[FairfieldLife] Re: 632 pundits in VC
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jymbonic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: > > > > Global Good News: > > > > Raja Wynne said that it was a great joy to be back in Maharishi Vedic > > City where there are now 632 Vedic Pandits, including the 85 that > > arrived recently. Snip. > > I want to hear what the pandits are saying in their letters home. Do > they like living in Vedic City? I think they're homesick before the > plane leaves India airspace, and an Iowa winter or two will send them > packing. Plus, who is there to order them to go to America now with > Maharishi gone? The image that comes to mind when I think of them > playing volleyball, which I've read here in FFL that they're fond of, > is the American interment of the Japanese-Americans during WWII. Do > Vedic Pandits have wives and kids, and, if so, are the families united > in Fairfield? Contrast the pandits with another expatriate group: the > American Purusha in Uttar Kashi. For the Purusha, retirement in Uttar > Kashi is the holy grail of Purusha life. For the Vedic Pandits, their > motivation is questionable. Were they ordered to go to Iowa? Do they > go so that they, like Guatamalans and El Salvadorans working in > America, can send money home? Do the Pandits want to stay in Iowa? Has > anyone gotten any feedback from them on their expatriate experience? > They get paid a stipend, get a loan paid off too their families, etc. RE: the volleyball story- -- I have this vision of 500 pundits lining up to play volley ball in this one tiny VB court rather than do their TM-SIdhis program together... Actually, I have that as a vision of what it would look like if a substantial number of them were playing VB at any given moment. And, if less than 10% are, is this such a big deal? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> > I have read many, many old translations in English from the
> > earliest ones and have never heard those words used. However
> > there is a great variation in the translations for dhyana. I
> > don't know if we actually have a previous translation of the
> > phrase bhavatita-dhyana, but if we do, I doubt you'd see TM
> > used as the trans.
>
> From the TMFree blog almost exactly a year ago:
>
> bhavatita could be seen as the path equivalent of the fruit,
> turiyatita (cosmic consciousness, i.e. "CC"). Most translators will
> translate turiyatita as "beyond turiya" or one could
> say "transcending turiya". Similarly we could say "transcending
> being" for bhavatita. So, literally, bhavatita-dhyana would be
> translated as "beyond being meditation" or "transcending being
> meditation" or simply "transcendental meditation"
>
> Here's what Monier-Williams gives for atIta:
>
> atIta mfn. gone by , past , passed away , dead ; one who has gone
> through or got over or beyond , one who has passed by or neglected ;
> negligent ; passed , left behind ; excessive ; m. N. of a particular
> S3aiva sect ; (%{am}) n. the past.
>
> An example would be "buddhyatIta", which means "beyond the reach of
> the understanding".
> Vaj | 03.26.07 - 3:22 pm | #
>
All very nice, but in fact, the only place you find the Krishna consciousness
founder
mentioning "transcendental meditation" is to pooh pooh it, and the first place
he mentions
it is in a lecture in November of 1968 in response to a newspaper article
someone gave
him about "the Transcendental Meditation," which he dismisses as not being real.
In his book, _The Bhagavad Gita As It is_, he never mentions the term
"transcendental
meditation," but instead uses "Dhyäna" or simply "meditation." He uses the
term
"transcendental" all over the place, but never puts the two words together.
In other words, you can't find a case where the founder of the Krishna
Consciousness
movement uses the term "transcendental Meditation" save in reference to a
newspaper
article about TM itself or in subsequent articles and speeches where he uses
the term only
to dismiss it as impossible and/or impractical.
The other website is dated 2002. MY guess is that they adopted MMY's
terminology since
it doesn't translate directly frrom "Dhyäna" and the discussion wasn't about
bhavatita but Dhyän in Panajali's Yoga Sutras book 1.41, which the author
calls:
Translation of yoga thesis on transcendental meditation
And he translates "Samapattih" as "direct experience of unified transcendental
meditation"
but doesn't use the term "transcendental meditation" anywhere else on the
website save in
reference to the book-as-a-whole:
http://www.heavenlygardens.org/sadhana/title.htm
So, the only places you can find where "transendental meditation" is used in a
context not
obviously related to MMY's TM are in the context of someone denouncing its use,
referring
explicitly to a newspaper article about it in late November 1968 and in a
website book
copyright 2002.
Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can I ask a question? I don't know you from Adam, > but you've been coming across a tad...uh...cultlike > about this Tom fellow. And the website you pointed > us to has a vibe that's more than a little icky IMO. > How much money have you...uh..."contributed" to > this Core Spirituality Institute? Tom has been my life partner for going on 25 years now. He was chosen 2 years in a row as the students favorite faculty member - teaching philosophy & film at MIU in th early 80's. For sure I'm his biggest cheerleader and I've contributed my life with no regrets. Who self publishes & ask for donations? A sanyansin, who else. Tom writes for himself and the few people that can grok it. He's actually dumbed this down quite a bit.But who is going to publish a book that is 750 pages and few people would understand. An editor friend of ours wanted Tom to write a book on the Gita a few years back. Kendra eventually wrote the book herself after Tom's was turned down the publishers were impressed but needed something for the masses. Tom just not do sound bites. He won't say something is true if it's only 85% probable that it is so it doesn't read like an Ayn Rand book 100% black or 100% white There are pictures of us here http://members.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=gypsyjanluise smaller picture here on the for you ickyweb site http://www.corespirituality.com/fellows.html I don't actually remember you as a personality but I guess we played hooky together one afternoon at the first Squaw Valley course '68, going to Tahoe in someones van. My roommate at the Christmas '67 Asilomar Course was a very shy girl named Karen Tjsomethingnagel, you eventual x-wife i guess. Quite a suprise to come back to the US in 75 and see the flashy Karen Wright, Registrar at miu.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 632 pundits in VC
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Global Good News: > > Raja Wynne said that it was a great joy to be back in Maharishi Vedic > City where there are now 632 Vedic Pandits, including the 85 that > arrived recently. Snip. I want to hear what the pandits are saying in their letters home. Do they like living in Vedic City? I think they're homesick before the plane leaves India airspace, and an Iowa winter or two will send them packing. Plus, who is there to order them to go to America now with Maharishi gone? The image that comes to mind when I think of them playing volleyball, which I've read here in FFL that they're fond of, is the American interment of the Japanese-Americans during WWII. Do Vedic Pandits have wives and kids, and, if so, are the families united in Fairfield? Contrast the pandits with another expatriate group: the American Purusha in Uttar Kashi. For the Purusha, retirement in Uttar Kashi is the holy grail of Purusha life. For the Vedic Pandits, their motivation is questionable. Were they ordered to go to Iowa? Do they go so that they, like Guatamalans and El Salvadorans working in America, can send money home? Do the Pandits want to stay in Iowa? Has anyone gotten any feedback from them on their expatriate experience?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Clinton's Use 'Gutter' Politics, Richardson says'
Bill Richardson is a honorable and principled man. He knew the goon squad would attack him for taking his stand.He gets respect from both sides of the aisle. I hope others follow quickly his lead. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > WASHINGTON, March 23 (UPI) -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Sunday > aides to U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., use "gutter" politics to get their way. > > The former candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination was compared > by one Clinton adviser to Judas this week following his voiced support of Clinton's rival, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., The Washington Post reported. > > "I'm not going to get in the gutter like that," Richardson said of the > comments from informal Clinton adviser James Carville. "And you know, that's typical of many of the people around Senator Clinton. They think they have a sense of entitlement to the presidency." > > Richardson has been critical of the ongoing fight for the Democratic > nomination, but his scorn of such tactics has primarily been aimed at Clinton's camp. > > "The campaign has gotten too negative," he said of the electoral battle. > > "I just feel the time has come to come together behind a candidate." > > > > - > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it > now. >
[FairfieldLife] 'Clinton's Use 'Gutter' Politics, Richardson says'
WASHINGTON, March 23 (UPI) -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Sunday aides to U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., use "gutter" politics to get their way. The former candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination was compared by one Clinton adviser to Judas this week following his voiced support of Clinton's rival, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., The Washington Post reported. "I'm not going to get in the gutter like that," Richardson said of the comments from informal Clinton adviser James Carville. "And you know, that's typical of many of the people around Senator Clinton. They think they have a sense of entitlement to the presidency." Richardson has been critical of the ongoing fight for the Democratic nomination, but his scorn of such tactics has primarily been aimed at Clinton's camp. "The campaign has gotten too negative," he said of the electoral battle. "I just feel the time has come to come together behind a candidate." - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > > wrote: > > > > > > Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? > > > > Primae noctis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primae_noctis > > > > When you get married, they get to boink your wife on your > > wedding night. > > > > :-) > > > > ( This is obviously a joke. Can you think of any of the > > Rajas who would risk doing this in the open, and risk > > the woman commenting on their...uh...performance? ) > > > > Seriously, they have the right to try to do anything > > they think they can get away with. The *extent* of what > > they think they can get away with is still undetermined. > > > > We, on the other hand, have been bequeathed a far greater > > right. We can laugh at them when they try. > > Amazing, more than 30 years out of the Movement and it still provokes > the Turq and makes him s frustrated. > The impression it made on him will be an eternal subject for his poor > soul. > Or so it seems. :-) > and true of anyone who has done TM for any length of time-- that experience of life's essence becomes the nucleus around which the ego of the segregated self flutters, trying desperately and continuously to make sense of it, while wishing fervently to slow down the inevitable death of the identity of the false segregated self. with that single sweet taste, the integrated self from that point on also continuously tries to break through, and eliminate through permanent union, the false segregated self. as they say, let the games begin.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angela, -- close calls
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5" > > wrote: > > > > > > Yes, that wonder can happen this way. My experience too. You > might > > > like this video deconstruction as it is told. Sort of an Advaitan- biology lesson. > > > > > > I had the nearly exact same kind of experience about ten years > ago > > > as this woman's was. I have written some things like this but > her > > > video presentation is much better multi-media getting at 'it', > as > > > in describing the larger universal 'what an i' without metaphor > or > > > needing folk mythos. > > > > > > Take a look at this video: > > > > > > Stroke of Insight > > > > > > http://www.ted.com:80/talks/view/id/229 > > > > FWIW, the second to last of Shiva-suutras (Kashmir Shaivism) > goes like this: > > nAsikAntarmadhyasaMyamAt kimatra > savyApasavyasaushhumneshhu (SS III 45) > > Without sandhi it might be something like this: > > nAsikA+antar-madhya-saMyamAt kim atra savya+apasavya-sauSumneSu. > > An "ultraliteral", quite awkward translation could be: > > nose-interior-middle-sanyama-from what here left-right-relating- > to-suSumna_s[1]-in > > The last compound word (savya-apasavya-sauSumneSu) seems to > refer (at least) to the naDiis called iDaa, pin.galaa and > suSumnaa. But I have absolutely no idea, why the last component > of this compound is 'sauSumna'(the suffix [e]Su is that of > locative plural) instead of 'suSumna', of which it is the > so called vRddhi derivative, often having the meaning 'relating > to.. ', in this case 'relating to suSumna'. > > One possible explanation, though prolly highly unlikely could > be, that 'right', 'left' and 'relating-to-suSumna' don't actually > refer (only?) to the naDiis but (also?) to the hemispheres of the > brain and corpus callosum, the thang that connects those > hemispheres! :0 > > [1] The last component is in plural, because that's the way > things are when we are dealing with a dvandva compound of > more than two (2) components (In which case the suffix > would be that of words in dual number, which actually > is quite, er, "handy", namely the fact that a language has > a dual in addition to singular and plural. The meaning > at least here is -- despite the fact that the ending is that > of a plural word form -- most prolly, singular.) > cardemaister yur making my brain work hard. Dear Carde, Om, these notes you make relate to that other parallel thread of Nirvikalpa Samadhi also. Yes, is different than just TM or the TM-sidhis. Actually the folks who do speak and teach to this which you bring up are Karunamayi http://karunamayi.org/ and Mother Meera http://mrreddy.org/ , or http://www.mothermeerahomecolorado.org/links.html . They are folks to sit with that can help with these things. Also Ammachi through her IAM technique http://www.amma.org/, . I'm sure there are some others. These though are where old TMmovement'ers can readily go to for more advanced help with their progress. In western world can also go to just Janet Sussman in FF for spiritual help with these things. She is very helpful practically on this kind of work too. She is often listed in advertizements in the FF Weekly Reader. http://www.fairfieldtoday.com/ Dr. David R. Hawkins out in Az. http://www.veritaspub.com/index.php is good on this too. Old TM'ers should be able to quickly relate to these westerners if they don't wish to attach to another teacher from India for help. Life in FF. Jai Guru Dev, -Doug in FF
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free will and atheism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis" > wrote: > > > > stu writes snipped: > > In all cases, free will is adopted and rejected by people regardless > of > > their proclivity towards faith. However, I am ever suspicious of > > anyone's arguments if they involve themselves with faith. If they are > > willing to accept one notion without adequate evidence what then of > > their other notions? Sounds to me like a lot of guesswork. > > > > TomT: > > In my experience relating Free Will and awakening I have come to see > > that Awakening is absolutely FREE. But it will Cost you every concept > > you have about it. Secondly it WILL happen because it is who you are > > and all you do is get to see that which has always been right under > > your nose. As one of my friends likes to say ""You'll find IT in the > > last > > place that you don't look." > > Tom > > > And what brought you to that place of awakening? > > s. > ruthless dedication to tearing down every concept, until there is nothing left; absolute ruthlessness and hunger to find out the absolute truth of life. anything less is staying within the lovely and seductive grip of illusion- anything else is living a lie, a false picture.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have read many, many old translations in English from the
> earliest ones and have never heard those words used. However
> there is a great variation in the translations for dhyana. I
> don't know if we actually have a previous translation of the
> phrase bhavatita-dhyana, but if we do, I doubt you'd see TM
> used as the trans.
>From the TMFree blog almost exactly a year ago:
bhavatita could be seen as the path equivalent of the fruit,
turiyatita (cosmic consciousness, i.e. "CC"). Most translators will
translate turiyatita as "beyond turiya" or one could
say "transcending turiya". Similarly we could say "transcending
being" for bhavatita. So, literally, bhavatita-dhyana would be
translated as "beyond being meditation" or "transcending being
meditation" or simply "transcendental meditation"
Here's what Monier-Williams gives for atIta:
atIta mfn. gone by , past , passed away , dead ; one who has gone
through or got over or beyond , one who has passed by or neglected ;
negligent ; passed , left behind ; excessive ; m. N. of a particular
S3aiva sect ; (%{am}) n. the past.
An example would be "buddhyatIta", which means "beyond the reach of
the understanding".
Vaj | 03.26.07 - 3:22 pm | #
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > I'd have to go to a library that had older books > > > > on Eastern spiritual techniques, because these > > > > days it's no longer used generically, at least in > > > > the U.S. But here are two (undated) sites on the > > > > Web that use it without any reference to MMY or > > > > TM: > > > > > > > > http://www.heavenlygardens.org/samadhi/step41.htm > > > > > > MMY refers to transcendental meditation as the simplest and most > > > important of the dhyan techniques. That referrence above is using > > > MMY's english term to refer to dyhan in Sanskrit. > > > > Or the chap was translating the Sanskrit term himself. > > That two people could come up with the same translation > > into English from the Sanskrit isn't at all unlikely. > > > > Even more likely is that "transcendental meditation" > > was one of the standard ways, if not *the* standard way, > > to translate the Sanskrit all along. But of course it > > would have meant different things in terms of actual > > implementation until MMY came along and nailed it down. > > > > > > http://www.krishna.org/sudarsana/a035.html#meditation > > > > > > The Krishna Consciousness guy came to the USA in 1966 straight > > > from India. SOBAL was first published in the UK in 1963. > > > > Seems to me vanishingly unlikely that two teachers who > > had their own distinctive techniques to push would steal > > the name of an entirely different technique. > > > > Except that his lecture where he first talks about > "Transcendental Meditation" is in late 1968 and he dismisses > it as purely of the mind, which is material: > > feed://odeo.com/channel/110013/rss.xml > > Bg. Introduction, Everyone Has Individuality > Jun 28, '06, 12:57 PM > âIntroduction to the Bhagavad-Gitaâ 68/11/23 Los Angeles, Bhagavad-gita 2.8-12 > > > Especially the Hare Krishna guy, since what he describes > > as "transcendental meditation" is the Hare Krishna chant, > > for pete's sake. > > Not when he first started talk about it, in 1968. He dismisses > that kind of thing as being mental, and hence material. He says the way to do it in this age is by chanting the name of God: In this age meditational yoga is not possible But in this age of Kali, where everyone is disturbed, always full of anxieties, and where life is very short, people are generally not interested in any transcendental subject matter. They are interested only in the bodily concept of life. When one is always disturbed by so many anxieties, how can he ascend to the platform of transcendental realization. It is very difficult in this age. It was difficult even five thousand years ago, when Arjuna took instruction on meditation from Krishna in Bhagavad-gita. Arjuna was a royal prince; he was very much advanced in so many ways. Yet on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra he said, "My dear Krishna, it is not possible for me to practice this transcendental meditation, this dhyana-yoga process. I am a family man; I have come here to fight for my political interest. How can I practice this system, in which I have to go to a solitary place, I have to sit down, I have to cease from sex It is not possible." Arjuna was so much more qualified than we are, yet he refused to practice this meditation. [Notice that Prabhupada paraphrases Arjuna referring to dhyana-yoga as transcendental meditation.--JS] So, reaching the transcendental platform by the hatha-yoga or dhyana- yoga system is not at all possible in this age. And if somebody is trying to practice such so-called meditation, he is not actually practising transcendental meditation. You cannot perform this transcendental meditation in the city. It is not possible. That is very clearly stated in the Bhagavad-gita. But you are living in the city, you are living with your family, you are living with your friends. It is not possible for you to go to the forest and find a secluded place. But Krishna says you must do this to practice transcendental meditation. In this age chanting the holy name of God is recommended So here, in this age, if you want to rise to the transcendental platform, then you must follow the recommendations of the Vedic literature: kalau tad dhari-kirtanat. In this age, simply by chanting the holy name of God one can reach all perfection. We are not introducing this chanting system by our mental concoction, to make things very easy. No, Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu introduced this process of transcendental meditation five hundred years ago. Also, the Vedic literature recommends it, and it is practical. You have seen that my disciples, these boys and girls, immediately experience a transcendental feeling as soon as they begin chanting Hare Krishna
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is NOTHING you can possibly do to get > her to admit the truth -- that she just made > that shit up to keep from admitting how STUPID > her idea was that lowercasing a term that means > a certain thing allows you to redefine that > thing. Wrong on both counts, sorry. Just for the record, it's capitalizing a term that can redefine it, not the reverse. Janet was going back to an older generic usage of the term "gnostic," from "gnosis" (as she clearly explained and you ignored). >From Oxford English Dictionary: gnosis /nosiss/ noun knowledge of spiritual mysteries. ORIGIN Greek, `knowledge'. gnostic /nostik/ adjective 1 relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge. 2 (Gnostic) relating to Gnosticism. noun (Gnostic) an adherent of Gnosticism. ORIGIN Greek gnostikos, from gnostos `known'. Note that two meanings are listed for the adjective "gnostic," the generic one lower-cased, the capitalized one specific. Other examples: catholic/Catholic, democrat/ Democrat, republican/Republican, and (special for you) know-nothing/Know-Nothing.
[FairfieldLife] Two Kitty Pictures
1) http://www.flickr.com/photos/triciawyse/2317439790/ 2) http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/2302705455_0c9985c3d2.jpg?v=0
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
On Mar 23, 2008, at 8:32 PM, sparaig wrote: The more odd-sounding names were chosen as a result of "Transcendental Meditation" being considered too generic, so they were using things like "Maharishi Technology of the Unified Field" (tm). Well there's a nice pseudo-scientific name. But my point still stands, no-one was using "transcendental meditation" to refer to dyhan before MMY. IT was translated as "concentration" by everyone else that I have read until I saw Judy's URL. I have read many, many old translations in English from the earliest ones and have never heard those words used. However there is a great variation in the translations for dhyana. I don't know if we actually have a previous translation of the phrase bhavatita-dhyana, but if we do, I doubt you'd see TM used as the trans.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > I'd have to go to a library that had older books > > > on Eastern spiritual techniques, because these > > > days it's no longer used generically, at least in > > > the U.S. But here are two (undated) sites on the > > > Web that use it without any reference to MMY or > > > TM: > > > > > > http://www.heavenlygardens.org/samadhi/step41.htm > > > > MMY refers to transcendental meditation as the simplest and most > > important of the dhyan techniques. That referrence above is using > > MMY's english term to refer to dyhan in Sanskrit. > > Or the chap was translating the Sanskrit term himself. > That two people could come up with the same translation > into English from the Sanskrit isn't at all unlikely. > > Even more likely is that "transcendental meditation" > was one of the standard ways, if not *the* standard way, > to translate the Sanskrit all along. But of course it > would have meant different things in terms of actual > implementation until MMY came along and nailed it down. > > > > http://www.krishna.org/sudarsana/a035.html#meditation > > > > The Krishna Consciousness guy came to the USA in 1966 straight > > from India. SOBAL was first published in the UK in 1963. > > Seems to me vanishingly unlikely that two teachers who > had their own distinctive techniques to push would steal > the name of an entirely different technique. > Except that his lecture where he first talks about "Transcendental Meditation" is in late 1968 and he dismisses it as purely of the mind, which is material: feed://odeo.com/channel/110013/rss.xml Bg. Introduction, Everyone Has Individuality Jun 28, '06, 12:57 PM âIntroduction to the Bhagavad-Gitaâ 68/11/23 Los Angeles, Bhagavad-gita 2.8-12 > Especially the Hare Krishna guy, since what he describes > as "transcendental meditation" is the Hare Krishna chant, > for pete's sake. > Not when he first started talk about it, in 1968. He dismisses that kind of thing as b eing mental, and hence material. > Plus which, very few people had even heard the term > "transcendental meditation" until 1968 when the Beatles > joined up, so it wasn't a matter of Prabhupada wanting > to trick people into thinking he was teaching a technique > that was all the rage. The imitators didn't come along > until the TM technique had become wildly popular; there > wasn't any percentage in it prior to that. > late November 1968., post Beatles TM mania. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > Excellent analogy. The term "transcendental > > > > meditation" existed for a very long time before > > > > MMY decided to trademark and capitalize it, and > > > > many have criticized him for appropriating a > > > > commonly used generic term and claiming that it > > > > could refer *only* to his specific brand of > > > > meditation. > > > > > > > > Thanks for making my point for me. > > > > > > WHAT? That's pure BS, Judy. > > > > Wow, Lawson, I'm surprised you didn't know this. > > well, its an interesting thing, because as far as I know, > and I've been checking off and on for the past 110-15 years > (dates back to just before the new version of the OED was > published), MMY coined that term before anyone else. > > > > MMY first used the term "transcendental deep meditation" in > > > the _Science of Being and Art of Living_ in the early 60's. > > > Show me where that phrase or the shorter "transcendental > > > meditation" was used in any literature before then. > > > > Why on earth would you think, just on its face, > > that the phrase "transcendental meditation" had > > never been used before MMY? > > > > I'd have to go to a library that had older books > > on Eastern spiritual techniques, because these > > days it's no longer used generically, at least in > > the U.S. But here are two (undated) sites on the > > Web that use it without any reference to MMY or > > TM: > > > > http://www.heavenlygardens.org/samadhi/step41.htm > > MMY refers to transcendental meditation as the simplest and > most important of the dhyan techniques. That referrence above > is using MMY's english term to refer to dyhan in Sanskrit. > > > http://www.krishna.org/sudarsana/a035.html#meditation > > The Krishna Consciousness guy came to the USA in 1966 straight > from India. SOBAL was first published in the UK in 1963. > > > If I've heard one objection to MMY appropriating > > the term, I've heard dozens. > > No doubt, and usually by people who didn't get involved in or > know about meditation until well after he published SOBAL 45 > years ago. > > > > You're revising history the same way people who deny that > > > "stress" as a term applied to physiological/psychological > > > conditions was a modern term coined by Hans Selye less > > > than 80 years ago. > > > > No, I'm not. You've apparently just never encountered > > the objection. > > I heard the objection from the Krishna Consciousness founder, > but, as I said, he didn't arrive in the West until 3 years > after MMY published his book. Give it up, Lawson. Judy hath spoken. True, there are some who might think that she originally...uh...spoketh hastily and without thought, in a not-terribly-well-thought-out attempt to put me down, but now her HONOR is on the line, and she has to pretend that the term transcendental meditation existed before Maharishi used it or trademarked it. There is NOTHING you can possibly do to get her to admit the truth -- that she just made that shit up to keep from admitting how STUPID her idea was that lowercasing a term that means a certain thing allows you to redefine that thing. BUT, now that I have Judy's full approval for doing so, here are some more truths about transcendental meditation. She CAN'T object, because she said it's OK to use that term as long as I don't capitalize it, because then it isn't misleading. Y'know...exactly the way that there is nothing misleading about using the term gnostic to refer to something that would be heretical to a Gnostic and contrary to every- thing they believed. :-) So...the REAL secret of transcendental meditation, the thing that makes it the bestest technique in the whole world (besides the headaches, that is), is how you *start* the technique. It's called "chucking." First you chuck your discrimination out the window and you believe everything that the founder of transcendental meditation, Meshuga- nishi says is Absolute Truth. Then you chuck your common sense out the window and believe that if you just focus hard enough and endure enough head- aches you can bring about world peace. Finally, you chuck out your credibility by practicing the transcendental meditation flying technique -- which involves flapping your arms and clucking like a chicken -- in public. I'm sure I'll reveal more of the secrets of trans- cendental meditation in the next few days. It's FAR superior to that Transcendental Meditation stuff, and much more entertaining to boot... :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > I'd have to go to a library that had older books > > on Eastern spiritual techniques, because these > > days it's no longer used generically, at least in > > the U.S. But here are two (undated) sites on the > > Web that use it without any reference to MMY or > > TM: > > > > http://www.heavenlygardens.org/samadhi/step41.htm > > MMY refers to transcendental meditation as the simplest and most > important of the dhyan techniques. That referrence above is using > MMY's english term to refer to dyhan in Sanskrit. Or the chap was translating the Sanskrit term himself. That two people could come up with the same translation into English from the Sanskrit isn't at all unlikely. Even more likely is that "transcendental meditation" was one of the standard ways, if not *the* standard way, to translate the Sanskrit all along. But of course it would have meant different things in terms of actual implementation until MMY came along and nailed it down. > > http://www.krishna.org/sudarsana/a035.html#meditation > > The Krishna Consciousness guy came to the USA in 1966 straight > from India. SOBAL was first published in the UK in 1963. Seems to me vanishingly unlikely that two teachers who had their own distinctive techniques to push would steal the name of an entirely different technique. Especially the Hare Krishna guy, since what he describes as "transcendental meditation" is the Hare Krishna chant, for pete's sake. Plus which, very few people had even heard the term "transcendental meditation" until 1968 when the Beatles joined up, so it wasn't a matter of Prabhupada wanting to trick people into thinking he was teaching a technique that was all the rage. The imitators didn't come along until the TM technique had become wildly popular; there wasn't any percentage in it prior to that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mar 23, 2008, at 4:36 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > > countries precisely *because* it was > > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > > circles.) > > > > > > > Well, actually, you're wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary (thanks > > to my urging) changed > > its dictionary definition of the term to note that it is trademarked > > in the US, at least. I > > know that some countries have different trademark rules, but it is > > NOT, as far as I know, > > due to "transcendental meditation" being "too common" that it can't > > be trademarked in > > those countries. > > > There was some European case IIRC a while back (in the last couple of > years) where precisely what you're conveying ended up being the case. > So it that one country (not sure of others) it is considered just too > generic to trademark, so it's back in the public domain. It's original > Sankrit name "bhavatita-dhyana" isn't close at all to the English > translation. > > Although clearly M. had a great knack for micromanaging the best names > and strategies for his products... > > ...the exception probably being "Maharishi Vibration Technology" :-). > The more odd-sounding names were chosen as a result of "Transcendental Meditation" being considered too generic, so they were using things like "Maharishi Technology of the Unified Field" (tm). But my point still stands, no-one was using "transcendental meditation" to refer to dyhan before MMY. IT was translated as "concentration" by everyone else that I have read until I saw Judy's URL. Lawson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
> Seriously, they have the right to try to do anything > they think they can get away with. > We, on the other hand, have been bequeathed a far > greater right. We can laugh at them when they try. We can also do things that will actually get us awakened. They'll never have that - it's too risky for them to go off-the-program to achieve what they think they've been looking for for the past 35 years. --- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony > and the Rajas is? > > Primae noctis. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primae_noctis > > When you get married, they get to boink your wife on > your > wedding night. > > :-) > > ( This is obviously a joke. Can you think of any of > the > Rajas who would risk doing this in the open, and > risk > the woman commenting on their...uh...performance? ) > > Seriously, they have the right to try to do anything > > they think they can get away with. The *extent* of > what > they think they can get away with is still > undetermined. > > We, on the other hand, have been bequeathed a far > greater > right. We can laugh at them when they try. > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I gave you two URLs to sites that use it without any > reference to TM or Maharishi. As I said, to find other > references I'd have to go to a library that carried > older spiritual books to find other uses, but obviously > I'm not going to go to that sort of trouble for such a > silly dispute. If you want to conclude that I'm lying > about having heard many complaints about MMY's > appropriation of the term, fine, believe what you want. > As I pointed out, the Krishna guy didn't arrive in the West until 3 years after MMY publsihed his book, so a lecture where he uses the term doesn't prove anything. ANd, you've heard plenty of complaints, but when did you hear them? I'm willing to bet that most people weren't involved in any form of meditation prior to the SOBAL publication in 1963. MMY's use of CC coopts an earlier term, but his CC, GC, UC division is now used in AA lectures without attribution and no doubt many people complain that he's coopted THAT, as well. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Interesting. How much is the David Lynch weekend? A few dollars. Maybe $100 or so counting meals. What happens on > one of these events? http://lynchweekend.org/ Lectures by David Lynch on TM, movie making, creativity. Lectures by John Hagelin on QM and consciousness Lectures by DOnovan about the good ole days in India, the 60's, etc. Lectures by Fred Travis on TM and physiology. concerts by Donovan, Moby and Chrysta Bella. $150 ($50 for "prospective" MUM students) includes 3 vegetarian breakfasts, lunches and dinners, I would assume at the new Agiro Student Center. http://www.mum.edu/campus/student_center.html Lawson What is a lunch scholarship? Lynch* Scholarship... http://lynchweekend.org/scholarships/ Its not guaranteed. Write Really Good Essay if you're not applying to become an MUM student. If you have to > attend MUM, it's not much of deal, since that has got to be > expensive! But still, any way it can be made cheaper would be great. > Raising the price to meditate was the fastest way possible to end > initiations almost completely. But was a very savvy move on MMY's part. He drove away all but the most loyal TM teachers, inspired really wealthy individuals to come out of the woodwork and donate, etc. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Mental health break
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXXm696UbKY (Via Andrew Sullivan.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: An answer to the question.
What's the evolutionist's answer to the question? I would think it would have something to do with how enjoying life helps further life. Simple. The people who could not see beauty were more likely to say, "What the fuck," and give up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was visiting my brother recently viewing some of Nature's > resplendent beauty in Nevada, and my Harvard Law school graduated, > atheist brother ask me; "One thing my professors could never tell me > is why we experience joy and appreciation when we see the beauties of > nature"? > > Well, I thought a moment, and said; "Hey Cyril, I know the answer to > that question". Well much to his chagrin I delivered this answer, "The > flower is a reflection (and a clue) as to what is hidden > underneath..." Well, he was beginning to feel a little uncomfortable > at this point and ask his wife to shut me up, so I continued. > > "..and the reason WE feel joy and appreciation at the sight of beauty > is, a portion of that beauty is hidden within us as well (as our own > self) and as such, nature (in this case a flower) functions as a > reminder, inspiring a memory of our long lost spiritual home within". > > Well it was pretty quiet for the rest of the day, some liberal > atheists don't like to entertain opposing points of view, especially > if it challenges the whole foundation of their lives.:-) >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > Excellent analogy. The term "transcendental > > > meditation" existed for a very long time before > > > MMY decided to trademark and capitalize it, and > > > many have criticized him for appropriating a > > > commonly used generic term and claiming that it > > > could refer *only* to his specific brand of > > > meditation. > > > > > > Thanks for making my point for me. > > > > WHAT? That's pure BS, Judy. > > Wow, Lawson, I'm surprised you didn't know this. > well, its an interesting thing, because as far as I know, and I've been checking off and on for the past 110-15 years (dates back to just before the new version of the OED was published), MMY coined that term before anyone else. > > MMY first used the term "transcendental deep meditation" in > > the _Science of Being and Art of Living_ in the early 60's. > > Show me where that phrase or the shorter "transcendental > > meditation" was used in any literature before then. > > Why on earth would you think, just on its face, > that the phrase "transcendental meditation" had > never been used before MMY? > > I'd have to go to a library that had older books > on Eastern spiritual techniques, because these > days it's no longer used generically, at least in > the U.S. But here are two (undated) sites on the > Web that use it without any reference to MMY or > TM: > > http://www.heavenlygardens.org/samadhi/step41.htm MMY refers to transcendental meditation as the simplest and most important of the dhyan techniques. That referrence above is using MMY's english term to refer to dyhan in Sanskrit. > > http://www.krishna.org/sudarsana/a035.html#meditation The Krishna Consciousness guy came to the USA in 1966 straight from India. SOBAL was first published in the UK in 1963. > > If I've heard one objection to MMY appropriating > the term, I've heard dozens. > No doubt, and usually by people who didn't get involved in or know about meditation until well after he published SOBAL 45 years ago. > > You're revising history the same way people who deny that > > "stress" as a term applied to physiological/psychological > > conditions was a modern term coined by Hans Selye less > > than 80 years ago. > > No, I'm not. You've apparently just never encountered > the objection. > I heard the objection from the Krishna Consciousness founder, but, as I said, he didn't arrive in the West until 3 years after MMY published his book. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] An answer to the question.
I was visiting my brother recently viewing some of Nature's resplendent beauty in Nevada, and my Harvard Law school graduated, atheist brother ask me; "One thing my professors could never tell me is why we experience joy and appreciation when we see the beauties of nature"? Well, I thought a moment, and said; "Hey Cyril, I know the answer to that question". Well much to his chagrin I delivered this answer, "The flower is a reflection (and a clue) as to what is hidden underneath..." Well, he was beginning to feel a little uncomfortable at this point and ask his wife to shut me up, so I continued. "..and the reason WE feel joy and appreciation at the sight of beauty is, a portion of that beauty is hidden within us as well (as our own self) and as such, nature (in this case a flower) functions as a reminder, inspiring a memory of our long lost spiritual home within". Well it was pretty quiet for the rest of the day, some liberal atheists don't like to entertain opposing points of view, especially if it challenges the whole foundation of their lives.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Hillary in 2012?
From the Huffington Post: "I've been trying to figure out for weeks why Hillary Clinton is still in this campaign because the math has been obvious for quite some time now. Even Mitt Romney had the - what would you call it, decency, wisdom, common sense - to drop out after he realized it was mathematically impossible (or next to impossible) for him to win. There is one possibility as to why Senator Clinton might still be in this race, inflicting heavy damage on the presumptive Democratic nominee. That reason is Hillary 2012." http://tinyurl.com/yrsgbs Anybody have any thoughts on this? Judy's already stated that she doesn't think Hill has a snowball's chance in hell in any year other than this one, but apparently at least one journalist disagrees. He pretty much sums up my own thoughts as well. Anyone else? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Typically, White Folks Are Good The Matrix is bad. (ÂThe Typical White Per
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > > > > Full story: > > > > > > 'Pelosi Denounces China's Tibet Crackdown' > > > Associated Press, March 20, 2008 > > > http://tinyurl.com/2ekumn > > > > > such hypocrisy that we invade any country on a whim, and then > > castigate the Chinese for having done the same thing- no wonder no > > one is paying any attention. > > Somehow the US foreign policy slowly morphed from complete revulsion of > communism to a whole hearted embrace of communism as long as they > supplied cheap labor to US conglomerates. The US government has to > treat the China with kid gloves otherwise the gloves will no longer be > available at Walmart for $1.99 a six pack. > > s. > even today there is "good" communism-- China, and "bad" communism-- Cuba, who we still can't forgive for humiliating us and kicking our butts forty years ago.
[FairfieldLife] Ostara, the Easter Bunny Moon
FW< March 20th Vernal Equinox 2008 Libra Full Moon and Aries Solar Illumination Festival of Easter Exact at 12:41 PM, CDT, Friday, March 21st. Lightened Bodies Happy Astrological New Year or Vernal Equinox! Happy "Eostre" or Spring. This Full Moon is the traditional festival of the Great Mother, the Fertility Goddess of our ancestors. The Phoenicians called Her "Astarte", the Norse, "Ostara". Astrarte was the Moon Mother of All Creation; the Moon was seen as the World Egg, symbol of Heaven and Earth. Our Easter Bunny used to be the Moon Hare visible on the face of the Moon and sacred to the Goddess. Eggs were painted red and given as a sign of rebirth and the emerging fertility of the season. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > The transcendental meditation technique > > involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing > > one's eyes closed, and concentrating as > > hard as possible on a magical word. The > > idea of transcendental meditation is to > > maintain complete focus on the magical > > word, no matter what. If another thought > > appears, you should force it out, even if > > this causes a headache. The headaches are > > signs that you are meditating properly. > > > The heavens cracked open and a pure light shined in. A wash of > kosmic love washed over my body now a unified one. Hallelujah! > Hallelujah! Hallelujah! > > O Guru Unc - For 30 years I must have been doing it wrong. Upon > reading your post this morning I adjusted my practice. Thank you! > Thank you! Thank you for transmitting the true technique. I bow > down to thee. Salom Aleichem. > > Gotta go, no need to use the internet anymore - will be visiting > you folks on the astral plane. > > Namasté, > > The vessel housing S2. > > PS - Tylenol took care of the headache. Aspirin is better, actually, because as we all know, 'aspirin' *used* to be a trademarked term but lost Bayer lost the rights. That places it on the same level as the transcendental meditation technique I describe above. Take two and text me in the morning. Remember the words of our founder Meshuganishi, "Y'know that blinding light behind your eyes that you once thought was the result of migranes? That's the dawning of enlightenment. Focus harder." :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Typically, White Folks Are Good The Matrix is bad. (ÂThe Typical White Per
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > > Full story: > > > > 'Pelosi Denounces China's Tibet Crackdown' > > Associated Press, March 20, 2008 > > http://tinyurl.com/2ekumn > > > such hypocrisy that we invade any country on a whim, and then > castigate the Chinese for having done the same thing- no wonder no > one is paying any attention. Somehow the US foreign policy slowly morphed from complete revulsion of communism to a whole hearted embrace of communism as long as they supplied cheap labor to US conglomerates. The US government has to treat the China with kid gloves otherwise the gloves will no longer be available at Walmart for $1.99 a six pack. s.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Janet Luise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is EXACTLY WHY Tom's book is so exciting! > A mystic with a PhD in Wittgenstein. Who self-publishes and asks for donations via PayPal. > No, one can't really PROVE. but there is so much garbled > incoherence in the field of religion that this book is way > closer to explaining gnosis that anything else. > I really think that about 200 of the 700 page WILL be > studied in classes in the future. Can I ask a question? I don't know you from Adam, but you've been coming across a tad...uh...cultlike about this Tom fellow. And the website you pointed us to has a vibe that's more than a little icky IMO. How much money have you...uh..."contributed" to this Core Spirituality Institute? I'm happy you're impressed by the book. I spot-read it and have to admit to being underwhelmed. But who, after all, am I? I could easily be mistaken. So I'm sure that if I am, and if it's as neat a book as you say it is, you'll be back in a few weeks telling us which real publisher has picked it up and where we can find more balanced reviews of it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The transcendental meditation technique > involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing > one's eyes closed, and concentrating as > hard as possible on a magical word. The > idea of transcendental meditation is to > maintain complete focus on the magical > word, no matter what. If another thought > appears, you should force it out, even if > this causes a headache. The headaches are > signs that you are meditating properly. > The heavens cracked open and a pure light shined in. A wash of kosmic love washed over my body now a unified one. Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! O Guru Unc - For 30 years I must have been doing it wrong. Upon reading your post this morning I adjusted my practice. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you for transmitting the true technique. I bow down to thee. Salom Aleichem. Gotta go, no need to use the internet anymore - will be visiting you folks on the astral plane. Namasté, The vessel housing S2. PS - Tylenol took care of the headache.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
On Mar 23, 2008, at 4:36 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > countries precisely *because* it was > considered to be too common a phrase. > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > common enough, presumably in spiritual > circles.) > Well, actually, you're wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary (thanks to my urging) changed its dictionary definition of the term to note that it is trademarked in the US, at least. I know that some countries have different trademark rules, but it is NOT, as far as I know, due to "transcendental meditation" being "too common" that it can't be trademarked in those countries. There was some European case IIRC a while back (in the last couple of years) where precisely what you're conveying ended up being the case. So it that one country (not sure of others) it is considered just too generic to trademark, so it's back in the public domain. It's original Sankrit name "bhavatita-dhyana" isn't close at all to the English translation. Although clearly M. had a great knack for micromanaging the best names and strategies for his products... ...the exception probably being "Maharishi Vibration Technology" :-).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: penitent leper > Subject: Gnosis + Knowledge > Newsgroups: alt.religion.gnostic > Date: 2003-10-12 14:15:38 PST > > This "knowing" is gnosis - it's pneumatic insight, not > equivalent to "knowledge about, and about" - such as > dictionary, formulaic, scholarly, or scientific knowledge. > To ask "How a Gnostic knows" is to ask how a mystic or > an enlightened Buddhist knows the state of enlightenment. > If you're asking for proof of such knowing, I doubt that > any system can offer such - other than to invite the > questioner to study and practice - and then decide for > him/herself. > This is EXACTLY WHY Tom's book is so exciting! A mystic with a PhD in Wittgenstein. No, one can't really PROVE. but there is so much garbled incoherence in the field of religion that this book is way closer to explaining gnosis that anything else. I really think that about 200 of the 700 page WILL be studied in classes in the future.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2008, at 4:15 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > It was a vague generic term, Sal, that could have > > referred to many types of meditation, or to a general > > class of meditation techniques, anything that led one > > "beyond" everyday life, however one wanted to define > > it--maybe superficial and silly, maybe complex and > > very serious, or anything in between. > > > > I'm suggesting MMY stuck in "deep" because he wanted > > to make what he called his meditation technique specific > > and to differentiate it from whatever anybody else had > > in mind when they used the general term "transcendental > > meditation." > > > > This really isn't rocket science. > > OK, Judy. I don't personally remember encountering the term > before TM, but it's possible I did and just don't remember. I > definitely don't remember "transcendental deep meditation" > (whew, what a mouthful) at all. I think that's what he uses in both SBAL and his Gita translation/commentary, actually. > Spare makes an interesting point about not being able to find > any written references pre-MMY, though. You wouldn't be likely to find something that early on the Web. I did find material from the Hare Krishnas' guru that used it for his technique. The page wasn't dated, but the guru was of about the same vintage as MMY.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > [...] > > But even if you can come up with their reasons for > > not trademarking it, it *still* is the case that it > > was a common enough term that people complained > > about MMY appropriating it--and hence my point to > > Barry stands. > > Actually, it was not a common-enough term, so your point > does NOT stand. Let me say it again: It was a common enough term that people were complaining about it. You never heard the complaints; fine. I did. And my point to Barry stands regardless. > If you can think of some other group or person who was > possible using it before MMY's use, feel free to google it > and find a prior use in print before MMY used it. Obviously that would be very difficult, Lawson. We're talking about the '60s, and earlier, and there aren't that many books from the '60s whose texts are on the Web. I did point you to material from Swami Bhaktivedanta, who started the Hare Krishnas about the same time. I kind of doubt he stole the term from MMY that far back.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine > wrote: > > > > On Mar 23, 2008, at 3:36 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY > > > term referred was the same as TM. And come to > > > think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck > > > in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was > > > teaching from whatever else was being taught or > > > referred to as transcendental meditation. > > > > You mean to distinguish it from the superficial and silly > > transcendental meditation that everyone else was teaching? > > Yes, I'm sure that's what he meant, Judy. :) > > It was a vague generic term, Sal, that could have > referred to many types of meditation, or to a general > class of meditation techniques, anything that led one > "beyond" everyday life, however one wanted to define > it--maybe superficial and silly, maybe complex and > very serious, or anything in between. > > I'm suggesting MMY stuck in "deep" because he wanted > to make what he called his meditation technique specific > and to differentiate it from whatever anybody else had > in mind when they used the general term "transcendental > meditation." > > This really isn't rocket science. > Sooo... SHow me any place in the published English language where "transcendental meditation" occurred prior to MMY's use of the term. Someone may have used it in terms of Transcendentalism Thought, but I can't find any printed mention of the temr anywhere online. Certainly, prior to MMY"s use, since meditation was such a foreign concept, it seems unlikely that there was much use of the term, and in fact, I can't find any. If it was such a common term, the US trademark office would NOT have allowed it. The UK trademark office uses different criteria then the US: the words are all exclusively things that might be commonly used to describe a service, it can't be trademarked in the UK, even if the specific combination isn't normally used. Lawson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
On Mar 23, 2008, at 4:15 PM, authfriend wrote: It was a vague generic term, Sal, that could have referred to many types of meditation, or to a general class of meditation techniques, anything that led one "beyond" everyday life, however one wanted to define it--maybe superficial and silly, maybe complex and very serious, or anything in between. I'm suggesting MMY stuck in "deep" because he wanted to make what he called his meditation technique specific and to differentiate it from whatever anybody else had in mind when they used the general term "transcendental meditation." This really isn't rocket science. OK, Judy. I don't personally remember encountering the term before TM, but it's possible I did and just don't remember. I definitely don't remember "transcendental deep meditation" (whew, what a mouthful) at all. Spare makes an interesting point about not being able to find any written references pre-MMY, though. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > > countries precisely *because* it was > > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > > circles.) > > > > P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY > > term referred was the same as TM. And come to > > think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck > > in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was > > teaching from whatever else was being taught or > > referred to as transcendental meditation. > > Again, it was NOT a common phrase with or without deep > before MMY started using it. Not an *everyday* term, as I said, but in use in spiritual circles and discourse (without the "deep"). > The UK law precludes the trademarking of words that are simply descriptions of the > product service, but prior to MMY, "transcendental meditation" and "transcendental deep > meditation" were NOT common phrases. > > Show me where the Transcendentalists (for example) used > either phrase. I don't believe I claimed the Transcendentalists used it, did I? I gave you two URLs to sites that use it without any reference to TM or Maharishi. As I said, to find other references I'd have to go to a library that carried older spiritual books to find other uses, but obviously I'm not going to go to that sort of trouble for such a silly dispute. If you want to conclude that I'm lying about having heard many complaints about MMY's appropriation of the term, fine, believe what you want.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2008, at 3:36 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY > > term referred was the same as TM. And come to > > think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck > > in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was > > teaching from whatever else was being taught or > > referred to as transcendental meditation. > > You mean to distinguish it from the superficial and silly > transcendental meditation that everyone else was teaching? > Yes, I'm sure that's what he meant, Judy. :) It was a vague generic term, Sal, that could have referred to many types of meditation, or to a general class of meditation techniques, anything that led one "beyond" everyday life, however one wanted to define it--maybe superficial and silly, maybe complex and very serious, or anything in between. I'm suggesting MMY stuck in "deep" because he wanted to make what he called his meditation technique specific and to differentiate it from whatever anybody else had in mind when they used the general term "transcendental meditation." This really isn't rocket science.
[FairfieldLife] Re: WWF Title Match -- Shakti vs. Nirvikalpa Samadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Shankara's 15 nondual angas can be found before his in verse 100 of > the A-parokshanubhuti, they're also in the Tejobindu Upanishad. Would be interesting to know who's "written" it. Seems almost like someone with OCD or FOAD... ;) Here's an extreme example (Shiva "talking"?): chinmaatrasvaruupamanubruuhiiti . sa hovaacha paramaH shivaH . akhaNDaikarasa.n dR^ishyamakhaNDaikarasa.n jagat.h . akhaNDaikarasaM bhaavamakhaNDaikarasa.n svayam.h .. 1.. akhaNDaikaraso mantra akhaNDaikarasaa kriyaa . akhaNDaikarasa.n j~naanamakhaNDaikarasa.n jalam.h .. 2.. akhaNDaikarasaa bhuumirakhaNDaikarasa.n viyat.h . akhaNDaikarasa.n shaastramakhaNDaikarasaa trayii .. 3.. akhaNDaikarasaM brahma chaakhaNDaikarasa.n vratam.h . akhaNDaikaraso jiiva akhaNDaikaraso hyajaH .. 4.. akhaNDaikaraso brahmaa akhaNDaikaraso hariH . akhaNDaikaraso rudra akhaNDaikaraso.asmyaham.h .. 5.. akhaNDaikaraso hyaatmaa hyakhaNDaikaraso guruH . akhaNDaikarasa.n lakshyamakhaNDaikarasaM mahaH .. 6.. akhaNDaikaraso deha akhaNDaikarasaM manaH . akhaNDaikarasa.n chittamakhaNDaikarasa.n sukham.h .. 7.. akhaNDaikarasaa vidyaa akhaNDaikaraso.avyayaH . akhaNDaikarasa.n nityamakhaNDaikarasaM param.h .. 8.. akhaNDaikarasa.n ki~nchidakhaNDaikarasaM param.h . akhaNDaikarasaadanyannaasti naasti shhaDaanana .. 9.. akhaNDaikarasaannaasti akhaNDaikarasaanna hi . akhaNDaikarasaatki~nchidakhaNDaikarasaadaham.h .. 10.. akhaNDaikarasa.n sthuula.n suukshma.n chaakhaNDaruupakam.h . akhaNDaikarasa.n vedyamakhaNDaikaraso bhavaan.h .. 11.. akhaNDaikarasa.n guhyamakhaNDaikarasaadikam.h . akhaNDaikaraso j~naataa hyakhaNDaikarasaa sthitiH .. 12.. akhaNDaikarasaa maataa akhaNDaikararasaH pitaa . akhaNDaikaraso bhraataa akhaNDaikarasaH patiH .. 13.. akhaNDaikarasa.n suutramakhaNDaikaraso viraaT.h . akhaNDaikarasa.n gaatramakhaNDaikarasa.n shiraH .. 14.. akhaNDaikarasa.n chaantarakhaNDaikarasaM bahiH . akhaNDaikarasaM puurNamakhaNDaikarasaamR^itam.h .. 15.. akhaiNDaikarasa.n gotramakhaNDaikarasa.n gR^iham.h . akhaNDaikarasa.n gopyamakhaNDaikarasashashashii .. 16.. akhaNDaikarasaastaaraa akhaNDaikaraso raviH . akhaNDaikarasa.n kshetramakhaNDaikarasaa kshamaa .. 17.. akhaNDaikarasa shaanta akhaNDaikaraso.aguNaH . akhaNDaikarasaH saakshii akhaNDaikarasaH suhR^it.h .. 18.. akhaNDaikaraso bandhurakhaNDaikarasaH sakhaa . akhaNDaikaraso raajaa akhaNDaikarasaM puram.h .. 19.. akhaNDaikarasa.n raajyamakhaNDaikarasaaH prajaaH . akhaNDaikarasa.n taaramakhaNDaikaraso japaH .. 20.. akhaNDaikarasa.n dhyaanamakhaNDaikarasaM padam.h . akhaNDaikarasa.n graahyamakhaNDaikarasaM mahat.h .. 21.. akhaNDaikarasa.n jyotirakhaNDaikarasa.n dhanam.h . akhaNDaikarasaM bhojyamakhaNDaikarasa.n haviH .. 22.. akhaNDaikaraso homa akhaNDaikaraso japaH . akhaNDaikarasa.n svargamakhaNDaikarasaH svayam.h .. 23.. akhaNDaikarasa.n sarva.n chinmaatramiti bhaavayet.h .
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > But even if you can come up with their reasons for > not trademarking it, it *still* is the case that it > was a common enough term that people complained > about MMY appropriating it--and hence my point to > Barry stands. > Actually, it was not a common-enough term, so your point does NOT stand. There was a retort by another fmaous guru when MMY started using it that "all meditation is transcendental" but that isn't the same as him having used the term "transcendental meditation" prior to MMY's use of the term. I've done searches on the term on the websites devoted to the Transcendentalists. They never used it that I can find. If you can think of some other group or person who was possible using it before MMY's use, feel free to google it and find a prior use in print before MMY used it. lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" > wrote: > > > > > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > > countries precisely *because* it was > > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > > circles.) > > > > Well, actually, you're wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary > > (thanks to my urging) changed its dictionary definition of > > the term to note that it is trademarked in the US, at least. > > I know that some countries have different trademark rules, > > but it is NOT, as far as I know, due to "transcendental > > meditation" being "too common" that it can't be trademarked > > in those countries. > > You'll need to show exactly why it can't be in > each country, then. > Wel, getting back to my original point, regardless of how other countries' trademark laws work, the phrase "transcendental meditation," with or without the word "deep" inserted, was NOT a common phrase before MMY started using it in the 1960s, certainly not in the USA, nor in Great Britain, I'm willing to bet, nor in Canada, Australia or any other country where English is spoken natively, including India. Excluding THOSE countries, its always possible it was a commonly used phrase, of course. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
Judy wrote: > > Excellent analogy. The term "transcendental > > meditation" existed for a very long time before > > MMY decided to trademark and capitalize it, and > > many have criticized him for appropriating a > > commonly used generic term and claiming that it > > could refer *only* to his specific brand of > > meditation. > > > > Thanks for making my point for me. > > Lawson wrote: > Show me where that phrase or the shorter "transcendental > meditation" was used in any literature before then. > The Sanskrit word 'Brahman' and 'Yoga'? In the Brahma Sutra and the Yoga Sutra (circa 200 B.C.)? All the authors of the Upanishads were transcendental meditators. The word 'gnosis' is a Sanskrit derivative for knowledge, 'transcendental' knowledge. From: penitent leper Subject: Gnosis + Knowledge Newsgroups: alt.religion.gnostic Date: 2003-10-12 14:15:38 PST This "knowing" is gnosis - it's pneumatic insight, not equivalent to "knowledge about, and about" - such as dictionary, formulaic, scholarly, or scientific knowledge. To ask "How a Gnostic knows" is to ask how a mystic or an enlightened Buddhist knows the state of enlightenment. If you're asking for proof of such knowing, I doubt that any system can offer such - other than to invite the questioner to study and practice - and then decide for him/herself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > countries precisely *because* it was > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > circles.) > > P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY > term referred was the same as TM. And come to > think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck > in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was > teaching from whatever else was being taught or > referred to as transcendental meditation. > Again, it was NOT a common phrase with or without deep before MMY started using it. The UK law precludes the trademarking of words that are simply descriptions of the product service, but prior to MMY, "transcendental meditation" and "transcendental deep meditation" were NOT common phrases. Show me where the Transcendentalists (for example) used either phrase. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] oops, no link in last message
Anyone who loves our country and our world should see this video. The 9/11 truth movement is about to enter a third stage. I was part of the first stage, one of the very earliest people to state that 9/11 was an inside job. I knew it the moment it happened and had my students in China do their critical thinking exercises and their research papers on gathering and assessing evidence. But I did not have any real evidence on 9/11, I just cried "fowl"; what happened was that, because I don't own a TV, a friend called to tell me it was happening. The first words out of my mouth were, "Bush wants to go to war." I took myself to a neighbor's to watch TV, and there were a number of things that didn't feel right about the official story.So that was the first stage. The second stage was that a increasing number of people with increasing levels of credibility began to gather evidence and expert opinions. That stage, while ongoing, was complete about a year to six months ago. There is now an abundance of conclusive evidence, and the international 9/11 truth movement is about to enter its third stage. The conference speakers you see in the video whose link I'm sending are essentially announcing what they are going to do about it now that the evidence is in. The big picture: International war crimes trials. 9/11CooperUnionNY,P.5/8CarlPerson,JustinMartell,JamesFetzer,AlfreadWebre09.07.07 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
On Mar 23, 2008, at 3:36 PM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY term referred was the same as TM. And come to think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was teaching from whatever else was being taught or referred to as transcendental meditation. You mean to distinguish it from the superficial and silly transcendental meditation that everyone else was teaching? Yes, I'm sure that's what he meant, Judy. :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" > wrote: > > > > > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > > countries precisely *because* it was > > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > > circles.) > > > > Well, actually, you're wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary > > (thanks to my urging) changed its dictionary definition of > > the term to note that it is trademarked in the US, at least. > > I know that some countries have different trademark rules, > > but it is NOT, as far as I know, due to "transcendental > > meditation" being "too common" that it can't be trademarked > > in those countries. > > You'll need to show exactly why it can't be in > each country, then. But even if you can come up with their reasons for not trademarking it, it *still* is the case that it was a common enough term that people complained about MMY appropriating it--and hence my point to Barry stands. In any event, there are zillions of other examples of a term meaning something generic when it's lower- cased and something more specific when it's capitalized--e.g., democratic/Democratic, republican/ Republican. Barry thought he was being real cute by using "Transcendental Meditation" as an analogy, but that doesn't hold water for lots of reasons in addition to the trademark angle. He got caught lecturing somebody when he didn't know what he was talking about, as usual, and then tried using a bogus analogy to wiggle out of his booboo.
[FairfieldLife] Fwd: 9/11 truth movement's 3rd stage
Note: forwarded message attached. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com --- Begin Message --- Anyone who loves our country and our world should see this video. The 9/11 truth movement is about to enter a third stage. I was part of the first stage, one of the very earliest people to state that 9/11 was an inside job. I knew it the moment it happened and had my students in China do their critical thinking exercises and their research papers on gathering and assessing evidence. But I did not have any real evidence on 9/11, I just cried "fowl"; what happened was that, because I don't own a TV, a friend called to tell me it was happening. The first words out of my mouth were, "Bush wants to go to war." I took myself to a neighbor's to watch TV, and there were a number of things that didn't feel right about the official story.So that was the first stage. The second stage was that a increasing number of people with increasing levels of credibility began to gather evidence and expert opinions. That stage, while ongoing, was complete about a year to six months ago. There is now an abundance of conclusive evidence, and the international 9/11 truth movement is about to enter its third stage. The conference speakers you see in the video whose link I'm sending are essentially announcing what they are going to do about it now that the evidence is in. The big picture: War crimes trials. Note: forwarded message attached. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com --- End Message ---
[FairfieldLife] Lynch's Lost Highway on DVD Tuesday
"Lost Highway" releases Tuesday on DVD for fans of this work. I'll probably pick it up. Dr. Pete will want to stay clear. :D
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
Janet Luise wrote: > I would guess that the info on the Cathers is all > largely from a source about 200-250 years ago... > Janet - "bogumils are derivbed from Paulicans, Paulicans from Manicheans, Manicheans from Gnostics. thus Cathars are derived from Gnostics". Read more: From: Kater Moggin Subject: Gnosis + Knowledge Newsgroups: alt.religion.gnostic Date: 2003-10-12 14:15:38 PST http://tinyurl.com/38yhtl
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > > countries precisely *because* it was > > considered to be too common a phrase. > > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > > common enough, presumably in spiritual > > circles.) > > Well, actually, you're wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary > (thanks to my urging) changed its dictionary definition of > the term to note that it is trademarked in the US, at least. > I know that some countries have different trademark rules, > but it is NOT, as far as I know, due to "transcendental > meditation" being "too common" that it can't be trademarked > in those countries. You'll need to show exactly why it can't be in each country, then.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
TurquoiseB wrote: > Nothing personal; it's just that I've spent 20+ > years studying the dualist religions, and what the > New Age (rhymes with sewage) has tried to portray > it as really irks me. > If you haven't read a single book on the Gnostics, how would you know? From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: Gnosis + Knowledge Newsgroups: alt.religion.gnostic Date: 2003-10-12 09:47:25 PST http://tinyurl.com/38yhtl One major difference being that most gnosticism I have read (which admittedly is very little) seems to posit a creation that at one point was *not* flawed, which then *became* flawed with the "fall of man." A major belief of Catharism seems to have been that there was *never* a time in which creation was not flawed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > countries precisely *because* it was > considered to be too common a phrase. > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > common enough, presumably in spiritual > circles.) > Well, actually, you're wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary (thanks to my urging) changed its dictionary definition of the term to note that it is trademarked in the US, at least. I know that some countries have different trademark rules, but it is NOT, as far as I know, due to "transcendental meditation" being "too common" that it can't be trademarked in those countries. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark > > BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be > trademarked in the U.K. and several other > countries precisely *because* it was > considered to be too common a phrase. > (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but > common enough, presumably in spiritual > circles.) P.S.: I'm not suggesting that what the non-MMY term referred was the same as TM. And come to think of it, it isn't impossible that he stuck in "deep" at first to distinguish what he was teaching from whatever else was being taught or referred to as transcendental meditation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark BTW, Transcendental Meditation couldn't be trademarked in the U.K. and several other countries precisely *because* it was considered to be too common a phrase. (Not an *everyday* phrase, certainly, but common enough, presumably in spiritual circles.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > [,,,] > > The transcendental meditation technique > > involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing > > one's eyes closed, and concentrating as > > hard as possible on a magical word. The > > idea of transcendental meditation is to > > maintain complete focus on the magical > > word, no matter what. If another thought > > appears, you should force it out, even if > > this causes a headache. The headaches are > > signs that you are meditating properly. > > > > Still want to nitpick about capitalization? > > > > Wait'll I get to the part about the weekly > > transcendental meditation sesame oil orgies... > > Except, Judy is wrong. Er, no.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > Excellent analogy. The term "transcendental > > meditation" existed for a very long time before > > MMY decided to trademark and capitalize it, and > > many have criticized him for appropriating a > > commonly used generic term and claiming that it > > could refer *only* to his specific brand of > > meditation. > > > > Thanks for making my point for me. > > WHAT? That's pure BS, Judy. Wow, Lawson, I'm surprised you didn't know this. > MMY first used the term "transcendental deep meditation" in > the _Science of Being and Art of Living_ in the early 60's. > Show me where that phrase or the shorter "transcendental > meditation" was used in any literature before then. Why on earth would you think, just on its face, that the phrase "transcendental meditation" had never been used before MMY? I'd have to go to a library that had older books on Eastern spiritual techniques, because these days it's no longer used generically, at least in the U.S. But here are two (undated) sites on the Web that use it without any reference to MMY or TM: http://www.heavenlygardens.org/samadhi/step41.htm http://www.krishna.org/sudarsana/a035.html#meditation If I've heard one objection to MMY appropriating the term, I've heard dozens. > You're revising history the same way people who deny that > "stress" as a term applied to physiological/psychological > conditions was a modern term coined by Hans Selye less > than 80 years ago. No, I'm not. You've apparently just never encountered the objection.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
Interesting. How much is the David Lynch weekend? What happens on one of these events? What is a lunch scholarship? If you have to attend MUM, it's not much of deal, since that has got to be expensive! But still, any way it can be made cheaper would be great. Raising the price to meditate was the fastest way possible to end initiations almost completely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > DId you note that they've already offered TM for free to anyone who attends teh David > Lynch Weekend? > > Or that TM now costs $600 + Lunch schollarship if you attend MUM? > > Or that the TM Sidhis now cost $900 + scholarship if you attend MUM? > > They're keeping the price the same, and creatively making it more accessible. > > > Lawson >
[FairfieldLife] Re: hypocrisy of Americans
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > (Technical note: It is sound *bite*, not "byte"-- > a bite as in a taste, a small piece that's "bitten" > out of the whole. And the phrase is something of a > misnomer today, unless one is talking about a radio > broadcast, because it's usually a sight-and-sound > bite.) > Though, in an electronic age, "sound byte" makes more sense, and with a stretch, can include any brief from of electronic media since they are all bytes. And the complete list of such terms is kinda fun: bit, nibble (or nybble), byte, word, long word... Don't know if there are more in the family. Double long word? Long long word? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: hypocrisy of Americans
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESVTGEOK_O8 > > I am truely ashamed of myself for letting the sound-bites > (sound-bytes?) of Fox News cloud my judgement sufficiently > that I felt a need to defend speech that actually needs no > defense when heard in context. It needs no defense for you and me and many others (although Obama himself has been forced to condemn some of it). For still others, though, it's indefensible. And all they'll see of it is the Fox News clips, or even just the "worst" pieces of those clips that will be put in anti-Obama commercials by right-wing McCain supporters, or written down and circulated in emails, or repeated by a neighbor. (Technical note: It is sound *bite*, not "byte"-- a bite as in a taste, a small piece that's "bitten" out of the whole. And the phrase is something of a misnomer today, unless one is talking about a radio broadcast, because it's usually a sight-and-sound bite.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [,,,] > The transcendental meditation technique > involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing > one's eyes closed, and concentrating as > hard as possible on a magical word. The > idea of transcendental meditation is to > maintain complete focus on the magical > word, no matter what. If another thought > appears, you should force it out, even if > this causes a headache. The headaches are > signs that you are meditating properly. > > Still want to nitpick about capitalization? > > Wait'll I get to the part about the weekly > transcendental meditation sesame oil orgies... Except, Judy is wrong. "transcendental meditation" was not a common phrase before MMY started using it in the SOBAL as "transcendental deep meditation" which was later shortened to the trademarked term "Transcendental Meditation." If it WAS in common use, they couldn't have made it a trademark, so capitalized or no, your characterization is just wrong. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > wrote: > > > > > I didn't suggest that you settle for anything. I > > > > merely suggested that you not misuse terms that > > > > refer to a certain philosophy. > > > > > > She isn't misusing it if she doesn't capitalize > > > it. She pointed out in the post you originally > > > "corrected" that when the term is capitalized, > > > it refers to the dualist belief system. But she > > > isn't capitalizing it, so she isn't "co-opting" > > > or misusing it. > > > > The transcendental meditation technique > > involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing > > one's eyes closed, and concentrating as > > hard as possible on a magical word. The > > idea of transcendental meditation is to > > maintain complete focus on the magical > > word, no matter what. If another thought > > appears, you should force it out, even if > > this causes a headache. The headaches are > > signs that you are meditating properly. > > > > Still want to nitpick about capitalization? > > Excellent analogy. The term "transcendental > meditation" existed for a very long time before > MMY decided to trademark and capitalize it, and > many have criticized him for appropriating a > commonly used generic term and claiming that it > could refer *only* to his specific brand of > meditation. > > Thanks for making my point for me. > WHAT? That's pure BS, Judy. MMY first used the term "transcendental deep meditation" in the _Science of Being and Art of Living_ in the early 60's. Show me where that phrase or the shorter "transcendental meditation" was used in any literature before then. You're revising history the same way people who deny that "stress" as a term applied to physiological/psychological conditions was a modern term coined by Hans Selye less than 80 years ago. Lawson Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Typically, White Folks Are Good The Matrix is bad. (ÂThe Typical White Person)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Duveyoung wrote: > > In lieu of this guilt, I personally have taken to > > flogging one person here who's immoral enough to > > support war... > > > Kill the fuckin' commie bastards! > > "'If freedom loving people throughout the world do > not speak out against China's oppression in China > and Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak > on behalf of human rights anywhere in the world,' > Pelosi said before a crowd of thousands of Tibetans, > including monks and schoolchildren." > > Full story: > > 'Pelosi Denounces China's Tibet Crackdown' > Associated Press, March 20, 2008 > http://tinyurl.com/2ekumn > such hypocrisy that we invade any country on a whim, and then castigate the Chinese for having done the same thing- no wonder no one is paying any attention.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
On Mar 23, 2008, at 1:28 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: Wait'll I get to the part about the weekly transcendental meditation sesame oil orgies... An "orgy" TMO-style--even my fertile imagination can't conjure up that one. But you're right, it would undoubtedly have something to do with sesame oil. And that's probably about it. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: hypocrisy of Americans
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > I'm fascinated by people who fixate on the Reverend Wright... > > > OK, let's look at the man's most controversial statements > and claims: > > 1) "Goddam America!" [for doing unjustifiable violence to > its citizens] > > Is this any different than various fundamentalist preachers > suggesting that God will smite the USA as He did Soddom and > Gomorra for actions the preacher considers major bliblical > sins? Actually, it's radically different. The good reverend was talking about the government of the USA in his speech and the "God Damn America" bit came at the very end of his rather impassioned speech listing the long history of abuses that the US government has committed (but governments can change! was his other point): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESVTGEOK_O8 I am truely ashamed of myself for letting the sound-bites (sound-bytes?) of Fox News cloud my judgement sufficiently that I felt a need to defend speech that actually needs no defense when heard in context. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] shempmcgurk you're a bit of a goof
- 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > I didn't suggest that you settle for anything. I > > > merely suggested that you not misuse terms that > > > refer to a certain philosophy. > > > > She isn't misusing it if she doesn't capitalize > > it. She pointed out in the post you originally > > "corrected" that when the term is capitalized, > > it refers to the dualist belief system. But she > > isn't capitalizing it, so she isn't "co-opting" > > or misusing it. > > The transcendental meditation technique > involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing > one's eyes closed, and concentrating as > hard as possible on a magical word. The > idea of transcendental meditation is to > maintain complete focus on the magical > word, no matter what. If another thought > appears, you should force it out, even if > this causes a headache. The headaches are > signs that you are meditating properly. > > Still want to nitpick about capitalization? Excellent analogy. The term "transcendental meditation" existed for a very long time before MMY decided to trademark and capitalize it, and many have criticized him for appropriating a commonly used generic term and claiming that it could refer *only* to his specific brand of meditation. Thanks for making my point for me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > DId you note that they've already offered TM for free to anyone who attends > teh David > Lynch Weekend? > > Or that TM now costs $600 + Lunch schollarship if you attend MUM? > er, Lynch* scholarship... > Or that the TM Sidhis now cost $900 + scholarship if you attend MUM? > > They're keeping the price the same, and creatively making it more accessible. > I should also point out they're revamping the MUM website and probably doing lots of other things little things we don't know about. My guess is that the TM organization literally froze as MMY's health slipped away and anything he didn't explicitly say to do wasn't done because he had always insisted on personally vetting all changes to everything and he had no mechanism in place for anyone to make even small decisions while he was still alive... Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? > > I mean, specifically, from an organisational point of view. Certainly, > from the "purity of the teachings" point of view it is to maintain the > purity and make sure it is perpetuated on Planet Earth. > > But what about organisation? Do they have free reign to, say, change > the price of learning TM? How about things such as compensation to > teachers of TM? > > Is part of the mandate the ability of we, the peons, to petition the > counsel of Rajas and King Tony of grievances? Or is it still top-down > ruling a la Maharishi? > King TOny stays out of hte limelight and lets the ruling council of rajas run things on a day to day basis. BUt, as I said, things ARE changing: scholarships all over the place, dress code changes, etc. I expect a bigger emphasis on scientific research again since they're starting up a physiology PhD program at MUM again. and buildings galore, though the building projects started just before MMY died. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey" > wrote: > > > > Hi, I am a former Fairfield resident (from the 80's!)and an > occasional > > visitor to this listserv. I imagine this topic has probably been > > discussed, so if you want to direct me to former postings, that's > > fine. Otherwise, I would be interested in opinion's on how > Maharishi's > > passing will change things in the movement and in Fairfield, if at > > all. thanks! > > > > > > I suspect that one area of change will be respect of authority. > > "Maharishi said" ruled the roost for many years and got many people > to do things that otherwise normal, rational people wouldn't do. > > "Bevan said" or "King Tony says" or "John says", I suspect, certainly > isn't going to carry the same weight. At some point, the TMO peons > are going to say: "Fuck you, you fat slob! I'm not going to do that!" > DId you note that they've already offered TM for free to anyone who attends teh David Lynch Weekend? Or that TM now costs $600 + Lunch schollarship if you attend MUM? Or that the TM Sidhis now cost $900 + scholarship if you attend MUM? They're keeping the price the same, and creatively making it more accessible. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Janet Luise" > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dualism *doesn't* ever get to the "nondual." It is, > > > > in fact, completely antithetical to the very idea > > > > that there ever could be such a thing as nondual. > > > . > > > > IN this view, the concept of Unity as described by > > > > MMY would have been considered the highest heresy. > > > > It would not have been considered possible. One > > > > could only hope to enter the world of spirit after > > > > death, never while encumbered by a body. > > > > > > Janet: Your view (dualist) is exactly the normative > > > Christian view. But why would any long time TM > > > practiioner settle for dualism? > > > > I didn't suggest that you settle for anything. I > > merely suggested that you not misuse terms that > > refer to a certain philosophy. > > She isn't misusing it if she doesn't capitalize > it. She pointed out in the post you originally > "corrected" that when the term is capitalized, > it refers to the dualist belief system. But she > isn't capitalizing it, so she isn't "co-opting" > or misusing it. The transcendental meditation technique involves sitting uncomfortably, squeezing one's eyes closed, and concentrating as hard as possible on a magical word. The idea of transcendental meditation is to maintain complete focus on the magical word, no matter what. If another thought appears, you should force it out, even if this causes a headache. The headaches are signs that you are meditating properly. Still want to nitpick about capitalization? Wait'll I get to the part about the weekly transcendental meditation sesame oil orgies... :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Happy Dead Jesus Day...
shempmcgurk wrote: > ...to you and yours! > > Of course, sticklers to detail would remind me that Good Friday is the > day that Jesus actually died and today, Easter Sunday, is the day of > resurrection, when Jesus rose from the dead. > > Please keep that idea of resurrection in mind, you Christians, as you > dig into your dead hams, dead lambs, dead Easter eggs, and all other > manner of livestock that made their way to your dinner plate. > > Resurrecton, indeed. The animals in your tum-tum should be so lucky. And enjoy your dead plants and tofu eggs. But we know you like eggs as you are often seen wearing them on your face around here. :D Happy fertility day!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Janet Luise" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > Dualism *doesn't* ever get to the "nondual." It is, > > > in fact, completely antithetical to the very idea > > > that there ever could be such a thing as nondual. > > . > > > IN this view, the concept of Unity as described by > > > MMY would have been considered the highest heresy. > > > It would not have been considered possible. One > > > could only hope to enter the world of spirit after > > > death, never while encumbered by a body. > > > > Janet: Your view (dualist) is exactly the normative > > Christian view. But why would any long time TM > > practiioner settle for dualism? > > I didn't suggest that you settle for anything. I > merely suggested that you not misuse terms that > refer to a certain philosophy. She isn't misusing it if she doesn't capitalize it. She pointed out in the post you originally "corrected" that when the term is capitalized, it refers to the dualist belief system. But she isn't capitalizing it, so she isn't "co-opting" or misusing it. It's commonly used in this generic sense of one who practices or achieves gnosis. You just didn't actually bother to *read* the post you were responding to, Barry, so you missed her explicit distinction between Gnostic and gnostic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: P.S. to my bow to buttsplicer on free will
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The poet Blake > might have had some insight into this, for in 1788 he > wrote that 'reason, or the ratio of all we have > already known, is not the same that it shall be when > we know more' (p. xiii). > Angela, I am not sure what you take me for. I am not a scientist, my background is in fine arts. I work as a film editor which is a purely creative field. The creative decisions I make each day require me to dutifully chuck reason to the wind. If I applied reason to my work, the shows I worked on would be cold forms of information. People would change the channels. I subscribe to a holistic approach to the world mixing reason and intuition, tempered with common sense. My assault on fantasy projections, disembodied voices, unicorns, paternal gods, levitation, immortal lives, perfect health, and yes, free will, is not a call to pure reason but an appeal to mindfulness. s. Can you tell me that this post was not in the cards?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Janet Luise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > Dualism *doesn't* ever get to the "nondual." It is, > > in fact, completely antithetical to the very idea > > that there ever could be such a thing as nondual. > . > > IN this view, the concept of Unity as described by > > MMY would have been considered the highest heresy. > > It would not have been considered possible. One > > could only hope to enter the world of spirit after > > death, never while encumbered by a body. > > Janet: Your view (dualist) is exactly the normative Christian view. > But why would any long time TM practiioner settle for dualism? I didn't suggest that you settle for anything. I merely suggested that you not misuse terms that refer to a certain philosophy. I could see Unity in s watermelon, but that doesn't mean that I can use "watermelon" as a synonym for Unity. That's what you're attempting to do by co-opting the term 'gnosticism.' :-) > I would guess that the info on the Cathers is all largely from a > source about 200-250 years ago (rather than 800 years ago when it > happened. There is NO honest documentation about the Cathars anymore > than there is on the Bible. Ah, but there is. Very little of the commercial stuff is accurate, but there are whole *libraries* of source material on the Cathars, *from* the era, many of them written by the Cathars themselves. Do you have a copy, for instance, of the Consolamentum? I do. Strangely enough, some of the best of these libraries are in the hands of Catholic scholars. They are very good about maintaining them and making them available to serious scholars. If your friend was one, I suspect he would know this. > You are so attached here I would guess > that in an earlier lifetime YOU probably "wrote" that history a few > hundred years ago in creating your own NEW AGE stuff! Actually, I was a Cathar perfecti. Several times. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free will and atheism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > stu writes snipped: > In all cases, free will is adopted and rejected by people regardless of > their proclivity towards faith. However, I am ever suspicious of > anyone's arguments if they involve themselves with faith. If they are > willing to accept one notion without adequate evidence what then of > their other notions? Sounds to me like a lot of guesswork. > > TomT: > In my experience relating Free Will and awakening I have come to see > that Awakening is absolutely FREE. But it will Cost you every concept > you have about it. Secondly it WILL happen because it is who you are > and all you do is get to see that which has always been right under > your nose. As one of my friends likes to say ""You'll find IT in the > last > place that you don't look." > Tom > And what brought you to that place of awakening? s.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Are starting arguments just a sad way of asking for a hug ?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Worth a shot... > > * * * H U G * * * > > :-) > I am all over that sentiment, heres to you guys: ***H U G *** A N D R E A C H A R O U N D its Easter after all, gotta go the extra mile. s.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Happy Dead Jesus Day...
To ponder whys and wherefores of the foreign policy of Israel earns one eternal damnation, and demands for thought-stopping. Yet the lack of tact displayed by the unprovoked satire about the Holiest Day in Christendom is amazing - especially considering that Israel might wisely make as many friends as possible. A country of such small geographic size is particularly vulnerable - especially in this era of incredible potential destruction from a few heavily-loaded suitcases.. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ...to you and yours! > > Of course, sticklers to detail would remind me that Good Friday is the > day that Jesus actually died and today, Easter Sunday, is the day of > resurrection, when Jesus rose from the dead. > > Please keep that idea of resurrection in mind, you Christians, as you > dig into your dead hams, dead lambs, dead Easter eggs, and all other > manner of livestock that made their way to your dinner plate. > > Resurrecton, indeed. The animals in your tum-tum should be so lucky. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reframing the Jesus Tradition - on line book by Tom Hickey
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dualism *doesn't* ever get to the "nondual." It is, > in fact, completely antithetical to the very idea > that there ever could be such a thing as nondual. . > IN this view, the concept of Unity as described by > MMY would have been considered the highest heresy. > It would not have been considered possible. One > could only hope to enter the world of spirit after > death, never while encumbered by a body. > Janet: Your view (dualist) is exactly the normative Christian view. But why would any long time TM practiioner settle for dualism? Surely you've had the experience of nondualism in TM ? Amness ISness within you without you being totally connected with everything on this planet? WE all ARE THAT THAT Unity no ego desire and even if it isn't an all time reality, it's least I would expect it to be a common experience? and as Maharishi has said... "with the passage of time..God consciousness happens to find unity an individual needs to connect with all Avatar at some point DOES become meaningful Turqoise again: > > Janet, with all due respect, I think you should > do more reading about gnosticism and other dualist > belief systems of that era, and less from the New > Age. > Janet: Tom Hickey has 3 advance degrees from a Jesuit University, has studied Jesus material extensively, & is anything BUT "New Age" This book represents the best of reorienting a teaching back to its source.From the best of Biblical scholars today Capital G Gnostics was a name given to a large group of very different folks who were just opposed to them ie Christians. Since the word (small g) gnostics comes from someone who has experienced gnosis or UNION with GOD a (small g) gnostic has GOT to be non dual. I would guess that the info on the Cathers is all largely from a source about 200-250 years ago (rather than 800 years ago when it happened. There is NO honest documentation about the Cathars anymore than there is on the Bible. You are so attached here I would guess that in an earlier lifetime YOU probably "wrote" that history a few hundred years ago in creating your own NEW AGE stuff! OK that's as ridiculous as what you're saying I'm just trying to fit into this Spiritual Comedy Central when the only thing that seems to count is zinging someone else. In Truth & Love, Janet Luise
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
> > I don't have the patience to disect that format to > > try to glean a few facts beyond all the propaganda! > > Bob wrote: > I doubt that you will find the bozo units on this list > terribly helpful. If you want to know whazzup in the TMO, > look at their newsletter: > > http://www.globalgoodnews.com/global-news-success.html > Yeah, Bob, that was really helpful!
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lurk, I'm going to rif on one of the words that > kept coming up in your rap -- accusation. > > Why, might I ask, would these people's stories be > regarded as "accusations?" Why can't they simply be > seen as an attempt by these people to tell the truth > as they see it? No "accusation" is implied unless > someone *hearing* the truth as they see it thinks > that there is something "wrong" about that truth. Okay. I think I see your point. My personality is such, that sometimes it takes me a while to catch onto things. Example: Really, up until recently, I felt Sandy Ego was not Jim Flannigan. Now, I think he is. The accounts of M's sexual exploits have never rang true. But perhaps they are. Really, I don't care. And truthfully, I found the stories so dull that I could never make my way through them all. My objections are all procedural. Will the individuals who were involved care to step forward now, as someone indicated they might? I can understand if they don't want to. I mean, after 30 plus years, I know I would want to put it behind me. And I've never understood Ned Wynn, and if he has an agenda, or if he is just bring this whole situation to light because it exposes a great hypocrisy. And certainly I applaud him if this is the case-exposing an hypocrisy. Maybe we will get greater resolution on this issue, or perhaps it will remain where it is today. I think for me, it's just about run it's course.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Tibet!
Kirk wrote: > It has to start somewhere though, and the Tibetans are > the slaughtered lambs. > "CHENGDU, China - China lashed out Sunday at critics of its crackdown on Tibetan protesters, describing U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as "habitually bad tempered" while claiming the Western media serve those who want to smear the communist country." Read more: 'China lashes out at crackdown critics' By Cara Anna Associated Press, Sun Mar 23, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/ypsg45 China accuses Dalai Lama of taking Olympics "hostage" By Chris Buckley Reuters, Sun Mar 23, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/24929l
[FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
TurquoiseB wrote: > > Interestingly, that is the factor that is kill- > > ing Hillary in the polls and helping Obama. > > The people can feel each of their *intents*, > > and are reacting accordingly. > > Judy wrote: > Actually in many cases they're projecting > intents on both candidates. > "When these folks hear that a candidate's own minister has spewed anti-American, racial diatribes, it deeply disturbs them. Even before the Wright story broke, Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania, a Hillary Clinton supporter, suggested that race would cost Obama about 5 percentage points in that state's primary next month." Read more: 'It will take more than one great speech for Obama to reassure some Democrats' By Albert R. Hunt International Herald-Tribune, March 23, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/yoat4b
[FairfieldLife] A Dios La Pido _ Juanes I ask this of God
A Dios La Pido _ Juanes I ask this of God Juanes is one of my favorite artists. He's a combination of Rock & Roll & Columbian folk rythmns. His music is helping me learn Spanish. I think he's the Beatles of this generation... This seemed like a good song for EASTER SUNDAY This has English subtitles A Dios La Pido _ Juanes I ask this of God http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COeQwkufuYg My favorite songs of his are Juanes - La Camisa Negra [LIVE] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SFZ_cWakI8 Juanes - Me Enamora http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWA59qwfGL0 and will be broacast on Austin City Lights this Saturday night on many PTVs but NOT in Iowa. Iowa Public TV has selected Brit Sit over the concerts
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
On Mar 23, 2008, at 11:02 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:48 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? To do justice, to love righteousness, and to walk humbly with their God. Real superhero stuff. Cool. Here's one of my favorite heroes. And remember, Andy was rich enough to have become a Raja if he'd wanted to and if he had lived long enough and if they'd have let him. Imagine this routine done with Andy wearing Raja's robe and a crown... Great stuff, that blank look on his face is priceless. With a robe and crown would be truly awesome. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Typically, White Folks Are Good The Matrix is bad. (ÂThe Typical White Person)
Duveyoung wrote: > In lieu of this guilt, I personally have taken to > flogging one person here who's immoral enough to > support war... > Kill the fuckin' commie bastards! "'If freedom loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China's oppression in China and Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak on behalf of human rights anywhere in the world,' Pelosi said before a crowd of thousands of Tibetans, including monks and schoolchildren." Full story: 'Pelosi Denounces China's Tibet Crackdown' Associated Press, March 20, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/2ekumn
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > wrote: > > > > Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? > > Primae noctis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primae_noctis > > When you get married, they get to boink your wife on your > wedding night. > > :-) > > ( This is obviously a joke. Can you think of any of the > Rajas who would risk doing this in the open, and risk > the woman commenting on their...uh...performance? ) > > Seriously, they have the right to try to do anything > they think they can get away with. The *extent* of what > they think they can get away with is still undetermined. > > We, on the other hand, have been bequeathed a far greater > right. We can laugh at them when they try. Amazing, more than 30 years out of the Movement and it still provokes the Turq and makes him s frustrated. The impression it made on him will be an eternal subject for his poor soul. Or so it seems. :-)
[FairfieldLife] So how long does it take to find out who you are?
ENYA-Pilgrim Youtube video below: Pilgrim, how you journey On the road you chose To find out why the winds die And where the stories go. All days come from one day That much you must know, You cannot change what's over But only where you go. One way leads to diamonds, One way leads to gold, Another leads you only To everything you're told. In your heart you wonder Which of these is true; The road that leads to nowhere, The road that leads to you. Will you find the answer In all you say and do? Will you find the answer In you? Each heart is a pilgrim, Each one wants to know The reason why the winds die And where the stories go. Pilgrim, in your journey You may travel far, For pilgrim it's a long way To find out who you are... Pilgrim, it's a long way To find out who you are... Pilgrim, it's a long way To find out who you are... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5YKN32xoXw
[FairfieldLife] Typically, White Folks Are Good The Matrix is bad. (ÂThe Typical White Person)
The international murderers may not be typical white persons -- a typical white person may be a much better person than what's projected by minority groups, and the bad white persons may be quite rare but also driven to obtain the power that will allow them to enact and act out their fears. We all meet a lot of typical white persons each day as they deliver our mail, check our groceries, stand in line with us outside a theater, work with us, etc. Not much that's monstrous in daily life. Most folks have something inside them that could be called the dark side, a mean streak, a killer instinct. Any parent would use lethal force to protect their child, for instance, but I'm thinking that these Shiva-qualities require a precise scenario before they're allowed to be amplified, methinks. Those would-be leaders who can be comfortable with causing massive carnage on innocents are drawn to the very positions of power in a way that is not unlike how "way too many" sick individuals come forth and offer to "pull the switch" and be executioners at their local prison. It's pretty rare to wake up in the morning and think that dropping a big bomb would just make your dayyou've got to pass all the "ashram" tests to be allowed to do that, so thinking about it doesn't happen until much of the enabling has been set into place. Call me naive, but I don't think the average white person could be an "instant executioner" without a huge psychic matrix supporting it. To be silly, imagine a button that would launch a nuke at downtown Tehran, and you place it in front of your typical white person (read American fundamentalist Arab hater) and tell them to go ahead and push it if they want to erase all those "possible terrorists." The silliness immediately leaps to the fore, and it is impossible to imagine the typical white person pushing that button without asking a ton of questions first. Personally, I sure would ask enough to know if the button was real, who authorized it, how legal it really is, etc. Only if one is a president does the necessary matrix get provided such that few, if any, questions need to be asked. Note that even George Bush has yet to push that button, and he has that very button. It's not easy killing a hundred thousand in a single blast. And even though we all believe he wants to push that button, he isn't doing so because that psychic matrix, even for a US president, is not complete until some very precise conditions are met. There may be a Hitler inside us all, but most cultures keep their masses un-empowered such that our inner fuhrers are kept sleeping -- otherwise, we'd have a lot of challenges to leaders coming from the ranks, nicht whar? To me it's all one big thingie -- we the masses allow the various persons with various dark sides to be our leaders, and to deny that these leaders are in fact reflecting us, is a self-serving blindness. The most powerful attempt by anyone posting here to impact the thinking of our leaders has been what? -- shaking hands with Obama and asking him about global warming? Gee that's massive! So see? With no one here attending anti-war rallies, distributing leaflets, doing youtube rants, etc., our laughably impotent sniping at our leaders is questionable to the max. In lieu of this guilt, I personally have taken to flogging one person here who's immoral enough to support war -- call it empty symbolism, projection, whatever -- but what else can we do other than investing in some very time consuming, personally risky (internment camps?) long-odds behaviors? The masses have almost zero power, and even those who get a good grip on the public's attention, say, Cindy Sheehan, find themselves to be politically unable to do much even with the press there snapping their pictures. BigMedia can spin anything, and small folks on a big mission are eaten for breakfast. Cindy's image was used to sell headlines -- first she was sympathetically portrayed, then vilified as crazy, vengeful, deluded, etc. She had little power to sway those characterizations. This is why I would love spectrum-enders like a Kucinich or a Ron Paul to shake the foundations of how things work today. Too many are in power to stay and are simply abusing and marauding their constituents with spin, lies, and backroom deals. So, nope, there's a typical white person and then that very different beast, a matrix-tempered, matrix-honed, white person who is encouraged to amplify inner fears. Turns out, even a black person cannot avoid such a scenario skewing their deepest values, and it is all too clear that the matrix is the monster that needs to be fought. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Rev. Billy Graham= A typical white person > I remember he blessed- President Richard M. Nixon; > While Nixon was bombing, terrorizing and napalming, Cambodia and Viet Nam (he promised to end the war in 1968)... >The Nixon tap
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:48 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: > > > Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? > > To do justice, to love righteousness, and to walk humbly with > their God. Real superhero stuff. Cool. Here's one of my favorite heroes. And remember, Andy was rich enough to have become a Raja if he'd wanted to and if he had lived long enough and if they'd have let him. Imagine this routine done with Andy wearing Raja's robe and a crown... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHG9jp6s1OI
[FairfieldLife] Happy Dead Jesus Day...
...to you and yours! Of course, sticklers to detail would remind me that Good Friday is the day that Jesus actually died and today, Easter Sunday, is the day of resurrection, when Jesus rose from the dead. Please keep that idea of resurrection in mind, you Christians, as you dig into your dead hams, dead lambs, dead Easter eggs, and all other manner of livestock that made their way to your dinner plate. Resurrecton, indeed. The animals in your tum-tum should be so lucky.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's pissing on Fairfield had on his movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And, oh, Judy, your > daddy did you a disservice with that cliche about the > open mind: if you're committed to TM, then the > opening of the mind lets in all of infinity. Actually, his comment had to do with critical thinking, not expanded consciousness. > Regarding her famous horselaugh in response to my > proposition that depopulation was seriously an agenda > for the ruling body of humanity It wasn't my famous horselaugh, it was a very ordinary "LOL." And it wasn't in response to your depopulation thesis. It was my spontaneous reaction to your words "cloud the clarity of my research efforts." You can decide for yourself what struck me so funny about your expressing concern for the clarity of your research efforts.
Re: [FairfieldLife] What is their mandate?
On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:48 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? To do justice, to love righteousness, and to walk humbly with their God. Sal
[FairfieldLife] What effect has Maharishi's pissing on Fairfield had on his movement?
This may well be my last post of the week since I've got to get ready to move to Minnesota or Indianapolis or both (the grant folks didn't want to take my rejection of them seriously, so I'm reconsidering--I seem to have a bargaining position). I also have four pressing writing/translating/editing assignments. Moreover, I'm not fully recovered--well, I never was veklemmt, but my body was. Waves of nausea and dizziness. Yesterday, literally all I could do was sit as still as possible at the computer with only my mind more or less functioning--less, according to Judy, who'd sooner accept a hug from a boa constrictor [who is said to cover its victims with slime before strangling them] than from me. And, oh, Judy, your daddy did you a disservice with that cliche about the open mind: if you're committed to TM, then the opening of the mind lets in all of infinity. Regarding her famous horselaugh in response to my proposition that depopulation was seriously an agenda for the ruling body of humanity, I'd say 1) horselaughs are not famous for being rational, nor is shocked outrage at the "unthinkable." 2) Here's the link in response to the horselaugh: WE'RE ALL DOOMED! 40 YEARS FROM GLOBAL CATASTROPHE - AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT, SAYS CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT By Sarah Sands The Daily Mail March 22, 2008 http://www.dailymai l.co.uk/pages/ live/articles/ news/news. html?in_article_ id= 541748&in_page_ id=1770 Like Lovelock, I look forward to the evolutionary challenge that faces us. What we've got now is not sustainable, not for the planet and not for us. So the planet will right the situation since we obviously didn't manage to control our population, and our attempts to do so through warfare, etc. have not been working for the last hundred years. Keep in mind that in a situation like that, fascism seems to be the most intelligent response we, as a species have been able to come up with (ii.e. see Robert's post about the white boys: orange meme: the merger of big biz and big gov). It's not that our rulers are evil, its that our rulers choose "evil" people to represent them when a tightening of the belt seems a last-ditch operation to save the patient. So, ta ta, I'll look in on yuns as often as I can. Hugs to all. a --- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > "lurkernomore20002000" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey" > > > wrote: > > > > > > Uh, that was funny, but no, not particularly > helpful! > > > > Yes, Of course I know it was a backhanded slap. > It's an awfully > > general question. Perhaps someone will have the > patience to answer > > it. I don't live in Farifield, and am not really > a part of the > > movement, although I was fully engagaed at one > time. I follow > > events here. Unforutnately to get a feel for > things, you have to > > follow the posts and pick out the ones that > interest you. I think > > the verdict is, from what I have gathered, is that > not much has > > changed, but the next year is likely to bring some > interestig > > developments. > > > > One simmering debate, are the accounts of > Maharishi's sex life, > > which are said to be the subject of books by those > involved upon his > > death. We will see if these come out, or if > another reason will be > > given why they can't. I expect the latter. As I > undertand, we have > > never had a first person account, and therefore > any accusations must > > be chalked up to hearsay. At least according to > the normal rules of > > evidence as I understand them. Personally, I don't > care one way or > > the other. I just think if someone makes an > accusation, they should > > back it up, especially if they are on record that > they will. > > Lurk, I'm going to rif on one of the words that > kept coming up in your rap -- accusation. > > Why, might I ask, would these people's stories be > regarded as "accusations?" Why can't they simply be > seen as an attempt by these people to tell the truth > > as they see it? No "accusation" is implied unless > someone *hearing* the truth as they see it thinks > that there is something "wrong" about that truth. > > Here's a story: "Bill Clinton was President of the > United States and did many fine things for its > citizens." > > Here's another: "Bill Clinton *also* allowed a young > intern to...uh...puff on his cigar in the Oval > Office." > > Is *either* of these statements an accusation? > > In my view, *neither* is. Both are true. But some > folks > who had unrealistic ideas about either Bill Clinton > personally or the office he represented may feel > that > the latter is an accusation, because the truth of it > > creates some sense of cognitive dissonance in THEM. > > That's what I think is going on here. You say that > you > don't care one way or another what Maharishi did > (or, > more accurately in this situation, diddled). B
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is their mandate?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? Primae noctis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primae_noctis When you get married, they get to boink your wife on your wedding night. :-) ( This is obviously a joke. Can you think of any of the Rajas who would risk doing this in the open, and risk the woman commenting on their...uh...performance? ) Seriously, they have the right to try to do anything they think they can get away with. The *extent* of what they think they can get away with is still undetermined. We, on the other hand, have been bequeathed a far greater right. We can laugh at them when they try.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey" > wrote: > > > > Uh, that was funny, but no, not particularly helpful! > > Yes, Of course I know it was a backhanded slap. It's an awfully > general question. Perhaps someone will have the patience to answer > it. I don't live in Farifield, and am not really a part of the > movement, although I was fully engagaed at one time. I follow > events here. Unforutnately to get a feel for things, you have to > follow the posts and pick out the ones that interest you. I think > the verdict is, from what I have gathered, is that not much has > changed, but the next year is likely to bring some interestig > developments. > > One simmering debate, are the accounts of Maharishi's sex life, > which are said to be the subject of books by those involved upon his > death. We will see if these come out, or if another reason will be > given why they can't. I expect the latter. As I undertand, we have > never had a first person account, and therefore any accusations must > be chalked up to hearsay. At least according to the normal rules of > evidence as I understand them. Personally, I don't care one way or > the other. I just think if someone makes an accusation, they should > back it up, especially if they are on record that they will. Lurk, I'm going to rif on one of the words that kept coming up in your rap -- accusation. Why, might I ask, would these people's stories be regarded as "accusations?" Why can't they simply be seen as an attempt by these people to tell the truth as they see it? No "accusation" is implied unless someone *hearing* the truth as they see it thinks that there is something "wrong" about that truth. Here's a story: "Bill Clinton was President of the United States and did many fine things for its citizens." Here's another: "Bill Clinton *also* allowed a young intern to...uh...puff on his cigar in the Oval Office." Is *either* of these statements an accusation? In my view, *neither* is. Both are true. But some folks who had unrealistic ideas about either Bill Clinton personally or the office he represented may feel that the latter is an accusation, because the truth of it creates some sense of cognitive dissonance in THEM. That's what I think is going on here. You say that you don't care one way or another what Maharishi did (or, more accurately in this situation, diddled). But at the same time someone saying that he did diddle constitutes an "accusation." Putting those two claims into the same paragraph sets off *my* cognitive dissonance detector.
[FairfieldLife] What is their mandate?
Does anyone know what the "mandate" of King Tony and the Rajas is? I mean, specifically, from an organisational point of view. Certainly, from the "purity of the teachings" point of view it is to maintain the purity and make sure it is perpetuated on Planet Earth. But what about organisation? Do they have free reign to, say, change the price of learning TM? How about things such as compensation to teachers of TM? Is part of the mandate the ability of we, the peons, to petition the counsel of Rajas and King Tony of grievances? Or is it still top-down ruling a la Maharishi?
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, I am a former Fairfield resident (from the 80's!)and an occasional > visitor to this listserv. I imagine this topic has probably been > discussed, so if you want to direct me to former postings, that's > fine. Otherwise, I would be interested in opinion's on how Maharishi's > passing will change things in the movement and in Fairfield, if at > all. thanks! > I suspect that one area of change will be respect of authority. "Maharishi said" ruled the roost for many years and got many people to do things that otherwise normal, rational people wouldn't do. "Bevan said" or "King Tony says" or "John says", I suspect, certainly isn't going to carry the same weight. At some point, the TMO peons are going to say: "Fuck you, you fat slob! I'm not going to do that!"
[FairfieldLife] Re: What effect has Maharishi's passing had on Fairfield and the movement?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey" > wrote: > > Hi, I am a former Fairfield resident (from the 80's!)and an > occasional > > visitor to this listserv. I imagine this topic has probably been > > discussed, so if you want to direct me to former postings, that's > > fine. Otherwise, I would be interested in opinion's on how > Maharishi's > > passing will change things in the movement and in Fairfield, if at > > all. thanks! > > > Basically it has changed in some ways, and in some ways it hasn't. In > some ways we are anticipating change, and in some ways the change has > already come. There have been some changes on the surface, and some > changes deeper down. There have been some changes in Fairfield and > some changes in Vlodrop. Oh, and some changes in India. Basically > some of the change ocurred before the passing, and some ocurred > shortly after the passing. There is even some change that we expect > will happen, but has not yet happened fully. Some change has been > more pronounced, and some has been more subtle. > > Hope this helps. I don't know if he intended it to be, but this is one of the funniest posts I've read in a long time. If you DID intend it to be funny, thanks for the laughs. If you DIDN'T, go see a therapist.
