi was directly attacking the caste system. I don't think that Guru Dev supported it in a desire for control, I think he did it out of ignorance. As a Brahman his privileged existence was only benefited by the rules, so it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage to fight this system as Gandhi found out when Hindu fanatics shot him. Saying that Sudras are evolving quickly and comfortably by the restrictions on their economic opportunities imposed on them sounds like a bad justification for oppression and cruelty. You and I are white guys in a first world country. We have no blocks to our advancement in any area of our lives. I think everyone should have such an open road ahead of them. I think society has made some good steps to help insure this. Here in DC we have a large community of middle and upper class black men and women who are proving all those racist claims about their potential and nature by segregationists dead wrong. I wish the same for low caste Hindus. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Predictably I disagree with Schilpp's assessment of what the world needs, including his opposition to the US entering WWII. I strongly disagree with his assertion that Guru Dev was a valuable source of values since his support of the caste system's oppressiveness puts him at the ethical level of Strom Thurman. Any guy who is going to ask to be taken seriously as a moral authority is gunna at least have to clear the bar of our lowest social values. That is not repressing people due to their birth. It is immoral and wrong. Appealing to the tradition of oppression does not get him off the hook any more than it did for good ol' boy Strom. There is no evidence I have found that Guru Dev supported the misguided and repressive elements of the caste system, only that he saw the caste structure as a natural outgrowth of society's dharma. The caste system is not there to repress others, though it can be used to do that. By itself it is a natural way that society orgainzes itself, so that each of evolves quickly and comfortably. It was compassion that drove Guru Dev's actions, not a desire for control.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: The funny thing is that I read that Guru Dev page that was posted earlier, http://www.srigurudev.net/srigurudev/gurudev/biography.html trying to just understand what his quotes revealed about him. He came off like such a priggish old fart. Obsessed with people not sinning and preparing for death. Teaching the scriptures without his own thinking entering in, just like the good little fundamentalist Hindu he was. The quotes could have been Jimmy Swaggart if you just changed the name of the God. I don't know what motivates a kid to try to leave home at 9, never have relationships with women to the point of banning them from his presence when he is older, and living as a homeless man in National Parks away from all people...but I'm not giving him special guy credit for it. There are much simpler explanations. Those much simpler explanations, though, might also have to cover why so many people in India, from all strata of society, revered him so deeply. And oh, by the way, one doesn't usually refer to a hermit who makes his home in the forest for spiritual reasons as a homeless man. That's what's called loading the language in anti-thought reform circles. Yes, that is rather radical to use that terminology, as there is a big difference between someone like Guru Dev and someone like Turpuiose B. Out of curiosity, what do you consider that difference to be? The former lived in the forest and exhibited acumen and conviction, the latter is homeless, scattered, and directionless. I would have thought those facts were obvious. OffWorld They are.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This morning's sunrise
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise1.jpg http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise2.jpg Thanks! Sunrise2 is beautiful!
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: ...there is a big difference between someone like Guru Dev and someone like Turpuiose B. Out of curiosity, what do you consider that difference to be? The former lived in the forest and exhibited acumen and conviction, the latter is homeless, scattered, and directionless. I would have thought those facts were obvious. You forgot to call me a drunk, but thanks for clarifying. The personal dig aside, Offworld makes the point (which Barry chooses, of course, not to address, because it refutes his and Curtis's position so conclusively) succinctly: the implications of the term homeless in its common usage simply don't apply to Guru Dev. Another way of putting it might be, Home is where the heart is.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Coherence schmoherence
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: No, Jim *was* indulging in a fit of pique. He would have us believe it's cosmic pique, and you would have us believe it's somehow rational pique. But it's still pique, as is everything you say below. Pique: a transient feeling of wounded vanity? No f*cking way dude! Way. That's really how I see your actions here, Jim. They're totally predictable, in that whenever someone like myself or new_morning questions how reality-based your self-assessment of your Self Realization is, you immediately react angrily, lashing out at the person who posed the questions. And then you go through this amazing nice dance, sucking up to people to get them to think better of you. It's a little like watching the moodswings of a chronic abuser. ( But without the physical abuse, of course. :-) I stand by my assessment -- pique. But wounded vanity actually describes it better. You may call it anything you like. Just don't expect me to agree with you just *because* that's what you call it. And that doesn't mean that I don't like you; merely that I think there's some self-deception hiding in your self-description. You still got your butt kicked yesterday :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Coherence schmoherence
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: No, Jim *was* indulging in a fit of pique. He would have us believe it's cosmic pique, and you would have us believe it's somehow rational pique. But it's still pique, as is everything you say below. Pique: a transient feeling of wounded vanity? No f*cking way dude! Way. That's really how I see your actions here, Jim. They're totally predictable, in that whenever someone like myself or new_morning questions how reality-based your self-assessment of your Self Realization is, you immediately react angrily, lashing out at the person who posed the questions. What's at least as predictable is that if someone challenges one of Barry's opinions, he will immediately characterize the person as angry or upset, in most cases without actually addressing the challenge.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Kn...
In a message dated 3/9/2007 10:28:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 8, 2007, at 8:59 PM, authfriend wrote: The bulk of the evidence is that he *was* revered for his personal qualities. That's called a cult of personality, That's called usually not considered very healthy. Reverence for him and others like him based on personal qualities might be one of the reasons India is such a mess. Exactly. *George W. Bush* is revered by millions of Americans for his personal qualities. Reverence for a leader on the basis of his or her personal qualities does not, of course, automatically constitute a cult of personality.c A cult of personality exists when the reverence for the leader is based on alleged personal qualities that he or she either does not actually possess, or that are irrelevant in evaluating his or her actions as a leader (as Shakespeare has Hamlet describe the fratridical King Claudius, That one can smile, and smile, and be a villain). The term therefore is an expression of opinion about the leader's character and/or the nature of his/her actions, not a statement of established fact. And obviously, that the majority of Americans would now say support for Bush constitutes a cult of personality says absolutely zero about whether the reverence for Guru Dev entailed a cult of personality.personality.WBR Each case must be own merits. The equivalence Barry draws is a little like saying that because the fans of Andrea Bocelli revere him despite his lack of genuine musical talent, therefore reverence for Placido Domingo is equally misplaced. Also, it's not always one or the other. Bill Clinton was revered for his personal qualities at least as much as Bush is, despite some serious failures of character; but their respective failings, both personally and politically, are hardly comparable in terms of their effects on national and global well- being. (Well, one might say Clinton's inability to keep his zipper up had the effect of putting George Bush in office, but that just highlights the complexities involved in applying the cult of personality label.) And today on AOL top story Newt Gennrich had his zipper down during the time that the Republicans were trying to impeach Clinton. Two faced system of complete assholes. Lsoma. Nothing wrong with sex, but to judge others while you are doing the same thing is unintelligent to say the least. 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: This morning's sunrise
In a message dated 3/9/2007 10:32:07 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , Alex Stanley j_alexander_j_alexandj_ wrote: _http://alex.http://alehttp://alex.Whtt_ (http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise1.jpg) _http://alex.http://alehttp://alex.Whtt_ (http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise2.jpg) Thanks! Sunrise2 is beautiful! The sunrise tells us more about the truth than anything I have written or read on this forum. Beauty and silence. Lsoma. BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research. This was my point. Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. I think he had a strange relationship with his fellow man. His reluctance to become Shankaracharya is not relevant to my point although it adds to the drama of his story. At the end of James Browns concerts he would collapse and pretend he could not go on until the crowd rose to a fever pitch. Here in DC we can't get our homeless people into shelters either, even when it is freezing cold. They love their freedom and I suspect so did Guru Dev. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I think my example are fine. They show that people's reverence for another person has more to do with their own needs than the person they revere. What happened afterwards is irrelevant except that it dramatizes that people are often wrong about the person's qualities. Now in Guru Dev's case I can see people thinking highly of him the way people give the Pope a lot of credit. Even though the Pope, IMO supports some ideas that don't serve our time well. But to be generous to Guru Dev, I can see him as a Pope like figure who did his job well and supported the ideas of his antiquated tradition. As far as why people revered him I don't think either of us has any better evidence. Gandhi followers did not join in this high regard because they were fighting institutions like the one Guru Dev represented in order to bring some more justice to India. So he was not universally revered, he was revered by people who agreed with the orthodox Hindu perspective he represented. I am only a materialist compared to many posters here. I am not any pure ideology. Your skepticism about my evidence is warranted. When it comes to my take on Guru Dev I am just spouting my opinion based on very little information about him. This lack of information is also the state for people who make a big deal about his life. They are claiming that he was really special and I am saying I don't see any evidence for that yet. All the conjecture about him is just that. Personal presence is a quality universally quoted from Mao's followers. It means nothing to me. I don't doubt that people who revered Guru Dev felt loads of it. This is an area that people suck in. People are terrible at judging a person from afar and it gets worse in groups. So why make any conjecture about his mental state pro or con? It is just a piece for discussion, and it has worked. There have been some good responses including yours. I was sincere in my opinions as others have been in theirs. I judge Guru Dev's behavior from a few facts of his life if we accept them. He left home at an incredibly early age. I asked my social worker friend what kind of kid leaves home at age 9. Abused kids are the only ones she has ever come across. Kids naturally want the support of their family. It is highly unnatural to want to leave. His supposed spiritual mission is something that requires a lot of beliefs that I don't share. It is also possible that he had an attachment disorder. He did not feel anything for his family. In this possibility he may have been treated well, but was unable to feel anything towards his family. The idea of a child being allowed to leave the house and fend for himself is horrific and a crime in this country. Think about his parents for a moment. This was not normal in India either. So I am just stating my opinion that I think he had social problems. He seemed to do OK being treated as a God, but he couldn't just hang as an equal with other people before he was elevated to that status. Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:06 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment..by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep- I loved the Beatles- George was my fave, then Ringo probably. They were just a life changing group- the Fab Four. Presley cracked the door open pretty good, but the Beatles flung it open the rest of the way. But the bottom line is that they were just four Ordinary Guys. The Beatles phenomenon was all about what millions of people projected *onto* those four Ordinary Guys. Ordinary in many ways, as Beethoven and Mozart were ordinary in many ways, but extraordinary as creative geniuses.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: society's dharma In the South it was called Jim Crow. It states that by the circumstances of your birth you are destined to live within specific boundaries. I should have said that I am not defending the caste system as currently practiced. I am supporting the caste system conceptually, as an ideal. There is a wide range of consideration for how we live. It is never black and white, though easiest to support such a polarized world view. Paradox abounds. So I can say I support the caste system as a natural system, but also have my eyes open to its large potential for abuse. Its like teaching a baby to eat. At first they may be horribly awkward, causing all sorts of problems for themselves and those around them by their misuse of a fork and spoon. May even injure themselves with it. After watching such a process, would you then conclude that rather than babies learn to use a fork and spoon, they are flawed in struments based on the baby's inability to use them, and declare that from then on the baby will eat with its hands?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research. This was my point. Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. His desire to live in isolation and silence had to do with his self development. The fact that he needed to be away from people to accomplish it was a byproduct. Its like the difference between driving a car to work vs. taking the bus. Because most people prefer to drive to work in a car because it is faster and more convenient doesn't mean that they can't stand to take the bus. It just doesn't serve their needs to take the bus.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Multiple IDs (was Re: Coherence schmoherence)
--- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 8, 2007, at 2:58 PM, Alex Stanley wrote: I'm curious, nabby, why is it that you have so much trouble keeping track of how you're subscribed to FFL? I just approved your latest subscription, and I was able to find three other IDs of yours that are still subscribed: Multiple personal identity disorder Seeing as how this is FFL, there's probably a more logical explanation: The Illuminati are using mind-control to make Benjamin Creme hack into nabby's Yahoo accounts and change his passwords. Post of the month, Alex! Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/lOt0.A/hOaOAA/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 Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TV dinner still cooling? Check out Tonight's Picks on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
On Mar 9, 2007, at 9:31 AM, authfriend wrote: The personal dig aside, Offworld makes the point (which Barry chooses, of course, not to address, because it refutes his and Curtis's position so conclusively) succinctly: the implications of the term homeless in its common usage simply don't apply to Guru Dev. Another way of putting it might be, Home is where the heart is. Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip And oh, by the way, one doesn't usually refer to a hermit who makes his home in the forest for spiritual reasons as a homeless man. That's what's called loading the language in anti-thought reform circles. Actually, what Curtis wrote is the result of NOT loading loading the language by cutting the guy and his actions a break because he was somehow spiritual. I found his description refreshing; it's how *most people on the planet* would view the life of such a person if they hadn't been programmed to view it as somehow special and highly evolved. Actually most people on the planet are not so programmed. But most would have the good sense to make the distinction between someone whose lifestyle is purposely unconventional due to their religious convictions, and someone whose lifestyle is unconventional because they can't get their act together. It's not even necessary to *approve* of those religious convictions to recognize the difference.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Coherence schmoherence
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: No, Jim *was* indulging in a fit of pique. He would have us believe it's cosmic pique, and you would have us believe it's somehow rational pique. But it's still pique, as is everything you say below. Pique: a transient feeling of wounded vanity? No f*cking way dude! Way. That's really how I see your actions here, Jim. They're totally predictable, in that whenever someone like myself or new_morning questions how reality-based your self-assessment of your Self Realization is, you immediately react angrily, lashing out at the person who posed the questions. What's at least as predictable is that if someone challenges one of Barry's opinions, he will immediately characterize the person as angry or upset, in most cases without actually addressing the challenge. I enjoy trading responses with him, but yeah he resorts to this charge of anger and upset ad nauseum. Like I said, those who don't play nice with Barry get slandered. Its all about being nice.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 1:17 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 8, 2007, at 8:59 PM, authfriend wrote: The bulk of the evidence is that he *was* revered for his personal qualities. That's called a cult of personality, Judy, and is usually not considered very healthy. Reverence for him and others like him based on personal qualities might be one of the reasons India is such a mess. Exactly. *George W. Bush* is revered by millions of Americans for his personal qualities. Most of which are merely projections, of course. And it doesn't have to apply only to politicians either, as Judy would probably say it does. It's typically applied to political leaders, particularly heads of state (that's what the term was coined to refer to), but even in the generic sense it's applicable only in certain specific situations of reverence for a leader, as I explained in my earlier post.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:06 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment..by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Yep- I loved the Beatles- George was my fave, then Ringo probably. They were just a life changing group- the Fab Four. Presley cracked the door open pretty good, but the Beatles flung it open the rest of the way. But the bottom line is that they were just four Ordinary Guys. The Beatles phenomenon was all about what millions of people projected *onto* those four Ordinary Guys. Ordinary in many ways, as Beethoven and Mozart were ordinary in many ways, but extraordinary as creative geniuses. Yep- I haven't seen a musical group yet that could play every genre of music as well and as comfortably as they did. And they were doing stuff with multi-tracked sound when working with George Martin that was decades ahead of its time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research. This was my point. Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. I think he had a strange relationship with his fellow man. I know very little about Guru Dev and have no desire to find out more. He's dead, and of no relevance to my life. But what you say here, Curtis, strikes a *strong* relevance to things I've noticed in my study of spirituality in general. There is *all too often* a common trait among spiritual teachers -- they have an inability to relate to other people *except* in the role of teachers, to whom these other people are often *required* to wave camphor and treat them as *non-equals*. One has to journey far and wide to find a spiritual teacher who is willing or able to relate to his or her students as equals, and to form any relationships with them that are *not* based on an enormous disparity of power. I've seen this trait in *so many* spiritual teachers that I really think it comes with the territory. Just as it can be legitimately said that anyone who actually wants to become President of the United States is unqualified to hold the position, I think it can be legitimately said that anyone who is willing to fit into the trad- itional me teacher, you peon spiritual teacher mold is potentially unqualified to do so. It's just such an *artificial* model, and one that in my long-considered opinion has so many *drawbacks* for both student and teacher, that I think the whole traditional teacher-student model should be thrown into the trash bin and another one found.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
The personal dig aside, Offworld makes the point (which Barry chooses, of course, not to address, because it refutes his and Curtis's position so conclusively) succinctly: the implications of the term homeless in its common usage simply don't apply to Guru Dev. Another way of putting it might be, Home is where the heart is. Here in DC guys living in National Parks are counted as homeless or transient. They don't have jobs, don't support the community with taxes, and don't own or rent real estate. Many of the guys in our area are super religious and believe that they have direct communication with God. They are unable to cope with society. Here in the US we don't give them an exemption because they have strong beliefs. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that Guru Dev was any different when he was living in the woods. The fact that he became revered as a living God later says more about the culture he lived in than any personal qualities he may have had. I was interested that the site tried to use miracles as a way to support the idea that he was special. Do you think he had a magic way of gaining funds? Do you believe that a tiger walking past him was evidence of his special relationship of nature? Do you think that the President of India calling the head of his largest voting base grand names makes it more likely to be so? I am purposely using the terms of my culture and perspective on his life. I am not in his culture and don't have any reason to adapt the perspective of people who have bought into his mythology. Guru Dev was a fascinating guy. There are a lot of ways to view his life. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: ...there is a big difference between someone like Guru Dev and someone like Turpuiose B. Out of curiosity, what do you consider that difference to be? The former lived in the forest and exhibited acumen and conviction, the latter is homeless, scattered, and directionless. I would have thought those facts were obvious. You forgot to call me a drunk, but thanks for clarifying. The personal dig aside, Offworld makes the point (which Barry chooses, of course, not to address, because it refutes his and Curtis's position so conclusively) succinctly: the implications of the term homeless in its common usage simply don't apply to Guru Dev. Another way of putting it might be, Home is where the heart is.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. India may have a system that works for their homeless. If calling yourself a holy man lets them eek out a living, it may be better than what we have here. We treat our homeless really poorly and pretend they don't exist. I can't believe how many are homeless in the DC area. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 9:31 AM, authfriend wrote: The personal dig aside, Offworld makes the point (which Barry chooses, of course, not to address, because it refutes his and Curtis's position so conclusively) succinctly: the implications of the term homeless in its common usage simply don't apply to Guru Dev. Another way of putting it might be, Home is where the heart is. Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip As a Brahman his privileged existence was only benefited by the rules, so it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage to fight this system Actually he spent most of his life, by choice, *not* benefiting from the privilege of being a Brahmin. As Jim points out, he had to be cajoled for many years before he'd consent to take a position in which he was accorded that privilege.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research. This was my point. Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. Or not. For all we know, the entire time he was Shankaracharya, he may have been wishing he were back in the forest by himself communing with God and living on roots and berries. snip Here in DC we can't get our homeless people into shelters either, even when it is freezing cold. Or they prefer the cold to the dangerous squalor of the shelters.
RE: [FairfieldLife] This morning's sunrise
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alex Stanley Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:16 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] This morning's sunrise http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise1.jpg http://alex.natel.net/misc/sunrise2.jpg Thanks. I like the photos you post.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the bottom line is that they were just four Ordinary Guys. The Beatles phenomenon was all about what millions of people projected *onto* those four Ordinary Guys. Ordinary in many ways, as Beethoven and Mozart were ordinary in many ways, but extraordinary as creative geniuses. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. First, I believe that the term 'genius' is overused and completely inappropriate when dealing with popular music. I know of no one I would apply the term to, and I have a collection of thousands of albums. To compare the Beatles and their musicianship to Mozart or Beethoven is, in my opinion, silly. They wrote pop songs. Better pop songs than most, but pop songs nonetheless. They had an intuitive grasp of vocal harmony, but intuitive was all that it was. They didn't even venture out of 3/4 or 4/4 time until We Can Work It Out. But they were cute and they appeared at a time at which the world was desperately seeking an alternative to the churn-it-out-and-sell-it music produced by Tin Pan Alley and the music companies, and so they found a resonance with audiences. But just look at what those audiences were *comparing* them to. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:01 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: India may have a system that works for their homeless. If calling yourself a holy man lets them eek out a living, it may be better than what we have here. We treat our homeless really poorly and pretend they don't exist. I can't believe how many are homeless in the DC area. Actually in India many criminals will don the robes of a sanyassi in order to remain on the lam. No better way to hide from authorities than to look like a holy man. I've heard yogis claim it's not safe to be a sadhu these days because so many of them are outright criminals.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 7:05 AM, sparaig wrote: And of course, we don't know how, if at all, the following relates to TM-related synchronous alpha waves, but itis interesting to note that research published AFTER the research cited in the book, but before the book went to press, contradicts what the book claims. Shoddy overall, is my impression: they have an agenda and just ignore any and all research that conflicts with that agenda. This is like the worst aspects of TM research, but due to the prestige of the researchers, no-one is paying any attention to their blatant bias. If they were biased I doubt they'd be so excited about some of the other forms of meditation they report in the article. It is not just about one kind or one brand of meditation. Seemed a well-rounded article to me. Er, nope. They report on one modern TM study and dismiss it completely. There's a 27 year gap between that study and the next-oldest. That's blatant as you can get. It's important to understand that in research science, there are constantly new papers being published which may or may not affect future opinion. Er, how could I have missed that? The latest and greatest research is the Shamatha Project which is underway with the first retreat as we speak. It should be an exciting year for meditation research. Actually, unless the Shamatha Project reveals something entirely different than expected, the latest and greatest research is Fred's ongoing work on the activation of the thalamus.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
I've seen this trait in *so many* spiritual teachers that I really think it comes with the territory. Just as it can be legitimately said that anyone who actually wants to become President of the United States is unqualified to hold the position, I think it can be legitimately said that anyone who is willing to fit into the trad- itional me teacher, you peon spiritual teacher mold is potentially unqualified to do so. Wow, that was best thing I have read all week! That totally nails where I am at. I am only interested in relating to people as equals. I expect the same in return. People can try to separate themselves in so many ways, spiritually being only one. I grew up in prep schools and never even really saw the class system in place. But as hired help as a bluesman for rich private parties, I often see my employer tying to speak to me as if I am in a different class. Not overtly shitty, but distinctly not equal. At some point in the conversation they often realize that I am not speaking to them in the deferential, insecure manor due to their status. This usually leads them to get real with me and drop the false wall. It has lead to some really interesting friendships. I think that unless the person is a real dick, being real with them can make it safe for them to drop the barriers. My therapy for my upbringing has been close friends from other cultures. They relate to me on such a deep human to human level, beyond either of our conditioning. I'll bet you have found the same. Great post Turq. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research. This was my point. Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. I think he had a strange relationship with his fellow man. I know very little about Guru Dev and have no desire to find out more. He's dead, and of no relevance to my life. But what you say here, Curtis, strikes a *strong* relevance to things I've noticed in my study of spirituality in general. There is *all too often* a common trait among spiritual teachers -- they have an inability to relate to other people *except* in the role of teachers, to whom these other people are often *required* to wave camphor and treat them as *non-equals*. One has to journey far and wide to find a spiritual teacher who is willing or able to relate to his or her students as equals, and to form any relationships with them that are *not* based on an enormous disparity of power. I've seen this trait in *so many* spiritual teachers that I really think it comes with the territory. Just as it can be legitimately said that anyone who actually wants to become President of the United States is unqualified to hold the position, I think it can be legitimately said that anyone who is willing to fit into the trad- itional me teacher, you peon spiritual teacher mold is potentially unqualified to do so. It's just such an *artificial* model, and one that in my long-considered opinion has so many *drawbacks* for both student and teacher, that I think the whole traditional teacher-student model should be thrown into the trash bin and another one found.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
On Mar 9, 2007, at 10:39 AM, Rick Archer wrote: Ordinary in many ways, as Beethoven and Mozart were ordinary in many ways, but extraordinary as creative geniuses. They definitely had some gifts and songwriting was certainly one of them. But let's not forget they were also the first band to really get into the use of multitrack recording *as an art form*. If anything points out the extent to which multitracking was the key to their genius (way overused IMO), all one has to do is listen to the Beatle's recent CD/SRS-DVD Love. It's the ultimate Beatle's mix tape done by George Martin and son. George Martin truly was the fifth Beatle. And if you don't have Love, you don't know what you're missing. I especially enjoy Love in Surround Sound while munching on semolina pilchards.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
For all we know the reason he wasn't rousted out of the National Park was because of his status. Neither of us knows how he was able to cash in on it. Remember he wore the robe of his order of elite monks who could only be Brahmans. He actually wore his privileged class status AS his sleeve! Of course whether or not he chose to cash in on it is irrelevant to the fact that he had the choice, unlike his lower caste contemporaries. Here in the US some white guys like to grow dreads and act like Rastamen. But at any time they can cut them off and go work in a bank. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip As a Brahman his privileged existence was only benefited by the rules, so it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage to fight this system Actually he spent most of his life, by choice, *not* benefiting from the privilege of being a Brahmin. As Jim points out, he had to be cajoled for many years before he'd consent to take a position in which he was accorded that privilege.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Or not. For all we know, the entire time he was Shankaracharya, he may have been wishing he were back in the forest by himself communing with God and living on roots and berries. I think it is likely that he felt like this often. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Actually casual investigation will show that Guru Dev was very reluctant to take the post of Shankaracharya. It took twenty years (!) for him to take it. You are either trying to start a discussion, or haven't taken the time to challenge your assumptions with some research. This was my point. Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. Or not. For all we know, the entire time he was Shankaracharya, he may have been wishing he were back in the forest by himself communing with God and living on roots and berries. snip Here in DC we can't get our homeless people into shelters either, even when it is freezing cold. Or they prefer the cold to the dangerous squalor of the shelters.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
I read a great article once about how tough the life of a wandering sadhu is. The guy was describing how tormented they get by people demanding miracles and cures. If they can't produce them they get abused. He also complained that the double edged sword of being holy is that people ignore your own needs a lot so they often don't get fed because people figure they don't really need to eat. It seems like a tough gig. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:01 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: India may have a system that works for their homeless. If calling yourself a holy man lets them eek out a living, it may be better than what we have here. We treat our homeless really poorly and pretend they don't exist. I can't believe how many are homeless in the DC area. Actually in India many criminals will don the robes of a sanyassi in order to remain on the lam. No better way to hide from authorities than to look like a holy man. I've heard yogis claim it's not safe to be a sadhu these days because so many of them are outright criminals.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:11 AM, sparaig wrote: The latest and greatest research is the Shamatha Project which is underway with the first retreat as we speak. It should be an exciting year for meditation research. Actually, unless the Shamatha Project reveals something entirely different than expected, the latest and greatest research is Fred's ongoing work on the activation of the thalamus. Actually I believe that is old research--originally done by Austin in the 90's. He called it thalamic gating which occurred in the reticular formation and the allocentric neural networks (IIRC). Later research has shown it's more a network of brain structures that are involved.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 9:31 AM, authfriend wrote: The personal dig aside, Offworld makes the point (which Barry chooses, of course, not to address, because it refutes his and Curtis's position so conclusively) succinctly: the implications of the term homeless in its common usage simply don't apply to Guru Dev. Another way of putting it might be, Home is where the heart is. Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? Depends on what they'd do if you offered them a nice house free of any conditions. You just can't give up on your fantasies. ROTFL! The fantasy is that homeless people are living on the streets because they prefer to do so. One way people cope with finding themselves in a desperate situation for which they themselves are largely responsible is to pretend they've chosen it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For all we know the reason he wasn't rousted out of the National Park was because of his status. Neither of us knows how he was able to cash in on it. Huh?? I have no idea what point you're making. Remember he wore the robe of his order of elite monks who could only be Brahmans. He actually wore his privileged class status AS his sleeve! Of course whether or not he chose to cash in on it is irrelevant to the fact that he had the choice, unlike his lower caste contemporaries. Here in the US some white guys like to grow dreads and act like Rastamen. But at any time they can cut them off and go work in a bank. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip As a Brahman his privileged existence was only benefited by the rules, so it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage to fight this system Actually he spent most of his life, by choice, *not* benefiting from the privilege of being a Brahmin. As Jim points out, he had to be cajoled for many years before he'd consent to take a position in which he was accorded that privilege.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? To say nothing of coping with Guru Dev's well known rule for accepting *zero* donations or income from the outside. Nothing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. I wrote: Or not. For all we know, the entire time he was Shankaracharya, he may have been wishing he were back in the forest by himself communing with God and living on roots and berries. I think it is likely that he felt like this often. So it *wasn't* necessarily that he was OK with people when they were worshipping him as Shankaracharya. That was my point.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:11 AM, sparaig wrote: The latest and greatest research is the Shamatha Project which is underway with the first retreat as we speak. It should be an exciting year for meditation research. Actually, unless the Shamatha Project reveals something entirely different than expected, the latest and greatest research is Fred's ongoing work on the activation of the thalamus. Actually I believe that is old research--originally done by Austin in the 90's. He called it thalamic gating which occurred in the reticular formation and the allocentric neural networks (IIRC). Later research has shown it's more a network of brain structures that are involved. Quite so. Doesn't matter. I was talking about the relationship between this and meditation. All the MRI/fMRI prublished/referred to so far on Buddhist meditation says that it INCREASES the activity of the thalamus. This puts it squarely into the waking-state realm.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
So it *wasn't* necessarily that he was OK with people when they were worshipping him as Shankaracharya. That was my point. All we know is this is how he chose to live. First alone, then as a living God with people doing pujas to him. I wish we knew more about how he felt about it but his actions speak for what what he chose. It is a fact the the context of his association with other people was as in a revered status. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Before he was Shankaracharya he couldn't stand to be around people. When they were waving camphor and ghee lamps in front of him worshiping him as Shankaracharya he was OK with people. I wrote: Or not. For all we know, the entire time he was Shankaracharya, he may have been wishing he were back in the forest by himself communing with God and living on roots and berries. I think it is likely that he felt like this often. So it *wasn't* necessarily that he was OK with people when they were worshipping him as Shankaracharya. That was my point.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? MANY of them. Judy, I have to say that it doesn't sound as if you've ever actually talked to very many homeless people. If you had I don't think you'd say the things you said above. Like Curtis, I've met and had long conver- sations with a number of homeless people, ANY of whom could pull off what you suggest above (becoming Pat Robertson), and without breaking a sweat doing it. There is as wide a range of human beings and human characteristics among the homeless as there is among the...uh...homed. It's yer classic bell curve. And at both ends and in the middle of that curve there are remarkable people. I've met former Catholic priests who are now homeless, and ministers (lots! of ministers...I wonder what that says?) and guys who have never read a spiritual book in their lives, yet who were among the most spiritual people I've met on this planet. Before you go spoutin' off about the homeless, Judy, I'd advise gettin' out and *meeting* a few more of them. It's a crapshoot. You might run into a crazy or a drunk or a criminal on the run or you might just run into the Buddha. But then you could just as easily run into all these people in the poshest neighborhood in New Jersey.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? To say nothing of coping with Guru Dev's well known rule for accepting *zero* donations or income from the outside. Nothing. If one of Curtis's street people were successful in these respects, it would be awfully difficult not to view them as special. (Or let's say remarkable, since special has acquired such negative baggage on this forum.)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
Tiger Woods should boycott The Masters until Augusta National admits a women as a voting member. I think I can beat Jack's record of eighteen majors without playing here, Tiger could announce at a protest/press conference outside the AN gates. Hootie and the boys would have heart attacks. Tiger could then go on offer his own tournament as a socially conscious alternative to Masters Week. Lee Trevino would be there (he used to dress with the caddies in protest). authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip As a Brahman his privileged existence was only benefited by the rules, so it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage to fight this system Actually he spent most of his life, by choice, *not* benefiting from the privilege of being a Brahmin. As Jim points out, he had to be cajoled for many years before he'd consent to take a position in which he was accorded that privilege. - The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? MANY of them. Judy, I have to say that it doesn't sound as if you've ever actually talked to very many homeless people. If you had I don't think you'd say the things you said above. Like Curtis, I've met and had long conver- sations with a number of homeless people, ANY of whom could pull off what you suggest above (becoming Pat Robertson), and without breaking a sweat doing it. There is as wide a range of human beings and human characteristics among the homeless as there is among the...uh...homed. It's yer classic bell curve. And at both ends and in the middle of that curve there are remarkable people. I doubt it's anywhere near the percentage you claim (there *are* statistics on how many are mentally ill and/or addicted), but the point is you would consider a homeless person who was elevated to, say, Archbishop and made a good job of it remarkable, and rightly so. According to Curtis, Guru Dev was just another mentally unbalanced homeless bum, nothing at all special about him. I've met former Catholic priests who are now homeless, and ministers (lots! of ministers...I wonder what that says?) and guys who have never read a spiritual book in their lives, yet who were among the most spiritual people I've met on this planet. Well, yeah, but that's by *your* definition of spiritual.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I would have but there was something organic on his hand. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? One in a million I guess. The 2001 census puts the homeless in India at 78 million. But this isn't my point. The fact that he was homeless doesn't mean he wasn't very interesting. I have gotten to know quite a few homeless guys because they hang out for my outdoor shows. They run the range from really bright but quirky, to off the wall. I don't really know much about how much more than showing up and spouting scripture is involved in the Shankaracharya job, do you? I am not saying he wasn't really good at it, I don't know. But I was looking for evidence for the accolades he gets in the movement and I don't see it. I agree with your point that I am judging him from a few quotes, but that is what we have and others are judging him as His Divinity on similar evidence. I already told you I don't consider the fact that he was revered to be proof that he deserved it. I gave examples of revered people who did not. The idea that millions still feel that way about him lacks any evidence for me. How would we know? It isn't like Kitty Kelly is going to make him her next project, so I doubt we are going to get anymore insight into him. Hindu fanatics killed Gandhi. We know about Mao's personal weirdness from his doctor who wrote a tell all memoir. Unless someone is going to write it who was around Guru Dev we will never know what it was really like in Joitir Math. It would make a great sitcom though. So do you believe that he had a magic source of funds and that this should be taken as evidence of his special powers, or do you think he had secret backing and kept it quiet as a PR move? (guess which I pick)
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
If one of Curtis's street people were successful in these respects, it would be awfully difficult not to view them as special. (Or let's say remarkable, since special has acquired such negative baggage on this forum.) I think we are missing each other on this point. He was a fascinating guy. I probably would connect with him on his love of nature. I don't see any evidence for him being more amazing then a lot of other religious leaders upholding the status quo even if it includes the cruelty of the caste system. I think you are over focusing on my bringing up the fact of his homelessness. That doesn't make him less interesting, it makes him more. Especially when coupled with your point about how he pulled of the Shankaracharya gig. So I'll give him special and remarkable (although not necessarily for the reasons he is revered in TMO), but he doesn't' get divine. Is that fair? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? To say nothing of coping with Guru Dev's well known rule for accepting *zero* donations or income from the outside. Nothing. If one of Curtis's street people were successful in these respects, it would be awfully difficult not to view them as special. (Or let's say remarkable, since special has acquired such negative baggage on this forum.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is as wide a range of human beings and human characteristics among the homeless as there is among the...uh...homed. It's yer classic bell curve. And at both ends and in the middle of that curve there are remarkable people. I've met former Catholic priests who are now homeless, and ministers (lots! of ministers...I wonder what that says?) and guys who have never read a spiritual book in their lives, yet who were among the most spiritual people I've met on this planet. Santa Fe, New Mexico is a weird place. When you're there as a tourist, it looks all posh and upscale. But when you live there, you soon discover that you're living in the cap- ital of second poorest state in the nation. There are a *lot* of homeless there, and I've been privileged enough to have conversations with many of them. There's the guy who stands at the corner of St. Francis and West Alameda selling newspapers, wearing a skirt. Crazy as a bedbug. But before his career as a homeless cross-dressing news- paper salesman on the street, he was one of the top scientists up at the National Labs in Los Alamos. The story on the street (he won't talk about it himself) is that he worked for years on super-secret advanced weaponry and one day he just snapped, and left. There are the guys down on the Plaza who dress like cowboys and actually have an established cowboy camp up along the river off Upper Canyon Road. They're a real trip. One of them is even like their cowboy spiritual leader. Living on the street can get you down. It's a bitch. But there are some people who *don't* let it get them down. And they're a real treat to meet and interact with.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: According to Curtis, Guru Dev was just another mentally unbalanced homeless bum, nothing at all special about him. I think that's *exactly* what Curtis and I are saying, Judy. That is *exactly* how he would have been seen if he had been living the same lifestyle in the United States instead of India. And I don't think that there is anything wrong with saying this. It's a perfectly valid way of seeing him and his life. And there are *other* perfectly valid ways of seeing him and his life. They are not mutually exclusive.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A really silly comment......by none other than Mr. Knapp LSGM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Sure, Judy, and the fact that a number of people living on top of grates in DC say they like their neighborhoods must mean they're not homeless either, right? You just can't give up on your fantasies. I think the exemption only extends to guys who claim to have a connection with God. Those homeless guys are the saints that we should think of differently. Here in DC that is about one out of three guys on the street. In fact I handed a George Washington to a guy the other day who was quoting the Bible so convincingly I almost let him put his hand on my head to save me. Maybe you should have let him. I'm just fascinated by the nearsightedness of this perspective and the extremely selective way you pick and choose the evidence for it. How many of these homeless guys, if you plucked them off the street, dressed them up in robes, gave them a fancy house with lots of servants, and appointed them the leader of, say, a prominent Christian denomination, would actually end up fulfilling the expectations for a person in such a position? MANY of them. Judy, I have to say that it doesn't sound as if you've ever actually talked to very many homeless people. If you had I don't think you'd say the things you said above. Like Curtis, I've met and had long conver- sations with a number of homeless people, ANY of whom could pull off what you suggest above (becoming Pat Robertson), and without breaking a sweat doing it. There is as wide a range of human beings and human characteristics among the homeless as there is among the...uh...homed. It's yer classic bell curve. And at both ends and in the middle of that curve there are remarkable people. I've met former Catholic priests who are now homeless, and ministers (lots! of ministers...I wonder what that says?) and guys who have never read a spiritual book in their lives, yet who were among the most spiritual people I've met on this planet. Before you go spoutin' off about the homeless, Judy, I'd advise gettin' out and *meeting* a few more of them. It's a crapshoot. You might run into a crazy or a drunk or a criminal on the run or you might just run into the Buddha. But then you could just as easily run into all these people in the poshest neighborhood in New Jersey. In San Francisco the word is among those working in the business district to not even look at the pandhandlers, unless you want to be followed down the street by someone cursing you for not paying up. Before I knew that, I tried to talk to a homeless guy around Union Square and ended up being called a 'mf' because I wouldn't give him more than a buck. Cheery bunch.
[FairfieldLife] Bush's bad ju-ju...
Pretty wild. From newsvine.com GUATEMALA CITY - Mayan priests will purify a sacred archaeological site to eliminate bad spirits after President Bush visits next week, an official with close ties to the group said Thursday. That a person like (Bush), with the persecution of our migrant brothers in the United States, with the wars he has provoked, is going to walk in our sacred lands, is an offense for the Mayan people and their culture, Juan Tiney, the director of a Mayan nongovernmental organization with close ties to Mayan religious and political leaders, said Thursday. Bush's seven-day tour of Latin America includes a stopover beginning late Sunday in Guatemala. On Monday morning he is scheduled to visit the archaeological site Iximche on the high western plateau in a region of the Central American country populated mostly by Mayans. Tiney said the spirit guides of the Mayan community decided it would be necessary to cleanse the sacred site of bad spirits after Bush's visit so that their ancestors could rest in peace. C 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM claims quite premature
On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:43 AM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 9, 2007, at 11:11 AM, sparaig wrote: The latest and greatest research is the Shamatha Project which is underway with the first retreat as we speak. It should be an exciting year for meditation research. Actually, unless the Shamatha Project reveals something entirely different than expected, the latest and greatest research is Fred's ongoing work on the activation of the thalamus. Actually I believe that is old research--originally done by Austin in the 90's. He called it thalamic gating which occurred in the reticular formation and the allocentric neural networks (IIRC). Later research has shown it's more a network of brain structures that are involved. Quite so. Doesn't matter. I was talking about the relationship between this and meditation. All the MRI/fMRI prublished/referred to so far on Buddhist meditation says that it INCREASES the activity of the thalamus. This puts it squarely into the waking-state realm. And as you know, the thalamus shuts down sensory input during sleep...and the EEG of TM is almost identical to sleep...
