[FairfieldLife] Key to Peace in Iraq

[John]

To All Members:

In order to reduce the violence in Iraq, the people of that land needs 
to establish a strong central government which can enforce the laws of 
its people.  These laws should include provisions to promote Natural 
Law.

Also, the Iraqis need to surrender their own disparate religious 
interests for the good of the entire country.  This surrender of tribal 
mentality should lead to a cohesive central government.

In other words, the people need to adopt a higher level of 
consciousness in order to gain the unifying power of Natural Law.  
Without taking advantage of this power, the Iraqis will continue to 
foment an ever growing cancer of violence.  More people will die and 
the land will become a wasteland.

The United States should NOT take on the role of being the benefactor 
for the government of Iraq ad infinitum.  The USA should let the Iraqi 
develop their own destiny as an independent nation.  Peace needs to 
nurtured from the hearts of the Iraqis by themselves and at their own 
terms.  This is the only way stability in Iraq can be maintained.  As 
such, the US should get out of Iraq as soon as possible.

  

[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 
 Hi Trinity,
 
 Welcome back to krodha-dama.
 
 We get to hear claims here  from time to time about lineages - 
along
 with various references to yogic insider knowledge. Most of it is
 nothing but mere claims, usually based upon a favored explanation 
given
 by some teacher who is rooted in a particular interpretation or
 philosophic view about yoga.
 
 Here, in this context, it appears quite funny - so we should all 
have a
 good laugh, pass the bottle of bourbon and salute our foolish
 imaginations.
 
 The PatanjalaYogaSutra is clocked around 150-200 CE.  Both the 
Samkhya
 and Yoga darshanas were dealt with by Buddhist scholars, even as 
late as
 Paramatha in China (6th Cent. CE). That is pretty much it because
 neither of these darshanas survived the intervening centuries down 
to
 our era of time.
 
 Did not survive means no param-para, no sampradaya, no lineage, 
no
 diksha, no transmission of secret techniques, no transmission of 
hidden
 knowledge, and more importantly no person remaining to retain any 
kind
 of lengthy or abridged explanations.
 
 Swami Hariharananda Aranya tried to revive this extinct lineage in 
the
 19th Century, CE by creating a SankhyaYoga Matha but it did not 
survive
 either.
 
 Vedanta survived - in various forms and sampradayas. Vedantic 
teachers
 read Patanjali and created their own interpretations of his 
intended
 meaning, although almost always defering to and starting from 
Vyasa's
 commentary.
 
 And Trinity you are quite correct. I posted Shankara's short 
vivarana
 about siddhis in Card's thread about YS. III.37(38). He sees 
siddhis as
 distractions but only for a yogin who wants to remain absorbed in 
the
 vision of purusha. Even then there is no problem for one detached 
in
 proper vairagya.
 
 empty
 
 

How about siddhis being a touchstone of the depth(?) of samaadhi?

dharma-megha-samaadhi is possible to reach only
if one is 'akusiida' even in 'prasaMkhyaana',

prasaMkhyaane 'py akusiidasya sarvathaa viveka-khyaater
dharma-meghaH samaadhiH (IV 29)

Perhaps 'prasaMkhyaana' means, amongst other things,
that one is capable of performing siddhis, if one
so wishes (is 'kusiida', *not* 'a-kusiida'??).

kusIda mfn. (fr. 1. %{ku} and %{sad}? ; cf. %{kuSIda}) , lazy , 
inert (?) TS. vii ; (%{am}) n. any loan or thing lent to be repaid 
with interest , lending money upon interest , usury TS. iii Gobh. 
Gaut. Pa1n2. c. ; red sandal wood L. ; (%{as} , %{A}) mf. a money-
lender , usurer L. 

 akusIda or %{akuzIda} mfn. taking no interest or usury , without 
gain.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Thanks for that post Gary.  So often Atheism is presented 
 arrogantly as the only rational POV...

Amen. :-) Although it probably doesn't need to 
be said, when I used the term Professional
Atheist in a previous post, I was referring
to that handful of authors who have turned
atheism into a cottage industry and source
of talk show bookings lately, not to you or
others who -- like myself -- quietly just 
have no need in their lives for the concept
of a God.

 ...but people drop out of believing in God for as many 
 reasons as people change their religions.  It is a
 decision of heart and mind and can embrace a total 
 person's capacities.  Atheism was not something I sought, 
 quite the opposite. 

Since we're sharing stories here, you've
made me think about mine, and made me realize
that I don't really have one. I *never*, in
my entire life, had any kind of intuitive
feeling for or allegiance to the notion of
a God. Even during my many years in the TM
movement, with its dependence on the Hindu
notions of gods and goddesses and personal
Gods. Whenever that language would come up,
I just looked at it as some kind of metaphor
and didn't give it any thought.

It wasn't until I encountered formal Buddhist
thought that I realized I'd found a spiritual
group that -- as you say -- embraced a notion
of Unity without having to dress up that
notion in the clothing of some kind of God.
So there really was no breakthrough or 
realization moment for me, just a develop-
ing level of comfort with something I'd 
assumed intuitively all my life.

 When I was first exposed to the option, I just laughed it 
 off as an extreme position that intuitively felt wrong.  

My feelings exactly, with a *lot* of extreme
positions. Although it's a bit of a stretch,
for a variety of reasons I've been exposed here
in Spain to a bunch of people who consider them-
selves polyamorous. Their allegiance to sexual
non-allegiance and non-fidelity :-) seems to
permeate everything they do. They literally can't
go more than a couple of minutes upon meeting
someone new without announcing themselves as
polyamorous.

My reaction to the concept of polyamory, as an
old hippie, is Ho hum...so fucking what. My
reaction to those who have to wear their identi-
fication with their sexuality on their sleeve
and announce it to the world as Who we are
*also* inspires a sense of Ho hum in me, one
that I relate to those who similarly have to
announce their atheism as Who we are.

Belief in a God is such a *tiny* part of who 
and what anyone is that I really can't see why
anyone makes a big deal out of it. But different
strokes for different folks, I guess.

I suspect that the issue is about a lack of
understanding among the God-oriented spiritual
folks that there can be such a thing as NON-
God-oriented spiritual folks. So much of their
own spiritual lives is spent focusing on devo-
tion towards or alignment with (or, sadly, fear
of) God that they just can't imagine someone
living a spiritual life without those things
being an integral part of it.

Since those things were *never* a part of my
spiritual life, I never had any problems when
I ran into people of the atheist persuasion
who regarded their path as a spiritual one.
To me, spiritual has *never* connoted or
implied a belief in some kind of God, merely
a commitment to trying to live a better life,
whatever better means to the person trying
to achieve it.

snip to
 I remember the first night it all sunk in totally that 
 no one was aware of my internal thoughts, I was completely 
 alone.  For my whole life, I had always felt that there was 
 a benevolent power in the universe, had many experiences of 
 it, but that night I was set adrift, on my own. At first it 
 was scary, but then it became very peaceful and centered.  
 What replaced my lifelong attention on a higher power to 
 help me in tough times became a faith in myself and in the 
 power of life to fight obstacles. 

Beautifully and powerfully said, Curtis. That's
it exactly. Even though I never had the transi-
tion from belief in God to non-belief in God
that you did, I identify with the sense of 
peace and centered-ness you describe. It can
also be described as a sense of self sufficiency,
in a way that no believer in something *outside*
(or greater than, in the sense that the self
is a subset of something greater) can really
express. 

 I see the universe as a mystery and don't find scriptural 
 explanations satisfactory anymore.  That doesn't mean
 they have no value to me, just that I don't view their 
 POV to be authoritative. 

Exactly. I can even find such points of view 
beautiful and inspiring. I remember the day 
that Edg found my admiration of a French film
called Que la lumiere soit (Let there be light)
puzzling. It didn't seem appropriate to him that
I -- a non-believer in God, after all -- would
enjoy a film all *about* God, or a peculiar 
notion of 

[FairfieldLife] 'The Good Side'

[Robert]

The Bridge ~ Step 65 ~ The Good Side


  Every bad guy has a good guy inside


  ~ An Open Letter to the Leaders of the World ~


On one hand, we want to thank you. You have provided us with such adversity 
and it is this that has finally made us stronger. You have been formidable 
foes, but we are learning that this world will get better only when we love our 
enemies and see the good in them. We know that every bad guy has a good guy 
inside. And we know that spark of divine essence that dwells deep within our 
own beings, also lies deep within yours. 

  If you were to come and join us at our table, you would find curiosity, 
friendship, and forgiveness. Just because you have treated us badly does not 
mean that we hold a grudge against you. We would, however, expect you to 
understand that we reject your authority and that you will find no support for 
your plans and schemes among us. We simply no longer choose to be manipulated. 

  Although there will be obstacles, we are willing to start over. We are 
prepared to be responsible for our own lives now. We must discard your Cards, 
Vaccines, and Chip Implants because they have too many strings attached. We 
must turn off your television and radio programs until their messages become 
uplifting. And we will start to rebuild our lives, without your help, by first 
living together in small self-sufficient communities. If need be, we will grow 
our own food in our backyards as well as in common areas, and we will barter 
and trade among ourselves. We will also nurture our children with foresight, 
and learn to love and heal each other so peace and freedom can return to all of 
our lives. 

  As we see it, you are also being stalked by your own evolution and you will 
change. You cannot avoid being drawn out of your secrecy at this time. The only 
path left for you to follow is one of conscience. Like us, you are realizing 
that there is no separation between you and what you perceive. We are all 
beginning to understand that when we inflict pain or hardship on others, we 
inflict it upon ourselves. Once you fully comprehend what you are doing to 
yourself, you won't be able to continue. Enlightenment is coming to all who 
renounce conflict and violence. Even an unscrupulous, sophisticated robber 
baron can evolve into a higher, more loving entity. He is no less entitled to 
the Grace of our Great Creator than the people he has conspired against. 

  Just that one small transformation in your attitude whereby you begin to see, 
without blinders, that you only lack the opening of your heart in order to take 
the next step -- a step for which you are poised and ready, but which all of 
your power and money cannot provide for you. Isn't it ironic, now, that you 
have dared for generations to hide our own hearts from us? Ever since we were 
trusting little schoolchildren reciting your pledges and practicing your 
patriotic ceremonies, you deceptively taught us to place our hand over our 
heart on the left side of our chest! Only now are we locating our hearts in the 
exact center of our chests, and we are learning how to activate the 
shy;wondrous feelings that have long slept dormant within us. 

  The people of the Earth yearn for the day when we will all live together in 
peace. You cannot stop us from advancing toward the love we all deserve. That 
glorious moment nears, when, instead of being adversaries, we will stand 
together as brothers and sisters whose consciences have awakened, as equals 
whose time of heaven on Earth has come. Until then: for all the people who 
needlessly suffer and die because of your economic and political manipulations; 
and for all the animals who face extinction or life in a cage that doesn't even 
allow them enough space to turn around; and for all the beautiful plants and 
trees of the forests who burn indiscriminately, we ask one last question. Why 
must you continue to bring harm and havoc to all the living things of the Earth 
when your own truest happiness would automatically come from helping us instead?

  From The Intenders of the Highest Good Novel



My Intention for today is: 
  I Intend that I am seeing everyone, including the current world managers, in 
their highest light.





   


   





   
   

-
We encourage you to forward this message to your list of friends. If this 
message was sent to you from a friend, you can go to http://www.intenders.org 
to sign up free


 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[TurquoiseB]

Good thread, Curtis. I'm keeping your (I think)
retitling of the original thread above, because
it ties in well to the rap it inspired in me.

I honestly think that a lot of the bottom line
of why some people prefer to believe in a God
and some don't is their level of comfort with
the idea that someone or something IS in charge
of life and its machinations. The believers in
God (or even in Nature as a designing force
in the universe) is founded on -- in my opinion,
and all that it *is* is opinion -- the desire
to believe that there is a Plan.

For whatever reason -- consider it a failing on
my part if you want, or a strength if you want --
I really don't find any need to believe that 
there is a Plan. I'm completely comfortable with
a random universe, in which there is no Plan
whatsoever. I'm comfortable with every pattern
or design or Grand Plan that humans perceive
in the universe around them -- including my own --
having been *projected* there, out of a desire
to believe that things *aren't* random.

I don't have any problem with life being random.
I don't have any problem with it having some kind
of Plan behind it. I will never know for sure,
either way.

But as far as I can tell, a *lot* of people are
*not* comfortable with the notion that life just
might be random. They want to believe that their
lives have meaning, that they are an integral
part of some Grand Plan that they might not fully
understand, but which is in place and proceeding...
uh...according to Plan.

Cool, I guess. It just doesn't get me off to 
believe that. My life may have no meaning what-
soever, and that's just fine with me. That *frees*
me to assign my *own* meaning to it, even if
that meaning is as puny a thing as trying to
bring my best to each of my interactions with
other beings I encounter randomly during the
course of each day.

That -- how you choose to live each day -- is to 
me a far greater concern than whether there is 
some Grand Plan for the universe and what it is
supposed to become. What it may become is,
in my estimation, a *distraction*, a way of 
selling futures or believing in a preferable
future, and thus avoiding full immersion in and
embracing of what really IS, here and now. A
*dissatisfaction* with what IS, here and now,
a belief that it doesn't fully represent the
Plan, seems to me to be kinda missing the point.

But others find a comfort in believing that there
is a Plan for all of this, and that their lives
are an integral part of that Plan. Good on them.
May that belief allow them to enjoy life and to
grow as compassionate human beings.

Me, I'm gonna stick with Plan Agnosticism as a
way of life. I don't know whether there is a Plan
or not, and it doesn't matter to me one way or
another. If there isn't, then I have to invent
my own. If there is, I *still* have to invent
my own.

I do not hold *any* scripture or guideline for
how to live life as authoritative or The Truth.
*None* of them. They were all -- in my opinion --
speculative works of fiction created by well-
meaning human beings who were projecting their
desire or need for a Plan onto a random universe.

I was born into this software/hardware construct
we call Life without a User's Manual. And, being
a hacker by nature, I don't feel badly about not
having one. Heck, I probably wouldn't have RTFM'd
if I *had* been presented with one. 

I'm content with just pressing keys here and there
and seeing what happens, and learning from my own
experience. If pressing F8 tends to have the same
effect over and over, and I find the effect to be
a good thing, then I might adopt pressing F8 as
some kind of spiritual practice in my life. But
if someday I press F8 and the *opposite* happens,
I'm not terribly attached to pressing F8 as a way
of life. I can drop it like a hot potato and do
something else. 

Pressing F8 is not part of some Grand Plan for me;
it's just something I figured out on my own that
seems to work most of the time. If it stops work-
ing, I try to figure out something else. I'm
flexible.

And that last word brings up another reason why
I think that some people like to believe in a Plan.
They're *not* flexible. Something in them is 
*offended* by the idea that doing the same thing
they've been doing for a long time might *not*
cause the results they're expecting. They like to
believe that the thing they're doing is part of
some inviolable, eternal Plan, and should always
work the same way.

Cool, I guess, if that's what gets these folks off.
May they continue through life pressing the same
keys they've been pressing in them so far, secure
in the knowledge that pressing those keys is part
of some Grand Plan. May they continue on their path,
secure in the knowledge *that* pressing these same
keys will someday result in the fulfillment of
that Grand Plan, for themselves and for the universe.
Whatever floats your boat.

Me, I'll keep pressing keys at random, just to see
what happens. Doing this has gotten me here and now,
and I have *no problem* 

[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
  mainstream20016@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@
wrote:
  
  
  [snip]
  
  

The stress-free schools link to the California TM school has been 
disabled:

http://www.stressfreeschools.org/video/california_school.html


there is another link which talks about TM in schools, but all 
private/charter, so it's clear that the TMO is trying to keep
the SF 
public middle school's TM program hush-hush, as Chris, the Lynch 
foundation spokesman clearly states above:

http://www.stressfreeschools.org/video/stressfreeschools.html
  
  
   All directly involved are tip-toeing through the elephants to avoid
  stirring up third-party 
   opposition to public recognition of TM's good effect in this public
  school
   but that doesn't address the future prospects of teaching TM
  broadly, which will require a 
   secular organization teaching TM as a secular technique, which will
  happen soon, as a 
   response of the need of the time.
  
  
  How are they going to teach and maintain TM as a secular technique
  while using the Puja to initiate? Surely they're not going to do away
  with the Puja, eh?
 
 
 from #151229:
 'Like a surgeon who scrubs for surgery outside of the surgical
suite, away from the 
 patient, the TM teacher can prepare for teaching TM by performing
the puja privately, in 
 an adjoining room.'

Two questions:

1) Do the would-be meditaters bring fruit flowers and handkerchief?
[Please explain]

2) Is all of this by *direct* instructions from Maharishi? 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore's Nine Inconvenient Errors

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
  

   In a message dated 10/16/07 7:07:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
   do.rflex@ writes:
   
   The  whole House of Cards that is An Inconvenient Truth falls 
 apart 
if  just 2 or 3 of the following are errors.
   
   According to whom?
   
   The  judge has no scientific credentials.
   
   
   
   
   Neither does Al Gore.
  
  
  Ah, but the many thousands of scientists world-wide who are the 
 source
  of his information, do.
 
 
 ...and where, pray tell, is that list of thousands?
 
 And don't tell me the IPCC because they aren't all scientists (unlike 
 the Oregon Petition in which they WERE all scientists).


The IPCC isn't all scientists but at least 2000 scientists are
contributers to it's climate change reports.

[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)

[kaladevi93]

Hi Bill:

I'm not sure what to make of your infrequent posts here to FFL, so often filled 
with bile 
and now, misinformation.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 
 We get to hear claims here  from time to time about lineages - along
 with various references to yogic insider knowledge. Most of it is
 nothing but mere claims, usually based upon a favored explanation given
 by some teacher who is rooted in a particular interpretation or
 philosophic view about yoga.
 
 Here, in this context, it appears quite funny - so we should all have a
 good laugh, pass the bottle of bourbon and salute our foolish
 imaginations.
 
 The PatanjalaYogaSutra is clocked around 150-200 CE.  Both the Samkhya
 and Yoga darshanas were dealt with by Buddhist scholars, even as late as
 Paramatha in China (6th Cent. CE). That is pretty much it because
 neither of these darshanas survived the intervening centuries down to
 our era of time.
 
 Did not survive means no param-para, no sampradaya, no lineage, no
 diksha, no transmission of secret techniques, no transmission of hidden
 knowledge, and more importantly no person remaining to retain any kind
 of lengthy or abridged explanations.

Of course this may be how it appears to someone who learned from a book. The 
reality 
however is quite different. For example I can tell you Vajranaths master in the 
yoga sutras 
come from a long oral lineage. The cave they were initated in records the oral 
tradition of 
that line for over 700 years! And thats just in this one place.

 
 Swami Hariharananda Aranya tried to revive this extinct lineage in the
 19th Century, CE by creating a SankhyaYoga Matha but it did not survive
 either.

Ah, more misinformation. First of all, Swami Hariharananda Aranya did not TRY 
to revive 
the lineage (from extant oral traditions), he did so. That was not in the 19th 
century but 
the 20th century. And not only DID that survive, it is now in its fourth 
generation and 
thriving.

Wow, you got every point wrong Bill. Impressive!

The Patanjali tradition is an ancient oral tradition which continues up to the 
present day, 
but it is very rare. Often it seems traditions have become extinct when in fact 
they 
submerge and reemerge, often beyond the eyes of the scholars and the masses.

 
 Vedanta survived - in various forms and sampradayas. Vedantic teachers
 read Patanjali and created their own interpretations of his intended
 meaning, although almost always defering to and starting from Vyasa's
 commentary.
 
 And Trinity you are quite correct. I posted Shankara's short vivarana
 about siddhis in Card's thread about YS. III.37(38). He sees siddhis as
 distractions but only for a yogin who wants to remain absorbed in the
 vision of purusha. Even then there is no problem for one detached in
 proper vairagya.

But of course the initial point was cultivation of siddhis is opposite of 
vairagya so therefore 
the inital point remains, as the oral tradition tells us.

Kala Devi

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis]

As Jed McKenna wrote in his second book Spiritually Incorrect
Enlightenment. Life is free fall forever. A lady commented Yah! and
everything is Teflon coated. Tom T

[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)

[kaladevi93]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptybill@ 
 wrote:
 
  
  Hi Trinity,
  
  Welcome back to krodha-dama.
  
  We get to hear claims here  from time to time about lineages - 
 along
  with various references to yogic insider knowledge. Most of it is
  nothing but mere claims, usually based upon a favored explanation 
 given
  by some teacher who is rooted in a particular interpretation or
  philosophic view about yoga.
  
  Here, in this context, it appears quite funny - so we should all 
 have a
  good laugh, pass the bottle of bourbon and salute our foolish
  imaginations.
  
  The PatanjalaYogaSutra is clocked around 150-200 CE.  Both the 
 Samkhya
  and Yoga darshanas were dealt with by Buddhist scholars, even as 
 late as
  Paramatha in China (6th Cent. CE). That is pretty much it because
  neither of these darshanas survived the intervening centuries down 
 to
  our era of time.
  
  Did not survive means no param-para, no sampradaya, no lineage, 
 no
  diksha, no transmission of secret techniques, no transmission of 
 hidden
  knowledge, and more importantly no person remaining to retain any 
 kind
  of lengthy or abridged explanations.
  
  Swami Hariharananda Aranya tried to revive this extinct lineage in 
 the
  19th Century, CE by creating a SankhyaYoga Matha but it did not 
 survive
  either.
  
  Vedanta survived - in various forms and sampradayas. Vedantic 
 teachers
  read Patanjali and created their own interpretations of his 
 intended
  meaning, although almost always defering to and starting from 
 Vyasa's
  commentary.
  
  And Trinity you are quite correct. I posted Shankara's short 
 vivarana
  about siddhis in Card's thread about YS. III.37(38). He sees 
 siddhis as
  distractions but only for a yogin who wants to remain absorbed in 
 the
  vision of purusha. Even then there is no problem for one detached 
 in
  proper vairagya.
  
  empty
  
  
 
 How about siddhis being a touchstone of the depth(?) of samaadhi?
 
 dharma-megha-samaadhi is possible to reach only
 if one is 'akusiida' even in 'prasaMkhyaana',
 
 prasaMkhyaane 'py akusiidasya sarvathaa viveka-khyaater
 dharma-meghaH samaadhiH (IV 29)
 
 Perhaps 'prasaMkhyaana' means, amongst other things,
 that one is capable of performing siddhis, if one
 so wishes (is 'kusiida', *not* 'a-kusiida'??).

Prasankhyana is the dicrimination between purusha and prakriti, it is also a 
source of the 
name of the Sankhya system (a prerequisite for the yoga-sutra).

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[t3rinity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I honestly think that a lot of the bottom line
 of why some people 

I'm out on this

[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris

[mainstream20016]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
 mainstream20016@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
   mainstream20016@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@
 wrote:
   
   
   [snip]
   
   
 
 The stress-free schools link to the California TM school has been 
 disabled:
 
 http://www.stressfreeschools.org/video/california_school.html
 
 
 there is another link which talks about TM in schools, but all 
 private/charter, so it's clear that the TMO is trying to keep
 the SF 
 public middle school's TM program hush-hush, as Chris, the Lynch 
 foundation spokesman clearly states above:
 
 http://www.stressfreeschools.org/video/stressfreeschools.html
   
   
All directly involved are tip-toeing through the elephants to avoid
   stirring up third-party 
opposition to public recognition of TM's good effect in this public
   school
but that doesn't address the future prospects of teaching TM
   broadly, which will require a 
secular organization teaching TM as a secular technique, which will
   happen soon, as a 
response of the need of the time.
   
   
   How are they going to teach and maintain TM as a secular technique
   while using the Puja to initiate? Surely they're not going to do away
   with the Puja, eh?
  
  
  from #151229:
  'Like a surgeon who scrubs for surgery outside of the surgical
 suite, away from the 
  patient, the TM teacher can prepare for teaching TM by performing
 the puja privately, in 
  an adjoining room.'
 
 Two questions:
 
 1) Do the would-be meditaters bring fruit flowers and handkerchief?
 [Please explain]
 
 2) Is all of this by *direct* instructions from Maharishi?



 Maharishi has been flexible with aspects of the puja, including not requirng 
the student to 
observe the teacher's performance of the puja.  Maharishi might allow the 
teacher to 
provide the fruit, flowers, and handkerchief, to further reassure the student. 

The TM technique's current irrelevance is due to the now overtly-religious TMO. 
The SIMS 
period through 1975 saw TM taught as a secular technique, and incredibly wide 
acceptance.  Since the Sidhi program instruction in 1976, the TMO has not been 
able to 
present itself as a non-religious organization.   Not coincidently TM has since 
become 
irrelevant.  A return to secular TM instruction made available from a new, 
separate secular 
teaching organization will allow its wide acceptance - the current affiliation 
with the 
overtly-religious TMO will not. 
 


  

[FairfieldLife] Trikking Buddhist

[Duveyoung]

Below is one of my sermons to a trikking group.  I put a lot of TM's
introductory lecture's concepts in it.  At that group, I try to
present spirituality found lurking in the wild and show how trikking
can be a holy practice.  For the most part, they react as if I'm
telling them to eat locusts and honey, but, hey, I'm accustomed, as
all here at FFlife are, to preaching to the deaf and hoping the silent
response is, you know, actual silence in their minds and not merely
slack-jawed gaping. ;-)  

Let me say up front that trikking one's way to God is almost certainly
impossible unless there was some sort of trikking ashram, Trikker
Guru, and an ancient literature too would help, eh?  Still, read my
sermon, cuz, it pertains to the recent thread here about atheism and
the mechanics of spirituality that even atheists use in daily life.

The sermon tries to view this very mundane activity, trikking, with
the same eyes that everyone here once used to look at lighting a
candle, sprinkling water, and bowing -- lighting, sprinkling, bowing
-- just meat robot actions, right?  But how significant to us, eh?,
when we looked especially at them.

Just so, trikking can be veneer-peered into being a puja of sorts. 
Not unlike seeing Fido-in-the-ditch's teeth, it requires an
especiality and mind control to delve into deeply enough to feel
God's heart, but it can be done -- geeze, even evil can be thusly, and
correctly, interpreted, eh?  So cut me a break, or as I like to put
it, Eat shit, Shemp.

Read this, and while you're at it, I'll start writing another post
about why I believe in God and plans.  If I haven't posted it by the
time you've finished the below, well, read the below again -- it's
that good.  :-) Or, watch my latest video several times.  
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6PPtD_v4ezE Or, just sit there quietly
thinking about me.  See?  I overflow you with great choices.

SPIRITUAL TRIKKING

I've written a ton of posts about trikking and consciousness and all
things spiritual, and there's been speculations galore with many of us
seemingly convinced that one can evolve into a better person by trikking.

Better person -- try to define that phrase. But, yeah, I
willsigh

Towards that goal, let me explain why I think carving is spiritual. It
may take a bit to get around to making this a trikking essay, but bear
with me.

When I took my first religious instructions as a youth, my minister
told my class that if the mind wanders during prayer, try squeezing
your prayerfully clasped hands together harder to maintain focus.

Even at the age of 12, I thought that that advice fell short of being
a solution of merit. If God was so, you know, boring? that one had to
compress one's everything-scrunchable in order to muster keeping one's
attention on God, well, sheesh, it sure seemed deeply hinky. And, oh
did my mind wander during my youthful prayers. I wanted to be good at
praying, I wanted to surrender to the Will of God, but I didn't have a
disciplined mind. It is one thing, a beautiful thing, to BELIEVE that
God exists, but it is quite another to have a mind that ACTS as if
that were true.

If one surveys the major religions to catalog their methods of
praying, a spectrum of diverse offerings can initially confuse one,
but as things get grasped, one dynamic that they all seem to support
is concentration.

Concentration is defined as the ability to keep the mind attending to
a specific mental process. The process might be a set of words being
repeated, an outflowing of love for God, a mantra, staring at a candle
or blank wall, reading a scripture over and over again to delve into
its subtleties, whirling around in a circle, spinning a dreidel,
singing a hymn, and on and on this listing goes, but they all require
that one control one's mind from wandering to other mental
experiences. How well the mind is held in control is seen as the
yardstick for measuring one's spiritual ability. If your mind is
wandering a lot, it is, more often than not, thought to be weaker than
a mind that can resolutely stay on track.

Weaker to me means a mind that CHOOSES to ignore subtleties in the
mental processes being focused upon.

I had one spiritual teacher tell me, You know, every newbie
spiritualist wants to run to a cave somewhere, and get it all
accomplished as fast as possible, but once they get inside that cave,
they discover they haven't got what it takes to stay in there. There's
got to be some inside you that keeps you in that cave.

That something is a subtle mind. A weak mind can be overcome and
redirected by some slight desire, but a powerful mind will be able
to constantly gain deeper insights into its objects of focus --
insights that delight one and naturally the mind stays where it is
being delighted and thus focus is spontaneously and effortlessly
maintained. The strong mind reaps delight when it attends to more
than the weaker mind which CHOOSES to wander off to other gross
experiences that don't require a deep 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[curtisdeltablues]

Hey New,


 Good post Curtis. Actually great. I appreciate your POV.

Thanks.  It is really nice that you ask for my POV here.


 Several questions:

 Why atheism and not agnosticism?

In my understanding agnosticism runs a gambit from believing in God
but thinking he is unknowable, to what is practically an atheist.  So
agnosticism  might fit although I think atheism is more precise.  I
wrote about why the term atheist isn't completely satisfactory.  But
I have a pretty good idea of the specifics of how the world's
religious scriptures were written by men who created different God
ideas. I haven't seen anything in any scripture that would make me
think it was beyond the ability of men to create. So I don't share any
of the theistic views, I am a-theist.

That said, we still might find out there is a creator to the universe.
 I just don't think man has done so yet.  I think we need to know a
lot more about the mystical experiences we have induced with
meditation and their causes.  Humans love to take the content of their
compelling subjective experiences at face value. In particular, we
seem vulnerable to quickly believing the mystical experiences makes us
special and the language of religion and spiritual traditions
supports this elevated view of self. (even promoting it to Self)  I
believe that this messes up a more humble approach to mystical
experiences that isn't value ridden with traditional interpretations
of their meaning.

 I don't know seems more compatible  with the latter.

I feel at least as confident as about the Santa myth so far.
 
 In your POV:
   1) Where does karma stand?

I don't believe in a mechanism that keeps track of actions and don't
even understand what kind of moral equivalents the karma theories I
came across are claiming.  It seems like a ruse to maintain people in
subservient positions by the ruling class.  In India, who made up and
maintained the rule, let me guess.  Oh I know, the one who are
mentioned as the highest caste in the system!  And it turns out that
challenging their authority will get you a harsh karmic payback.
Karmic theories may arise from our sense of justice.  For me, seeing
natural disasters as just random, rather than a pay back for previous
wrongs, seems more compassionate.  So the karma theory doesn't help
me.  If it were true I don't see how man could know the details.  It
seems far fetched to me that men know such things.

   2) Can scriptures have a value in ethics, a la, the Jefferson Bible.

As part of our human history they have been instrumental in all
cultures in forming ethics, but we are starting to see where modern
times may have moved beyond some of the religious views, think stem
cell research and women's rights  I a fan of the Bible and have read
it thoughtfully a number of times.  I don't think it provideds good as
ethical guidance today.  I think the Greeks may have given us much
better tools to consider what kind of society we want to create
together, which is the fruit of ethics. 

The Vedic scriptures seem great at laying out the many many variables
in making ethical decisions.  It doesn't seem to offer simple answers,
but provides fuel for discussion.  This discussion needs to take place
in an atmosphere of humility where no one stands up and says I know
what God wants us to do.  This is killing out ability to refine our
ethics today.  Religion is a start of the ethical discussion, not the
end.  I am a fan of Jefferson but think he may have elevated the
importance of Jesus as an ethical teacher too high.  We can do better.
 And modern man has done much better when he can rise above the
standard laid out a long time ago.  Look at all the progress we have
made by departing from Biblical ethics, slavery, women's rights...

3) How do you feel about chicks who scream Oh God! OH GOD!! at
 the height of passion?

Too good to answer only once:

1.  Women are supposed to feel something when I am getting mine? 
Fascinating, that explains why they have been running away after.

2. I am sympathetic with women who feel that my mojo must have a
supernatural origin.

3. Is that what they are saying?  Damn, I always assumed they were
calling out the name of their last boyfriend and kicked them out of bed.

4.  I have never heard this.  Do women say that before or after they
scream Who are you, I'm gunna press charges?


Thanks for the questions.  If you care to weigh in with your
perspective on all this I would love to read it.




 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible

 Jefferson accomplished a more limited goal in 1804 with The
 Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth, the predecessor to Life and Morals
 of Jesus of Nazareth.[4] He described it in a letter to John Adams
 dated 13 October 1813:
  In extracting the pure principles which he taught, we should have
 to strip off the artificial vestments in which they have been muffled
 by priests, who have travestied them into various forms, as
 instruments of riches and power to themselves. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore's Nine Inconvenient Errors

[MDixon6569]

 
In a message dated 10/16/07 1:40:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I agree, and would like to add that  it’s a shame we’re spending billions on 
a war in a dubious attempt to  safeguard our supply of oil when that same 
money, if put into alternative  energy RD, could free us from the temptation 
of 
such wars and our  reliance on environmentally destructive energy sources. We 
need a  Kennedy-style alternative energy moon race


Having all the free energy in the world would be useless if we couldn't use  
it freely. The war isn't just to protect oil reserves in the middle east. It  
goes a little deeper than that. We could poor trillions into an alternative  
energy research program and still not come up with anything better than we have 
 now and in the end have another Bill Gates type person make the big break  
through in his garage using his own money.  



** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore's Nine Inconvenient Errors

[MDixon6569]

 
In a message dated 10/16/07 1:47:41 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I know  several folks/families who live off the grid and use solar. 
Once I house  sat for a couple in their 2500 square foot log home and 
they had a huge  capacity washer/dryer, ac, appliances, lights, garage 
door opener, etc. --  the whole works -- and although they had a back-
up gas generator, they  said they could go for 9 days with no sun at 
all, using all their  appliances as per usual, before they'd have to 
turn the generator  on.

My former spouse installed solar panels on her home in Davis last  
year and I don't believe she's had to pay anything to PGE yet, but  
has received payments from them every month for the excess 
electricity  she sells back to the grid.

From anecdotal reports it seems that we do  have the technology now, 
but costs are a crucial factor in the initial  switch to solar.




Well it seems to me that every knew home built would be equipped with solar  
panels in that case. It definitely would be a selling feature for  houses.  
But then maybe there is a conspiracy among builders and energy companies, you  
know kind of like the one between Big Oil and Big  Auto.



** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore's Nine Inconvenient Errors

[MDixon6569]

 
In a message dated 10/16/07 1:57:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

For the  cost of the Iraq war, America with its 10,000 small towns,
could have spent  $50,000,000 in each one to set up solar, hydrogen,
biofuel stations or  windfarms.

50 million bucks for Fairfield alone. Get it?

Does  anyone doubt that half a trillion dollars spent on anything would
getter  done?

Cancer cure anyone?

I heard that the ENTIRE WORLD COULD  BE GIVEN CLEAN DRINKING WATER,
ELECTRIFICATION for a mere  $75,000,000,ELEC

This is the true evil of  Bushco.

Edg



Better yet, Everybody could have *free health care* and *free housing* and  
*free legal care*!



** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore's Nine Inconvenient Errors

[MDixon6569]

 
In a message dated 10/16/07 9:57:54 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

And  speaking of global warming, remember that the IPCC said that the 
#1 cause  of global warming was not tailpipes (your term from below) 
but  cowpipes: farting and belching from livestock.

If people stopped  eating meat tomorrow, we could,literally, eliminate 
99% of the #1 cause of  global warming overnight. 

All cattle slaughtered. All chickens, lambs,  etc. No more farting, 
no more belching.




U, problem is, if I have to become vegetarian again and eat more grains  
and legumes then I will be the one farting instead of the  cows!



** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[curtisdeltablues]

Excellent post Turq, very Camus of you!  I also sing the praises of a
non-teleological universe.  Human freedom is so precious.  Despite the
influences of our past choices and thought patterns influencing my
decisions, I do try to break out of old patterns when I can be
conscious enough to do so.  Sometimes just putting myself in a
completely new situation can stimulate new choices.  But here I am
preaching to the choir since you seem ready to uproot your whole life
to another country to accomplish this.  High five for that man!  Here
I do it by going to places dominated by people of other cultures.  I
love the influence or random weirdness that comes up when interacting
with other cultures in their own settings.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Good thread, Curtis. I'm keeping your (I think)
 retitling of the original thread above, because
 it ties in well to the rap it inspired in me.
 
 I honestly think that a lot of the bottom line
 of why some people prefer to believe in a God
 and some don't is their level of comfort with
 the idea that someone or something IS in charge
 of life and its machinations. The believers in
 God (or even in Nature as a designing force
 in the universe) is founded on -- in my opinion,
 and all that it *is* is opinion -- the desire
 to believe that there is a Plan.
 
 For whatever reason -- consider it a failing on
 my part if you want, or a strength if you want --
 I really don't find any need to believe that 
 there is a Plan. I'm completely comfortable with
 a random universe, in which there is no Plan
 whatsoever. I'm comfortable with every pattern
 or design or Grand Plan that humans perceive
 in the universe around them -- including my own --
 having been *projected* there, out of a desire
 to believe that things *aren't* random.
 
 I don't have any problem with life being random.
 I don't have any problem with it having some kind
 of Plan behind it. I will never know for sure,
 either way.
 
 But as far as I can tell, a *lot* of people are
 *not* comfortable with the notion that life just
 might be random. They want to believe that their
 lives have meaning, that they are an integral
 part of some Grand Plan that they might not fully
 understand, but which is in place and proceeding...
 uh...according to Plan.
 
 Cool, I guess. It just doesn't get me off to 
 believe that. My life may have no meaning what-
 soever, and that's just fine with me. That *frees*
 me to assign my *own* meaning to it, even if
 that meaning is as puny a thing as trying to
 bring my best to each of my interactions with
 other beings I encounter randomly during the
 course of each day.
 
 That -- how you choose to live each day -- is to 
 me a far greater concern than whether there is 
 some Grand Plan for the universe and what it is
 supposed to become. What it may become is,
 in my estimation, a *distraction*, a way of 
 selling futures or believing in a preferable
 future, and thus avoiding full immersion in and
 embracing of what really IS, here and now. A
 *dissatisfaction* with what IS, here and now,
 a belief that it doesn't fully represent the
 Plan, seems to me to be kinda missing the point.
 
 But others find a comfort in believing that there
 is a Plan for all of this, and that their lives
 are an integral part of that Plan. Good on them.
 May that belief allow them to enjoy life and to
 grow as compassionate human beings.
 
 Me, I'm gonna stick with Plan Agnosticism as a
 way of life. I don't know whether there is a Plan
 or not, and it doesn't matter to me one way or
 another. If there isn't, then I have to invent
 my own. If there is, I *still* have to invent
 my own.
 
 I do not hold *any* scripture or guideline for
 how to live life as authoritative or The Truth.
 *None* of them. They were all -- in my opinion --
 speculative works of fiction created by well-
 meaning human beings who were projecting their
 desire or need for a Plan onto a random universe.
 
 I was born into this software/hardware construct
 we call Life without a User's Manual. And, being
 a hacker by nature, I don't feel badly about not
 having one. Heck, I probably wouldn't have RTFM'd
 if I *had* been presented with one. 
 
 I'm content with just pressing keys here and there
 and seeing what happens, and learning from my own
 experience. If pressing F8 tends to have the same
 effect over and over, and I find the effect to be
 a good thing, then I might adopt pressing F8 as
 some kind of spiritual practice in my life. But
 if someday I press F8 and the *opposite* happens,
 I'm not terribly attached to pressing F8 as a way
 of life. I can drop it like a hot potato and do
 something else. 
 
 Pressing F8 is not part of some Grand Plan for me;
 it's just something I figured out on my own that
 seems to work most of the time. If it stops work-
 ing, I try to figure out something else. I'm
 flexible.
 
 And that last word brings up another reason why
 I think that some 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
 
  I honestly think that a lot of the bottom line
  of why some people 
 
 I'm out on this

I'm going to spend my next-to-last post of this
week asking for a clarification on this, Michael
(thereby wasting it, when I could have been
talking about things of greater consequence).

I really don't understand what you're trying to
express here.

I understand that your first language is not 
English, and so it's possible that you were trying
to express something different than what came 
across. What *did* come across was a sense of you
being somehow *offended* by what I said, and drop-
ping out of the conversation because of it.

This leaves me puzzled and confused. I don't see
how I could possibly have been clearer that what
I expressed in the post you're reacting to is
*my opinion*. It does happen to be my long-thought-
out-and-considered belief, but that is synonymous
*with* opinion in my book.

I also went out of my way to say that not only was
it my opinion, I wasn't suggesting it to anyone
else as something they should hold as *their* 
opinion, or subscribe to as one of their beliefs.
I wasn't selling a thing. 

Therefore, if you *were* offended, I really don't
understand why. I made it perfectly clear that I
perceive no Plan behind the universe. None. Nada.
Nichevo. Bupkus. That's how *I* see things, not
how I was suggesting that *you* see things. 

I also went out of my way to say that I DON'T KNOW.
There could very possibly *be* a Plan for all I
know. And I am as comfortable with that as I am
with there being no Plan at all. So again, if you
were offended somehow, I just don't understand why,
or for what reason.

Please explain. 

What I said about one of the baseline reasons for
belief in God being a desire to believe that there
is some kind of Plan to creation is not new. It
has, in fact, been stated by any number of philos-
ophers, and by any number of *believers in God*.
It's basically a *staple* of such discussions.
What about this idea could *possibly* be considered
offensive?

If you *were* trying to express a sense of being
somehow offended by what I said, I have to say that
*that* is the very reason that we who don't believe 
in a God are often reluctant to discuss things with 
those who do. They tend to get offended and indignant 
over the mere expression of *ideas* that run counter 
to their own.

Again, please explain. Stalking off in a snit, if
that is what you intended your cryptic message to
convey, doesn't make a terribly strong case for 
your position in all of this, IMO. Not that I am
trying to argue at all; I'm not...I'm merely
expressing what I tend to believe. If you thought
I was trying to sell you something or convince *you*
to believe it, I suggest you look into not only what
I really said, but also the accuracy of your own 
perceptions.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Key to Peace in Iraq

[MDixon6569]

 
In a message dated 10/17/07 2:29:32 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The  United States should NOT take on the role of being the benefactor 
for the  government of Iraq ad infinitum. The USA should let the Iraqi 
develop  their own destiny as an independent nation. Peace needs to 
nurtured from  the hearts of the Iraqis by themselves and at their own 
terms. This is the  only way stability in Iraq can be maintained. As 
such, the US should get  out of Iraq as soon as possible.



Right, survival of the fittest!  



** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

[FairfieldLife] New page on mental health on TruthAboutTM.com

[Rick Archer]

From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 9:02 AM
To: David Orme-Johnson
Subject: new page on mental health on TruthAboutTM.com

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

I just posted a new page on TruthAboutTM.com on the TM techniques effects on
mental health. Here is a link and an excerpt. 

 

All the best, David

 

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfmResearch on the effects of the transcendental Meditation technique
on Mental Health

The Issue: Is there any scientific research showing that the Transcendental
Meditation program improves mental health?

The Evidence:

Several studies, some large scale, have shown that the Transcendental
Meditation program has beneficial effects for populations at different
levels of mental health status, and under different conditions of learning
the technique.

1.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#swedish#swedishEffects of the on the general population who
voluntarily learn the technique. An epidemiological study by the Swedish
government found that the rate of mental health problems among the 35,000
people in the country who practice the Transcendental Meditation program was
100 to 200 times lower than the general population. In addition, numerous
studies have reported wide-spectum mental health benefits from the practice.

2.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#Jap#JapEffects on individuals who were encouraged to learn the
technique in their workplace. A study of 800 industrial workers by Japan’s
National Institute of Health found a wide range of mental health benefits
from the Transcendental Meditation program.

3.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#Blue_Cross#Blue_CrossEffects on individuals who are highly
dedicated to TM practice and who have participated in many extended
meditation courses.  A studiy of Blue Cross Blue Shield health insurance
statistics on 693 faculty and staff of Maharishi University of Management
found they had 92% lower rates of hospital admissions for mental health
problems than the norm.

4.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#PTSS#PTSSEffects on individuals with serious pre-existing mental
health problems: Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome. A randomized controlled
study of Viet Nam veteran’s found significant improvements in PTSS symptoms
in those learning TM compared to those receiving psychotherapy.

5.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#Glueck#GlueckEffects on individuals with serious pre-existing
mental health problems: Institutionalized Psychiatric Patients. A controlled
study at a major mental health facility found the Transcendental Meditation
program was highly beneficial over usual care in improving mental health
status and reducing dependence on medications.

6.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#Eppley#EppleyEffects on reducing trait anxiety compared to other
meditation and relaxation techniques. A comprehensive meta-analysis of 146
studies found that the Transcendental Meditation program is more effective
in reducing trait anxiety than any other meditation or relaxation technique
studied.

7.HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/ResearchonMentalHealth/
index.cfm#broad_spectrum#broad_spectrumEvidence That the Transcendental
Meditation Program Has Broad Spectrum Benefits for Mental Health. Numerous
studies show that the Transcendental Meditation program:

1. has beneficial effects on many different aspects of mental health;

2.  reduces negative personality characteristics such as tension,
nervousness, neuroticism, hypochondria, irritability, and vulnerability;

3.  has benefits for psychiatry, including reduced psychiatric illness,
decreased depression, decreased psychosomatic disorders, improvements in
schizophrenia, improvements in manic-depressive psychosis, and improvements
in addictive disorders; and,

4. has benefits in special education, such as benefits for children with
learning problems, decreasing overactive and impulsive behavior,
improvements in autism, and decreased dropout rate in deprived adolescents
with learning problems.

 

 

 

David W. Orme-Johnson, Ph.D.

HYPERLINK mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]

HYPERLINK http://www.truthabouttm.com/www.TruthAboutTM.com

HYPERLINK http://www.seagroveartist.com/www.SeagroveArtist.com

191 Dalton Dr.

Seagrove Beach, FL 32459

850-231-2866

850-231-5012 Fax

 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 10/16/2007
2:14 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 
 Prasankhyana is the dicrimination between purusha and prakriti, it 
is also a source of the 
 name of the Sankhya system (a prerequisite for the yoga-sutra).


Perhaps, but in my understanding, from the linguistic POV, the
word 'saaMkhya' (with a long a-sound in the first syllable, which,
I believe, makes it a vRddhi-derivative) is derived from 'saMkhya',
one of whose meanings seems to be 'number'.

3 saMkhyA f. reckoning or summing up , numeration , calculation 
(ifc. = ` numbered or reckoned among ') R. Ragh. Ra1jat. ; a 
number , sum , total (ifc. ` amounting to ') S3Br. c. c. ; a 
numeral Pra1t. Pa1n2. c. ; (in gram.) number (as expressed by case 
terminations or personal tñterminations) Ka1s3. on Pa1n2. 2-3 , 1 ; 
deliberation , reasoning , reflection , reason , intellect MBh. 
Ka1v. ; name , appellation (= %{AkhyA}) R. ; a partic. high number 
Buddh. ; manner MW. ; (in geom.) a gnomon (for ascertaining the 
points of the compass) , Ra1mRa1s. 

4 sAMkhya mfn. (fr. %{saM-khyA}) numeral , relating to number W. ; 
relating to number (in gram as expressed by the case-terminations 
c.) Pat. ; rational , or discriminative W. ; m.one who calculates 
or discriminates well , (esp.) an adherent of the Sa1m2khya doctrine 
Cu1lUp. MBh. c. ; N. of a man Car. ; patr. of the Vedic R2ishi Atri 
Anukr. ; N. of S3iva MBh. ; n. (accord. to some also m.) N. of one 
of the three great divisions of Hindu1 philosophy (ascribed to the 
sage Kapila [q.v.] , and so called either from , discriminating ' , 
in general , or , more probably , from ` reckoning up ' or ` 
enumerating ' twenty-five Tattvas [see %{tattva}] or true entities 
[twenty-three of which are evolved out of Prakr2iti ` the 
primordial Essence ' or ` first-Producer ' , viz. Buddhi , 
Aham2ka1ra , the five Tan-ma1tras , the five Maha1-bhu1tas and 
Manas ; the twenty-fifth being Purusha or Spirit [sometimes called 
Soul] which is neither a Producer nor Production [see %{vikAra}] , 
but wholly distinct from the twenty-four other Tattvas. and is 
multitudinous , each separate Purusha by its union with Prakr2iti 
causing a separate creation out of Prakr2iti , the object of the 
philosophy being to effect the final liberation of the Purusha or 
Spirit from the fetters caused by that creation ; the Yoga [q.v.] 
branch of the Saqikhya recognizes a Supreme Spirit dominating each 
separate Purusha ; the Tantras identify Prakr2iti with the wives of 
the gods , esp. with the wife of S3iva ; the oldest systematic 
exposition of the SñSa1m2khya seems to have been by an author called 
Pan5ca-s3ikha [the germ , however , being found in the Shasht2i-
tantra , of which only scanty fragments are extant] ; the original 
Su1tras were superseded by the SñSa1m2khya-ka1rika1 of I1s3vara-
kr2ishn2a , the oldest manual on the SñSa1m2khya system that has 
come down to us and probably written in the 5th century A.D. , while 
the SñSa1m2khya-su1tras or SñS3iva-pravacana and Tattva-sama1sa , 
ascribed to the sage Kapila , are now thought to belong to as late a 
date as the 14th or 15th century or perhaps a little later) S3vetUp. 
MBh. c. IW. 73 c. RTL. 

[FairfieldLife] YouTube - Forget about 'Enlightenment'

[Rick Archer]

HYPERLINK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pS_wPeDxDQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0
pS_wPeDxDQ 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 10/16/2007
2:14 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Interesting video on Ajna chakra.

[BillyG.]

In this teaching Cosmic Consciousness is synonymous with MMY's Unity
Consciousness.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9cSuXLlOtAmode=relatedsearch=India%20Meditation%20Guru%20Yoga%20Enlightenment%20Samadhi%20Nirvana%20Buddha%20Babaji%20Kriya%20Hamsa%20Surya%20Yogiraj%20Siddhanath%20Yogi%20Master

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[mainstream20016]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
  
   I honestly think that a lot of the bottom line
   of why some people 
  
  I'm out on this
 
 I'm going to spend my next-to-last post of this
 week asking for a clarification on this, Michael
 (thereby wasting it, when I could have been
 talking about things of greater consequence).
 
 I really don't understand what you're trying to
 express here.
 
 I understand that your first language is not 
 English, and so it's possible that you were trying
 to express something different than what came 
 across. What *did* come across was a sense of you
 being somehow *offended* by what I said, and drop-
 ping out of the conversation because of it.
 
 This leaves me puzzled and confused. I don't see
 how I could possibly have been clearer that what
 I expressed in the post you're reacting to is
 *my opinion*. It does happen to be my long-thought-
 out-and-considered belief, but that is synonymous
 *with* opinion in my book.
 
 I also went out of my way to say that not only was
 it my opinion, I wasn't suggesting it to anyone
 else as something they should hold as *their* 
 opinion, or subscribe to as one of their beliefs.
 I wasn't selling a thing. 
 
 Therefore, if you *were* offended, I really don't
 understand why. I made it perfectly clear that I
 perceive no Plan behind the universe. None. Nada.
 Nichevo. Bupkus. That's how *I* see things, not
 how I was suggesting that *you* see things. 
 
 I also went out of my way to say that I DON'T KNOW.
 There could very possibly *be* a Plan for all I
 know. And I am as comfortable with that as I am
 with there being no Plan at all. So again, if you
 were offended somehow, I just don't understand why,
 or for what reason.
 
 Please explain. 
 
 What I said about one of the baseline reasons for
 belief in God being a desire to believe that there
 is some kind of Plan to creation is not new. It
 has, in fact, been stated by any number of philos-
 ophers, and by any number of *believers in God*.
 It's basically a *staple* of such discussions.
 What about this idea could *possibly* be considered
 offensive?
 
 If you *were* trying to express a sense of being
 somehow offended by what I said, I have to say that
 *that* is the very reason that we who don't believe 
 in a God are often reluctant to discuss things with 
 those who do. They tend to get offended and indignant 
 over the mere expression of *ideas* that run counter 
 to their own.
 
 Again, please explain. Stalking off in a snit, if
 that is what you intended your cryptic message to
 convey, doesn't make a terribly strong case for 
 your position in all of this, IMO. Not that I am
 trying to argue at all; I'm not...I'm merely
 expressing what I tend to believe. If you thought
 I was trying to sell you something or convince *you*
 to believe it, I suggest you look into not only what
 I really said, but also the accuracy of your own 
 perceptions.

A question of net etiquette has arisen.  Any comments as to how to end 
contribution to a 
topic?  t3rinity wrote   I'm out of here and Barry wrote the above response. 
The 
atmosphere is charged
 
At a party, one has many conversations, some short and some long (as was the 
above 
exchange), and one excuses oneself after a particularly long conversation when 
deciding 
to move  elsewhere in the room, or to get a breath of fresh air.  What might be 
a good way 
at 'Rick's Party' to excuse one's self, to move to another part of the room ?  

How about, Excuse, me, but I'd like to get a breath of fresh air - would that 
work well ?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[Bhairitu]

biosoundbill wrote:
 Hi Bhairitu,

 As far As the `M' and `NG' endings go, I don't really know which 
 ones are the most powerful.
 My TM mantra ends in `NG,' but I know lots of people who were 
 given `M' ending mantras. I often feel that MMY used both just to 
 make up a bigger pool of mantras. eg:- there are so many versions of 
 Sarasvati's bija!
 I never got an advanced technique, and often wonder how anyone could 
 meditate effortlessly on a longer mantra?
 Do you for example meditate effortlessly on Om ing kling 
 brihaspataye namah, or is this effortless way of meditating unique 
 to TM?
 According to Guru Dev no householder should meditate on `OM' alone, 
 but men can meditate on `Om' as part of a longer mantra, where as 
 Ladies should replace the `Om' with `Shree'

 Namaste,

 Billy
   
As far as endings go I don't think MMY made up anything.  He was 
following some obscure tradition.  There are some traditions that 
utilize both endings.

Yes there are many mantras for each deity.  That's why you have those 
1000 names of Visnu, 1000 names of Kali, etc sutras.  :)

Once you learn a long mantra it comes just as easily as a short one.  
One can even meditate effortlessly on Gayatri once learned.  But on long 
mantras some teachers in this day in age since we have the technology 
have people listening to them on cassette or even MP3 players. :)

Most Indians will tell you that it is not good to meditate on Om alone 
though you can use it temporarily to calm vata but extended use may 
actually make vata worse.   Ram may be better for vata imbalances.  
However mantra rules change from tradition to tradition and India is a 
large country with many, many traditions.

Jai Ma,
Bhairitu

[FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[biosoundbill]

Thanks Bhairitu,

I guess at the end of the day learning TM is a very good way of 
learning to meditate effortlessly. It has certainly become a big 
business, and one is never quite sure as to whether MMY's motives 
are noble or otherwise!
Once one has the technique, it makes sense to me that one should be 
working with energy that's missing in their lives, rather than 
meditating with just that one bija for the rest of one's life, 
despite the claims from some Gurus that one stay with one mantra 
only!

Namaste,

Billy



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 biosoundbill wrote:
  Hi Bhairitu,
 
  As far As the `M' and `NG' endings go, I don't really know which 
  ones are the most powerful.
  My TM mantra ends in `NG,' but I know lots of people who were 
  given `M' ending mantras. I often feel that MMY used both just 
to 
  make up a bigger pool of mantras. eg:- there are so many 
versions of 
  Sarasvati's bija!
  I never got an advanced technique, and often wonder how anyone 
could 
  meditate effortlessly on a longer mantra?
  Do you for example meditate effortlessly on Om ing kling 
  brihaspataye namah, or is this effortless way of meditating 
unique 
  to TM?
  According to Guru Dev no householder should meditate on `OM' 
alone, 
  but men can meditate on `Om' as part of a longer mantra, where 
as 
  Ladies should replace the `Om' with `Shree'
 
  Namaste,
 
  Billy

 As far as endings go I don't think MMY made up anything.  He was 
 following some obscure tradition.  There are some traditions that 
 utilize both endings.
 
 Yes there are many mantras for each deity.  That's why you have 
those 
 1000 names of Visnu, 1000 names of Kali, etc sutras.  :)
 
 Once you learn a long mantra it comes just as easily as a short 
one.  
 One can even meditate effortlessly on Gayatri once learned.  But 
on long 
 mantras some teachers in this day in age since we have the 
technology 
 have people listening to them on cassette or even MP3 players. :)
 
 Most Indians will tell you that it is not good to meditate on Om 
alone 
 though you can use it temporarily to calm vata but extended use 
may 
 actually make vata worse.   Ram may be better for vata 
imbalances.  
 However mantra rules change from tradition to tradition and India 
is a 
 large country with many, many traditions.
 
 Jai Ma,
 Bhairitu

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[Bhairitu]

biosoundbill wrote:
 Thanks Bhairitu,

 I guess at the end of the day learning TM is a very good way of 
 learning to meditate effortlessly. It has certainly become a big 
 business, and one is never quite sure as to whether MMY's motives 
 are noble or otherwise!
 Once one has the technique, it makes sense to me that one should be 
 working with energy that's missing in their lives, rather than 
 meditating with just that one bija for the rest of one's life, 
 despite the claims from some Gurus that one stay with one mantra 
 only!

 Namaste,

 Billy

   
Some traditions believe that only one mantra will create an imbalance 
and that balancing mantras should be given.

[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016  
 The TM technique's current irrelevance is due to the now overtly-
religious TMO. The SIMS 
 period through 1975 saw TM taught as a secular technique, and 
incredibly wide 
 acceptance.  Since the Sidhi program instruction in 1976, the TMO 
has not been able to 
 present itself as a non-religious organization.   Not coincidently 
TM has since become 
 irrelevant.  A return to secular TM instruction made available 
from a new, separate secular 
 teaching organization will allow its wide acceptance - the current 
affiliation with the 
 overtly-religious TMO will not.

Seculiarism is as doomed as capitalism. It's a nice idea that does 
not work. It will go the way of communism and become a footnote in 
the history of man. Before capitalism collapses the americans better 
prepare for some very big changes.

Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism.
-Maharishi, 1990

[FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore's Nine Inconvenient Errors

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  
 In a message dated 10/16/07 1:47:41 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 I know  several folks/families who live off the grid and use solar. 
 Once I house  sat for a couple in their 2500 square foot log home 
and 
 they had a huge  capacity washer/dryer, ac, appliances, lights, 
garage 
 door opener, etc. --  the whole works -- and although they had a 
back-
 up gas generator, they  said they could go for 9 days with no sun 
at 
 all, using all their  appliances as per usual, before they'd have 
to 
 turn the generator  on.
 
 My former spouse installed solar panels on her home in Davis last  
 year and I don't believe she's had to pay anything to PGE yet, 
but  
 has received payments from them every month for the excess 
 electricity  she sells back to the grid.
 
 From anecdotal reports it seems that we do  have the technology 
now, 
 but costs are a crucial factor in the initial  switch to solar.
 
 
 
 
 Well it seems to me that every knew home built would be equipped 
with solar  
 panels in that case. It definitely would be a selling feature for  
houses.  
 But then maybe there is a conspiracy among builders and energy 
companies, you  
 know kind of like the one between Big Oil and Big  Auto.




Yeah, that Big Oil/big Auto conspiracy to build big cars that guzzled 
gas worked out really well for the Detroit Big Three, didn't it.

Almost put them out of business in the '70s.

It certainly enabled the Japanese to be in the position they are 
today in which their better, more efficient smaller cars now dominate 
the market.





 
 
 
 ** See what's new at 
http://www.aol.com

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[t3rinity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 A question of net etiquette has arisen.  Any comments as to how to
end contribution to a 
 topic?  t3rinity wrote   I'm out of here 

Actually I wrote 'I'm out on THIS'

 and Barry wrote the above response. The 
 atmosphere is charged
  
 At a party, one has many conversations, some short and some long (as
was the above 
 exchange), and one excuses oneself after a particularly long
conversation when deciding 
 to move  elsewhere in the room, or to get a breath of fresh air. 
What might be a good way 
 at 'Rick's Party' to excuse one's self, to move to another part of
the room ?  
 
 How about, Excuse, me, but I'd like to get a breath of fresh air -
would that work well ?

I feel I have not offended or abused anyone. At the same time, I
reserve the right to get out of a conversation quietly - out of
different reasons. One reason is as simple as having not enough time.
Conversations are not between two people alone. So something once
started by me doesn't have to be continued by me unendingly. Others
may have taken up the thread while I may loose interest in the
particular direction the conversation flows. Maybe, at a particular
point, I feel that a conversation 'deteriorates'. Sometimes, we have
just expressed different viewpoints and leave it at that. There is no
need to quarrel or convince anybody. Why then going down that road? 
Too many threads here have been just people defending themselves /
accusing others etc. 'You said this, no you said this'

There are surely some questions directed to me I haven't answered yet,
but I will never be able to answer everything. Besides that,
everything is just an opinion. I have this opinion, you have that
opinion, fine, I have thought this, you have thought that, okay. I
don't really feel it matters so much.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[Marek Reavis]

Comment below:

**

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 biosoundbill wrote:
  Thanks Bhairitu,
 
  I guess at the end of the day learning TM is a very good way of 
  learning to meditate effortlessly. It has certainly become a big 
  business, and one is never quite sure as to whether MMY's motives 
  are noble or otherwise!
  Once one has the technique, it makes sense to me that one should 
be 
  working with energy that's missing in their lives, rather than 
  meditating with just that one bija for the rest of one's life, 
  despite the claims from some Gurus that one stay with one mantra 
  only!
 
  Namaste,
 
  Billy
 

 Some traditions believe that only one mantra will create an 
imbalance 
 and that balancing mantras should be given.

**end**

I have a friend in the East Bay who is originally from Trinidad 
Tobago, a hindu and Shaivite but his father is a Kali priest (now 
retired) and he grew up within that priestly tradition.

He had a small, personal temple (originally a garage) and frequently 
when I visited with him and his family we'd go there to meditate and 
he'd always offer prayers beforehand, both in Hindi and English, 
sometimes a lingam puja.  One thing I noticed was that when he was 
doing the Hindi prayers and chants, he'd end each line with the 
anusvara (or bindu)  -ng.  It didn't matter whether the word was a 
vowel of consonant ending, he always morphed it into -ng.

It seemed to function like the drone of the sruti-box in Indian music 
or the drone of the tambura and really seemed to charge the 
environment.  Good vibes.

Marek

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[curtisdeltablues]

I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from
where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so
spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance
up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?

Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come
from.  This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder!


 That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to
inheriting, meeky me.
 
 He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions
flitting in the billows.
 
 He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
 inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. Snip

And here are you saying that you know that God is the source of your
thoughts?  I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it
lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not
that there is anything wrong with that)  

Here is where it matters.  When people claim to know that it is
God who is feeding them thoughts.  Perhaps we have a functioning
personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this
stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our
mind...oh I know an unconscious mind!

 Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the
 silence is God's sparking.  
 
 I cannot find non-Godness.

What you can't find is your perception without using this filter
overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way.  Want
some REAL silence?  Try actually just experiencing your silence
without the belief overlay. 

Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an
explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God.  It is not
that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more
from the creator of the universe. 





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Here's how I experience God.  
 
 A closing of the inner eye.  Then WHAM God speaks.
 
 All thoughts present themselves to my silence and only my silence.  My
 ego, merely another noise in the brain, is not the recipient, the
 witness, the thinker, the blessed.  Only my silence can receive a
 thought. 
 
 Thoughts, each one of them, are found treasures -- and like a flurry
 of cash wind borne along a street, I snatch 'em up even though I have
 no pockets.  I want to hoard-gobble 'em like a hamster with ballooning
 cheeks, but each is so delicious I swallow immediately.  To me, the
 streaming of thoughts are like having a constant orgasm -- not even
 time to take a breath.  What a lover God is to keep me brimming full
 of ideation.  Who here can say otherwise?  Who can say, I author my
 thoughts.  Or, I'm on the thought committee, and I know the next
 thought that I'm scheduled to have. Or, Each thought is ego approved
 and marketed.
 
 No one.  It's all I can do to just accept the ecstatic flowingness.  
 
 I've never authored a single thought. As if.  Every thought comes from
 where I know not of.  Suddenly just there.  Impossibly there, and so
 spendable, so vital.  Manna pure and simple,  I pick this sustenance
 up off the ground-state.  We're all wandering Jews, eh?
 
 My soul seems to have won a thought lottery -- I'm rich.  I'm
 experiencing a tsunami of thinking that just keeps coming into the now
 and obviating any need for memory.  There's no such thing as the past
 when nowness so envelops me.  I cannot escape the presence of God's
mind.
 
 In meditation, I've had a silence sandwich.  You know, a slice of
 silence, meaty thought, a slice of silence, and ego for mayo.
 
 And yum yum, yum yum, yum, two bits.  To savor one bite of that
 sandwich can overwhelm the palate with pleasure.
 
 Yet, most of my time is spent surfing a sea of thinking, noshing at a
 banquet of notions, and smelling the scents from a million flowered
 field.  
 
 That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to inheriting,
 meeky me.
 
 He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions flitting
 in the billows.
 
 He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
 inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs.
 
 Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the
 silence is God's sparking.  
 
 I cannot find non-Godness.  
 
 Only my silence is dark enough to make His least glimmer bright.
 
 Only my silence is bright enough to make His least dot of dark POP!
 
 And then, suddenly, I see.
 
 It's not my silence at all.
 
 Even the silence is given to me.
 
 Edg

[FairfieldLife] Two questions for 'mainstream20016' (Was: more meditating school info...)

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:


[snip]


   All directly involved are tip-toeing through the elephants to
avoid stirring up third-party opposition to public recognition of TM's
good effect in this public school but that doesn't address the
future prospects of teaching TM broadly, which will require a secular
organization teaching TM as a secular technique, which will happen
soon, as a response of the need of the time.


  How are they going to teach and maintain TM as a secular
technique while using the Puja to initiate? Surely they're not going
to do away with the Puja, eh?


 from #151229: 'Like a surgeon who scrubs for surgery outside of the
surgical suite, away from the patient, the TM teacher can prepare for
teaching TM by performing the puja privately, in an adjoining room.'


Two questions:

1)  Do the would-be meditaters bring fruit flowers and handkerchief?
[Please explain]

2)  Is all of this by *direct* instructions from Maharishi?

[FairfieldLife] Question for the group

[do.rflex]

Do any of you know what Brahmachari Satyanand is currently doing and
where his is?

Thank you...

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[Marek Reavis]

Comment below:

**

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes 
from
 where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so
 spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance
 up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?
 
 Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come
 from.  This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder!
 
 
  That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to
 inheriting, meeky me.
  
  He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions
 flitting in the billows.
  
  He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
  inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. Snip
 
 And here are you saying that you know that God is the source of 
your
 thoughts?  I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it
 lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not
 that there is anything wrong with that)  
 
 Here is where it matters.  When people claim to know that it is
 God who is feeding them thoughts.  Perhaps we have a functioning
 personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this
 stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our
 mind...oh I know an unconscious mind!
 
  Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in 
the
  silence is God's sparking.  
  
  I cannot find non-Godness.
 
 What you can't find is your perception without using this filter
 overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way.  Want
 some REAL silence?  Try actually just experiencing your silence
 without the belief overlay. 
 
 Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an
 explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God.  It is not
 that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more
 from the creator of the universe. 
 
**snip to end**

Curtis, Edg, great material.  Curtis, for what it's worth, let me 
offer my take on this from my own theism.  

Basically, what you write re your own atheism is what I feel, too.  
All the gods are in me, in consciousness, and some of the forms or 
concepts of god just tweak my consciousness; stimulate my 
consciousness that makes me feel good -- opens me up and charges me 
somehow.  I don't have either the ability or clarity of experience to 
articulate it any better than that; and I can't (and don't) claim 
that god or gods exist independently of consciousness. I do claim 
that many of the forms and concepts that flow from the Indian, and 
mostly Hindu traditions, just do a number on me that makes me keep 
coming back for more.

I'm more subdued curently, but for a good long time my puja 
table/puja room just kept expanding like some Hindu Roccoco coral 
reef with iteration upon iteration of shrines, ghee lamps, bells, 
cloths, garlands, pictures, murtis, etc.  My GF is Haitian and it 
really freaked her out because she could only relate to it through 
the lens of her childhood and cultural experience with voodoo.  I've 
tried to explain to her that there's nothing weird about what I do, 
just some sort of compulsive behavior to stimulate particular nerve 
endings -- that's my best guess as to what's going on.  

If there is any independent being outside of my consciousness who is 
pleased by my behaviors, I can't say and don't claim; but the mental 
and emotional take I get when I regard an image of Saraswati or 
Ganapati or Shiva or Guru Dev is just so fine that it's good enough 
for me.  For me, the forms themselves rearrange my mentality and my 
personality such that I cherish the change.  Similarly, the mantra, 
and the puja and the more I incoporate all that stuff into my 
everyday, ongoing life the smoother, happier, stronger, better it all 
seems to go.

Basically, like many here, I'm an empiricist who goes around 
scratchin' and sniffin' and going with what feels right to me.  So 
far, so good.

Marek

RE: *****SPAM***** [FairfieldLife] Question for the group

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of do.rflex
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 1:04 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: *SPAM* [FairfieldLife] Question for the group

 



Do any of you know what Brahmachari Satyanand is currently doing and
where his is?

Thank you...

He died a few years ago. I’m sure he’s in a good place.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 10/16/2007
2:14 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[biosoundbill]

I'm no longer involved with the TM movement, but I still have lots 
of friends that are still in it. I was at a TM party recently, and 
clearly felt that most of them can't think for themselves, and are 
very ungrounded!

I often wonder if this is because of all those years of meditating 
on a pure bija mantra!

Check this link -   http://books.google.com/books?id=78HRnC_-
1SICpg=PA96lpg=PA96dq=bija+mantra+are+pure+energysource=webots=g
rTOmWNq7Ysig=PnbUYgD2KbWyQym5VkYd9ankmCo#PPA97,M1

In Chopra's technique each mantra has `Om' at the beginning 
and `Namah' at the end, with your personal syllable in the middle.

Namaste,

Billy



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 biosoundbill wrote:
  Thanks Bhairitu,
 
  I guess at the end of the day learning TM is a very good way of 
  learning to meditate effortlessly. It has certainly become a big 
  business, and one is never quite sure as to whether MMY's 
motives 
  are noble or otherwise!
  Once one has the technique, it makes sense to me that one should 
be 
  working with energy that's missing in their lives, rather than 
  meditating with just that one bija for the rest of one's life, 
  despite the claims from some Gurus that one stay with one mantra 
  only!
 
  Namaste,
 
  Billy
 

 Some traditions believe that only one mantra will create an 
imbalance 
 and that balancing mantras should be given.

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[Duveyoung]

Curtis,

What part of Even the silence is given to me didn't you understand?

What's being given is ALL THIS.  God does not stint.  Even the worst
person is an utterly clean canvas for His art, and He never paints
anything less than a masterpiece.  Right now, the experience of being
you is like, you know, hanging in a heavenly Louvre somewhere with
God standing before it almost blinded by the light of it.

If amongst all the gifts, there is a Plan with a big ribbon bow, a
Mind in a package that rattles when you shake it, a Destiny unfolding
inside thin wrappings, well, in this ocean of notions, it's
understandable if one doesn't have the insight to open those packages
first.  The incandescent dazzle of dead dog's teeth has us all like
toddlers on Christmas morning wading hip-deep in presents.  

Agoggitude-R-Us.

I don't say that I know God exists -- only that Whatever is pleasing
all of us so deeply -- so deeply that even evil desires are fulfilled
as proof that the charm of creation cannot be dented thereby --
whatever He or It or That is, I am completely immersed in Him,
It, That.  If He is sentience blazing, or if It is cold physics
grinding, I am in awe of the infinity of That.  No thought can go
beyond the fact of creation's utter particularity in populating the
universe with worlds -- or minds with thoughts.  Nothing is missing. 
Allness is there.

Where's not God?  Ask any scientist about subtlety.  Ask any monk
about the endlessness of expansion of self.  Ask any mother what is
seen in a child's eyes.  Ask Arjuna why he could not gaze at God's
true Face.

I'll tell ya, this Hiranyagarba ball may all be only a dollop in the
dark, but Indra would chop off his right arm to be It.

Good enough for a definition of God to me.

If somewhere beyond the cosmic boonies a Magnificence chuckles at my
selling out small, so be it.  It is, after all, His thoughts, His
silence, His artistry that I am so.  

And, His that you are you.  

His entertainment to see my pong and your ping.

Your serve, Paddle Boy.

Edg




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from
 where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so
 spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance
 up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?
 
 Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come
 from.  This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder!
 
 
  That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to
 inheriting, meeky me.
  
  He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions
 flitting in the billows.
  
  He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
  inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. Snip
 
 And here are you saying that you know that God is the source of your
 thoughts?  I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it
 lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not
 that there is anything wrong with that)  
 
 Here is where it matters.  When people claim to know that it is
 God who is feeding them thoughts.  Perhaps we have a functioning
 personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this
 stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our
 mind...oh I know an unconscious mind!
 
  Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the
  silence is God's sparking.  
  
  I cannot find non-Godness.
 
 What you can't find is your perception without using this filter
 overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way.  Want
 some REAL silence?  Try actually just experiencing your silence
 without the belief overlay. 
 
 Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an
 explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God.  It is not
 that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more
 from the creator of the universe. 
 
 
 
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote:
 
  Here's how I experience God.  
  
  A closing of the inner eye.  Then WHAM God speaks.
  
  All thoughts present themselves to my silence and only my silence.  My
  ego, merely another noise in the brain, is not the recipient, the
  witness, the thinker, the blessed.  Only my silence can receive a
  thought. 
  
  Thoughts, each one of them, are found treasures -- and like a flurry
  of cash wind borne along a street, I snatch 'em up even though I have
  no pockets.  I want to hoard-gobble 'em like a hamster with ballooning
  cheeks, but each is so delicious I swallow immediately.  To me, the
  streaming of thoughts are like having a constant orgasm -- not even
  time to take a breath.  What a lover God is to keep me brimming full
  of ideation.  Who here can say otherwise?  Who can say, I author my
  thoughts.  Or, I'm on the thought committee, and I know the next
  thought that I'm scheduled to have. 

Re: *****SPAM***** [FairfieldLife] Question for the group

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 On Behalf Of do.rflex
 Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 1:04 PM
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Subject: *SPAM* [FairfieldLife] Question for the group
 
  
 
 
 
 Do any of you know what Brahmachari Satyanand is currently doing and
 where his is?
 
 Thank you...
 
 He died a few years ago. I'm sure he's in a good place.


Thanks, Rick. What's with the *SPAM* in the title?

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[curtisdeltablues]

Marek you really combined our divergent perspective, well done!  I
will always be fascinated by religious symbols and you presented one
of the possible reasons why.  If they are symbols,archetypes of our
consciousness, they should have a profound effect when we dwell on
them, even emotionally.  I am happy at my end of the continuum in this
discussion but I really admire your ability to grok all the extremes
and come up with your own individual take.  

I once took a first date to an exhibit of voodoo temples that was in
Baltimore and represented the biggest exhibit of them in the US ever
before.  They had dozens of complete alters.  Voodoo really scrambles
the images, Jesus painted on rum bottles and all sorts of unusual
pairing of symbols.  I was blown away by it all.  My date...not so
much!  It put our first meeting in a bit too exotic a setting for her
and that was really all I needed to know!  The fact that your girl can
hang with your interest is a great sign!


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Comment below:
 
 **
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 
  I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes 
 from
  where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so
  spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance
  up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?
  
  Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come
  from.  This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder!
  
  
   That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to
  inheriting, meeky me.
   
   He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions
  flitting in the billows.
   
   He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
   inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. Snip
  
  And here are you saying that you know that God is the source of 
 your
  thoughts?  I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it
  lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not
  that there is anything wrong with that)  
  
  Here is where it matters.  When people claim to know that it is
  God who is feeding them thoughts.  Perhaps we have a functioning
  personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this
  stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our
  mind...oh I know an unconscious mind!
  
   Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in 
 the
   silence is God's sparking.  
   
   I cannot find non-Godness.
  
  What you can't find is your perception without using this filter
  overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way.  Want
  some REAL silence?  Try actually just experiencing your silence
  without the belief overlay. 
  
  Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an
  explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God.  It is not
  that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more
  from the creator of the universe. 
  
 **snip to end**
 
 Curtis, Edg, great material.  Curtis, for what it's worth, let me 
 offer my take on this from my own theism.  
 
 Basically, what you write re your own atheism is what I feel, too.  
 All the gods are in me, in consciousness, and some of the forms or 
 concepts of god just tweak my consciousness; stimulate my 
 consciousness that makes me feel good -- opens me up and charges me 
 somehow.  I don't have either the ability or clarity of experience to 
 articulate it any better than that; and I can't (and don't) claim 
 that god or gods exist independently of consciousness. I do claim 
 that many of the forms and concepts that flow from the Indian, and 
 mostly Hindu traditions, just do a number on me that makes me keep 
 coming back for more.
 
 I'm more subdued curently, but for a good long time my puja 
 table/puja room just kept expanding like some Hindu Roccoco coral 
 reef with iteration upon iteration of shrines, ghee lamps, bells, 
 cloths, garlands, pictures, murtis, etc.  My GF is Haitian and it 
 really freaked her out because she could only relate to it through 
 the lens of her childhood and cultural experience with voodoo.  I've 
 tried to explain to her that there's nothing weird about what I do, 
 just some sort of compulsive behavior to stimulate particular nerve 
 endings -- that's my best guess as to what's going on.  
 
 If there is any independent being outside of my consciousness who is 
 pleased by my behaviors, I can't say and don't claim; but the mental 
 and emotional take I get when I regard an image of Saraswati or 
 Ganapati or Shiva or Guru Dev is just so fine that it's good enough 
 for me.  For me, the forms themselves rearrange my mentality and my 
 personality such that I cherish the change.  Similarly, the mantra, 
 and the puja and the more I incoporate all that stuff into my 
 everyday, ongoing life the smoother, 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[Bhairitu]

biosoundbill wrote:
 I'm no longer involved with the TM movement, but I still have lots 
 of friends that are still in it. I was at a TM party recently, and 
 clearly felt that most of them can't think for themselves, and are 
 very ungrounded!

 I often wonder if this is because of all those years of meditating 
 on a pure bija mantra!

 Check this link -   http://books.google.com/books?id=78HRnC_-
 1SICpg=PA96lpg=PA96dq=bija+mantra+are+pure+energysource=webots=g
 rTOmWNq7Ysig=PnbUYgD2KbWyQym5VkYd9ankmCo#PPA97,M1

 In Chopra's technique each mantra has `Om' at the beginning 
 and `Namah' at the end, with your personal syllable in the middle.

 Namaste,

 Billy

   
What book is it?  Your link won't work and using your search terms I get 
two pages of books but none with that ID.

If mantras aren't balanced then indeed people can become ungrounded 
though the original 20 minutes twice a day being a light practice might 
not cause that at least for about 80% of practitioners.  Agni mantras 
usually aren't used for the public but Shiva and Shanti mantras are 
okay.  Every mantra has a certain resonance and will cause the mind and 
body to respond in a certain way.  A good guru makes sure that the 
mantra (and additional mantras) are right for the aspirant.

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes 
from
 where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so
 spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance
 up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?
 
 Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come
 from.  This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder!
 
 
  That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to
 inheriting, meeky me.
  
  He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions
 flitting in the billows.
  
  He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
  inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. Snip
 
 And here are you saying that you know that God is the source of 
your
 thoughts?  I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it
 lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not
 that there is anything wrong with that)  
 
 Here is where it matters.  When people claim to know that it is
 God who is feeding them thoughts.  Perhaps we have a functioning
 personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this
 stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our
 mind...oh I know an unconscious mind!
 
  Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in 
the
  silence is God's sparking.  
  
  I cannot find non-Godness.
 
 What you can't find is your perception without using this filter
 overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way.  Want
 some REAL silence?  Try actually just experiencing your silence
 without the belief overlay. 
 
 Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an
 explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God.  It is not
 that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more
 from the creator of the universe. 
 

 
Boy, there's been some beautiful writing about atheism on here today 
chaps, it moves me, it really does. So often all you hear is the fear 
so many religious people have that athiests are immoral or not to be 
trusted because we have no faith. Nice to know there are others out 
there who feel like me and have really thought about where they are 
and what life means.

I've spent my life reading books about Darwinism and to me the real 
majesty of creation is how it has got here from nothing. The world 
seems so much more precious and just plain REAL once you really get 
what is going on, and it takes some huge mental leaps, not to mention 
an exercise in severe humility, to understand Darwin. I think it's 
one of the most misunderstood theories. To blame god or intelligent 
design for creation just takes things away from it IMO. And doesn't 
actually answer how things got started, it just pushes the answer 
further away. It's impossible to prove that something doesn't exist 
of course, I've just never felt the need to complicate things with 
gods. Or is that just a belief? No way to know.

Man is a strange creature, it's no wonder to me we feel special and 
in need of an explanation of why we are different. It's just amazing 
we got the particular few things we needed to be us, a descended 
larynx so we can form a big enough range of sounds to have speech and 
a brain capable of utilising that speech as abstract thought and 
viola! the rest is history (literally). How easy it would have been 
for that never to have happened, self-awareness must be the rarest 
thing in the entire universe. Just think, the earth is here for 4 
billion years and it takes that long before the first creature gets 
the wake up gene, what are the chances of it? Pretty slim I'd say, 
and it humbles me to think we could be the only beings in creation 
that are aware they are alone.

Another astonishing thing is our brains came pre-adapted with the 
ability to transcend, amazing experiences guaranteed! With 
capabilities like that could the history of mans inner spiritual life 
ever have been different? 

As you can see I like my world without god, it's more precious to me 
like that. But it's so easy to start taking things for granted, so 
easy to forget the big picture, so easy to stop feeling small. 
Reading these pages today nudged me awake, gave me things to think 
about. So thanks for that, I hope I can return the favour someday.

RE: *****SPAM***** [FairfieldLife] Question for the group

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of do.rflex
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 1:51 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: *SPAM* [FairfieldLife] Question for the group

 

Thanks, Rick. What's with the *SPAM* in the title?

That ends up in a lot of my email titles. I don’t know whether it gets added
coming in or going out. Somewhere along the line, something thinks the post
might be spam. Every day I have to approve many posts to FFL that Yahoo
flags as possible spam (but which aren’t).


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 10/16/2007
2:14 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 This is really, rally great. Thanks Edg

Ditto!

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote:
 
  Here's how I experience God.  
  
  A closing of the inner eye.  Then WHAM God speaks.
  
  All thoughts present themselves to my silence and only my 
silence.  My
  ego, merely another noise in the brain, is not the recipient, the
  witness, the thinker, the blessed.  Only my silence can receive a
  thought. 
  
  Thoughts, each one of them, are found treasures -- and like a 
flurry
  of cash wind borne along a street, I snatch 'em up even though I 
have
  no pockets.  I want to hoard-gobble 'em like a hamster with 
ballooning
  cheeks, but each is so delicious I swallow immediately.  To me, 
the
  streaming of thoughts are like having a constant orgasm -- not 
even
  time to take a breath.  What a lover God is to keep me brimming 
full
  of ideation.  Who here can say otherwise?  Who can say, I 
author my
  thoughts.  Or, I'm on the thought committee, and I know the 
next
  thought that I'm scheduled to have. Or, Each thought is ego 
approved
  and marketed.
  
  No one.  It's all I can do to just accept the ecstatic 
flowingness.  
  
  I've never authored a single thought. As if.  Every thought 
comes from
  where I know not of.  Suddenly just there.  Impossibly there, 
and so
  spendable, so vital.  Manna pure and simple,  I pick this 
sustenance
  up off the ground-state.  We're all wandering Jews, eh?
  
  My soul seems to have won a thought lottery -- I'm rich.  I'm
  experiencing a tsunami of thinking that just keeps coming into 
the now
  and obviating any need for memory.  There's no such thing as the 
past
  when nowness so envelops me.  I cannot escape the presence of 
God's
 mind.
  
  In meditation, I've had a silence sandwich.  You know, a slice of
  silence, meaty thought, a slice of silence, and ego for mayo.
  
  And yum yum, yum yum, yum, two bits.  To savor one bite of that
  sandwich can overwhelm the palate with pleasure.
  
  Yet, most of my time is spent surfing a sea of thinking, noshing 
at a
  banquet of notions, and smelling the scents from a million 
flowered
  field.  
  
  That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to 
inheriting,
  meeky me.
  
  He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions 
flitting
  in the billows.
  
  He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
  inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs.
  
  Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in 
the
  silence is God's sparking.  
  
  I cannot find non-Godness.  
  
  Only my silence is dark enough to make His least glimmer bright.
  
  Only my silence is bright enough to make His least dot of dark 
POP!
  
  And then, suddenly, I see.
  
  It's not my silence at all.
  
  Even the silence is given to me.
  
  Edg
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: The good things TM gave us

[biosoundbill]

The Yoga of Sound by Russill Paul  
Google Tantric Deity Bija Mantras Shakti yoga

It's the last result on page 1 - The Yoga of Sound: Healing  
Enlightenment Through the Sacred ... - Google Books Result

Read from p91 to 97

Namaste,

Billy


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 biosoundbill wrote:
  I'm no longer involved with the TM movement, but I still have 
lots 
  of friends that are still in it. I was at a TM party recently, 
and 
  clearly felt that most of them can't think for themselves, and 
are 
  very ungrounded!
 
  I often wonder if this is because of all those years of 
meditating 
  on a pure bija mantra!
 
  Check this link -   http://books.google.com/books?id=78HRnC_-
  
1SICpg=PA96lpg=PA96dq=bija+mantra+are+pure+energysource=webots=g
  rTOmWNq7Ysig=PnbUYgD2KbWyQym5VkYd9ankmCo#PPA97,M1
 
  In Chopra's technique each mantra has `Om' at the beginning 
  and `Namah' at the end, with your personal syllable in the 
middle.
 
  Namaste,
 
  Billy
 

 What book is it?  Your link won't work and using your search terms 
I get 
 two pages of books but none with that ID.
 
 If mantras aren't balanced then indeed people can become 
ungrounded 
 though the original 20 minutes twice a day being a light practice 
might 
 not cause that at least for about 80% of practitioners.  Agni 
mantras 
 usually aren't used for the public but Shiva and Shanti mantras 
are 
 okay.  Every mantra has a certain resonance and will cause the 
mind and 
 body to respond in a certain way.  A good guru makes sure that the 
 mantra (and additional mantras) are right for the aspirant.

[FairfieldLife] Re: YouTube - Forget about 'Enlightenment'

[pranamoocher]

Thanks, Rick.
Fantastic video and interesting speaker.  I could actually relate to
what he was saying; he seems more of an enlightened peer than a
master-on-a-pedestal.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 HYPERLINK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pS_wPeDxDQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0
 pS_wPeDxDQ 
 
 
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
 Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date:
10/16/2007
 2:14 PM

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two questions for 'mainstream20016' (Was: more meditating school info...)

[mainstream20016]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
 mainstream20016@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
 
 
 [snip]
 
 
All directly involved are tip-toeing through the elephants to
 avoid stirring up third-party opposition to public recognition of TM's
 good effect in this public school but that doesn't address the
 future prospects of teaching TM broadly, which will require a secular
 organization teaching TM as a secular technique, which will happen
 soon, as a response of the need of the time.
 
 
   How are they going to teach and maintain TM as a secular
 technique while using the Puja to initiate? Surely they're not going
 to do away with the Puja, eh?
 
 
  from #151229: 'Like a surgeon who scrubs for surgery outside of the
 surgical suite, away from the patient, the TM teacher can prepare for
 teaching TM by performing the puja privately, in an adjoining room.'
 
 
 Two questions:
 
 1)  Do the would-be meditaters bring fruit flowers and handkerchief?
 [Please explain]
 
 2)  Is all of this by *direct* instructions from Maharishi?

from #151890:

Maharishi has been flexible with aspects of the puja, including not requirng 
the student to 
observe the teacher's performance of the puja. Maharishi might allow the 
teacher to 
provide the fruit, flowers, and handkerchief, to further reassure the student. 

The TM technique's current irrelevance is due to the now overtly-religious TMO. 
The SIMS 
period through 1975 saw TM taught as a secular technique, and incredibly wide 
acceptance. Since the Sidhi program instruction in 1976, the TMO has not been 
able to 
present itself as a non-religious organization. Not coincidently TM has since 
become 
irrelevant. A return to secular TM instruction made available from a new, 
separate secular 
teaching organization will allow its wide acceptance - the current affiliation 
with the 
overtly-religious TMO will not.

[FairfieldLife] Re: YouTube - Forget about 'Enlightenment'

[off_world_beings]

I came to FFL tonight looking for something , and this guy tells me 
not to look for something. Cool. I like this guy, he seems authentic.

OffWorld


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 HYPERLINK
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=0pS_wPeDxDQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0
 pS_wPeDxDQ 
 
 
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
 Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 
10/16/2007
 2:14 PM

[FairfieldLife] Re: more meditating school info with my apology to chris

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
  mainstream20016@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
mainstream20016@ wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@
  wrote:


[snip]


  
  The stress-free schools link to the California TM school
has been 
  disabled:
  
  http://www.stressfreeschools.org/video/california_school.html
  
  
  there is another link which talks about TM in schools, but
all 
  private/charter, so it's clear that the TMO is trying to keep
  the SF 
  public middle school's TM program hush-hush, as Chris, the
Lynch 
  foundation spokesman clearly states above:
  
  http://www.stressfreeschools.org/video/stressfreeschools.html


 All directly involved are tip-toeing through the elephants
to avoid
stirring up third-party 
 opposition to public recognition of TM's good effect in this
public
school
 but that doesn't address the future prospects of teaching TM
broadly, which will require a 
 secular organization teaching TM as a secular technique,
which will
happen soon, as a 
 response of the need of the time.


How are they going to teach and maintain TM as a secular
technique
while using the Puja to initiate? Surely they're not going to
do away
with the Puja, eh?
   
   
   from #151229:
   'Like a surgeon who scrubs for surgery outside of the surgical
  suite, away from the 
   patient, the TM teacher can prepare for teaching TM by performing
  the puja privately, in 
   an adjoining room.'
  
  Two questions:
  
  1) Do the would-be meditaters bring fruit flowers and handkerchief?
  [Please explain]
  
  2) Is all of this by *direct* instructions from Maharishi?
 
 
 
  Maharishi has been flexible with aspects of the puja, including not
requirng the student to 
 observe the teacher's performance of the puja.  Maharishi might
allow the teacher to 
 provide the fruit, flowers, and handkerchief, to further reassure
the student. 
 
 The TM technique's current irrelevance is due to the now
overtly-religious TMO. The SIMS 
 period through 1975 saw TM taught as a secular technique, and
incredibly wide 
 acceptance.  Since the Sidhi program instruction in 1976, the TMO
has not been able to 
 present itself as a non-religious organization.   Not coincidently
TM has since become 
 irrelevant.  A return to secular TM instruction made available from
a new, separate secular 
 teaching organization will allow its wide acceptance - the current
affiliation with the 
 overtly-religious TMO will not.


Having now read most of your posts in this thread, I get the
impression that this current effort to establish a 'secular' TMO is
mainly an idea you have concocted and are promoting and that it didn't
come from Maharishi.

I also get the impression that you wouldn't hesitate to proceed to
accomplish a 'secular' organization without his direct approval. 

In my eyes it's bad enough that the key substance of the initiation,
the Puja, its importance and its implications, is being relegated to
darkness, and that the would-be meditaters are totally excluded from
it. In my view, your proposition is not only dangerously contra to
maintaining the purity of the teaching, but flat out dishonest.

I also find it appalling that a TM teacher would resort to having to
hide truths about TM from the general public.

[FairfieldLife] World War III?

[John]

To All Members:

Will Bush take us to another war before he leaves office?  Please, 
see the article below:


Bush: Threat of World War III if Iran goes nuclear By Matt Spetalnick 
Wed Oct 17, 2:33 PM ET
 


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush warned on 
Wednesday a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War III as he 
tried to shore up international opposition to Tehran amid Russian 
skepticism over its nuclear ambitions. 

ADVERTISEMENT
 
Bush was speaking a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin, who 
has resisted Western pressure to toughen his stance over Iran's 
nuclear program, made clear on a visit to Tehran that Russia would 
not accept any military action against Iran.

At a White House news conference, Bush expressed hope Putin would 
brief him on his talks in Tehran and said he would ask him to clarify 
recent remarks on Iran's nuclear activities.

Putin said last week that Russia, which is building Iran's first 
atomic power plant, would proceed from the position that Tehran had 
no plans to develop nuclear weapons but he shared international 
concerns that its nuclear programs should be as transparent as 
possible.

The thing I'm interested in is whether or not he continues to harbor 
the same concerns that I do, Bush said. When we were in Australia 
(in September), he reconfirmed to me that he recognizes it's not in 
the world's interest for Iran to have the capacity to make a nuclear 
weapon.

Bush, who has insisted he wants a diplomatic solution to the Iranian 
issue, is pushing for a third round of U.N. sanctions against Iran.

Russia, a veto-holding member of the Security Council, backed two 
sets of limited U.N. sanctions against Iran but has resisted any 
tough new measures.

Stepping up his rhetoric, Bush said a nuclear-armed Iran would pose 
a dangerous threat to world peace.

We've got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to 
destroy Israel, he said. So I've told people that, if you're 
interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be 
interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to 
make a nuclear weapon.

PUTIN'S SPECIAL MESSAGE

Iran rejects accusations it is seeking to develop a nuclear bomb, 
saying it wants nuclear technology for peaceful civilian purposes 
such as power generation, and has refused to heed U.N. Security 
Council demands to halt sensitive uranium enrichment.

Chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani was quoted by Iran's 
official IRNA news agency on Wednesday as saying that Putin had 
delivered a special message on its atomic program and other issues. 
No other details were given.

Putin's visit on Tuesday was watched closely because of Moscow's 
possible leverage in the Islamic Republic's nuclear standoff with the 
West. It was the first time a Kremlin chief went to Iran since Josef 
Stalin in 1943.

Asked about Putin's special message, U.S. State Department 
spokesman Tom Casey said he was not aware of any deal or offer put 
forward by Moscow to Tehran over the nuclear program.

On Russian opposition to Caspian Sea states being used to launch 
attacks against Iran, Casey reiterated that Bush kept all his options 
on the table but that the United States was committed to the 
diplomatic path with Tehran.

(Additional reporting by Frederick Dahl in Tehran and Sue Pleming in 
Washington)

[FairfieldLife] World's First Microlending Website Accelerates Global Lending Movement

[Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It?]

*World's First Microlending Website Accelerates Global Lending Movement*
*October 17, 2007*


*Kiva.org http://kiva.org/: One of the Fastest-Growing Non-Profits in
History Marks Second Year of Exponential Growth*


From increasing its total loan portfolio to more than $13
million to reach 20,000 entrepreneurs in developing
countries, to an invitation to participate in the Clinton
Global Initiative annual meeting, to an endorsement by
President Clinton in his new book, Giving, Kiva.org
marked its two-year anniversary today in a very big way.
Its second year of unprecedented growth has affected an
exponentially growing number of lenders and entrepreneurs
and received support from more than 130,000 individuals
around the globe, including President Clinton and Oprah
Winfrey.

Through Kiva.org, people around the world can become
micro-bankers to developing world entrepreneurs, said
President Clinton. [These are people] who have their own
ideas, so we can give them a chance to raise their kids
with dignity, send their kids to school, and in troubled
places like Afghanistan, we can marginally increase the
chance that peace can prevail, because people will see
there is a positive alternative to conflict.

Kiva.org, which built the first and fastest-growing online
microlending platform, enables individuals to connect with
developing world entrepreneurs in 39 countries through
small business loans of as little as $25. By combining
microfinance with Web 2.0, Kiva.org has created a way for
the average individual to make a real difference in the
life of an entrepreneur halfway around the world; you no
longer need a Bill Gates-sized budget to have a Bill
Gates-style philanthropic investment portfolio!

In only its second year of operation, Kiva.org has achieved
the following:

-- Facilitated loans of over $12.5m to 19,250 developing
world entrepreneurs (to date totals are over $13m to 20,000
developing world entrepreneurs from 130,000 lenders.)

-- Received support from President Clinton, through
inclusions in his newbook Giving, and interviews with
Greta van Susteren (FOX) and Keith Olbermann (MSNBC.)

-- Appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show with President
Clinton (9/04/07.)

-- Partnered with 48 microfinance institutions in 27
countries, including first-ever partnerships in Iraq and
Afghanistan (to date totals are 62 partners in 39
countries.)

-- Received support from Kellogg Foundation, Draper
Richards Foundation, DOEN Foundation and Halloran
Philanthropy.

-- Attended the 2007 Brookings Blum Roundtable, the Clinton
Global Initiative annual meeting, and won The Tech Museum
Awards 2007 Economic Development Award Laureate and the
World Summit Award 2007 for e-Business.

-- Received press coverage from news organizations
including ABC World News, CNN, BBC, PBS, The Wall Street
Journal, The New York Times, Today Show, TIME Magazine and
BusinessWeek.

*Why is Kiva.org so successful?*

Kiva.org has created a simple yet extremely effective way
for the average individual to make a real difference in the
life of a person in the developing world, for just $25:

-- Connections: Kiva.org's website allows lenders to choose
the individual they would like to lend to, providing a
photograph and description of each entrepreneur and their
business loan needs. I love the feeling of connection I
have to the people to whom I lend money via Kiva.org. I
support these people wholeheartedly in their daily
struggles to meet the needs of their families, says Kiva
Lender Glenda Denniston of Wisconsin.

-- Transparency: Kiva Field Partners update lenders on the
progress of each loan through repayment notifications and
business journals that provide updates on the successes and
difficulties being encountered by the entrepreneur.

-- Accountability: Kiva.org regularly verifies the use of
loan funds through the participation of auditors, Kiva
Fellows and Kiva Staff visits.  By committing to 100%
transparency of the use and placement of loan funds,
Kiva.org enables a greater level of accountability of
contributions, even to the extent that Kiva Lenders have
visited recipients of their loan funds in country.

*About Kiva.org*

Kiva.org (www.kiva.org) is the world's first
person-to-person microlending website, empowering
individuals to lend directly to an entrepreneur in the
developing world. Founded in 2005 by Matt and Jessica
Flannery, Kiva.org's mission is to connect people, through
lending, to alleviate poverty. Kiva.org currently connects
lenders in more than 50 countries with entrepreneurs in 39
developing countries, through 62 microfinance partners.
Kiva.org is headquartered in San Francisco.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Interesting video on Ajna chakra.

[Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It?]

This is a splendid find, thank you, Billy.



On 10/17/07, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 In this teaching Cosmic Consciousness is synonymous with MMY's Unity
 Consciousness.



 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9cSuXLlOtAmode=relatedsearch=India%20Meditation%20Guru%20Yoga%20Enlightenment%20Samadhi%20Nirvana%20Buddha%20Babaji%20Kriya%20Hamsa%20Surya%20Yogiraj%20Siddhanath%20Yogi%20Master

[FairfieldLife] Re: Key to Peace in Iraq

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  
 In a message dated 10/17/07 2:29:32 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 The  United States should NOT take on the role of being the 
benefactor 
 for the  government of Iraq ad infinitum. The USA should let the 
Iraqi 
 develop  their own destiny as an independent nation. Peace needs to 
 nurtured from  the hearts of the Iraqis by themselves and at their 
own 
 terms. This is the  only way stability in Iraq can be maintained. 
As 
 such, the US should get  out of Iraq as soon as possible.
 
 
 
 Right, survival of the fittest!  
 

No, it is the survival of the smartest that prevails...which is 
unfortunate for Bush and his republican followers.

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Besides that,
 everything is just an opinion. I have this opinion, you have that
 opinion, fine, I have thought this, you have thought that, okay. I
 don't really feel it matters so much.

Yes, probably. Perhaps no. Knowledge given to you by 
someone of superlative esteemed human qualities, IMO (just an opinion,
but works for me) might not be authoritative (100% probability of
truth) -- but can have a high probability. And our assessment of this
probability might change with time as we get new information. MMY
might have for some been at 99.5% for some of us in 1968-9 -- but has
now sunk to 60%, in 2007. And 60% is good and respectful. 

Long preface to my point. I admire, respect and -- what is the word --
cherish, am happy for you, seek, glow with respect -- not sure of the
right word -- your relation  with Mother Meera.

So with such access, I am curious if you just have opinions about
many spiritual things -- or that you use that word to be polite.
And I mean all of this in a positive, uplifting, friendly way.

In other words, and I have never met her, I give her a high
probability of validity of knowledge. Don't ask me why, but I do. I  
don't know why,other than the picture of her glance sears me.

I guess if I had your access (not the right word -- but the best I can
do -- I imagine that I would have more than opinions. That is, I would
have (IMO) a high probability of valid knowledge. (And I know this is
not a strong epistimological case -- but I just feel she has correct
knowledge for me. Don't ask me why. And I am rational enough to
question such.) 

[FairfieldLife] Re: My God

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from
 where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so
 spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance
 up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?
 
 Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come
 from.  This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder!
 
 
  That's God to me.  An overwhelming giving of the earth to
 inheriting, meeky me.
  
  He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions
 flitting in the billows.
  
  He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow.  He's laughing
  inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. Snip
 
 And here are you saying that you know that God is the source of your
 thoughts?  I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it
 lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not
 that there is anything wrong with that)  
 
 Here is where it matters.  When people claim to know that it is
 God who is feeding them thoughts.  Perhaps we have a functioning
 personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this
 stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our
 mind...oh I know an unconscious mind!
 
  Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the
  silence is God's sparking.  
  
  I cannot find non-Godness.
 
 What you can't find is your perception without using this filter
 overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way.  Want
 some REAL silence?  Try actually just experiencing your silence
 without the belief overlay. 
 
 Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an
 explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God.  It is not
 that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more
 from the creator of the universe. 
 
 

I tend to agree with Curtis. 

Realizing one does not think, volitionally, thoughts --  that they
come effortlessly, is a good wonderful step,IMO. And you may GET IT
the first time you get checked, or 20 years later when you are
checked, or when you memorize the checking notes. Or never. Stealth
Mahavakya.

But attributing thoughts to God -- while nice and poetic, is neither
necessary -- or even much of a compliment to God -- if She exists
beyond Maya. (And She includes the prospect of a totally Gay, Queen
God. All possibilities,all possibilities) ((If so, I vote for Lyood 
on Entourage).

If God and Ishwara type exists (and SHE has not walked thru my walls
-- nor has Ganesh (btw, did you  see the new Albee play, Waiting for
Ganesh?) then I give them enough credit to be Deist types -- and
exit stage left -- as did yogi bear -- when they designed this
latest gig (aka creation). 

There is no need to posit GOD as thinking your f.. mundane thoughts.
OMG, give God a little more credit. If GOD thought your thoughts, the
THOUGHTS would so f... blast you to NOTHINGNESS (Jai Sarte) -- its not
even polite to imagine the carnage.

Thoughts come because of your past mundane attachments. And your
reaction to oncoming karma (responses based on learning and education
-- again karma-based).

And why Randomness and Predetermination are the only two choices --
thats trip down blinders-on thinking. There are SO many more
possibilities.

So rock on, if you need to get off on the image --and illusion -- of 
GOD thinking your thoughts (just a bit grandiose and meglomanic are
we?) I thought we left maya back at the last train stop.

[FairfieldLife] Does TM do any Harm? Revised page on TruthAboutTM.com

[Rick Archer]

From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 8:00 PM
To: David Orme-Johnson
Subject: Does TM do any Harm? Revised page on TruthAboutTM.com

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

This page reviews all the research claiming that practice of the TM program
may cause harm. 

 

Below is an excerpt from the page, which presents brief summaries of the
studies, which are followed by more details on the TruthAboutTM.com Web
site. Of particular interest is the often quoted paper by Otis, (# 1 in the
list below), which was found to be seriously confounded.

 

Al the best, David

 

---

Papers Often Referenced to as Asserting that the TM Program Has or May Have
Harmful Effects. 

Out of the over 600 studies on the Transcendental Meditation program over
the past 35 years, only a dozen or so even suggest that the program has
harmful effects. This amounts to only 2% negative papers, compared with
98% of the papers reporting beneficial effects.


Close analysis shows that the harm papers are all uncontrolled studies,
some not on the Transcendental Meditation program at all. In some, the claim
of harm is based on unfounded speculation with no evidence. Others present
strong evidence that the TM program is beneficial even for seriously ill
psychiatric patients, although these studies rightly warn that such patients
should be closely monitored when learning to meditate. One article presents
interesting experiences of witnessing in cosmic consciousness, which are
simply misinterpreted in terms of psychiatric concepts.

The 14 papers reviewed below are ones that are often cited on the Internet
and in reviews as evidence that the Transcendental Meditation program has or
may have harmful effects. 

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/DoesTMDoAnyHarm/index.c
fm#Otis_New#Otis_New1. Leon S. Otis. Adverse Effects of Transcendental
Meditation. Meditation: Classic and Contemporary Perspectives Alden
Publications, 1984, p. 204.

The study by Otis, which was never published in a peer-reviewed journal,
makes the following errors: (1) it confounds the number of problems
experienced by meditators with how long they have been meditating; (2) it
compared groups that were not equivalent at pretest; (3) it reported only
part of the data; (4) it changed its hypotheses to fit the data; (5) it
proposed a fictitious physiological mechanism for how meditation could cause
harm; (6) it has never been replicated, and (7), it is contradicted by
better-designed, controlled research.

Imagine that a truck salesman compares how many problems his trucks had over
a three-month period with the number of problems other truck brands had over
an 11-months-to-10-year period. Is this a valid comparison? Of course not.
Naturally, one would expect more problems to come up over the longer time
period. Yet this is the essence of Otis’s claim that Experienced meditators
have more problems that Novice meditators.

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/DoesTMDoAnyHarm/index.c
fm#Lazarus#Lazarus2. Arnold A. Lazarus. Psychiatric Problems Precipitated
by Transcendental Meditation. Psychological Report, 1976, 39, pp. 601-602.

Arnold A. Lazarus.  Meditation: The Problems of Unimodal Technique.
Meditation: Classic and Contemporary Perspectives. New York: Alden
Publications, 1984, p. 691.

The author’s main thesis is “how can anything be good for everyone” and he
sets out to find a subgroup for whom TM practice would not be indicated.
This is not a controlled study, and the author presents no systematic data
of any kind to support his thesis. Instead, he supports his points with
uncontrolled observations and hearsay. His opinions are contradicted by
substantial, well-controlled research on a variety of patient groups and
other populations (e.g., see Opinion on Glueck research above). These
controlled studies have found TM practice to be beneficial. Conceptually,
one can understand how TM practice could be universally beneficial from the
physiological research, which indicates that it produces a state of deep,
coherence rest. Like sleep, it is good for everyone.

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/DoesTMDoAnyHarm/index.c
fm#Glueck_75_Comp_Psychiatry#Glueck_75_Comp_Psychiatry3. Bernard C. Glueck
and Charles F. Stroebel. Biofeedback and Meditation and the Treatment of
Psychiatric Illness. Comprehensive Psychiatry, Volume 16, Number 4, 1975.

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/DoesTMDoAnyHarm/index.c
fm#Glueck_85_Current_Psychiatric#Glueck_85_Current_Psychiatric4. Bernard C.
Glueck and Charles F. Stroebel. Biofeedback and Meditation and the Treatment
of Psychiatric Illness. Current Psychiatric Therapies, Vol. 15, 1975, p.
109-115.

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/DoesTMDoAnyHarm/index.c
fm#Stoebel_78#Stoebel_785. Charles F. Stroebel and Bernard C. Glueck.
Passive Meditation: Subjective, 

[FairfieldLife] No Effects Studies page on TruthAboutTM.com

[Rick Archer]

From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 9:38 PM
To: David Orme-Johnson
Subject: No Effects Studies page on TruthAboutTM.com

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

This is the last one for a while. Tomorrow morning we are leaving for
Fairfield for a month of long meditations.

 

This page responds to five studies claiming that TM practice has no effects.
These studies, by the way, contradict articles asserting that the practice
has adverse effects. These studies generally say that it is benign, like
ordinary rest.

 

Of particular interest is the # 5 in the short summaries below, a response
to a review by Canter and Ernst claiming that TM practice does not improve
cognitive ability. Detailed responses are on the Web site. I have responses
to other “no-effect” studies, which I will post later.

 

All the best, David

 

-

Critique of studies alleging that Transcendental Meditation technique has no
effect

ISSUE: DOES THE TRANCENDENTAL MEDITATION PROGRAM HAVE NO EFFECT?

Below are short summaries of studies reporting that the Transcendental
Meditation has no effect, followed by more detailed analyses.


HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/Research/No-EffectStudies/index.cfm#Desir
aju#Desiraju1. Desiraju, T. (1990) The Yoga and Consciousness Project.
National Institute of Mental Health and Neuroscience. Bangalore, India: Omni
magazine, November, pp. 84-88.

Dr. Desiraju’s EEG study is one that claims that Transcendental Meditation
has no special effects. It in no way shows or implies that the
Transcendental Meditation technique has negative effects. His results appear
to be due to a lack of understanding that the practice of the Transcendental
Meditation technique is a dynamic process, not a single state. It has
different phases: thoughts, inner silence (transcendental consciousness),
sometimes sleep and dream states. When these different phases are averaged,
no special effects might be seen. However, many researchers that have
discriminated between the different phases of Transcendental Meditation
practice have found unique effects, particularly during the transcendental
consciousness phase.

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/Research/No-EffectStudies/index.cfm#Holme
s#Holmes2. Holmes, D.S. (1984). Meditation and Somatic Arousal Reduction: A
Review of the Experimental Evidence. American Psychologist 39, no. 1 (1984):
1-10.

The Holmes study was a qualitative review of several meditation techniques
combined together, claiming that meditation did not reduce somatic arousal
any more than ordinary rest. The review was flawed by mixing the results of
different techniques, which used different methods and had different goals.
A meta-analysis specifically on the Transcendental Meditation technique
found that the technique differed significantly from ordinary rest on a
number of physiological parameters (Dillbeck  Orme-Johnson, 1987).

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/Research/No-EffectStudies/index.cfm#Smith
#Smith3. Smith, J.C. (1976). Psychotherapeutic Effects of Transcendental
Meditation with Controls for Expectation of Relief and Daily Sitting.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 630-637. 

The Smith study claims that the Transcendental Meditation program does not
have any special ability to reduce trait anxiety, and that if there are
effects, they are due to the subjects’ expectations. However, a
meta-analysis of all studies on trait anxiety, including Smith’s, have shown
that Transcendental Meditation practice is more effective than other
relaxation and meditation techniques, controlling for expectation and a wide
range of other variables.

HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/Research/No-EffectStudies/index.cfm#Kaia#
Kaia4. Kaia, T. E.  Huddleston, S. (1999)The use of psychological skills
by female collegiate swimmers. Journal of Sports Behavior, Dec., 22(4),
602-610. 

This study did not actually measure the effects of the TM technique on
swimming skill, as the TranceNet Web site implies. It did not even suggest
that any of the swimmers even knew what the Transcendental Meditation
technique was, much less whether they ever actually practiced it. Therefore,
the TranceNet statement that “Transcendental Meditation had no significant
effect” is a completely wrong and misleading description of what the study
actually did and said.


HYPERLINK
http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/Research/No-EffectStudies/index.cfm#Cante
r#Canter5. Canter, P. H. and Ernst, E. (2003). The cumulative effects of
Transcendental Meditation on cognitive function. Wiener Klinische
Wochenschrift 115/21–22: 758–766.

This paper reviewed 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of
the Transcendental Meditation program on cognitive performance, from which
it concluded that the studies showing positive effects were a result of
expectation. However, the positive effects were on objective measures of
cognitive 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Who is in control of our lives?

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hey New,
 
 
  Good post Curtis. Actually great. I appreciate your POV.
 
 Thanks.  It is really nice that you ask for my POV here.
 
 
  Several questions:
 
  Why atheism and not agnosticism?
 
 In my understanding agnosticism runs a gambit from believing in God
 but thinking he is unknowable, to what is practically an atheist.  So
 agnosticism  might fit although I think atheism is more precise.  I
 wrote about why the term atheist isn't completely satisfactory.  But
 I have a pretty good idea of the specifics of how the world's
 religious scriptures were written by men who created different God
 ideas. I haven't seen anything in any scripture that would make me
 think it was beyond the ability of men to create. So I don't share any
 of the theistic views, I am a-theist.
 
 That said, we still might find out there is a creator to the universe.
  I just don't think man has done so yet.  I think we need to know a
 lot more about the mystical experiences we have induced with
 meditation and their causes.  Humans love to take the content of their
 compelling subjective experiences at face value. In particular, we
 seem vulnerable to quickly believing the mystical experiences makes us
 special and the language of religion and spiritual traditions
 supports this elevated view of self. (even promoting it to Self)  I
 believe that this messes up a more humble approach to mystical
 experiences that isn't value ridden with traditional interpretations
 of their meaning.
 
I get it. And agree -- with requisite (minor) qualifications.
(grandiose weasal words)

  I don't know seems more compatible  with the latter.
 
 I feel at least as confident as about the Santa myth so far.
  
  In your POV:
1) Where does karma stand?
 
 I don't believe in a mechanism that keeps track of actions and don't
 even understand what kind of moral equivalents the karma theories I
 came across are claiming.  

I do see action and reaction in physics and at least surface social
stuff (smile and everyone smiles back, be very helpful and caring to
EVERYONE -- and you get help and  caring  when you need it.) So I can
extrapolate that to farther reaching things. With some significant
probability of being wrong.

And karma is foundational to me. It explains an elegant universe
without an active God. (doesn't preclude passive, hidden Deist one)

And Jyotish is the map of karma, it is said. I am not offering a
proof, or even a belief in karma.But damn, it so so uncannily right on
sometimes. I just  changed sub dashas (out of worst saturn period
possible) and damn, if what has happened in the last month, hasn't
been there in my chart for 50 years.

It seems like a ruse to maintain people in
 subservient positions by the ruling class.  

WhoAAA. Who said anything about this. Different defs of karma I
presume.

In India, who made up and
 maintained the rule, let me guess.  Oh I know, the one who are
 mentioned as the highest caste in the system!  And it turns out that
 challenging their authority will get you a harsh karmic payback.

I said karma,not caste. Should I write slower? :)

 Karmic theories may arise from our sense of justice.  For me, seeing
 natural disasters as just random, rather than a pay back for previous
 wrongs, seems more compassionate.  

I see you never visted NO before Katrina. (Joke -- with some pebble of
 truth perhaps). Collective Karma.  Bridge of  San Luis Rey. Not just
an Indian concept.

So the karma theory doesn't help
 me.  If it were true I don't see how man could know the details.  It
 seems far fetched to me that men know such things.
 
2) Can scriptures have a value in ethics, a la, the Jefferson Bible.
 
 As part of our human history they have been instrumental in all
 cultures in forming ethics, but we are starting to see where modern
 times may have moved beyond some of the religious views, think stem
 cell research and women's rights  I a fan of the Bible and have read
 it thoughtfully a number of times.  I don't think it provideds good as
 ethical guidance today.  I think the Greeks may have given us much
 better tools to consider what kind of society we want to create
 together, which is the fruit of ethics. 

Yes. but Sheep? 

 
 The Vedic scriptures seem great at laying out the many many variables
 in making ethical decisions.  It doesn't seem to offer simple answers,
 but provides fuel for discussion.  This discussion needs to take place
 in an atmosphere of humility where no one stands up and says I know
 what God wants us to do.  This is killing out ability to refine our
 ethics today.  Religion is a start of the ethical discussion, not the
 end.  I am a fan of Jefferson but think he may have elevated the
 importance of Jesus as an ethical teacher too high.  We can do better.

Naivly, perhaps, I still dig Jesus, my bro, as an ethical teacher.


(And turn the other check doesn't mean what you were thinking.)