[FairfieldLife] The conservative case for Barack Obama
The conservative case for Barack Obama by Andrew J. Bacevich Barack Obama is no conservative. Yet if he wins the Democratic nomination, come November principled conservatives may well find themselves voting for the senator from Illinois. Given the alternativesand the state of the conservative movementthey could do worse. Granted, when it comes to defining exactly what authentic conservatism entails, considerable disagreement exists even (or especially) among conservatives themselves. My own definition emphasizes the following: a commitment to individual liberty, tempered by the conviction that genuine freedom entails more than simply an absence of restraint; a belief in limited government, fiscal responsibility, and the rule of law; veneration for our cultural inheritance combined with a sense of stewardship for Creation; a reluctance to discard or tamper with traditional social arrangements; respect for the market as the generator of wealth combined with a wariness of the markets corrosive impact on humane values; a deep suspicion of utopian promises, rooted in an appreciation of the sinfulness of man and the recalcitrance of history. Accept that definition and it quickly becomes apparent that the Republican Party does not represent conservative principles. The conservative ascendancy that began with the election of Ronald Reagan has been largely an illusion. During the period since 1980, certain faux conservativesespecially those in the service of Big Business and Big Empirehave prospered. But conservatism as such has not. The presidency of George W. Bush illustrates the point. In 2001, President Bush took command of a massive, inefficient federal bureaucracy. Since then, he has substantially increased the size of that apparatus, which during his tenure has displayed breathtaking ineptitude both at home and abroad. Over the course of Bushs two terms in office, federal spending has increased 50 percent to $3 trillion per year. Disregarding any obligation to balance the budget, Bush has allowed the national debt to balloon from $5.7 to $9.4 trillion. Worse, under the guise of keeping Americans safe, he has arrogated to the executive branch unprecedented powers, thereby subverting the Constitution. Whatever else may be said about this record of achievement, it does not accord with conservative principles. As with every Republican leader since Reagan, President Bush has routinely expressed his support for traditional values. He portrays himself as pro-life and pro-family. He offers testimonials to old-fashioned civic virtues. Yet apart from sporting an American flag lapel-pin, he has done little to promote these values. If anything, the reverse is true. In the defining moment of his presidency, rather than summoning Americans to rally to their country, he validated conspicuous consumption as the core function of 21st-century citizenship. Should conservatives hold President Bush accountable for the nations cultural crisis? Of course not. The pursuit of instant gratification, the compulsion to accumulate, and the exaltation of celebrity that have become central to the American way of life predate this administration and derive from forces that lie far beyond the control of any president. Yet conservatives should fault the president and his party for pretending that they are seriously committed to curbing or reversing such tendencies. They might also blame themselves for failing to see the GOPs cultural agenda as contrived and cynical. Finally, there is President Bushs misguided approach to foreign policy, based on expectations of deploying American military might to eliminate tyranny, transform the Greater Middle East, and expunge evil from the face of the earth. The result has been the very inverse of conservatism. For Bush, in the wake of 9/11, ideology supplanted statecraft. As a result, his administration has squandered American lives and treasure in the pursuit of objectives that make little strategic sense. For conservatives to hope the election of yet another Republican will set things right is surely in vain. To believe that President John McCain will reduce the scope and intrusiveness of federal authority, cut the imperial presidency down to size, and put the government on a pay-as-you-go basis is to succumb to a great delusion. The Republican establishment may maintain the pretense of opposing Big Government, but pretense it is. Social conservatives counting on McCain to return the nation to the path of righteousness are kidding themselves. Within this camp, abortion has long been the flagship issue. Yet only a naïf would believe that todays Republican Party has any real interest in overturning Roe v. Wade or that doing so now would contribute in any meaningful way to the restoration of family values. GOP support for such values is akin to the Democratic Partys
[FairfieldLife] 'Seeking That 'Kumbaya' Moment...'
The history of the use and abuse of 'Kumbaya.' Meghan Daum March 29, 2008 You know a nation is in trouble when the worst epithet its citizens can hurl at each other is the title of a folk song: Kumbaya, an African American spiritual whose name (and chorus) translates from the Gullah dialect as come by here. It has had an illustrious career as a Dust Bowl ballad, a civil rights anthem and, of course, a staple at Girl Scout camps and Unitarian Sunday schools everywhere. Lately, however, this morose and rather dull little ditty has morphed into a strangely ironic diss. Invoked by conservatives wishing to brand liberals as lame-brained idealists and by liberals themselves, who apparently hope to shed their hippie trappings by mocking them, Kumbaya is an equal opportunity aspersion. Like its lyrics, which proclaim that someone's laughing, someone's crying, someone's praying and someone's singing -- so kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya -- the song's rhetorical uses fit a far-ranging variety of political occasions. Think I'm overstating things? Let's hold hands and think back: The politics of hope is not about holding hands and singing 'Kumbaya.' (Barack Obama on his efforts to distinguish his policies from those of Hillary Clinton, October 2007.) Remember, it's not kumbaya-ish, it's really powerful. (Obama campaign organizers speaking to volunteers in Austin, Texas, February 2008.) The rap on Mr. Obama remains that he preaches the audacity of 'Kumbaya.' (Frank Rich in the New York Times, Feb. 3, 2008.) That was a 'Kumbaya' debate, and that favors the front-runner. (Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, on the Feb. 21 Democratic debate in Austin.) Any military person who concludes he's a left-wing, hair-on-fire, 'Kumbaya' child of the '60s has sadly misunderestimated him, to use George Bush's term. (Retired Gen. Merrill McPeak on Obama, Feb. 26, 2008.) The rise of multiracialism is not all 'Kumbaya' choruses and 'post-racial' identity. (Peggy Orenstein, in a New York Times Op-Ed, March 23, 2008.) We may never solve the mystery of who Carly Simon was singing about in You're So Vain, but it seems clear that Kumbaya (as a concept) now stands for Barack Obama (as a concept) and derives in large part from a John Edwards' coinage last fall: 'Kumbaya' candidate. Thanks to Obama's message of racial transcendence and the group-hug aura conveyed by his supporters, he has managed to give the song a second career as a metaphor for mushy emotionalism. It must be said that Kumbaya has now spread its wings far beyond the presidential campaign. In the last month alone, a Newsweek guest columnist referred to a 'Kumbaya' moment in energy legislation, and an Alaska lawmaker deemed increased education spending as about as 'Kumbaya' a thing as I've seen since the '60s (he didn't mean it as a compliment). On Wednesday, Microsoft's general counsel and intellectual property chief, Brad Smith, characterized the company's efforts to work with open source software creators by saying, It's not like let's all sing 'Kumbaya.' In other words, folks, this is big. More versatile than Walter Mondale's jab at Gary Hart, Where's the beef?, more upbeat than the first Clinton campaign's It's the economy, stupid and deeper than George W. Bush's I'm the decider, Kumbaya takes decades of political catchphrases and unites them around one raging campfire. The term allows its users to have their coolness cake and eat it too. To invoke Kumbaya is to display one's countercultural credentials while simultaneously letting it be known how stupid and irrelevant those credentials are in today's world. Like those loathsome shibboleths think outside the box and let's take a blue sky approach, which combine self-help jargon with corporate doublespeak, Kumbaya manages to be completely earnest and completely disingenuous at the same time. With the exception of the name of the musician Yanni, it's rare to see such versatility coming from a single word. Still, there's one Kumbaya moment in this election that we still haven't been privy to: an actual performance of Kumbaya, preferably at an Obama rally. I tried to reach Joan Baez, probably the most famous artist to have recorded the song, for her take on the Kumbaya craze, but her publicists wouldn't return my calls. I did notice, however, that for the first time in her career, Baez has endorsed a political candidate. I'll let you guess which one. Enough already. I want to hear Freebird. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mars Slide Show
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Extraordinary close-up shots of Mars from NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter: http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/03/05/science/space/0305Mars_index .html http://tinyurl.com/2o5xae Wow!
[FairfieldLife] Who's the sick man? ; )
From Tilak, Arctic Home in the Vedas: Thus the voice of recent research is raised very decidedly in favor of Europe, though there is no complete unanimity as to the exact portion of Europe, to regard as the early home of the Aryans; but the competition tends to lie between North Germany and Scandinavia, especially the south of Sweden. This last would probably do well enough as the country in which the Aryans may have consolidated and organized themselves before beginning to send forth their excess of population to conquer the other lands now possessed by nations speaking Aryan languages. Nor can one forget that all the great states of modern Europe, except that of the **sick man**, trace their history back to the conquest of the Norsemen who set out from the Scandinavian land, which Jordanis proudly calls officina gentium and vagina nationum. But I doubt whether the teachings of evolution may not force us to trace them still further towards the North: in any case, the mythological indications to which your attention has been called, point, if I am not mistaken, to some spot within the Arctic Circle, such, for example, as the region where Norse legend placed the Land of Immortality, somewhere in the north of Finland and the neighborhood of the White Sea. There would, perhaps, be no difficulty in the way of supposing them to have thence in due time descended into Scandinavia, settling, among other places, at Upsala [Sweden -- card],which has all the appearance of being a most ancient site, lying as it does on a plain dotted with innumerable burial mounds of unknown antiquity. http://www.vaidilute.com/books/tilak/tilak-12.html p. 380
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
Many of the myths of humanity are about heroes. And many of those heroes prove their herohood in battle; they are warriors. Do I see upliftment and inspiration in tales of the warrior mindset? Sometimes. Being will- ing to fight to the death for what one believes IS inspiring, IF what one believes is inspiring in itself. The hero myths are just a way of deluding the public into believing they individually can change the world. IOW, it is a diversion and at worst a form of mass hypnosis. That is not to say there is anything wrong about aspiring to be a leader which entails becoming a strong person and clear minded the latter of which is a benefit from spiritual sadhana. What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. Continuing the rap about myth... While it is fine to believe that the hero myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, that simply is not true *of many of the stories themselves*. It's a belief or predilection projected *onto* the stories. All cultures have hero stories as an integral part of their myths; but very few of those cultures had the concept of enlightenment *in* their cultures. As Freud reputedly said on his deathbed, Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes a hero story is just a hero story. :-) And some of the hero stories from cultures that had the concept of enlightenment as part of their logos were *just* good, old-fashioned hero stories, in which the individual hero overcomes external forces to win the day. So first, I don't believe that one can generalize and claim that all hero stories were *intended* as metaphors for something else. Second, I repeat my thesis from the original post: You can discern the extent of a person's spiritual progress by *which* myths he or she chooses to focus on. If the individual focuses on stories of heroes triumphing over his inner demons as metaphors for enlightenment, THAT IS HOW THEY VIEW THE PROCESS OF ENLIGHTENMENT. It's a *fight*. There are things to *overcome* And worse, they are parts of *ourselves*. The enlightenment process is viewed as *adversarial*, something one must struggle to achieve. While that is certainly one way of viewing the enlightenment process, it's far from the only way. There are many Taoist myths, for example, in which there is no conflict in the myth to provide good dramatic tension via warfare or fighting to overcome obstacles. A number of them are what I call (with a nod to Monty Python) the Find The Fish myths. The hero is searching for a treasure (Where IS that fish...fishy, fishy, fishy, fish?), only to discover that it's been in his pocket the whole time. If *these* myths were to be viewed as metaphors for enlightenment, it's a whole other ...uh...kettle of fish than the concept of fight- ing adversaries to realize enlightenment. We see this same disparity in *views* of the enlightenment process here on FFL, and in the language used by the posters to FFL. Some see it as a struggle, a fight, and themselves as heroes trying to overcome the obstacles that they perceive to be blocking them from enlighten- ment. Those obstacles may be perceived as stress or as the self or the ego, or whatever; the point is that there is a clear assumption that they must fight *against* something to *obtain* something. The very IDEA that enlightenment is something that must be obtained is telling of the state of attention behind the assumptions. Other posters speak of the enlightenment process in terms of realizing something that has always already been present, discovering the treasure that has always already been in their pockets. Some mix the metaphors and think of the enlightenment pro- cess one way one day and another way the next, and in my opinion that's cool. It's all POV, and one should honor the POV one finds oneself in at the moment IMO. I'm just continuing this rap about myth NOT to argue (how fucking boring is THAT, after all?) but out of a sense of play. As I suggested before, I think one can discern a LOT about the individual seeker by the types of myths he or she is drawn to. As Stu suggested, the language of those myths and the assumptions behind them serve to some extent to structure that seeker's mind, and to reveal the way he or she perceives his or her relationship to the external world. If the seeker is drawn to conflict myths (the hero overcoming enemies), then I might suggest that is how the seeker probably regards his or her own self. It's something that *stands in the way* of his or her enlightenment, and must be overcome. If the seeker is drawn to embrace what is already present myths, then THAT is how the seeker regards enlightenment. Bottom line for me is that the myths we love have power because they awaken in us memories of power, the same way that
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All this is from memory so it may not be exact, I fear I may have created a personal myth out of it to excuse my one-mallow performance in life. Actually I think I would have waited ti he was out of the room and rifled his drawers for the bag, another category perhaps. There seem to be so many variables in this experiment. I agree with the ability to put off present pleasure as a key ingredient of success, but there was a tinge of being obedience being rewarded that I question. Most of the most interesting happy people I know are very disobedient to authority. Of course I am pretty skewed by my bias for people who are living in alternative ways. I love experiments like that since I like to pretend I have powers of inductive reasoning! Right! I wonder about the variables too, but then the personality is only barely formed at age four and if it is a fundamental there must be a time it becomes apparent so maybe he really is onto something at least as far as the ability to delay gratification can have an affect on our lives. I did a bit of checking on the experiment and the children were checked at age fourteen and found to be better adjusted and more dependable, the idea is that the id, ego and superego balance is better in types who delay gratification. Which seems to imply it could be nurture rather than nature that causes it. It's a habit of mine to think of everything in evolutionary terms, which is tricky with the mind as we are a blank slates in so many ways, experiments like this are interesting to me because of the light it shines on how we evolved to have such a programmable mind with apparent free-will. The two-marshmallow kids also had an average 210 points higher SAT scores, which looks to be about a fifth. Seems a lot to me but then I did crap at school so maybe I'm not the best judge here ;-) Fascinating stuff indeed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
from the Hinduism Today website (6 schools of Saivism).:
Gorakshanatha, in Viveka Martanda, gives his view of
samadhi: Samadhi is the name of that state of phenomenal
consciousness, in which there is the perfect realization of the
absolute unity of the individual soul and the Universal Soul, and
in
which there is the perfect dissolution of all the mental
processes.
Just as a perfect union of salt and water is achieved through the
process of yoga, so when the mind or the phenomenal consciousness
is
absolutely unified or identified with the soul through the process
of
the deepest concentration, this is called the state of samadhi.
When
the individuality of the individual soul is absolutely merged in
the
self-luminous transcendent unity of the Absolute Spirit (Siva),
and
the phenomenal consciousness also is wholly dissolved in the
Eternal,
Infinite, Transcendent Consciousness, then perfect samarasattva
(the
essential unity of all existences) is realized, and this is called
samadhi. Having achieved samarasattva
For some reason, that word sounded to me so weird
(samara-sattva??) that I had to check it out. Seems like the
correct form would be 'samarasatva' (sama-rasa [same-feeling] + tva;
cf. sat+tva sattva):
samarasa mfn. having equal feelings (%{-tva} n.) , Ka1s3ikh.
(or samarasa), the yogi
remains continually aware of the transcendent unity of God, even
while being aware of the ordinary material world. This is the
supreme
achievement of the system. The school is noted for its concept of
kaya siddhi, extreme physical longevity, and even the claim of
immortality for some. Indeed, Gorakshanatha himself and many of
his
followers are considered to be alive today, carrying on their work
from hidden places. The precise methods of this are not delineated
in
their texts, but are taught directly by the guru.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Judy] What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. This is one way of putting it, and as far as I have observed the dominant way as stories like this are understood in Hindu religious life today ...and I can't be concerned how it was understood by a past Hindu society 5000 years ago. Judy explained it as a metaphor for the journey to enlightenment, but that is already through a more western filter - as enlightenment is a conceptthat is easily understood and we strive for it. For the Indian devotee, who actually listens to these stories, it is in a more general way, the journey to God the Divine, whatever you call it. [Barry] ... While it is fine to believe that the hero myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, that simply is not true *of many of the stories themselves*. It's a belief or predilection projected *onto* the stories. And so what? WTF do I care what the origine of these stories is? (Its certainly interesting) Religion is dynamic, and the question is, how is it understood TODAY, how are these stories USED TODAY in what context? Therefore I find your approach totally heady. It is the difference between an emic and an etic view of myth. here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emic_and_etic * An emic account is a description of behavior or a belief in terms meaningful (consciously or unconsciously) to the actor; that is, an emic account is culture-specific. Thats my and Judys POV * An etic account is a description of a behavior or belief by an observer, in terms that can be applied to other cultures; that is, an etic account is culturally neutral. Thats your POV. While I must add, that by no means is your approach culturally neutral. It is highly colored by our american culture and the western counter-culture. snip So first, I don't believe that one can generalize and claim that all hero stories were *intended* as metaphors for something else. Second, I repeat my thesis from the original post: You can discern the extent of a person's spiritual progress by *which* myths he or she chooses to focus on. For the first: see above. No matter how they were intended (as if this is anything we could really know) Second: Completely heady and unrealistic. People don't focus on stories like this. You haven't been to India probably. I am not saying that I know India totally, that is impossible, but these stories like the one of Parashurama, are hardly the FOCUS of Indians, when the scriptures are recited. They are part of larger works like the Ramayana, and these are regularely recited at special holy days like Dessera. Parashurama, even though one of the ten Avatars, is not really worshiped in India, there is no temple dedicated to him, he only figures in the context of the larger story of the Ramayana, and comes into the picture, when Rama defeats him in the bow contest. This story is actually very interesting, as it shows several things: 1) Its possible two Avatars are contemporaries. Parashurama was an Avatar, Rama becomes his successor. They both meet. 2) Parashurama challenged Rama, when he took the big bow, he abused him - until he finally realized ho he was, an Incarnation of Vishnu, like himself (Parashurama is usually regarded as an Amsa avatar, that is only a partial incarnation, Rama is poorna Avatar, a full incarnation). Clearly in the story Rama is the hero, and Parashurama is defeated by him in a mental contest - but after recognizing his Divinity, he gives the 'bow of Vishnu' to him. According to Svoboda in his Aghora book, this meant that he gave his power, the power of his Avatarship to him. This to me is the second implication of the story: One Avatar can empower the other! Sort of like Ramaksrishna gave all his powers to Vivekananda. If the individual focuses on stories of heroes triumphing over his inner demons as metaphors for enlightenment, THAT IS HOW THEY VIEW THE PROCESS OF ENLIGHTENMENT. Again, this is an unrealistic interpretation. These stories are simply stories, embedded into a larger narrative, full of Bhakti, praise etc. The main focus of the listener or reader will be on the Divinity of Rama, the book will incite devotion to him. I am reminded of a young Sadhu whom I met in Haridwar at one of the Kumbha Melas. I think he was called Ramji. The special thing about him wa, that he always carried a picture of Rama with him. Now, you might think that thi is not so special, but this picture was big, like a large living-room picture, framed, and it was waterproof, so he could bath in the Ganges with it. Actually the picture or rather Rama, as a child, on the picture was talking to him, like, leading him to his Guru, the Chitrakut Maharaji who was my host, who is a great enlightened
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: It's a *fight*. There are things to *overcome* And worse, they are parts of *ourselves*. The enlightenment process is viewed as *adversarial*, something one must struggle to achieve. First part yes, I think most religious people think there are bad qualities they have to overcome. But then it is GOD fighting the demons - not man! Uh, Michael...have you forgotten that you're talking to a person who doesn't believe that God exists? :-) Throwing out Big Bad Bob as an argument doesn't quite give your stance quite the authority you think it does. :-) This is the problem you have Barry - as you think, it is you who are the actor - you project this attitude to all others. But for others who have surrendered, it is God who does the job, people just have to believe in Rama, and he protects them and fights their inner demons - thats the gist of all these stories. You bring the light, and the darkness goes automatically - to give you a more familiar formulation of he same logic. You will never understand this, because your attitude is completely different. And because I'm so much less evolved than you are, eh? :-) That, after all, was the essence of your response to Vaj the other day about bhakti. If he didn't dig it, he just wasn't evolved enough to dig it, whereas you are. I threw a nugget into that thread that you didn't respond to at all -- that among some spiritual traditions bhakti (the focus on form) is regarded as a *remedial* practice for those who are unable to focus on the formless. They're just points of view, Michael. One is not better than the other. But you are *clearly* presenting the bhakti POV as better than the others. You do so over and over and over, and then when you're called on it you claim you're not doing it. You are. It's implicit in the language you use. This is the problem you have... Or below, part of my predicament. You LOOK DOWN at my way of perceiving the world. And you are very, very, very, very threatened by it. If you weren't you wouldn't believe that I'm trying to show you the right way. I'm not. I never have been. I'm just trying to point out ANOTHER way. If you feel threatened by it, that's YOUR samskara, dude. Thats part of your predicament - that you think you ethically responsible to show us the right way, and the perceived misconceptions in the TM movement. A religiously inclined person will leave he job to God. If your predilection is to believe that Big Bad Bob is going to do it all for you, and that makes you happy, go for it. I'm not trying to sell you another Way. But you seem to think I am. Nature knows best ... ONLY if Nature can know. That presumes the existence of a sentient Big Bad Bob. I am less presumptuous... :-)
[FairfieldLife] 'Hillary or Barack- The Stars Reveal the Obvious!'
OK, so for those of you who don't follow astrology, the astrological energy underpinning the big shift of 2012 that has everyone atwitter with expectation is a square between Pluto and Uranus (90 degree angle). If you want to know more, read Rick Tarnas' wonderful book Psyche and Cosmos, and get the bigger picture of how the outer planet aspect cycles have coincided quite precisely with archetypal waves of planetary change throughout the history of civilization. The last period when Pluto and Uranus were in a hard aspect (conjunctions, oppositions and squares) was the conjunction of 1964-1968, and we can look to that period to get an idea of dramatic change tsunami that is fast approaching. We have just entered within the 10 degree orb of influence of this building energy, so we are getting our first glimpse at its potential future influence. And it appears that our first taste of this coming cosmic conflict is taking place through the squaring off of Hilary and Obama in this democratic primary race, each of whom embody in their astrology one of these two planetary archetypes. After a misty eyed moment of inspiration watching the Yes We Can music video for Obama that's been electrifying the Internet, I finally got off my butt and dug deeper into the astrology behind the two Democratic contenders and I was amazed at what I found. I use the nodes of the moon as a central focus in my astrology readings. They help pierce the veil of the personality and get down to the core soul energies that are really running the show. I highly recommend Jan Spiller's book Astrology for the Soul if you'd like to know more about the nodes. The south node is associated with our past lives and the north node with our current souls desire. Generally, when we are moving in the direction of our North node, there is energy and support from the universe and our projects go smoothly. This is because things are juicy and new and our souls are excited. Conversely, when we operate from our old soul habits and return to the familiar territory of our south node, it's harder to be passionate about our projects, and they tend to be dead in the water energetically. Those old hat roles bore our souls and our projects tend to fall flat. Now, because the nodes are always opposite pairs, it's easy to look at them as I just have, as diametric opposites with the north node positive and the south node negative, but of course, on the soul level time doesnt exist. And in Vedic astrology, both of the nodes, Ketu, the dragons head, and Rahu, the dragons tail, are considered problematic. I think this is because both being stuck in old roles and projecting towards future goals can throw us out of the fullness of the moment. The Ideal then is a balanced, flowing both/and approach where we use the experiences and gifts of our past incarnations but we make sure to apply them in a fresh new direction. Our current personality then can act as a rainbow bridge, unifying all of our past and future incarnations into one big kundalini dragon filled flowing moment of soul. It is with regard to their capacity to achieve this ideal rainbow bridging synthesis where I see the biggest difference between Obama and Hilary astrologically. Obama has the south node in Aquarius, which is ruled by Uranus, the planet of lightning like revolutionary change that first came into our consciousness in 1781, just after the radical birth pangs of this nation. Archetypally, it is associated with that same energy of liberty, equality, and brotherhood. So while Obamas current personality may still be a little green, he has the deep Aquarian soul knowledge that we desperately need at this point to recreate unity, democracy, and community in this country. And he has his Sun, Mercury, and Uranus all in Leo, the sign of his north node, with Uranus actually conjoined to his North Node. The sun shining bright in its sign of rulership gives his personality the Leonine courage and strength it needs to successfully bring forward his Aquarian soul wisdom and lead us through this next great wave of Uranian Change. I believe that if we can empower him to lead, there will be crystal clarity around right use of power and fidelity to democratic principles that we have not seen in a long time in this country, if ever. I believe that he will use his position of power (Leo) to empower the collective (Uranus). Hillary, conversely, has her south node in Scorpio along with the Sun, Mercury and Venus. Her Venus, the planet of the heart chakra and the ruler of her Taurus north node, is in its detriment in Scorpio. It is also in a tight square with Mars and Pluto, the two rulers of Scorpio. So her personality structure, her Plutonian heart of darkness if you will, tends to prevent the full Taurus flowering of her souls desires, keeping her mired in swampy Scorpionic power plays based on never ending cycles of resentment and retribution.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:55 AM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
from the Hinduism Today website (6 schools of Saivism).:
Gorakshanatha, in Viveka Martanda, gives his view of
samadhi: Samadhi is the name of that state of phenomenal
consciousness, in which there is the perfect realization of the
absolute unity of the individual soul and the Universal Soul, and
in
which there is the perfect dissolution of all the mental
processes.
Just as a perfect union of salt and water is achieved through the
process of yoga, so when the mind or the phenomenal consciousness
is
absolutely unified or identified with the soul through the process
of
the deepest concentration, this is called the state of samadhi.
When
the individuality of the individual soul is absolutely merged in
the
self-luminous transcendent unity of the Absolute Spirit (Siva),
and
the phenomenal consciousness also is wholly dissolved in the
Eternal,
Infinite, Transcendent Consciousness, then perfect samarasattva
(the
essential unity of all existences) is realized, and this is called
samadhi. Having achieved samarasattva
For some reason, that word sounded to me so weird
(samara-sattva??) that I had to check it out. Seems like the
correct form would be 'samarasatva' (sama-rasa [same-feeling] + tva;
cf. sat+tva sattva):
samarasa mfn. having equal feelings (%{-tva} n.) , Ka1s3ikh.
Yes, that's right. We actually see this same word, used the same way
among the Naths and practitioners of Mahamudra.
[FairfieldLife] The Now Of Power
On another forum, the issue of personal power has come up, with some fascinating comments by participants as to what they think personal power is. So I thought I'd bring the subject up here, and see what FFLers think of this common spiritual buzzphrase. Do people have personal power? Do some people have more of it and some less? How do you tell?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many of the myths of humanity are about heroes. And many of those heroes prove their herohood in battle; they are warriors. Do I see upliftment and inspiration in tales of the warrior mindset? Sometimes. Being will- ing to fight to the death for what one believes IS inspiring, IF what one believes is inspiring in itself. The hero myths are just a way of deluding the public into believing they individually can change the world. IOW, it is a diversion and at worst a form of mass hypnosis. That is not to say there is anything wrong about aspiring to be a leader which entails becoming a strong person and clear minded the latter of which is a benefit from spiritual sadhana. What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. Continuing the rap about myth... While it is fine to believe that the hero myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, that simply is not true *of many of the stories themselves*. It's a belief or predilection projected *onto* the stories. All cultures have hero stories as an integral part of their myths; but very few of those cultures had the concept of enlightenment *in* their cultures. Yeah, I think you're way too hung up on words here. What I'm talking about is an archetype in the Jungian sense, no conscious recognition of concepts or metaphors required. snip So first, I don't believe that one can generalize and claim that all hero stories were *intended* as metaphors for something else. No intention required either. Second, I repeat my thesis from the original post: You can discern the extent of a person's spiritual progress by *which* myths he or she chooses to focus on. (Just for the record, note the value judgment here. The Hero's Journey myth, according to Barry, is *less evolved* than what he will go on to describe as the Find the Fish myth.) If the individual focuses on stories of heroes triumphing over his inner demons as metaphors for enlightenment, THAT IS HOW THEY VIEW THE PROCESS OF ENLIGHTENMENT. It's a *fight*. There are things to *overcome* And worse, they are parts of *ourselves*. The enlightenment process is viewed as *adversarial*, something one must struggle to achieve. Much too literal. While that is certainly one way of viewing the enlightenment process, it's far from the only way. There are many Taoist myths, for example, in which there is no conflict in the myth to provide good dramatic tension via warfare or fighting to overcome obstacles. A number of them are what I call (with a nod to Monty Python) the Find The Fish myths. The hero is searching for a treasure (Where IS that fish...fishy, fishy, fishy, fish?), only to discover that it's been in his pocket the whole time. If *these* myths were to be viewed as metaphors for enlightenment, it's a whole other ...uh...kettle of fish than the concept of fight- ing adversaries to realize enlightenment. I don't believe I said anything about the Hero's Jourey myth being the *only* form the enlightenment archetype takes, so this is largely a non sequitur. But even so, if you look at it more abstractly, the Find the Fish metaphor and the Hero's Journey metaphor have a common element. Even though the fish has been in one's pocket all the time, one must still come to a realization of this fact. Even if the path to discover the fish is circular, it still involves a movement, a journey, from nonrecognition of the fish to its recognition. snip I'm just continuing this rap about myth NOT to argue (how fucking boring is THAT, after all?) but out of a sense of play. As I suggested before, I think one can discern a LOT about the individual seeker by the types of myths he or she is drawn to. As Stu suggested, the language of those myths and the assumptions behind them serve to some extent to structure that seeker's mind, and to reveal the way he or she perceives his or her relationship to the external world. But the deeper structure is the archetype, which is common to all such myths. If the seeker is drawn to conflict myths (the hero overcoming enemies), then I might suggest that is how the seeker probably regards his or her own self. It's something that *stands in the way* of his or her enlightenment, and must be overcome. Just as one must overcome one's obliviousness to the location of the fish in one's own pocket. We will not cease from exploration, and the end of our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.--T.S. Eliot This applies no less to the Find the Fish metaphor than to the Hero's Journey metaphor.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: [Judy] What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. This is one way of putting it, and as far as I have observed the dominant way as stories like this are understood in Hindu religious life today ...and I can't be concerned how it was understood by a past Hindu society 5000 years ago. Judy explained it as a metaphor for the journey to enlightenment, but that is already through a more western filter - as enlightenment is a conceptthat is easily understood and we strive for it. For the Indian devotee, who actually listens to these stories, it is in a more general way, the journey to God the Divine, whatever you call it. Please see my response to Barry. What I'm talking about is independent of culture.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:07 PM, Michael wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not imagining anything about you Michael, I just go by what you say. No I think thats hard to do. Words almost always trigger divers responses according to the associations we attach to them -consciously or unconsciously. You cannot be indifferent: I was specifically reacting to this sentence (Message #171715): 'Well, no I'm not a bliss-kitten bhakti and I don't aspire to any sort of contrived devotion a la the Hari Khrishnas (or bhaktis in general). But yes guru-yoga does play a very important part of my own life, but not in the way you seem to be imagining it.' As if devotion has to be contrived! As if you even have to aspire for it! Its nothing of that sort. And why Hare Krishna (and quickly add Bhaktas in general)? Mike, you were asking me about guru-yoga as if that meant I should be having some sort of devotion towards a guru-figure but I see no reason--and definitely no advantage--to dividing reality for love or devotions sake. And again you speak of Guru Yoga as important to you, but not the way I IMAGINE. So how would I have imagined it? We could go back and forth on this one all day. The best way to understand any practice is to check it out yourself and receive teachings from those who have experience in that area. However approaching a teaching with a bias towards proving it wrong usually isn't a great way to investigate something. Therefore, if sometime in the future such a practice rocks your boat, check it out, then see what you get. While at the same time make fun of anyone 'following' a preceptor - or rather portraying this as the main problem of religion - which in any case you keep on redefining as you go along. Like in the case of Mao - Mao as a religious leader is equated with theism, whereas he was clearly an atheist No. All I am saying about Mao--yes he was an atheist--he became a god to 100's of millions. His book of sayings, the little red book, became like a bible to many, many people: In October 1966, Mao's Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung, which was known as the Little Red Book was published. Party members were encouraged to carry a copy with them and possession was almost mandatory as a criterion for membership. Over the years, Mao's image became displayed almost everywhere, present in homes, offices and shops. His quotations were typographically emphasised by putting them in boldface or red type in even the most obscure writings. Music from the period emphasized Mao's stature, as did children's rhymes. The phrase Long Live Chairman Mao for ten thousand years was commonly heard during the era, which was traditionally a phrase reserved for the reigning Emperor. After the Cultural Revolution, there are some people who still worship Mao in family altars or even temples for Mao.[35] And no, I am not trying to redefine things as I go along, I am merely attempting to clarify my points from some casual remarks I initially made which are being over-parsed to the point of bearing no resemblance whatsoever to my own POV. Actually Mao was not the type of person I was thinking of when I made my original casual comments, but it is interesting what can happen when someone becomes a god and is the head of a government. - while Buddhism is redefined as atheism (we can talk about if Buddhism is Atheism, but if you believe in an Absolute or Unity consciousness (Unity with what?) its not atheism to me. Sorry, but to me this is a big confusion about language. There are theistic Buddhists and there are some low forms of Buddhism which involve even worship of Buddha as a god type figure. They seem to me to be deviations. You seemed to non-sequitur on to different POV completely from what I was talking about. It's kinda hard to respond to someone who didn't seem to get the gist of what you were saying in the first place. I hardly think the type of Theists we have to worry about are various Hindu (or Christian, Jewish or Sufi, etc.) saints! Well you were talking about God men. I was thinking more of a different type of god worshipper, say like George W. Bush or those from the House of Saud or the European leaders who lead the Crusades. It's adherents at an entirely different developmental stage who seem to be the ones causing problems, both in the present and in the past. I could agree with that easily - but thats not what you said. Development - high and low - is a new aspect you are bringing in now. No Mike, I'm just clarifying where I'm coming from, that's all. I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that we actually have quite a bit in common. Most probably we do have a lot of things in common. Bhakti type approaches were just never my cup of tea, that's all. Neither were they mine. I'm not the big bhajan singer or pujari -
[FairfieldLife] The Now Of Then
There is a huge antique car show in my town this weekend. Sponsored by Audi -- prizes concours events, the whole tamale. And for some reason, all of the cars in this event have chosen to drive right in front of the cafe I'm sitting in. Go figure. I've always thought of sidewalk cafes as entertainment, but this parade raises the bar of what I had previously considered entertainment. The cars are from pretty much all eras of the automobile, from first to latest. A few are weird marketing cars, like the car-sized Freixenet champagne bottle on wheels that just went by. The real period cars are driven by people who are obviously *into* owning a car from a certain era. They're the more modern counterpart of the Society for Creative Anachronism folks and their fondness for the dress of the era they obsess about; they're *in costume*. So you've got yer dandies and their ladies from the Roaring Twenties in an old Cadillac convertible, you've got yer Belle Epoque French couple in a convertible of that era, you've got yer Italian playboy and his starlet girlfriend driving along in a Ferrari Testarossa. One of the *original* Testarossas. Boys love their cars. And I love them more than most, although I think I've outgrown my lust for fast, flashy cars myself. I'm comfortable with my old Peugeot 306, Enzo help me. :-) But boy! do I REMEMBER some of the flashy cars I've driven? They're like the flashy women -- they leave a distinct impression...and the occasional samskara. I remember being 19, driving a 1954 Ferrari that had actually run in the Mille Miglia. It had a four- speed crashbox transmission (meaning that there was no synchromesh between gears, so you had to double- clutch shifting up as well as down), it had a hard racing suspension that probably gave me permanent liver damage, and the clutch and brake pedal pressure was so high that I limped for a week after driving the beast for an hour. But boy! was it fun. I was completely in the Now, but at the same time -- curiously -- in the Then. I could really feel a part of me driving this same car in the Mille Miglia, exchanging leads with Stirling Moss. At that time, this car was State Of The Art; one of its sisters *won* the Mille Miglia. It was at one point of time by definition the best car in the world -- in its class, and for its intended purpose, racing. The car had charisma, personal power. So do a lot of these other cars driving along in front of me. Interesting people drove them back Then, and interesting people are driving them Now. I think I'm going to have mucho fun wandering among them later when they are out on display, trying to figure out the history of each one, its particular Then.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield on the BBC!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: Next monday on BBC2, a programme about meditation is being broadcast part of which was filmed at MIU http://open2.net/alternativetherapies/meditation.html Oops, just realised I will probably be the only one on here who will be able to watch it... Not so, these days. There are numerous electronic fandagoes that should allow anyone with an Internet connection (probably need broadband). Check out their web page. Uns This is the programme's web page: http://tinyurl.com/34fgwp I think you would need to download the BBC's IPlayer software which is free. There is a time difference of seven hours. Uns.
[FairfieldLife] Mother Meera in Boston (was Re: MM = FF 911)
This just in: Dear Friends, Mother Meera will be visiting Boston on Tuesday, September 30th. Once more of the details have been determined (such as where and when darshan will be held), we will be sending out a registration form with all the information included. Again, if you are interested in helping out, please contact us. The event is growing and much help will be needed. info [at] mothermeera-boston-providence [dot] org --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool fflmod@ wrote: Michael, can you tell me if Boston is a definite stop on the tour? The Boston website still says it depends upon the interest level. It is definite. They just didn't yet update their web pages. You can also see that some of the web pages have the correct dates on their link-list, but not yet on their main page. The reason is, they have someone else doing the web page for them, so there is a delay, while I updated right away. The only difference between cities will be, that those with fewer applications, will only have one evening Darshan (7 pm), and those with more interest, will have an additional afternoon Darshan (2 pm). But Mother will definitely go to these places now. The best is, if you are interested, do a pre-registration, and they should inform you in a short while. Also, clicking on New Yorg brings up the Washington, DC website. Thank you. I just did it, it was late at night, and I did a few 'undos' obviously one too much :-) --- Michael t3rinity@ wrote: Mother Meera will be in Fairfield finally - on September 11. Just came out that way. No special symbolism intended. See the whole schedule here: http://mothermeeradarshan.org/ http://www.MotherMeera-Fairfield.com/ Mother will also go to India again in May and will be first time in North India, Delhi April 30, Rishikesh May 3 http://mothermeeraindia.com/
[FairfieldLife] The Natural Law Party was a good idea
The Boston Globe has a periodic feature called Uncommon Knowledge: surprising insights from the social sciences. It summarizes research that, in many cases, might have policy implications if politicians paid attention to science. Take this blurb from last Sunday, about the conservative's starve the beast philosophy: Two economists find no support in the historical record to indicate that tax cuts have a negative effect on federal spending. PERHAPS CONSERVATIVES SHOULD give John McCain more credit on economic policy. McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts, something that haunted him on his path to the Republican nomination. He defends himself by saying that tax cuts must be matched by spending restraint, but many conservatives believe that cutting taxes preemptively is the best way to restrain spending - the starve the beast hypothesis. Now two economists find no support in the historical record to indicate that tax cuts have a negative effect on federal spending. In fact, they found a positive effect - the tax cuts were followed by spending increases. Unless politicians explicitly connect spending and tax policy, there is a tendency to disassociate the two. Meanwhile, contrary to the notion that tax cuts pay for themselves via extra growth, most of the subsequent recovery in lost revenue came as a result of tax increases enacted specifically to counter the initial tax cuts. Romer, C. and Romer, D., Do Tax Cuts Starve the Beast: The Effect of Tax Changes on Government Spending, National Bureau of Economic Research (October 2007). http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/03/23/uncommon_knowledge/ http://tinyurl.com/2stef7
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:24 PM, Michael wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that we actually have quite a bit in common. Bhakti type approaches were just never my cup of tea, that's all. On a second thought: My reaction is simply the insight, that I donot actually want to change you or anyone here. If its not your cup of tea its not your cup of tea. If it was, we wouldn't need to discuss it, it would just be obvious. I OTOH have not need in proving anything about myself either - if you think I am stupidly attached to a dual view, while the nondual is highest, (btw Willy is right - Buddhism is most certainly not nondualistic )I am okay, its okay to be stupid ;-) I have my own insights, and I follow them, no need really to share. Thats why it is futile. What would be interesting would be to hear your own insight as to what the worship of god, gods and goddesses has done for humanity--and other life on this planet--throughout history. Has it decreased suffering or has it increased it? Has it helped decrease negative emotions for the majority of it's adherents? What has worship of god, gods or goddesses done for world peace? And what of science and god, gods and goddesses? Are god, gods or goddesses considered higher or more special than humans or other forms of sentient life? Should laws be put in place globally to prevent god or goddess-based human right abuses? If my parents god believes that the foreskin of my penis should be removed surgically while still a child, should they be allowed to do that or is that child abuse? Should temples throughout India, Nepal and other places be allowed to sacrifice animals and/or humans to gain the boon or favor from some god or goddess? Are there some forms of god that are naturally disruptive of human and other life? If yes, what does that mean? Should Indian sacrificial wars still be allowed to 'blow of steam' and re-establish balance with nature? Should texts which once promulgated human and or animal sacrifices still be considered valid or even useable? If yes, what are the implications for karma?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
Michael wrote: (btw Willy is right - Buddhism is most certainly not nondualistic ) Some forms of Buddhism may be nondual, but probably not original Buddhism, which split into eighteen sects. Most Therevade Buddhism is dualistic in nature, believing as it does in causation, a path to enlightement, and karma. Much of Mahayana Buddhism in dualistic in nature, believing in celestial Buddhas and Bodhisatvas. Vajrayana Buddhism may be non-dulaistic, especially the 'conciousness only' school of Asanga. But if you read the above description of Gorakshanath, anyone can see that TM practice is derived from the nath tradition, and subsequently the Western transmision of the Trika tantrism of Kashmere and the Sri Vidya tradition of Karnataka. Marshy probably didn't ascribe to Adwaita non-dualism; he never said very much about Maya. Shankara's grand-guru was most probably a Buddhist. Read more: Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Matsyendranath - Fish Master of the Yoni Tantra From: Willytex Updated: 2/11/2005 http://tinyurl.com/39mltb Listen, Parvati, to this highly secret one, Dearest. Ten million times have you wanted to hear this. Beauteous One, it is from your feminine nature that you continually ask me. You should conceal this by every effort. Parvati, there is mantra-pitha, yantra-pitha and yoni-pitha. Of these, the chief is certainly the yoni-pitha, revealed to you from affection. Forum: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Not just another tantric, mind control cult! Author: Willytex Updated: 07/15/2004 http://tinyurl.com/3cnyny In my opinion, Guru Dev was following the Nath Siddha path, a yogic sect; yogis who practiced the same meditation technique as us modern TM-Sidhas, a technique which was most likely invented by Matsyendranath, the famous inventor of Hatha Yoga, in the 9th century in Bihar or Bengal. However, I could be wrong, but I don't think so. Forum: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Phat! A magic word for protection? Author: Willytex Date: 08/15/2003 http://tinyurl.com/3aygz7 There are two main parampara of Japa Yogis: the authentic initiated right-hand Japa Yogi, and the self-initiated left-hand Japa Yogi, the latter sometimes called in India a 'bhogi'. A true right-hand Japa Yogi will always be japping silently with his right hand only, and always using the index and middle finger, placed inside a cotton bag held at the muldhara chakra.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amy Goodman Questions Sen. Obama on Heeding Iraqis Call for Full US Withdrawal
Judy qrote: I'm sorry, but I found this bit extremely annoying: Obama is offering the most sweeping liberal foreign-policy critique we've heard from a serious presidential contender in decades... Peter Wehner takes a detailed look at Barack Obama's positions with respect to Iraq: ...was opposed to doing anything about Iraq even when, like everyone else, he believed Saddam Hussein was a menace who was likely armed with weapons of mass destruction; became a supporter of the war after the fact and remained one even as things were going poorly; and morphed into an aggressive opponent again just as the prospects of an American victory began to brighten. 'The Audacity of Opportunism' Posted by Paul Mirengoff: Powerline, March 15, 2008 http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/03/020048.php
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stop Bagging Hillary
Judy wrote: It's a pity. He promised so much. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25 197,23140008-7583,00.html http://tinyurl.com/29easc Gen. McPeak + Jeremiah Wright + Samantha Power + Zgibniew Brzezinski = Obama Jewish problem? Thus, it may very well be the case that Obama has a 'Wright problem' which, more likely than not, encompasses some new resistance on the part of Jewish voters. Read more: 'Obama Jewish problem?' Posted by John Hindraker: Powerline, March 26, 2008 http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/03/020134.php
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:24 PM, Michael wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that we actually have quite a bit in common. Bhakti type approaches were just never my cup of tea, that's all. On a second thought: My reaction is simply the insight, that I donot actually want to change you or anyone here. If its not your cup of tea its not your cup of tea. If it was, we wouldn't need to discuss it, it would just be obvious. I OTOH have not need in proving anything about myself either - if you think I am stupidly attached to a dual view, while the nondual is highest, (btw Willy is right - Buddhism is most certainly not nondualistic )I am okay, its okay to be stupid ;-) I have my own insights, and I follow them, no need really to share. Thats why it is futile. What would be interesting would be to hear your own insight as to what the worship of god, gods and goddesses has done for humanity--and other life on this planet--throughout history. Has it decreased suffering or has it increased it? Can't answer that one, no way to compare really. You could ask the same question about science. While I agree it has decreased suffering, it also has let the planet to the verge of extinction. Has it helped decrease negative emotions for the majority of it's adherents? I would say in general yes, even though there are clearly cases where the opposite is true. What has worship of god, gods or goddesses done for world peace? Hard to answer, because even humanism is derived from religion. And what of science and god, gods and goddesses? Are god, gods or goddesses considered higher or more special than humans or other forms of sentient life? Well God is usually considered to be the highest ideal of life. But I think, the way you phrase your questions clearly shows a big gap of undestanding. Would you rephrase your questions and substitute it instead of 'god, gods goddesses' with 'essence of consciousness' or with anoher phrase like 'all that there is' or with simply 'the Absolute'. How would this sound then? Childish? Should laws be put in place globally to prevent god or goddess-based human right abuses? Yes I would agree. If my parents god believes that the foreskin of my penis should be removed surgically while still a child, should they be allowed to do that or is that child abuse? Can't say, as I don't really know enough of the subject. In any way I don't consider those practises as the essence of their religion. I am certainly not going out of my way to justify all practices done in the name of Religion. Should temples throughout India, Nepal and other places be allowed to sacrifice animals and/or humans to gain the boon or favor from some god or goddess? I am strictly against animal sacrifices. I have friends in India who were actively fighting against it yes. Are there some forms of god that are naturally disruptive of human and other life? If yes, what does that mean? My opinion is, that it very much depends on the attitude of the worshiper. Sure there are different spirit beings, read the gita. Should Indian sacrificial wars still be allowed to 'blow of steam' and re-establish balance with nature? Sacrificial wars? Never heard about it. No. of course not. Should texts which once promulgated human and or animal sacrifices still be considered valid or even useable? If yes, what are the implications for karma? No, I am against it. I know that these were en vogue in the past in almost all religions, but since then we have come a long way. I think that animal sacrifice should be forbidden, as I am a strict vegetarian. Btw. those sacrifices are hardly any more executed in India, there is the famous exception of Kaligat in Calcutta, and I am certainly not drawn to this place. Slaughter of animals is much more common in the atheistic west. No karma, no sin, we do just what pleases us humans.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh, Michael...have you forgotten that you're talking to a person who doesn't believe that God exists? :-) I had written an elaborate answer to this post, spending much time, but unfortunately it got lost in cyperspace. Maybe it will still come up. Oh it could be its just not Gods will, maybe he wants you to stay atheist. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amy Goodman Questions Sen. Obama on Heeding Iraqis Call for Full US Withdrawal
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy qrote: I'm sorry, but I found this bit extremely annoying: Obama is offering the most sweeping liberal foreign-policy critique we've heard from a serious presidential contender in decades... Willytex's snippage here is deliberately calculated to make it appear that I'm saying I found Obama's foreign-policy critique annoying. That is not the case, and Willytex knows it. Refer to my original post (171840) for the correct context.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Now Of Power
On Mar 30, 2008, at 8:00 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Do people have personal power? Yes. Do some people have more of it and some less? Absolutely. How do you tell? Stand next to some kryptonite, and it should become obvious. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's the sick man? ; )
Eric wrote: From Tilak, Arctic Home in the Vedas: According to the Oxford Companion to Archaelogy: The Indo-European languages: Broadly speaking, the Indo-European, left-written, language group includes Celtic, (Gaulish, Irish, Welsh, Breton, etc.) since the La Tene Iron Age, 500-1 B.C.; Italic (Latin and the Romance languages, etc.); the Germanic languages (Scandanavian, English, Dutch, German, etc.); the Baltic languages (Old Prussian, Lithuanian, Latvian, etc.); the Slavic languages (Polish, Chezh, Slovak, Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian, Russian, Ukranian, Albanian, etc.); Greek (from the Bronze Age circa 1300 B.C.); Armenian (1900 B.C.); Indo-Iranian (Sanskrit, Old Persian, Avestan) and Tocharian of Chinese Turkestan. Read more: Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Back to Eden Aryana From: Willytex Date: Wed, Jun 8 2005 http://tinyurl.com/2668pg After surveying the history of India, it is reasonable to conclude that the Indian Aryan speakers came from the steppes of Eurasia, before 2,000 B.C., bringing their language, their religion, and their weapons of war into what is now Iran. Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: A.I.T. (Aryan Invasion Theory) From: Willytex Date: Sat, Jul 30 2005 http://tinyurl.com/ypolwo Most archaelogists and linguists agree that the Indo-Aryans migrated into India in the 2nd millennium B.C. from their homeland of Eranvej (the present Russian Turkestan) via Afghanistan into India. The Indo-aryan speaking people must have come *after* the Indus Civilization, or they would have mentioned it, would they not? Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: A Passage to India From: Willytex Date: Wed, Jun 8 2005 http://tinyurl.com/25yey8
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Hillary or Barack- The Stars Reveal the Obvious!'
Select the conclusion you want to prove, and then go about finding the rock solid evidence to support it. Babaji the scientist. FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, so for those of you who don't follow astrology, the astrological energy underpinning the big shift of 2012 that has everyone atwitter with expectation is a square between Pluto and Uranus (90 degree angle). If you want to know more, read Rick Tarnas' wonderful book Psyche and Cosmos, and get the bigger picture of how the outer planet aspect cycles have coincided quite precisely with archetypal waves of planetary change throughout the history of civilization. The last period when Pluto and Uranus were in a hard aspect (conjunctions, oppositions and squares) was the conjunction of 1964-1968, and we can look to that period to get an idea of dramatic change tsunami that is fast approaching. We have just entered within the 10 degree orb of influence of this building energy, so we are getting our first glimpse at its potential future influence. And it appears that our first taste of this coming cosmic conflict is taking place through the squaring off of Hilary and Obama in this democratic primary race, each of whom embody in their astrology one of these two planetary archetypes. After a misty eyed moment of inspiration watching the Yes We Can music video for Obama that's been electrifying the Internet, I finally got off my butt and dug deeper into the astrology behind the two Democratic contenders and I was amazed at what I found. I use the nodes of the moon as a central focus in my astrology readings. They help pierce the veil of the personality and get down to the core soul energies that are really running the show. I highly recommend Jan Spiller's book Astrology for the Soul if you'd like to know more about the nodes. The south node is associated with our past lives and the north node with our current soul's desire. Generally, when we are moving in the direction of our North node, there is energy and support from the universe and our projects go smoothly. This is because things are juicy and new and our souls are excited. Conversely, when we operate from our old soul habits and return to the familiar territory of our south node, it's harder to be passionate about our projects, and they tend to be dead in the water energetically. Those old hat roles bore our souls and our projects tend to fall flat. Now, because the nodes are always opposite pairs, it's easy to look at them as I just have, as diametric opposites with the north node positive and the south node negative, but of course, on the soul level time doesn't exist. And in Vedic astrology, both of the nodes, Ketu, the dragon's head, and Rahu, the dragon's tail, are considered problematic. I think this is because both being stuck in old roles and projecting towards future goals can throw us out of the fullness of the moment. The Ideal then is a balanced, flowing both/and approach where we use the experiences and gifts of our past incarnations but we make sure to apply them in a fresh new direction. Our current personality then can act as a rainbow bridge, unifying all of our past and future incarnations into one big kundalini dragon filled flowing moment of soul. It is with regard to their capacity to achieve this ideal rainbow bridging synthesis where I see the biggest difference between Obama and Hilary astrologically. Obama has the south node in Aquarius, which is ruled by Uranus, the planet of lightning like revolutionary change that first came into our consciousness in 1781, just after the radical birth pangs of this nation. Archetypally, it is associated with that same energy of liberty, equality, and brotherhood. So while Obama's current personality may still be a little green, he has the deep Aquarian soul knowledge that we desperately need at this point to recreate unity, democracy, and community in this country. And he has his Sun, Mercury, and Uranus all in Leo, the sign of his north node, with Uranus actually conjoined to his North Node. The sun shining bright in its sign of rulership gives his personality the Leonine courage and strength it needs to successfully bring forward his Aquarian soul wisdom and lead us through this next great wave of Uranian Change. I believe that if we can empower him to lead, there will be crystal clarity around right use of power and fidelity to democratic principles that we have not seen in a long time in this country, if ever. I believe that he will use his position of power (Leo) to empower the collective (Uranus). Hillary, conversely, has her south node in Scorpio along with the Sun, Mercury and Venus. Her Venus, the planet of the heart chakra and the ruler of her Taurus north node, is in its detriment in Scorpio. It is also in a tight square with Mars and Pluto, the two rulers of Scorpio. So her personality structure, her
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's the sick man? ; )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Tilak, Arctic Home in the Vedas: Thus the voice of recent research is raised very decidedly in favor of Europe, though there is no complete unanimity as to the exact portion of Europe, to regard as the early home of the Aryans; but the competition tends to lie between North Germany and Scandinavia, especially the south of Sweden. This last would probably do well enough as the country in which the Aryans may have consolidated and organized themselves before beginning to send forth their excess of population to conquer the other lands now possessed by nations speaking Aryan languages. Nor can one forget that all the great states of modern Europe, except that of the **sick man**, trace their history back to the conquest of the Norsemen who set out from the Scandinavian land, which Jordanis proudly calls officina gentium and vagina nationum. But I doubt whether the teachings of evolution may not force us to trace them still further towards the North: in any case, the mythological indications to which your attention has been called, point, if I am not mistaken, to some spot within the Arctic Circle, such, for example, as the region where Norse legend placed the Land of Immortality, somewhere in the north of Finland and the neighborhood of the White Sea. There would, perhaps, be no difficulty in the way of supposing them to have thence in due time descended into Scandinavia, settling, among other places, at Upsala [Sweden -- card],which has all the appearance of being a most ancient site, lying as it does on a plain dotted with innumerable burial mounds of unknown antiquity. http://www.vaidilute.com/books/tilak/tilak-12.html p. 380 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sick_man_of_Europe Now this was written in 1903 by Lokamanya Bâl Gangâdhar Tilak, so it was probably the Ottoman empire.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
Barry_1 wrote: Many of the myths of humanity are about heroes. And many of those heroes prove their herohood in battle; they are warriors. Do I see upliftment and inspiration in tales of the warrior mindset? Sometimes. Being will- ing to fight to the death for what one believes IS inspiring, IF what one believes is inspiring in itself. Barry_2 wrote: The hero myths are just a way of deluding the public into believing they individually can change the world. IOW, it is a diversion and at worst a form of mass hypnosis. That is not to say there is anything wrong about aspiring to be a leader which entails becoming a strong person and clear minded the latter of which is a benefit from spiritual sadhana. Judy wrote: What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. Yeah, I guess in the Barry's zeal to discredit the FFL TMers they really got confused on this one! I guess that is what happens when they don't do their research very well. This rap of theirs is just outrageous! Don't they read books? 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces' by Joseph Campbell was the inspiration for George Lucas' 'Star Wars'. 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces' by Joseph Campbell Pantheon, 1949 This is the Monomyth shared by all cultures- and indeed seems to be a direct inspiration from the cosmos itself by way of the collective unconscious. Here we have the eternal cycle of 1) the call to adventure; 2) the crossing of the threshold; 3) the tests, trials, and helpers; 4) the sacred marriage, apotheosis (becoming one with god), or elixir theft; 5)the flight 6) recrossing/ressurection; and 7) the return to society with hard won gifts. He examines all of these elements in depth with a wealth of cross-cultural examples. Read more: Amazon reviews: http://tinyurl.com/24xu7k
[FairfieldLife] Will Judy Stein be supporting John McCain?
During the last presidential election over at a.m.t., Judy Stein spent an inordinate amount of time and attention to convincing readers how important John Kerry's military service was and how it was so much better than George Bush's. This is something that all can see by doing a Google Groups search on this topic, with Judy Stein as author (alot of hits come up!). I wonder: what is the military service records of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? How do their military service experience stack up against John McCain's? Where did Barack serve and in which part of the military? How about Hillary? Marines? Navy? Air Force? Since it was SO important for Judy last time out, this must be the #1 issue for her this time around. So, let's do the exercise for Judy's sake and see whom she will be supporting...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stop Bagging Hillary
Just in case there's a newbie reading any Richard J. Williams posts here, it is my opinion and seemingly the opinion of many here that all newbies should be warned that this poster is a troll who likes to start fights and supports the USA staying in Iraq and denies to an absolute degree the suffering that US Imperialism and GlobalBigBiz causes in third world countries. Even a light scanning of his posts will reveal that he's a scurrilous hater of almost everyone, an outright fake who pretends to be spiritual and to be scripturally scholarly, and a crass miscreant of very dark intent. His world would be perfect if America stationed troops throughout the world, privatized all natural resources, and continued its genocidal policies. Below he posts links to show Obama in a bad light. He's merely trying to besmirch Obama and Hillary any way that he can, so that McCain gets elected and keeps war going for 100 years. He says that his father was a Wing Commander in the USAF, and, assuming that an officer of that rank is totally sold out to militarism, this may go a long way to explaining the war mongering posts that are so vile. He poses as a religious scholar, seemingly supports the TM program in Texas, yet has never shed a tear about the millions of lives ended or ruined by war -- a direct proof of a stone cold heart that remains unaffected by all his cutting and pasting of scriptures. When called upon to explain himself, he simply does not answer, or justifies the murdering of third worlders as a necessity for America's safety. In the year or more since I've been posting here, not a single person has spoken highly this creep who posts a constant drizzle of rancid spin from a very sick mind's contents. He's the only person who here who cannot call any other poster friend, compatriot, or fellow supporter. About a dozen posters here regularly label him as a troll. All the above my opinion only, but I predict yours will not vary much from this: this person's previous incarnation MUST HAVE BEEN as a bacterium living inside a dingleberry on a rabid dog's ass. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy wrote: It's a pity. He promised so much. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25 197,23140008-7583,00.html http://tinyurl.com/29easc Gen. McPeak + Jeremiah Wright + Samantha Power + Zgibniew Brzezinski = Obama Jewish problem? Thus, it may very well be the case that Obama has a 'Wright problem' which, more likely than not, encompasses some new resistance on the part of Jewish voters. Read more: 'Obama Jewish problem?' Posted by John Hindraker: Powerline, March 26, 2008 http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/03/020134.php
[FairfieldLife] Re: Will Judy Stein be supporting John McCain?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: During the last presidential election over at a.m.t., Judy Stein spent an inordinate amount of time and attention to convincing readers how important John Kerry's military service was and how it was so much better than George Bush's. This is something that all can see by doing a Google Groups search on this topic, with Judy Stein as author And if you do such a search and read some of the posts, you'll see exactly how grossly and deliberately misleading Shemp's characterization above is. I doubt anybody will be surprised.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
Michael wrote: First part yes, I think most religious people think there are bad qualities they have to overcome. But then it is GOD fighting the demons - not man! TurquoiseB wrote: Uh, Michael...have you forgotten that you're talking to a person who doesn't believe that God exists? :-) Uh, Turq, it has already been established that you believe in buddhas, bodhisattvas, ramas, siddhis, karmas, spirits, shaktis, souls, enlightenment, and certain termas, such as the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Not to mention bogamils, cat-ass kissers, gnostics, human flying and levitation. Maybe you're the TB on this forum! No true skeptic would believe any of these things.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amy Goodman Questions Sen. Obama on Heeding Iraqis Call for Full US Withdrawal
I'm sorry, but I found this bit extremely annoying: Obama is offering the most sweeping liberal foreign-policy critique we've heard from a serious presidential contender in decades... Judy wrote: Willytex's snippage here is deliberately calculated to make it appear that I'm saying I found Obama's foreign-policy critique annoying. That is not the case, and Willytex knows it. Well, I guess you found my post annoying since you failed to include it in your snippage. But it looks like Obama is a flip-flopper just like Hillary. Apparently they both flip-flopped on the Iraq issue - they are political opportunists, just like most other politicians. Who can respect a flip-flopper? John Kerry was a flip-flopper too. Dems are flip-floppers - they flip-flop. Now that is annoying and Judy knows it! Refer to my original post (171840) for the correct context. Peter Wehner takes a detailed look at Barack Obama's positions with respect to Iraq: Barack Obama and Iraq: was opposed to doing anything about Iraq even when, like everyone else, he believed Saddam Hussein was a menace who was likely armed with weapons of mass destruction; became a supporter of the war after the fact and remained one even as things were going poorly; and morphed into an aggressive opponent again just as the prospects of an American victory began to brighten. 'The Audacity of Opportunism' Posted by Paul Mirengoff: Powerline, March 15, 2008 http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/03/020048.php
[FairfieldLife] Re: Will Judy Stein be supporting John McCain?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: During the last presidential election over at a.m.t., Judy Stein spent an inordinate amount of time and attention to convincing readers how important John Kerry's military service was and how it was so much better than George Bush's. This is something that all can see by doing a Google Groups search on this topic, with Judy Stein as author And if you do such a search and read some of the posts, you'll see exactly how grossly and deliberately misleading Shemp's characterization above is. I doubt anybody will be surprised. I doubt anyone cares what Magoo thinks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Will Judy Stein be supporting John McCain?
Shemp wrote: During the last presidential election over at a.m.t., Judy Stein spent an inordinate amount of time and attention to convincing readers how important John Kerry's military service was and how it was so much better than George Bush's. This is something that all can see by doing a Google Groups search on this topic, with Judy Stein as author (alot of hits come up!). 'John Kerry reporting for duty'! Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Re: Swift Boat heroes From: Willytex Date: Fri, Oct 15 2004 http://tinyurl.com/2bsqtv Kerry slandered his colleagues as war criminals merely as a pretext for withdrawing troops from Vietnam. He was pandering to the people who said the domino theory was not valid. These are the same people who said the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese were nationalists-- not murderous Communist tyrants.
[FairfieldLife] Giant Crystal Cave Comes to Light
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/photogalleries/giant-crystals-cave/ http://www.google.de/search?hl=deq=naica+crystal+cavesbtnG=Google-Suchemeta= http://www.tahuti.nl/NaicaCrystalCave.pdf e n j o y - Lesen Sie Ihre E-Mails jetzt einfach von unterwegs..
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield on the BBC!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor uns_tressor@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: Next monday on BBC2, a programme about meditation is being broadcast part of which was filmed at MIU http://open2.net/alternativetherapies/meditation.html Oops, just realised I will probably be the only one on here who will be able to watch it... Not so, these days. There are numerous electronic fandagoes that should allow anyone with an Internet connection (probably need broadband). Check out their web page. Uns This is the programme's web page: http://tinyurl.com/34fgwp I think you would need to download the BBC's IPlayer software which is free. There is a time difference of seven hours. Uns. Thanks for doing the research on this Uns, it saved me a job. I'll watch on the TV but as it's got Stephen Fry visiting Fairfield it should be interesting enough for anyone to have a look as the series has been fascinating so far.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bagging Willytex
Ed wrote: Just in case there's a newbie reading any Richard J. Williams posts here, it is my opinion and seemingly the opinion of many here that all newbies should be warned that this poster is a troll who likes to start fights... Oh my Gawd! A TMer troll - this sucks, big time. Bag that Willytex! Who the hell does he think he is? How did he get in here? Kill the fuckin' bastard. What a nutcase. Newsgroups: alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan Subject: Re: The Mechanics of Patanjali Samadhi Author: Robert Epstein Date: Tues, Jun 5 2007 http://tinyurl.com/2eftle Be careful, this punditser guy (aka Willytex) guy is a known troll on a number of lists, including alt.meditation.transcendental and FairFieldLife at groups.yahoo.com. He claims to worship at local hindu temples in Texas, be a TM meditator/hopper and a number of other contradictory claims. His primary goal seems to be to confuse and reek havoc. He is another old TM student, supposedly a friend of the Maharishi and other unsubstantiated claims. He also claims to have known Chogyam Trungpa, etc.. He reeks havoc by quoting various subjects with only partial or copied info or knowledge. It appears to be authentic until you look closer and it becomes clear he's just here to deceive. and supports the USA staying in Iraq and denies to an absolute degree the suffering that US Imperialism and GlobalBigBiz causes in third world countries. Even a light scanning of his posts will reveal that he's a scurrilous hater of almost everyone, an outright fake who pretends to be spiritual and to be scripturally scholarly, and a crass miscreant of very dark intent. His world would be perfect if America stationed troops throughout the world, privatized all natural resources, and continued its genocidal policies. [snip] In the year or more since I've been posting here, not a single person has spoken highly this creep who posts a constant drizzle of rancid spin from a very sick mind's contents. He's the only person who here who cannot call any other poster friend, compatriot, or fellow supporter. About a dozen posters here regularly label him as a troll. All the above my opinion only, but I predict yours will not vary much from this: this person's previous incarnation MUST HAVE BEEN as a bacterium living inside a dingleberry on a rabid dog's ass.
[FairfieldLife] Revolver -- a film review
Now this is strange. I saw this film last night, Revolver, directed by Guy Ritchie, and if you look it up at RottonTomatoes.com, http://tinyurl.com/3cvacr you'll see that this film is just about the worst film of all time. Everyone just hates it. Except me. I loved it. If you loved the films, Being There, Waking Life, What Dreams May Come, or, especially, Memento, you're going to love this movie, but don't expect this film to be anything like them except for how they stretch your mind. You're going to love it if you can abide that Advaita is being taught to an unsuspecting audience (you?) by showing them a film that seemingly is a gangster shoot-em-up revenge tale but is really more like a reality show in which two gurus enlighten a man without his permission! Yep, that's the true plot! Casting is perfect. Jason Statham you'd expect to be this kung-fu killer but turns out to be a great hearted seeker who doesn't know his evolutionary status but overcomes severe challenges nonetheless, and he pulls it off. Ray Liotta you'd think would be some Mafioso type, and yep he's cast exactly as that, but the Ray that usually creeps one out because, well, Ray is creepy looking, doesn't offend this time, and instead, Ray works it so well that you get drawn into his character's mind instead of merely viewing him as a two-dimensional plot-prop. Vincent Pastore is cast BOTH with and against his type. He's your classic Mafioso, and his character is as dark and as badass as they come, but at the same time that you're thinking and feeling these things about him, the extremely smart script writing penetrates this mask that he wears in exactly the same way that the Jason Statham character must come to recognizing Vincent's character's status in Jason's life. You and Jason get challenged in exactly the same ways. André Benjamin, the guy from Outcast, the guy who always acts like he's on uppers when he's on talk shows, pulls off being equal to Vincent's achievement and also does double duty of being used both for and against type. He uses silence like an Uzi and questions like a surgical knive. Then there's direction, and this is one film you've never seen played-with so much by the director without getting in the way of the script. Many, many, MANY new gimmicks and film no-no-s turned into lemonade are used to good effect -- good effect means helps the viewer of the film (you?) become aware of SELF. It's sad, but it's no wonder that this artwork has been so universally misunderstoodit seems it just has gone over the heads of every critic. Try it. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Revolver -- a film review
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now this is strange. I saw this film last night, Revolver, directed by Guy Ritchie, and if you look it up at RottonTomatoes.com, http://tinyurl.com/3cvacr you'll see that this film is just about the worst film of all time. Everyone just hates it. Except me. I loved it. I'm not going to read past this because I don't want to read any spoilers...but I'll say this: two of my favourite films are Guy Ritchie's Lock, stock, and two smoking barrels and, especially, Snatch. If Revolver is anywhere as good as these two, it will be a classic as far as I'm concerned. If you loved the films, Being There, Waking Life, What Dreams May Come, or, especially, Memento, you're going to love this movie, but don't expect this film to be anything like them except for how they stretch your mind. You're going to love it if you can abide that Advaita is being taught to an unsuspecting audience (you?) by showing them a film that seemingly is a gangster shoot-em-up revenge tale but is really more like a reality show in which two gurus enlighten a man without his permission! Yep, that's the true plot! Casting is perfect. Jason Statham you'd expect to be this kung-fu killer but turns out to be a great hearted seeker who doesn't know his evolutionary status but overcomes severe challenges nonetheless, and he pulls it off. Ray Liotta you'd think would be some Mafioso type, and yep he's cast exactly as that, but the Ray that usually creeps one out because, well, Ray is creepy looking, doesn't offend this time, and instead, Ray works it so well that you get drawn into his character's mind instead of merely viewing him as a two-dimensional plot-prop. Vincent Pastore is cast BOTH with and against his type. He's your classic Mafioso, and his character is as dark and as badass as they come, but at the same time that you're thinking and feeling these things about him, the extremely smart script writing penetrates this mask that he wears in exactly the same way that the Jason Statham character must come to recognizing Vincent's character's status in Jason's life. You and Jason get challenged in exactly the same ways. André Benjamin, the guy from Outcast, the guy who always acts like he's on uppers when he's on talk shows, pulls off being equal to Vincent's achievement and also does double duty of being used both for and against type. He uses silence like an Uzi and questions like a surgical knive. Then there's direction, and this is one film you've never seen played-with so much by the director without getting in the way of the script. Many, many, MANY new gimmicks and film no-no-s turned into lemonade are used to good effect -- good effect means helps the viewer of the film (you?) become aware of SELF. It's sad, but it's no wonder that this artwork has been so universally misunderstoodit seems it just has gone over the heads of every critic. Try it. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Tibet!
Monks yelled reactionary slogans and held up a banner of snow-mountain lions, the Tibet Daily said. Full story: 'Tibet deaths, arrests and protests shadow Olympics' by Chris Buckley Reuters, Tuesday, March 25, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/39v8df
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would be interesting would be to hear your own insight as to what the worship of god, gods and goddesses has done for humanity--and other life on this planet--throughout history. Has it decreased suffering or has it increased it? Has it helped decrease negative emotions for the majority of it's adherents? What has worship of god, gods or goddesses done for world peace? And what of science and god, gods and goddesses? Are god, gods or goddesses considered higher or more special than humans or other forms of sentient life? Should laws be put in place globally to prevent god or goddess- based human right abuses? If my parents god believes that the foreskin of my penis should be removed surgically while still a child, should they be allowed to do that or is that child abuse? Should temples throughout India, Nepal and other places be allowed to sacrifice animals and/or humans to gain the boon or favor from some god or goddess? Are there some forms of god that are naturally disruptive of human and other life? If yes, what does that mean? Should Indian sacrificial wars still be allowed to 'blow of steam' and re-establish balance with nature? Should texts which once promulgated human and or animal sacrifices still be considered valid or even useable? If yes, what are the implications for karma? Quite a bit of tension now in the world between two atheist cultures, Chinese communists and Tibet buddhists, with deaths resulting. The worship of gods or God is completely tangential to suffering or not, and has no direct impact on the state of the world in this regard, in my opinion. If consciousness is high God is worshipped appropriately becuase God is accurately experienced to be the worship and acknowledgement of the highest values within oneself, the self being universal. If the consciousness is low, the worship of God can be used to further justify segregation and the small self. as can the lask of worship of God (hint, hint). To imply that there is a correspondence between the worship of higher beings and suffering in the world just sounds like more of your apparently inexhaustable Buddhist fundamentalism.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Now Of Power
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On another forum, the issue of personal power has come up, with some fascinating comments by participants as to what they think personal power is. So I thought I'd bring the subject up here, and see what FFLers think of this common spiritual buzzphrase. Do people have personal power? nope Do some people have more of it and some less? nope How do you tell? don't know.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amy Goodman Questions Sen. Obama on Heeding Iraqis Call for Full US Withdrawal
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Since so many political articles are posted here, I thought I'd through this one into the mix: HYPERLINK http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/80623http://www.alter n et.org/m odule/printversion/80623 http://tinyurl.com/356rpt It's long, well-written, and it instilled some hope in me, which, of course, is Obama's campaign slogan. I'm sorry, but I found this bit extremely annoying: Obama is offering the most sweeping liberal foreign-policy critique we've heard from a serious presidential contender in decades. snip (I wish you had snipped more judiciously--makes it look as if I was saying I found Obama's foreign policy critique annoying!) I found one of the most striking differences between H. Clinton and Obama in a summary of their respective positions on Iraq. One of the open secrets about what we are doing in Iraq has to do with the massive permanent bases we are building there, far larger than anything needed during the war. These bases have received no publicity from the media, and yet can be researched easily. They are in place for a permanent military occupation of the country. Only Obama is saying no permanent bases in Iraq. All the other Democrats including Clinton are being quiet about it, hoping the public won't notice. This is a significant foreign policy difference, because it means we either colonize Iraq, with the resentment of the entire Middle East continuing to be aimed our way, or we get out of Iraq and begin repairing the damage we've done through reconciliation and negotiation. Hillary Clinton has now voiced her opposition to having permanent military bases in Iraq. In a letter to the White House that we've obtained, Hillary lays out her strong disapproval of the idea, and calls upon the Bush Administration to address the issue and declare that they won't do it. Read more, including the text of her letter to Bush, at Talking Point Memo's Election Central (November 27, 2007): http://tinyurl.com/2or6ma Where did you read this summary that said she was being quiet about not having permanent bases in Iraq? OK, thanks for the correction. I must say I believe Obama will make good on this conviction-- can't say that for certain about any others. I was going on a summary I saw on CNN, fwiw.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
Vaj, what distinction is there between the unenlightened on any path? Whether the ignorant adhere to belief in god or to belief in no god, the problems of injustice and atrocities are directly attributed to ignorance. The atheists and the god-believers are all equally capable of evil and will create or adopt structures of belief and images of god that reflect and condone their own ignorance and limitation. And what difference is there between paths to enlightenment? There is One Reality which is known or not known. This Reality is all that is. We live in the illusion of many teachings and many paths, but when the One Reality is known, it is found to be everywhere equally, in all teachings and paths. Bhakti yoga is not an inferior path which produces a duality-based enlightenment. The appearance of duality in the devotional path is just an appearance. When the bhakta closes her eyes in meditation, she also merges into deep formlessness. The bhakta is drawn by love to seek a deeper and deeper experience of the beloved, and this movement toward more and more subtle experience of the divine inevitably takes the bhakta to the same deepest conscious union as that found by any other seeker. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:24 PM, Michael wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that we actually have quite a bit in common. Bhakti type approaches were just never my cup of tea, that's all. On a second thought: My reaction is simply the insight, that I donot actually want to change you or anyone here. If its not your cup of tea its not your cup of tea. If it was, we wouldn't need to discuss it, it would just be obvious. I OTOH have not need in proving anything about myself either - if you think I am stupidly attached to a dual view, while the nondual is highest, (btw Willy is right - Buddhism is most certainly not nondualistic )I am okay, its okay to be stupid ;-) I have my own insights, and I follow them, no need really to share. Thats why it is futile. What would be interesting would be to hear your own insight as to what the worship of god, gods and goddesses has done for humanity--and other life on this planet--throughout history. Has it decreased suffering or has it increased it? Has it helped decrease negative emotions for the majority of it's adherents? What has worship of god, gods or goddesses done for world peace? And what of science and god, gods and goddesses? Are god, gods or goddesses considered higher or more special than humans or other forms of sentient life? Should laws be put in place globally to prevent god or goddess-based human right abuses? If my parents god believes that the foreskin of my penis should be removed surgically while still a child, should they be allowed to do that or is that child abuse? Should temples throughout India, Nepal and other places be allowed to sacrifice animals and/or humans to gain the boon or favor from some god or goddess? Are there some forms of god that are naturally disruptive of human and other life? If yes, what does that mean? Should Indian sacrificial wars still be allowed to 'blow of steam' and re-establish balance with nature? Should texts which once promulgated human and or animal sacrifices still be considered valid or even useable? If yes, what are the implications for karma?
[FairfieldLife] Judy: you cut out the questions...why?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: During the last presidential election over at a.m.t., Judy Stein spent an inordinate amount of time and attention to convincing readers how important John Kerry's military service was and how it was so much better than George Bush's. This is something that all can see by doing a Google Groups search on this topic, with Judy Stein as author And if you do such a search and read some of the posts, you'll see exactly how grossly and deliberately misleading Shemp's characterization above is. I doubt anybody will be surprised. Judy, Why did you cut out the questions that I asked? Don't you want to answer them? Cutting them out doesn't make them go away... Why not take a stab at answering them...military records were a VERY important consideration for you four years ago...here, let me reproduce those questions so that you may answer them now: I wonder: what is the military service records of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? How do their military service experience stack up against John McCain's? Where did Barack serve and in which part of the military? How about Hillary? Marines? Navy? Air Force?
[FairfieldLife] Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
http://cubo.cc/ Move your mouse around to see her move. This was created by CGI -- not a real girl. Here's the question: what's missing that is needed to make the creepiness go away? A soul? Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judy: you cut out the questions...why?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: During the last presidential election over at a.m.t., Judy Stein spent an inordinate amount of time and attention to convincing readers how important John Kerry's military service was and how it was so much better than George Bush's. This is something that all can see by doing a Google Groups search on this topic, with Judy Stein as author And if you do such a search and read some of the posts, you'll see exactly how grossly and deliberately misleading Shemp's characterization above is. I doubt anybody will be surprised. Judy, Why did you cut out the questions that I asked? Because they're irrelevant and disingenuous, as you know.
[FairfieldLife] John Cusack gets it
His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: Many of the myths of humanity are about heroes. And many of those heroes prove their herohood in battle; they are warriors. Do I see upliftment and inspiration in tales of the warrior mindset? Sometimes. Being will- ing to fight to the death for what one believes IS inspiring, IF what one believes is inspiring in itself. The hero myths are just a way of deluding the public into believing they individually can change the world. IOW, it is a diversion and at worst a form of mass hypnosis. That is not to say there is anything wrong about aspiring to be a leader which entails becoming a strong person and clear minded the latter of which is a benefit from spiritual sadhana. What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. Well certainly one can look at it that way but I'm not sure that Turq was talking exclusively about the Hero's Journey which is a story form which we've seen a lot of lately including Wristcutters and my viewing last night of the horrible film Hitman which seems to be made for a subspecies that is addicted these kinds of video games. Unfortunately for Turq I rather have to scan his long epistles as I have many places to go during in my daily rounds of the Internet. That's also why I try to stick to only a paragraph or two when I write here because I know most people don't have the luxury either.
[FairfieldLife] New on Maharishi Channel!
B. Attributeless Absolute â Sat Chit Ananda Maharishiâs talks from 1970, Humboldt (40 min) â new on Maharishi Channel. 6. Maharishi on Guru Dev, July 6, 1971 (43 min) â new on Maharishi Channel. 7. Meditation Heals the Soul and Gives BlissâMaharishiâs talk from 1959 (40 min) â new on Maharishi Channel.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Revolver -- a film review
I liked Shoot'em Up too which also got bad reviews but unlike Hitman which I watched last night and I agree with the critics was a bad film Shoot'em Up showed how to do an action movie without boring those with an IQ. This film has also been on my list but these days I watch for a BluRay release to watch films because I would rather watch in HD (Shemp probably thinks I'm spoiled because of this and I am). I also have been busy wading through the 8 releases for the latest Horror Fest Online series and am halfway through. I was trying to figured out where I'd seen the actress the film Tooth and Nail as I recalled whatever series she was in she had a nose ring. Turns out she, Rachel Miner, was on Californication as Hank's agent's assistant: http://imdb.com/name/nm0001540/ She's very good in Tooth and Nail which is a so-so film. So far the best two I've seen of the series has been Nightmare Man which is a tongue in cheek low budget that they just had a lot of fun making and Mulberry Street which also low-budget was well done. And for Shemp. Juno releases on the 15th on DVD and yup BluRay. :) We probably won't be hearing much from Shemp that week. Duveyoung wrote: Now this is strange. I saw this film last night, Revolver, directed by Guy Ritchie, and if you look it up at RottonTomatoes.com, http://tinyurl.com/3cvacr you'll see that this film is just about the worst film of all time. Everyone just hates it. Except me. I loved it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ John Cusack gets it He sure does. Here's more right on stuff from Cusack: Bush 2. How depressing, corrupt, unlawful and tragically absurd the administration's world view actually is...how low the moral bar has been lowered...and (though I know I'm capable of intellectually lazy notions of collective guilt) how complicit our silence as citizens is... Nixon, a true fiend, looks like a paragon of virtue next to the criminally incompetent robber barons now raiding the present and future. But where are the Dems? American foreign policy is in chaos. We are now left in the surreal position of having to condemn American-sponsored torture as official policy while a deranged President Bush orders his staff to attend ethics briefings -- a refresher course -- from the White House counsel. The very idea of America is in chaos and this chaos has created a vacuum. One question for any Democrat: Who will have the balls to get us out of Iraq? If the Democrats don't step up and fill this vacuum, the Republicans will. They will take us out of Iraq. And then the Democrats will be left holding the bag -- first as the enablers who let the Republicans take us into an unnecessary and immoral war, and then as the whipping boys who stood by while the Republicans kept justifying what was clearly an unnecessary and immoral war. They were so worried about positioning themselves as hawks, not being seen as soft on terror and war, that they lost the capacity for outrage when the person responsible for a legal memo that denied the validity of the Geneva Conventions was appointed Attorney General. And it was downhill from there... ~~Here's a blistering excerpt from a Hunter Thompson piece he included: We have become a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world -- a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just Whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us. No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we'll kill you. Well, shit on that dumbness, George W. Bush does not speak for me or my son or my mother or my friends or the people I respect in this world. We didn't vote for these cheap, greedy little killers who speak for America today -- and we will not vote for them again in 2002. Or 2004. Or ever. Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid rich kids like George Bush? They are the same ones who wanted to have Muhammad Ali locked up for refusing to kill gooks. They speak for all that is cruel and stupid and vicious in the American character. They are the racists and hate mongers among us -- they are the Ku Klux Klan. I piss down the throats of these Nazis. And I am too old to worry about whether they like it or not. Fuck them. ~~Much more here John Cusack On Bush, the Dems, Jon Stewart, Hunter Thompson, Bill Moyers, and King (not Don)- Huffington Post: http://tinyurl.com/9vqfo
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
On Mar 30, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Michael wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:24 PM, Michael wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that we actually have quite a bit in common. Bhakti type approaches were just never my cup of tea, that's all. On a second thought: My reaction is simply the insight, that I donot actually want to change you or anyone here. If its not your cup of tea its not your cup of tea. If it was, we wouldn't need to discuss it, it would just be obvious. I OTOH have not need in proving anything about myself either - if you think I am stupidly attached to a dual view, while the nondual is highest, (btw Willy is right - Buddhism is most certainly not nondualistic )I am okay, its okay to be stupid ;-) I have my own insights, and I follow them, no need really to share. Thats why it is futile. What would be interesting would be to hear your own insight as to what the worship of god, gods and goddesses has done for humanity--and other life on this planet--throughout history. Has it decreased suffering or has it increased it? Can't answer that one, no way to compare really. You could ask the same question about science. While I agree it has decreased suffering, it also has let the planet to the verge of extinction. Well I don't know that we can say science is responsible, instead human beings using science along with questionable morals and lack of any real sense of connectedness to others seems the root problem. And what of science and god, gods and goddesses? Are god, gods or goddesses considered higher or more special than humans or other forms of sentient life? Well God is usually considered to be the highest ideal of life. But I think, the way you phrase your questions clearly shows a big gap of undestanding. Would you rephrase your questions and substitute it instead of 'god, gods goddesses' with 'essence of consciousness' or with anoher phrase like 'all that there is' or with simply 'the Absolute'. How would this sound then? Childish? Only if you value an absolute and if that provided something of value for society. In many ways, an absolute would be an extreme. Esp. if it ignores the relative. So if it is placed in the position of the highest ideal of life and given that cherishing the absolute is an extreme, I can also see that this could cause some major problems for those whose development isn't inclined to spiritual practice--currently the majority of this planet's humans. In terms of spiritual practice regarding an absolute, I'd also be concerned that taking any extreme as a key part of spiritual practice could be problematic as one would hope the human physical and subtle nervous systems would prefer a balanced more middle way rather than some cosmic personality superimposed on our nervous systems. However having said that, I'd also think that some wisdom deities, like Saraswati for example, could be beneficial as part of a practice. The maha- aspect of numerous Hindu deities are balanced pairs, when practiced in a balanced way. That's tantra, balance thru opposites. Should temples throughout India, Nepal and other places be allowed to sacrifice animals and/or humans to gain the boon or favor from some god or goddess? I am strictly against animal sacrifices. I have friends in India who were actively fighting against it yes. I too question it. In this country it's mainly practiced by a religion known as Voudoun. One hears the most horrible rumors. They worship a pantheon of gods known as Loa, like with Hindu deities some are benign, some are fun and some are malignant or violent. Are there some forms of god that are naturally disruptive of human and other life? If yes, what does that mean? My opinion is, that it very much depends on the attitude of the worshiper. Sure there are different spirit beings, read the gita. I also have little interest in Vaishnavism--really most of the puritanical and sentimental eastern trips don't do that much for me which isn't to say there aren't some interesting things there. The Hare Krishnas in this country are fabulous vegetarian cooks. Should Indian sacrificial wars still be allowed to 'blow of steam' and re-establish balance with nature? Sacrificial wars? Never heard about it. No. of course not. Yeah, they went on until fairly recently, like 75 years ago and may still in secret. They're meant to be mock wars but I'm told many a time they get bloody and people are killed, often rendering participants covered in human blood. And of course it's considered highly auspicious to die at one of these battles. Sick. Should texts which once promulgated human and or animal sacrifices still be considered valid or even useable? If yes, what are the implications for karma? No, I
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
On Mar 30, 2008, at 2:07 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote: Vaj, what distinction is there between the unenlightened on any path? Whether the ignorant adhere to belief in god or to belief in no god, the problems of injustice and atrocities are directly attributed to ignorance. The atheists and the god-believers are all equally capable of evil and will create or adopt structures of belief and images of god that reflect and condone their own ignorance and limitation. Yes, I agree since relatively speaking any vehicle for destruction can be a demonic influence on life. But then why have religious peoples who commit wars and atrocities at all? And what difference is there between paths to enlightenment? There is One Reality which is known or not known. This Reality is all that is. Well I know some would agree with such an absolute statement. But no, I don't believe that there is One reality that is all there is. But absolutists do believe that. We live in the illusion of many teachings and many paths, but when the One Reality is known, it is found to be everywhere equally, in all teachings and paths. I never was a fan of perennialism, the so-called philosophia perennis. Just more philosophical BS to me (sorry)...
Re: [FairfieldLife] John Cusack gets it
The only thing I've got against Naomi Klein (et al) is that she doesn't seem to grasp that what Corporate America is doing in Iraq and has done in Latin America (and elsewhere) is not new with Uncle Miltie's Chicago school economics. Corporate America (with the help of the Federal Reserve) was at in WWI and, especially, WWII. It was primarily American money that created and installed Hitler. a --- Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] John Cusack gets it
The only thing I've got against Naomi Klein (et al) is that she doesn't seem to grasp that what Corporate America is doing in Iraq and has done in Latin America (and elsewhere) is not new with Uncle Miltie's Chicago school economics. Corporate America (with the help of the Federal Reserve) was at in WWI and, especially, WWII. It was primarily American money that created and installed Hitler. a --- Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: Many of the myths of humanity are about heroes. And many of those heroes prove their herohood in battle; they are warriors. Do I see upliftment and inspiration in tales of the warrior mindset? Sometimes. Being will- ing to fight to the death for what one believes IS inspiring, IF what one believes is inspiring in itself. The hero myths are just a way of deluding the public into believing they individually can change the world. IOW, it is a diversion and at worst a form of mass hypnosis. That is not to say there is anything wrong about aspiring to be a leader which entails becoming a strong person and clear minded the latter of which is a benefit from spiritual sadhana. What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. Well certainly one can look at it that way but I'm not sure that Turq was talking exclusively about the Hero's Journey which is a story form which we've seen a lot of lately including Wristcutters and my viewing last night of the horrible film Hitman which seems to be made for a subspecies that is addicted these kinds of video games. My point is that the really pervasive cross-cultural myths are archetypal. The Hero myths are only superficially about heroes winning actual physical battles or changing the world (or finding the fish in your pocket). They're fundamentally about inner transformation, a process in which you are the Hero, the protagonist of your own story.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
So Judy, have I won you over to my point of view then, that Hamlet is about transformation and enlightenment? --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: Many of the myths of humanity are about heroes. And many of those heroes prove their herohood in battle; they are warriors. Do I see upliftment and inspiration in tales of the warrior mindset? Sometimes. Being will- ing to fight to the death for what one believes IS inspiring, IF what one believes is inspiring in itself. The hero myths are just a way of deluding the public into believing they individually can change the world. IOW, it is a diversion and at worst a form of mass hypnosis. That is not to say there is anything wrong about aspiring to be a leader which entails becoming a strong person and clear minded the latter of which is a benefit from spiritual sadhana. What I think both of you are missing is that the Hero's Journey myth is a metaphor for enlightenment, for the *internal* battle for Self-realization. The Hero isn't triumphing over other people but over his own inner demons. Well certainly one can look at it that way but I'm not sure that Turq was talking exclusively about the Hero's Journey which is a story form which we've seen a lot of lately including Wristcutters and my viewing last night of the horrible film Hitman which seems to be made for a subspecies that is addicted these kinds of video games. My point is that the really pervasive cross-cultural myths are archetypal. The Hero myths are only superficially about heroes winning actual physical battles or changing the world (or finding the fish in your pocket). They're fundamentally about inner transformation, a process in which you are the Hero, the protagonist of your own story. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] John Cusack gets it
I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. Angela Mailander wrote: The only thing I've got against Naomi Klein (et al) is that she doesn't seem to grasp that what Corporate America is doing in Iraq and has done in Latin America (and elsewhere) is not new with Uncle Miltie's Chicago school economics. Corporate America (with the help of the Federal Reserve) was at in WWI and, especially, WWII. It was primarily American money that created and installed Hitler. a --- Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Judy, have I won you over to my point of view then, that Hamlet is about transformation and enlightenment? Uh, no, I'm talking about cultural myths.
Re: [FairfieldLife] John Cusack gets it
Yeah, I think that's prolly the reason. Corporate America financing and installing Hitler is too much of a bombshell even in this forum for most people to swallow. But the money trail is unmistakable. What I still don't understand is why so many Jews were involved in the creation of Hitler. And Paul Warburg lost close relatives in the death camps. Yet he was on the board of directors of I.G. Farben which manufactured the poison gases that were used to kill millions--and he knew it. a --- Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. Angela Mailander wrote: The only thing I've got against Naomi Klein (et al) is that she doesn't seem to grasp that what Corporate America is doing in Iraq and has done in Latin America (and elsewhere) is not new with Uncle Miltie's Chicago school economics. Corporate America (with the help of the Federal Reserve) was at in WWI and, especially, WWII. It was primarily American money that created and installed Hitler. a --- Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
In the name of America so much has been done that getting out of Iraq is the merely the least that needs doing to undo the damage that's been done. I don't think Obama is the guy to do it, but who knows? I think to really make a dent in repairing the damages America has done, the following would be merely a good start: --the military industrial complex must be outted fully to the masses with the top 10% of the management being sent directly to jail -- but the worst of them sent to Iran for trial. --Every military industrial business should be simply taken over and have its money used to repay the American people, and the weapons industry should be shut down until further notice. --Bush and his cronies should all be tortured in public ON LIVE TV so that we can psychically understand what we've done to the world. This should continue until North Korea, Iran and the Palestinians beg us to stop the torture in the name of humanity. --BigOil should be made to pay for every carbon molecule they've unleashed with the bulk of the money spent on cleaning up the environment and the rest spent on green energy production. They should not be allowed to make a profit until oil ceases to be used in the world. --All companies should be made to take back the jobs they've sent overseas. --All countries that want to sell goods in America have to have the same unions, collective bargaining, and lifestyles of workers that harmonize with American standards -- otherwise, fuck off. --Any family that had a loved one die by American munitions should be awarded damages. --All Mexicans should be sent back to Mexico with American hegemony telling the government there to change instantly -- to raise the living standards of their citizens or we shut down the borders for real -- not the fake shutting down now deluding the American masses. --If your parents illegally came to America, sorry, but you have to choose staying here or going back to the old country with them. Figure it out. Blame your parents for not fighting the good fights in their countries. --Psychology must be taught at every grade level. Personal honesty must be honored such that even a young child can stand up for what's right. --Parents must pass a test before they can make a child. Having every American know child rearing should be seen as America's first and most important educational goal. Free adult education to all to enable them to pass the test. Anything one's child does is as if the parent has done it -- legally, socially, financially. --Fox News should be given lock stock and barrel to Obama's preacher. --Line item veto power to President of the United States -- make him/her PERSONALLY AND FINANCIALLY responsible for any pork and/or criminal expenditures that violate the Constitution. --No lobbying allowed. --No campaign contributions allowed. The government should pay for televised debates after an American Idol type of Internet exposure of the candidates which SLOWLY allows the cream to rise to the top, and then those toppers are voted on for real. --Any American debt owed to other countries becomes legally secondary to debts owed to Americans by Americans. --The Blackwater private army should be made to use all it's profits to become a new Peace Corp. All the money and properties of the management should be sold at auction to help fund this. --No more death penalty. --And, Richard should be put on television with Dr. Phil haranguing him until he admits to the world knows that he's a really good example of the kind of broken personality that got America fucked up in the first place. --An apology to the world from all Americans with a promise that until the world has clean water, no slavery, and political freedom, we will consider it our fault. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ John Cusack gets it He sure does. Here's more right on stuff from Cusack: Bush 2. How depressing, corrupt, unlawful and tragically absurd the administration's world view actually is...how low the moral bar has been lowered...and (though I know I'm capable of intellectually lazy notions of collective guilt) how complicit our silence as citizens is... Nixon, a true fiend, looks like a paragon of virtue next to the criminally incompetent robber barons now raiding the present and future. But where are the Dems? American foreign policy is in chaos. We are now left in the surreal position of having to condemn American-sponsored torture as official policy
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gorakshanatha's view of Samadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 30, 2008, at 2:07 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote: Vaj, what distinction is there between the unenlightened on any path? Whether the ignorant adhere to belief in god or to belief in no god, the problems of injustice and atrocities are directly attributed to ignorance. The atheists and the god-believers are all equally capable of evil and will create or adopt structures of belief and images of god that reflect and condone their own ignorance and limitation. Yes, I agree since relatively speaking any vehicle for destruction can be a demonic influence on life. But then why have religious peoples who commit wars and atrocities at all? I'm not sure what you are saying in the above 2 sentences. I don't think we can answer why people, religious or not, commit wars and atrocities. We can only speculate, and perchance our speculations seem to reflect a viewpoint of a particular philosophical tradition. At most, and at least, we can only say that such wars and atrocities appear to exist. And what difference is there between paths to enlightenment? There is One Reality which is known or not known. This Reality is all that is. Well I know some would agree with such an absolute statement. But no, I don't believe that there is One reality that is all there is. But absolutists do believe that. I don't know what absolutists say and believe, but I question what is absolute about the statement that there is one reality. It is a very large and all-inclusive statement. It acknowledges everything that appears to exist and everything that doesn't. We live in the illusion of many teachings and many paths, but when the One Reality is known, it is found to be everywhere equally, in all teachings and paths. I never was a fan of perennialism, the so-called philosophia perennis. Just more philosophical BS to me (sorry)... Again, I'm not familiar with perennialism and the so-called philosophia perennis which you object to. I'm only speaking from my own experience and reflections on reality. Ideas are abstract, but there is something Real to be known, and it is not limited or obstructed by any of our beliefs about it. It expresses through all that is. All of this is an expression of it. When we try to describe and define it, we are the metaphorical blind who describe the different parts of the elephant.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
Really? And how do you define that? Hamlet wasn't based on an old story that had been circulating just because it has mythic elements? King Lear doesn't have mythic elements? --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Judy, have I won you over to my point of view then, that Hamlet is about transformation and enlightenment? Uh, no, I'm talking about cultural myths. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did a second try but noticed that I sent it to you personally instead of to the list - through some new service. Would you kindly repost it here?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
You're being a bit naive about our so-called freedoms. People's careers have been trashed at universities because they've tried to publish in the area under discussion. a --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judy: you cut out the questions...why?
Why did you cut out the questions that I asked? Judy wrote: Because they're irrelevant and disingenuous, as you know. Case dropped against Haditha defendant: Charges were dropped against LCpl. Stephen Tatum on Friday, leaving Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Cpl. Andrew Grayson as the remaining three Marines who haven't had their cases resolved. Eventually, John Murtha will be exposed as a corrupt man who used the Haditha Marines in his attempt to become the House Majority Leader. This is a house of cards, and it's all falling apart now, said Brian Rooney. Full story: 'Case dropped against Haditha defendant' By Allison Hoffman Associated Press, March 28, 2008 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/marines_haditha Read more: 'The Indictment Against John Murtha' http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2592 I think I'd have an axe to grind too if Marines stormed into my house and murdered my family. I'd also have an axe to grind if I were in the military and took pride in my service, and then learned that some of my fellow troops had committed a massacre. Read more: Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Re: Marine killing of innocents From: Judt Stein Date: Mon, May 22 2006 7:42 pm http://tinyurl.com/ypwrse Read what Murtha said, then shut your stinking mouth. - Judy Stein Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Subject: Marine killing of innocents confirmed From: John Manning Date: Sat, May 20 2006 6:48 pm http://tinyurl.com/ypwrse Murtha, a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq, said at a news conference Wednesday that sources within the military have told him that an internal investigation will show that ...there was no firefight, there was no IED (improvised explosive device) that killed these innocent people. Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
On Mar 30, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Duveyoung wrote: Here's the question: what's missing that is needed to make the creepiness go away? A soul? Here's another question: what's missing that's needed to make these silly URL wild-goose chases go away? A brain? Enough already. A huge percentage of posts are now simply people posting websites to send others to. Is this really imroving the quality of posts here on FF Life? I'd almost be willing to take some kind of poll, to see if I'm the one who needs to wake up, cause I find it really detracting from the generally interesting discussions here. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
Sal Sunshine wrote: Here's another question: what's missing that's needed to make these silly URL wild-goose chases go away? For informers like you to go away? 'Stop the world, I want to get off' was the plaintive refrain of some Broadway comedy show I think. It could also be the motto for the greens, except that they want everybody off. Is that what they aspire to as they sit at home quietly in that seductive, undemanding cloak of blackness? To switch off civilisation and shuffle away into the perpetual tenebrosity dragging everyone else behind them? The conditions are ripe for the spread of this insanity. Indeed, it is spreading now. How long will it be, I wonder, before some official body somewhere floats the idea of mandatory blackouts and curfews? The voluntary approach they will proclaim, 'has not worked'. Read more: 'The dying of the light' by Thaddeus Tremayne http://tinyurl.com/32gwdt Comments: How long before some green nut shoots up a school in order to reduce the number of children who are casting a carbon footprint? And surely some public figure will defend the action. The fact that such a thing is actually possible shows how far the green nuts have gone.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 30, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Duveyoung wrote: Here's the question: what's missing that is needed to make the creepiness go away? A soul? Here's another question: what's missing that's needed to make these silly URL wild-goose chases go away? A brain? Enough already. A huge percentage of posts are now simply people posting websites to send others to. Is this really imroving the quality of posts here on FF Life? I'd almost be willing to take some kind of poll, to see if I'm the one who needs to wake up, cause I find it really detracting from the generally interesting discussions here. Looks like Sal is suffering from Kangen Water Deficiency Syndrome. Maybe some Laughing Yoga will help: http://youtube.com/watch?v=31TTcjYw0hQ
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Judy: you cut out the questions...why?
I'd also have an axe to grind if I were in the military and took pride in my service, and then learned that some of my fellow troops had committed a massacre. Well, what do you think war is? No massacres in a war? Since when? Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:18 PM, Alex Stanley wrote: Looks like Sal is suffering from Kangen Water Deficiency Syndrome. Maybe some Laughing Yoga will help: You're probably right, Alex, but I won't be going to the website to find out. :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're being a bit naive about our so-called freedoms. People's careers have been trashed at universities because they've tried to publish in the area under discussion. a Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about freedoms, nor did I claim there would be no adverse consequences to publishing a book that doesn't tread lightly. Try to follow the thread, eh? --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really? And how do you define that? Hamlet wasn't based on an old story that had been circulating just because it has mythic elements? King Lear doesn't have mythic elements? You can find mythic elements in anything. That doesn't mean a commercial production in which such elements can be found is about those elements. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: So Judy, have I won you over to my point of view then, that Hamlet is about transformation and enlightenment? Uh, no, I'm talking about cultural myths. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
Sal, Sorry that you suffer so. I know your issue -- have it too. BUT BUT BUT, my posting the link was to get folks to think about the visual presentation of sentience, and why it is that we all agree on whether it's 'there' or not. This example of an almost perfect artificial human, seemed to me to be as educational as, say, Turq's link to the Moonwalking Bear video. One cannot look at this girl and think photograph of real human, but instead, we know we are being beguiled to think so. To me it's a very very spiritual lesson, and to really grok it, I'm thinking one has to be right down there at the ritam level to be able to say just exactly what it is about real that the unreal never has. Maybe all of us would greatly benefit if we tried to tell if we are alive by looking at what a mirror tells us. Might be surprising. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 30, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Duveyoung wrote: Here's the question: what's missing that is needed to make the creepiness go away? A soul? Here's another question: what's missing that's needed to make these silly URL wild-goose chases go away? A brain? Enough already. A huge percentage of posts are now simply people posting websites to send others to. Is this really imroving the quality of posts here on FF Life? I'd almost be willing to take some kind of poll, to see if I'm the one who needs to wake up, cause I find it really detracting from the generally interesting discussions here. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:31 PM, Duveyoung wrote: Sal, Sorry that you suffer so. I know your issue -- have it too. I wasn't trying to pick on you, Edg, so sorry if it might have seemed that way. BUT BUT BUT, my posting the link was to get folks to think about the visual presentation of sentience, and why it is that we all agree on whether it's 'there' or not. This example of an almost perfect artificial human, seemed to me to be as educational as, say, Turq's link to the Moonwalking Bear video. One cannot look at this girl and think photograph of real human,but instead, we know we are being beguiled to think so. To me it's a very very spiritual lesson, and to really grok it, I'm thinking one has to be right down there at the ritam level to be able to say just exactly what it is about real that the unreal never has. Well, your words are a lot more interesting than a video made by someone I know nothing about. Maybe all of us would greatly benefit if we tried to tell if we are alive by looking at what a mirror tells us. Might be surprising. Do it all the time, Edg, and much of the time I'm not really happy with what I see. :) Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Now Of Power
TurquoiseB wrote: On another forum, the issue of personal power has come up, with some fascinating comments by participants as to what they think personal power is. So I thought I'd bring the subject up here, and see what FFLers think of this common spiritual buzzphrase. Do people have personal power? Do some people have more of it and some less? How do you tell? Well I had personnel power when I was a manager. :) Which if you look at the business definition is personal power is pretty much the same: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/personal-power.html When I do find it necessary I am able to exert quite a bit of influence over people. Even before learning the tantric siddhis I was successful at it and even more since. With my relatives however I probably made the mistake of being too easy going so they thought I was a pushover until something came up where I exerted control. You'd think they'd know better since I held a successful position as a manager at a company trusted with directorial powers over millions of dollars of product. :) Then we can also look at the definition as personal power as being able to keep one's self together, organized and functional as opposed to dysfunctional which I would argue an increasing number of human beings are becoming these days. Of course the more dysfunctional society becomes the more difficult it is for even the most together folks to remain so. So how do you tell? They should have their act together and a reputation for being so. But then in some cases people who are random are valued for their creativity. I think that is because there are two poles here: the grounded and the creative. The grounded are usually not very creative at all but can expedite things better than the creative. We all lie somewhere along the line between the two and may even fluctuate daily as the need occurs.
[FairfieldLife] Dutch student container housing! : 0
http://www.gypsii.com/place.cgi?op=viewid=61321
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
You said, You can find a publisher for practically anything. Not true in the political arena. think before you spit out your habitual phrases such as non sequitur. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're being a bit naive about our so-called freedoms. People's careers have been trashed at universities because they've tried to publish in the area under discussion. a Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about freedoms, nor did I claim there would be no adverse consequences to publishing a book that doesn't tread lightly. Try to follow the thread, eh? --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
Well, we're arguing about the definition of terms here. Hamlet has become a cultural myth in the English speaking world. Hamlet is about transformation, enlightenment, and rulership. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really? And how do you define that? Hamlet wasn't based on an old story that had been circulating just because it has mythic elements? King Lear doesn't have mythic elements? You can find mythic elements in anything. That doesn't mean a commercial production in which such elements can be found is about those elements. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: So Judy, have I won you over to my point of view then, that Hamlet is about transformation and enlightenment? Uh, no, I'm talking about cultural myths. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You said, You can find a publisher for practically anything. Not true in the political arena. think before you spit out your habitual phrases such as non sequitur. Boy, you're dishonest. The non sequitur was your comment about freedoms and careers getting trashed. And it's still a non sequitur, sorry. Now that you've done your dainty little two-step back to the actual topic being discussed, if by in the political arena you mean a book about politics, I disagree. As I said: As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Including highly controversial books about politics. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: You're being a bit naive about our so-called freedoms. People's careers have been trashed at universities because they've tried to publish in the area under discussion. a Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about freedoms, nor did I claim there would be no adverse consequences to publishing a book that doesn't tread lightly. Try to follow the thread, eh? --- authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Myth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, we're arguing about the definition of terms here. Hamlet has become a cultural myth in the English speaking world. Hamlet is about transformation, enlightenment, and rulership. We disagree. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Really? And how do you define that? Hamlet wasn't based on an old story that had been circulating just because it has mythic elements? King Lear doesn't have mythic elements? You can find mythic elements in anything. That doesn't mean a commercial production in which such elements can be found is about those elements. --- authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: So Judy, have I won you over to my point of view then, that Hamlet is about transformation and enlightenment? Uh, no, I'm talking about cultural myths. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
You're calling me dishonest? Isn't that a bit Baroque? --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You said, You can find a publisher for practically anything. Not true in the political arena. think before you spit out your habitual phrases such as non sequitur. Boy, you're dishonest. The non sequitur was your comment about freedoms and careers getting trashed. And it's still a non sequitur, sorry. Now that you've done your dainty little two-step back to the actual topic being discussed, if by in the political arena you mean a book about politics, I disagree. As I said: As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Including highly controversial books about politics. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: You're being a bit naive about our so-called freedoms. People's careers have been trashed at universities because they've tried to publish in the area under discussion. a Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about freedoms, nor did I claim there would be no adverse consequences to publishing a book that doesn't tread lightly. Try to follow the thread, eh? --- authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: New on Maharishi Channel!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B. Attributeless Absolute � Sat Chit Ananda Maharishiâs talks from 1970, Humboldt (40 min) � new on Maharishi Channel. 6. Maharishi on Guru Dev, July 6, 1971 (43 min) � new on Maharishi Channel. 7. Meditation Heals the Soul and Gives Bliss�Maharishiâs talk from 1959 (40 min) � new on Maharishi Channel. It would be nice if they made those podcasts instead. I t makes no sense to use a channel for recorded info. Live info or time-specific gandharvan music, but not lectures from 1959... lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're calling me dishonest? I believe I said, Boy, you're dishonest. Doesn't that sound as though I'm calling you dishonest? Isn't that a bit Baroque? It's a simple word, Angela. I'd say it's your dishonesty that's baroque. (No capital letter required.) --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: You said, You can find a publisher for practically anything. Not true in the political arena. think before you spit out your habitual phrases such as non sequitur. Boy, you're dishonest. The non sequitur was your comment about freedoms and careers getting trashed. And it's still a non sequitur, sorry. Now that you've done your dainty little two-step back to the actual topic being discussed, if by in the political arena you mean a book about politics, I disagree. As I said: As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Including highly controversial books about politics. --- authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: You're being a bit naive about our so-called freedoms. People's careers have been trashed at universities because they've tried to publish in the area under discussion. a Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about freedoms, nor did I claim there would be no adverse consequences to publishing a book that doesn't tread lightly. Try to follow the thread, eh? --- authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I thought that Baghdad Year Zero was a pretty good indictment of corporate America and she expanded on it in her follow-up book. I do think that some journalists do tread lightly around these things as more condemning articles and books might wind up without a publisher. As long as it's not actually libelous and is reasonably well done, you can find a publisher for practically anything, just maybe not one of the big houses. There are lots of independent publishers who will take on highly controversial books. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Realizing the dharmakaya of the Buddha
Once we realize emptiness, all phenomena are included within this reality, which is not separate from the cause and effect of karma and which is free of mental constructs. On this ultimate level of realization, it is possible to state that there is no wholesome or unwholesome action. When we have realized the nature of all phenomena, negative actions naturally subside and positive ones are spontaneously accomplished. Until this time, however, we would be slipping into nihilism if we said that the phenomena of relative truth, such as positive and negative actions or karma, do not exist. Just knowing this authentic view, however, is not enough. For others to be able to experience it, we must also know the scriptures and reasonings so that we can teach. Without the support of this knowledge, it will be difficult for others to trust what we say, and so Milarepa speaks of scripture and reasoning as an adornment to realization. Dissolving thoughts into the dharmakaya-- Is this not meditation naturally arising? Join it with experience To make it beautifully adorned. One way to understand meditation is to see it as a practice of working with the many thoughts that arise in our mind. With realization they arise as mere appearances of the dharmakaya, the natural arising of mind's essential nature. Being clear about this true nature of thought is called attaining the level of natural arising. At this point, there is no difference in any thought that may arise, because we see the nature of each thought to be emptiness, arising as the dharmakaya. Meditation could be defined as realizing the dharmakaya of the Buddha. --from Music in the Sky: The Life, Art Teachings of the 17th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje by Michele Martin, published by Snow Lion Publications
Re: [FairfieldLife] Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
I like Maukie better. http://www.broenink-art.nl/maukie2.swf --- Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://cubo.cc/ Move your mouse around to see her move. This was created by CGI -- not a real girl. Here's the question: what's missing that is needed to make the creepiness go away? A soul? Edg 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] You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
[FairfieldLife] factoids about India
http://www.theonion.com/content/atlas/
[FairfieldLife] �Did Bill Warp Hill?�
All these years, trading her soul, looking the other way; Making up stories in her head- a legend in her own mind. Manipulating, to protect her husband, from the vast right-wing conspiracy. For all these years, putting up with his shenanigans? She traded her soul, to win the WH We can see what she traded to stick with Bill for political power. She wants to fight her way, all the way to this slippery slope; Of using any means to reward the pain of being married to the most slippery character in the World. - Like movies? Here's a limited-time offer: Blockbuster Total Access for one month at no cost.
Re: [FairfieldLife] John Cusack gets it
Here is a 17 minute interview of Naomi Klein by John Cusack. She talks about the Uncle Miltie's Chicago school economics and how regimes like Pinochet's were test beds for it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/09/25/huffpost-video-john-cusa_n_65861.html There's also a preview of War, Inc there too which looks like it is going to be a hoot! Bet the Rethugs will hate it. Angela Mailander wrote: The only thing I've got against Naomi Klein (et al) is that she doesn't seem to grasp that what Corporate America is doing in Iraq and has done in Latin America (and elsewhere) is not new with Uncle Miltie's Chicago school economics. Corporate America (with the help of the Federal Reserve) was at in WWI and, especially, WWII. It was primarily American money that created and installed Hitler. a --- Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: His latest film War Inc was inspired by Naomi Klein's writings particularly the Baghdad Year Zero article. He really what a bunch of scum the Bush administration is as you can tell by his interview with Bill Maher on Friday night: http://youtube.com/watch?v=HIbV7REzdbI I'll be looking forward to the film: http://imdb.com/title/tt0884224/ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Mother Meera in Boston (was Re: MM = FF 911)
Say hello when you come to Boston for this, Patrick. I'll be doing the evening darshan if there are two and we can do only one. --- Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This just in: Dear Friends, Mother Meera will be visiting Boston on Tuesday, September 30th. Once more of the details have been determined (such as where and when darshan will be held), we will be sending out a registration form with all the information included. Again, if you are interested in helping out, please contact us. The event is growing and much help will be needed. info [at] mothermeera-boston-providence [dot] org --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool fflmod@ wrote: Michael, can you tell me if Boston is a definite stop on the tour? The Boston website still says it depends upon the interest level. It is definite. They just didn't yet update their web pages. You can also see that some of the web pages have the correct dates on their link-list, but not yet on their main page. The reason is, they have someone else doing the web page for them, so there is a delay, while I updated right away. The only difference between cities will be, that those with fewer applications, will only have one evening Darshan (7 pm), and those with more interest, will have an additional afternoon Darshan (2 pm). But Mother will definitely go to these places now. The best is, if you are interested, do a pre-registration, and they should inform you in a short while. Also, clicking on New Yorg brings up the Washington, DC website. Thank you. I just did it, it was late at night, and I did a few 'undos' obviously one too much :-) --- Michael t3rinity@ wrote: Mother Meera will be in Fairfield finally - on September 11. Just came out that way. No special symbolism intended. See the whole schedule here: http://mothermeeradarshan.org/ http://www.MotherMeera-Fairfield.com/ Mother will also go to India again in May and will be first time in North India, Delhi April 30, Rishikesh May 3 http://mothermeeraindia.com/ 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] Like movies? Here's a limited-time offer: Blockbuster Total Access for one month at no cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text4.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: John Cusack gets it
If Barack Obama can't clean up this mess, who can... While attending a caucus in Seattle, I read on his platform, that he intends to prosecute all the Bush criminals. There is no doubt how criminal this administration has been and still is. But my belief is that the Corporate/Military is so heavily intrenched in our politics, that we have gotten used to it. Hillary Clinton and John McCain are part and parcel of this mentality. We are at a cross-roads in the history of the world. We need to adopt a new mindset compared to what happened in WWI and WWII and since then. The people behind the scenes who worship money, and power for power's sake, are the same; Whether in Nazi Germany, or Vietnam or Iraq. The energy is the same... The faces are changed is all. Hillary is just as evil as George Bush in my opinion, and is representing the same energy. John McCain is slightly less evil, because at times he does speak a little truth; but lately he has sold his soul almost as completely as Hillary. So, all these pawns that the Bushies play, or the Clinton's play, or the Big Mac is Back people play, they are all complete idiots and fools. As far as I'm concerned... (Snip) ~Here's a blistering excerpt from a Hunter Thompson piece he included: We have become a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world -- a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just Whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us. No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we'll kill you. Well, shit on that dumbness, George W. Bush does not speak for me or my son or my mother or my friends or the people I respect in this world. We didn't vote for these cheap, greedy little killers who speak for America today -- and we will not vote for them again in 2002. Or 2004. Or ever. Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid rich kids like George Bush? They are the same ones who wanted to have Muhammad Ali locked up for refusing to kill gooks. They speak for all that is cruel and stupid and vicious in the American character. They are the racists and hate mongers among us -- they are the Ku Klux Klan. I piss down the throats of these Nazis. And I am too old to worry about whether they like it or not. Fuck them. ~~Much more here John Cusack On Bush, the Dems, Jon Stewart, Hunter Thompson, Bill Moyers, and King (not Don)- Huffington Post: http://tinyurl.com/9vqfo
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
Looks like Sal is suffering from Kangen Water Deficiency Syndrome. Maybe some Laughing Yoga will help: http://youtube.com/watch?v=31TTcjYw0hQ Ha! I was about to reply to Sal and say it's the links to youtube that are the most annoying! --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 30, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Duveyoung wrote: Here's the question: what's missing that is needed to make the creepiness go away? A soul? Here's another question: what's missing that's needed to make these silly URL wild-goose chases go away? A brain? Enough already. A huge percentage of posts are now simply people posting websites to send others to. Is this really imroving the quality of posts here on FF Life? I'd almost be willing to take some kind of poll, to see if I'm the one who needs to wake up, cause I find it really detracting from the generally interesting discussions here. Looks like Sal is suffering from Kangen Water Deficiency Syndrome. Maybe some Laughing Yoga will help: http://youtube.com/watch?v=31TTcjYw0hQ 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] You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
[FairfieldLife] Inhabitat » World’s Largest 38500-meal Solar Kitchen in India
HYPERLINK http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/03/17/world%e2%80%99s-largest-solar-kitchen-i n-india-can-cook-upto-38500-meals-per-day/http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/03/ 17/world%e2%80%99s-largest-solar-kitchen-in-india-can-cook-upto-38500-meals- per-day/ No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1350 - Release Date: 3/30/2008 12:32 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: Realizing the dharmakaya of the Buddha
These are very beautiful words. I've read them several times. The first time I read them, I thought I was reading your own illumined wisdom, tertonzeno, until I reached the end! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once we realize emptiness, all phenomena are included within this reality, which is not separate from the cause and effect of karma and which is free of mental constructs. On this ultimate level of realization, it is possible to state that there is no wholesome or unwholesome action. When we have realized the nature of all phenomena, negative actions naturally subside and positive ones are spontaneously accomplished. Until this time, however, we would be slipping into nihilism if we said that the phenomena of relative truth, such as positive and negative actions or karma, do not exist. Just knowing this authentic view, however, is not enough. For others to be able to experience it, we must also know the scriptures and reasonings so that we can teach. Without the support of this knowledge, it will be difficult for others to trust what we say, and so Milarepa speaks of scripture and reasoning as an adornment to realization. Dissolving thoughts into the dharmakaya-- Is this not meditation naturally arising? Join it with experience To make it beautifully adorned. One way to understand meditation is to see it as a practice of working with the many thoughts that arise in our mind. With realization they arise as mere appearances of the dharmakaya, the natural arising of mind's essential nature. Being clear about this true nature of thought is called attaining the level of natural arising. At this point, there is no difference in any thought that may arise, because we see the nature of each thought to be emptiness, arising as the dharmakaya. Meditation could be defined as realizing the dharmakaya of the Buddha. --from Music in the Sky: The Life, Art Teachings of the 17th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje by Michele Martin, published by Snow Lion Publications
