[FairfieldLife] Re: for the argument against VP Hillary Clinton
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 4:10 PM, authfriend wrote: Not at all, Sal. What I'm *seeing* is unhinged. If you had told me six months ago this is what the primary election would turn into, I'd have laughed in your face. That's because six months ago most people were buying into the myth of Hillary's inevitability, including me, Judy. No, it has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Or rather, what it has to do with is the impossible leap between She's inevitable and She's the devil incarnate. There just isn't any rational explanation for that. Hyperbole, Judith. I don't think anyone here or elsewhere has suggested that Hillary Clinton is the devil incarnate. That would be silly. In all the myths, the devil has class.
[FairfieldLife] Re: for the argument against VP Hillary Clinton
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 9:36 PM, authfriend wrote: Well, if you read her floor speech, and know what the AUMF was, you know she wasn't voting for war, so this would appear to be a non sequitur. That's parsing words, Judy. A vote for military force is a vote for, well, military force. If it had been anyone but Hillary you'd undoubtedly be agreeing. If it had been Maharishi she would be saying that it was an explicit vote for world peace. This is the universe not only defined by Judith Stein but pronounced as the truth for all others by Judith Stein. The only explanation for all of this I can see is that losers attract losers as their mindless followers. Maharishi's dead, so now Judy needed to find a new loser to defend compulsively. Voila... Hillary. And once again her posting week is at an end, and Judith Stein, having fought against the forces of ignorance valiantly for another two whole days, can retire to Valhalla and rest upon her shield until next week's battle. Then she will descend from heaven once more and fight the good fight against all of the enemies of freedom and light everywhere. Y'know...the people whom she considers Rl Rl Stpid. I'm sorry, but THAT is the common denomin- ator that has characterized Judy's pro- nouncements on this forum and others for decades -- *I* am the smart one here; *I* am the one who sees things correctly, while you are deluded or intentionally misleading. *I* am smart, and you are Rl Rl Stpid. It doesn't matter whether Judy is defending Maharishi, or the TMO, or Hillary Clinton, or the caste system, or even if she's making up statistics to prove that she isn't so abrasive that she destroyed one internet forum and was well on her way to destroying a second until Rick stepped in and stopped her. The message is always the same. We could save ourselves and her a lot of time and energy by just creating a robot to post the same thing 50 times a week for her. It would free her to surf other internet forums, and we'd get exactly the same message: I AM SMART, YOU ARE STOOOPID.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 11, 2008, at 11:34 AM, cardemaister wrote:
I can't help feeling that for you pure consciousness is some
low level asaMprajñaata-ish-samaadhi, like for instance nirvitarka
or nirvicaara. I don't understand what dualistic
has to do with this. In my understanding saaMkhya holds that
puruSa is kevala, and thus has nothing to do with the three
guNas, that is, prakRti.
It's a dualistic style of enlightenment, that's all--what TMers would
call Cosmic Consciousness--there is a permanent witness which isn't
resolved. So from a Buddhist perspective, it would not be similar to
the style of enlightenment in Buddhism, which was more similarity with
Advaita Vedanta style realization.
But how can pure consciousness be a skandha? In my understanding,
PC is absolute abstraction!
skandha m. (accord. to Un2. iv , 206 , from %{skand} in the sense of
` rising ' ?) the shoulder , upper part of the back or region from
the neck to the shoulder-joint (in men and animals) AV. c. c.
[1256,3] ; the stem or trunk of a tree (esp. that part of the stem
where the branches begin) S3a1n3khGr2. MBh. c. ; a large branch or
bough L. ; a troop , multitude , quantity , aggregate (cf. %{kari-} ,
%{nara-sk-}) MBh. BhP. ; a part , division (esp. a division of an army
or a form of military array) MBh. Ka1v. c. ; a chapter , section (of
a book , system c.) VarBr2S. Car. ; a tract , path , region (esp. of
the winds , said to be seven) MBh. Hariv. ; (in phil.) the five
objects of sense (see %{viSaya}) W. ; (with Buddhists) the five
constituent elements of being (viz. %{rUpa} , ` bodily form ' ;
%{vedanA} , ` sensation ' ; %{saMjJA} , ` perception ' ;
%{saMskAra} , ` aggregate of formations ' ; %{vijJAna} , `
consciousness or thought-faculty ') MWB. 109 ; (with Jainas) the body
(in the widest sense = %{piNDa}) Sarvad. ; a partic. form of the
A1rya1 metre Col. ; a king , prince L. ; any article used at the
coronation of a king (as a jar filled with consecrated water , an
umbrella c.) W. ; a sage , teacher ib. ; war , battle ib. ; an
engagement , agreement ib. ; a heron ib. ; equality of height in the
humps of a pair of draught oxen ib. ; = %{samparA7ya} and %{bhadrA7di}
L. ; N. of a serpent-demon MBh. ; of a poet Cat. ; often w.r. for
%{skanda} ; (%{A}) f. a branch L. ; a creeper L.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
But how can pure consciousness be a skandha? The skandhas have to do with Theravada Buddhism. But it is a fact that the Buddhism of India, Tibet, Vietnam, China, Korea, and Japan follow the Mahayana, which is based on the 'Conciousness Only' school of Vasabandhu and Asanga. Pure conciousness is termed 'nirvana' in Buddhism, and should not be equated with the mere skandhas of the early Thervada. All conscious objects are only constructs of consciousness because there are no external objects. They are like a dream. - Mahayanasagraha Sutra The external world has no existence independent of the consciousness, which perceives it. - Gaudapadacharya In Buddhism, consciousness-only or mind-only is a theory according to which all existence is nothing but consciousness, and therefore there is nothing that lies outside of the mind. Consciousness-only: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness-only
[FairfieldLife] Re: for the argument against VP Hillary Clinton
I'll bet you still haven't read her floor speech. Here's the URL again; it's not long. Seems to me you owe her that much if you're going to base your opinion of whether she's fit to hold public office on her vote for the AUMF: Sal wrote: I did, Judy, and a vote for war is still a vote for war, no matter how she or anyone else may rationalize. So, you're thinking that the U.S. is in a war? Only the U.S. Congress can declare war, Sal. A vote to use military force is not needed for the President to send troops in anywhere he wants to. Harry Truman sent military troops into South Korea and defied the Berlin Wall with U.S. troops without a declaration of war by Congress. We've had U.S. troops in Kosovo for ten years now and troops in Afghanistan for five. Has war been declared on Serbia or Afghanistan? I think not. But, in fact, even the U.S. Congress could not vote for a civil war in Iraq. You are thinking that Iraq is in a civil war, right? In my opinion, Bush was right to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. If only Bill Clinton had sent troops into Africa he could have saved millions of lives in Rawanda. Clinton didn't need to declare war on Africa to save lives. That's the difference between Bill and Hill - she would stand up and fight for freedom, but Bill retreated from a U.N. mission in Somalia after a single Black Hawk went down. Bill bombed a soap factory and killed a camel inside a shed, but Hill voted to unseat the tyrant Saddam Hussien.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Curtis wrote: So you are thinking that perhaps the caste system is peripheral to Hindu theology? Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was of the renounced order, so he would have renounced the Hindu system of 'caste'. From what I've read, SBS did not teach on the basis of caste, having rejected it. If the Swami had upheld the 'caste' system he would not have made Marshy his close confidant. The modern 'caste system' in India is based on 'jati', birth circumstances, not skin color. But the word 'caste' when applied to Indian religions is a misnomer. The word caste was introduced by Europeans and pertains to skin color. The original Indian system of division of labor apparently had nothing to do with the color of one's skin. The Indian Constitution has outlawed discrimination, since 1947. I've seen no source which indicates that SBS was opposed to the socialist, secular, democratic principles that founded the Indian nation. If you can find any, please post them so that we can read them. But in fact, racial prejudice was introduced into South Asia by Arayan speaking Caucasians during the Vedic Age. Europeans have been racial profiling since before the age of the Celts, who apparently were one of the first to divide people into groups of priests, warriors, farmers and servants. Even today we have remnants of the 'caste system' in our military which divides members into 'officers' and 'enlisted' men. There is far more racial profiling in America than in India. In America we have labor unions as well as race prejudice. That said, I am totally opposed to racism but it doesn't seem to be a factor in the teaching of SBS. You've already admitted that you know next to nothing about what SBS said about anything. For all you know, SBS may have been totally opposed to all kinds of human color profiling.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HI's Sen. Inouye on the race card
Bob wrote: He noted that he has had white voters complain to him that 90 percent of the blacks in a state are voting for Obama and just 45 percent of the whites. http://starbulletin.com/2008/05/11/editorial/borreca.html So, according to Dan Inouye, the voting was based on race?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 11, 2008, at 3:29 PM, sandiego108 wrote: Just curious Vaj if you have any stats on Buddhists. You mention (frequently) that most TMers according to you are not familiar with permanent states of non-dual awareness. This assumes that you believe that many Buddhists are. I'd say some Buddhists are, but know I don't know if anyone is keeping exact numbers. In terms of movements who have produced the largest numbers of realizers of the nondual state in the west, my guess is we'd see that probably the larger groups like Trungpa's group and the dhamma.org/SN Goenka people who offer free instruction all over the world. Many people will have some basic familiarity with their nature after just the 10 day intro course. So, given that Buddhists have been around for a lot longer than TMers, where are the millions, or billions, of enlightened Buddhists- - living permanent non-dual states? If Buddhist practice is so superior to TM, and they've had all of this time to spread and culture techniques to gain full enlightenment, non-dual awareness, then where are all the success stories? There oughta be millions of them on the planet as we speak, and there is not a shred of evidence this is so. If Buddhahood or full enlightenment was common, that might be the case. But some areas where the conditions were right have produced fairly large numbers of Buddhas, certainly the Himalayan kingdoms being a popular example, but we're seeing it now worldwide. We're also seeing former yogis consciously reincarnating in the west, including the US. I am not criticizing Buddhism, just that it is no more a true answer for us all than any other technique or religion. Well it certainly has larger range of methods than any one is likely to get with basic TM, but so does Hinduism, Jainism, etc.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
On May 11, 2008, at 11:56 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Great details New, I am reading this with interest. It does not surprise me that a Chinese person, especially from that era would not find the caste system oppressive. Perhaps Angela would like to fill us in on the daily life during that dynasty in China. Much of what persists today in the west on the caste system are the remnants of British propaganda from colonial rule. If one wants to have a real good idea about what the varnas are and how they were intended should read the recently translated works on the varnas by Alain Danielou. Danielou was one of the students of Swami Karpatri, the man who was not only an important student of Guru Dev, but was the person who was offered the Shank. of the north position first (he instead recommended SBS). Danielou's work shows how Hindu society was organized to preserve certain arts, much like the first labor guilds arose in medieval Europe under various kings as feudalism began to wane, and how it was originally a vast system of universal tolerance. It will undo much of the British propaganda which persists to this very day and have you reconsidering what your western education taught you to believe about the varnas. The Castes (Varnä) MAN is a social animal, which is to say that the human species forms a whole, an organism, whose various cells have their own distinct functions. This is why the different lineages of mankind exist. The qualities and abilities of each improve over the generations so as to form an efficient, harmonious society that is capable of carrying out the role assigned to the human species in the plan of creation. In the same way that the different organs of the body have different functions, even though they originate in cells, so in the plan laid out for the species there exist particular lineages that are more adapted to certain functions and whose abilities, once they are recognized, encouraged, and developed, become hereditary. Each human grouping, each race, each family, must seek to uphold its integrity, to improve its particular speciality, and to play the social role corresponding to its nature, and above all else to preserve and transmit its own special genetic and cultural heritage. Our virtues are to a great extent transmissible, being connected to aspects of character that can be inherited. This is why they must be cultivated and improved so that we may play our role to the full in the brief span of our existence. There is thus for everyone a natural law (Dharmä) that regulates the use and development of mental and physical characteristics, inherited at birth, together with the gift of life itself, so that we may play to the full our part in the evolution of our lineage. Ancestor worship involves above all else the respect and transmission of our double heritage, genetic and cultural. Each being is born unique. In the almost infinite number of possible combinations of the elements that constitute the living being, it is beyond belief that the same arrangement could be repeated, that two beings could be absolutely identical, with the same nature, appearance, function, and station; nevertheless, the human types defined by heredity can be classified. In order to achieve his physical and spiritual destiny, each individual must establish his basis; determine the class to which he belongs, the duties and qualities inherent in that class, and its unique characteristics so that he may make them productive; and, eventually, go beyond them. Everyone must achieve the perfection of a social or exterior role before he can perfect his personal or interior role. The two roles can be vastly different and even contradictory; thus, we see that men from the artisan castes can earn their living in their humble professions and yet can at the same time be philosophers, holy men, and artists before whom kings and Brahmans bow with respect. The circumstances of our birth correspond to the level of development of our own lineage and to the conditions in which we can best progress. Each of the links in the lineage is found at a particular stage of the evolution of that species‑in its youth, maturity, or decline. This is why individuals of different races are not at the same level in their evolution. There is no advantage to anyone in wanting to change one's situation or function, nor in wanting to perform the duties of another. Thus, except in very rare cases, one does not change one's sex, species, race, or caste during one's life. The external hierarchy of beings and things is often the opposite of the interior order. This is the reason why, during the Kali Yuga (the present world age), it is most desirable to be either woman or worker (Shudrä), for through mere humility and devotion to their role or work, these people can attain exterior perfection, which
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: for the argument against VP Hillary Clinton
On May 12, 2008, at 2:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: No, it has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Or rather, what it has to do with is the impossible leap between She's inevitable and She's the devil incarnate. There just isn't any rational explanation for that. Hyperbole, Judith. I don't think anyone here or elsewhere has suggested that Hillary Clinton is the devil incarnate. That would be silly. In all the myths, the devil has class. Also hot to mention that whatever else you want to say about him, he knows how to get the job done. Unlike Hillary, who botched her campaign from Day One. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 4:37 AM, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 11:34 AM, cardemaister wrote: I can't help feeling that for you pure consciousness is some low level asaMprajñaata-ish-samaadhi, like for instance nirvitarka or nirvicaara. I don't understand what dualistic has to do with this. In my understanding saaMkhya holds that puruSa is kevala, and thus has nothing to do with the three guNas, that is, prakRti. It's a dualistic style of enlightenment, that's all--what TMers would call Cosmic Consciousness--there is a permanent witness which isn't resolved. So from a Buddhist perspective, it would not be similar to the style of enlightenment in Buddhism, which was more similarity with Advaita Vedanta style realization. But how can pure consciousness be a skandha? In my understanding, PC is absolute abstraction! I find many adherents of TM, due to conceptual indoctrination, often have a hard time getting Buddhist metaphysics because they accepted the beliefs on PC as true and absolute. A common experience I've noticed among TMers who learned Buddhist meditation later is that they are shocked when they transcend what they had previously believed was the transcendent! If the description and (non-conventional) experience we were indoctrinated in with TM can be transcended then, from a Buddhist perspective, it is a compounded phenomenon. If it is a compounded phenomenon it is impermanent. That's not to imply there are not techniques in Hinduism to transcend the causal, there are. They're just not taught in the TMO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
Vaj wrote: In terms of movements who have produced the largest numbers of realizers of the nondual state in the west, my guess is we'd see that probably the larger groups like Trungpa's group... Who, exactly, in Trungpa's group, would you consider to be realizing the 'nondual' state in the west? Sakyong Jamgon Mipham or Khandro Tseyang Ripa Mukpo? The consort of the Sakyong is referred to as the Sakyong Wangmo. The first Sakyong Wangmo is Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche's widow, Lady Diana Mukpo. The next Sakyong Wangmo will be Khandro Tseyang Ripa Mukpo, daughter of His Eminence Terton Namkha Drimed Rabjam Rinpoche, to whom Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche was married on June 10, 2006 in Halifax, NovaScotia. Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakyong_Mipham_Rinpoche
[FairfieldLife] Re: for the argument against VP Hillary Clinton
Sal wrote: Also hot to mention that whatever else you want to say about him, he knows how to get the job done. Unlike Hillary, who botched her campaign from Day One. Taking the advice of Al Gore and National Security Advisor Tony Lake, Bill agreed to a proposal to bomb Serbian military positions while helping the Muslims acquire weapons to defend themselvesthe fulfillment of a pledge he had made during the 1992 campaign. But instead of pushing European leaders, he directed Secretary of State Warren Christopher merely to consult with them. When they balked at the plan, Bill quickly retreated, creating a perception of drift. The key factor in Bill's policy reversal was Hillary, who was said to have deep misgivings and viewed the situation as a Vietnam that would compromise health-care reform. The United States took no further action in Bosnia, and the ethnic cleansing by the Serbs was to continue for four more years, resulting in the deaths of more than 250,000 people. - Sally Bedell Smith Inside the Clinton White House: 'For Love of Politics' by Sally Bedell Smith Amazon - $10.88 http://tinyurl.com/2tppnn
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 3:29 PM, sandiego108 wrote: Just curious Vaj if you have any stats on Buddhists. You mention (frequently) that most TMers according to you are not familiar with permanent states of non-dual awareness. This assumes that you believe that many Buddhists are. I'd say some Buddhists are, but know I don't know if anyone is keeping exact numbers. In terms of movements who have produced the largest numbers of realizers of the nondual state in the west, my guess is we'd see that probably the larger groups like Trungpa's group and the dhamma.org/SN Goenka people who offer free instruction all over the world. Many people will have some basic familiarity with their nature after just the 10 day intro course. So, given that Buddhists have been around for a lot longer than TMers, where are the millions, or billions, of enlightened Buddhists- - living permanent non-dual states? If Buddhist practice is so superior to TM, and they've had all of this time to spread and culture techniques to gain full enlightenment, non-dual awareness, then where are all the success stories? There oughta be millions of them on the planet as we speak, and there is not a shred of evidence this is so. If Buddhahood or full enlightenment was common, that might be the case. But some areas where the conditions were right have produced fairly large numbers of Buddhas, certainly the Himalayan kingdoms being a popular example, but we're seeing it now worldwide. We're also seeing former yogis consciously reincarnating in the west, including the US. I am not criticizing Buddhism, just that it is no more a true answer for us all than any other technique or religion. Well it certainly has larger range of methods than any one is likely to get with basic TM, but so does Hinduism, Jainism, etc. I just don't see what all the fuss is about. It seems the purpose of all of these methods is liberation. Even if there are more tools in the toolbox from these religions, what does it matter if the goal isn't being reached anyway? It all devolves into my religion is better than your religion.
[FairfieldLife] Faith Blindness
I ran across an interesting fact today, one that left me pondering the nature of faith, and its relationship or non-relationship to reality. It started with sitting down to watch the latest episode of Battlestar Galactica (synchronistically titled Faith), and realizing again what a good series it is. If Firefly could be legitimately characterized as outlaws in space, BG can be legitimately charact- erized as religion in space. The series has dealt since day one with fundamental issues of religion and faith. There have been miracles and spiritual leaders, visions, and visionary prophets leading their people to the promised land. I have literally seen reviews in the mainstream press describing this last season as building up to the Rapture. It's a whole space opera based on faith -- on some- one sharing a personal, subjective vision and others chucking their doubts out the window and following that vision on nothing more than faith, as if faith was not only the most important thing, but the only thing. Anyway, after watching the episode I was curious as to how BG was doing ratings-wise, so I Websurfed a little, ending up at TV.com. There, in the Best TV Series of All Time, SciFi category, BG is currently ranked number one. That was no surprise. What was a surprise was to find the followup series to Battle- star Galactica, Caprica, rated at number 37, ahead of things like Lost In Space, The Outer Limits, and The Twilight Zone. It has an overall 8.2 rating (out of 10), which puts it a shade less than ten points below the show with the highest overall rating, Firefly. 51% of the people voting on Caprica rated it perfect. Caprica has never aired. It is due out next year. Now *that* is faith. :-) But isn't it also a fascinating commentary on the *nature* of faith? No one who has voted on this series as the best has ever seen it. They were exposed to a first product, liked it, and merely assumed that the followup product would be just as good, or better. Crazy, huh? Now think back to being told about the Dawning Of The Age Of Enlightenment. Or that people will be flying through the air Real Soon Now. Or the nature of the Maharishi Effect, and how by this time next year, just as soon as we have enough butt-bouncers lifting off, the world will be ushered into a new era of world peace and Heaven On Earth. And many people voted on these science fiction ideas, even though they had never seen them. They voted with their presence in a movement that made them laughable to most people in the world. They voted with their presence at butt-bouncing courses. And most of all they voted with their pocketbooks. And their votes were based -- as are the votes for Caprica as the best -- on nothing but faith. Sometimes faith is justfied; sometimes it is not. We don't know whether Caprica will turn out to be a good TV series or an exercise in jumping the shark. But last time I checked the TV news, the Age of Enlightenment wasn't the lead story, and neither was people flying through the air. And yet, some here still have absolute faith that those things will take place. If there were a website where you could vote for your preferred vision of the future of planet Earth, they would place their check- mark right next to the entry that says, Age Of Enlightenment...Real Soon Now. Faith. Ain't it a puzzler?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
This helps a lot, New, and so you can forget my previous rant. I should have kept my mouth shut in any case since I didn't really have time to state my case fully and skipped all the logical steps between statements. --- new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fa Hien a Buddhist pilgrim from China visited India around 400 AD. Only the lot of the Chandals he found unenviable; outcastes by reason of their degrading work as disposers of dead, they were universally shunned... But no other section of the population were notably disadvantaged, no other caste distinctions attracted comment from the Chinese pilgrim, and no oppressive caste 'system' drew forth his surprised censure.[28] Yet another Chinese pilgrim Hsuan Tsang's accounts (around 600 AD) indicate that the king of Sind region was of Sudra caste. In this period kings of Sudra and Brahmin origin were as common as those of Kshatriya varna and caste system was not wholly prohibitive and repressive.[29] The castes did not constitute a rigid description of the occupation or the social status of a group. Since British society was divided by class, the British attempted to equate the Indian caste system to their own social class system. They saw caste as an indicator of occupation, social standing, and intellectual ability.[30] Intentionally or unintentionally, the caste system became more rigid during the British Raj, when the British started to enumerate castes during the ten year census and codified the system under their rule. Sociologists have commented on the historical advantages offered by a rigid social structure, such as the caste system and its lack of usefulness in the modern world. Historically, the caste system offered several advantages to the population of the Indian subcontinent. While Caste is nowadays seen by instances that render it anachronistic, in its original form, the caste system served as an important instrument of order in a society where mutual consent rather than compulsion ruled;[31] where the ritual rights as well as the economic obligations of members of one caste or sub-caste were strictly circumscribed in relation to those of any other caste or sub-caste; where one was born into one's caste and retained one's station in society for life; where merit was inherited, where equality existed within the caste, but inter-caste relations were unequal and hierarchical. A well-defined system of mutual interdependence through a division of labour created security within a community.[31].[32] In addition, the division of labour on the basis of ethnicity allowed immigrants and foreigners to quickly integrate into their own caste niches.[33] The caste system played an influential role in shaping economic activities.[34] The caste system functioned much like medieval European guilds, ensuring the division of labour, providing for the training of apprentices and, in some cases, allowing manufacturers to achieve narrow specialisation. For instance, in certain regions, producing each variety of cloth was the speciality of a particular sub-caste. Also, philosophers argue that the majority of people would be comfortable in stratified endogamous groups, and have been in ancient times.[35] Membership in a particular caste, with its associated narrative, history and genealogy, would instill in its members a sense of group accomplishment and cultural pride. Such sentiments are routinely expressed by the Marathas, Rajputs, Iyers, Jats for instance. British Rule The fluidity of the caste system was affected by the arrival of the British. Prior to that, the relative ranking of castes differed from one place to another.[37] The castes did not constitute a rigid description of the occupation or the social status of a group. Since the British society was divided by class, the British attempted to equate the Indian caste system to the class system. They saw caste as an indicator of occupation, social standing, and intellectual ability.[38] During the initial days of British East India Company's rules, caste privileges and customs were encouraged,[39] but the British law courts disagreed with the discrimination against the lower castes. However British policies of divide and rule as well as enumeration of the population into rigid categories during the 10 year census contributed towards the hardening of caste identities.[40] Varna and jati (Class and caste) According to the ancient Hindu scriptures, there are four varnas. The Bhagavad Gita says varnas are decided based on Guna and Karma. Manusmriti and some other shastras mention four varnas: the Brahmins (teachers, scholars and priests), the Kshatriyas (kings and warriors), the Vaishyas (traders), and Shudras (agriculturists, service providers, and some artisan groups). Offspring of different varnas belong to different J#257;tis. Another group excluded
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Along the lines of Danielou, its my understanding that the Brits' having a class system at the time that was rigid and oppressive transformed the Indian caste system. In contrast, the latter was based on tolerance and respect for castes, and strong self-and family esteem for the excellence of the family's crafts, learning, talents, etc. The Brits used caste as a divisive and culturally crude tool of conquest and control using divide and conquor, stimulating caste tensions and rivalries, and playing/pitting one caste against another. They created caste in their own image of class hatred, loathing and bitterness -- as an exploitive tool. The way to get ahead in this neo-psuedo caste system was to play by British rules. Maharajas were bought off and towed the new party doctrine. And the maharajas supported the priests and clergy who also learned how to play the game. Over 300 years of explotiation, imperialism and racism, the Brits successfully transformed a working system of caste guilds, reasonably benefical to all castes in anagrarian society, into the putrid stew that Curtis critiques. If you are going to damn anyone, I would think the ruling Brit class is far more on target than shanks. I was asking Curtis if he knew SBS full or deeper view on caste. While Dandielou is one voice, he echoes a view that presumably stems from SBS via his student K. That view does not appear exploitive, oppressive, elitist or hate-based. While it may or may not be useful in a post-industrial age, being originally designed for agrarian societies, I think it is fool hardy to adamantly reject all aspects of it based on a horrid use and mutilation of it by the Brits. I suggest that genetics as a basis for indentifying and culturing traits that excel in various professions and careers, and having a strong, tolerant and vibrant flows of cultural and genetic heritage may be a good thing. Albeit there are many exploitive scenarios, as in anything, that could also unfold. However, to equate and damn the British rape and bastard child caste system as that which a deeply spiritual culture and generations progressively cultivated -- is quite short-sighted. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 11:56 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Great details New, I am reading this with interest. It does not surprise me that a Chinese person, especially from that era would not find the caste system oppressive. Perhaps Angela would like to fill us in on the daily life during that dynasty in China. Much of what persists today in the west on the caste system are the remnants of British propaganda from colonial rule. If one wants to have a real good idea about what the varnas are and how they were intended should read the recently translated works on the varnas by Alain Danielou. Danielou was one of the students of Swami Karpatri, the man who was not only an important student of Guru Dev, but was the person who was offered the Shank. of the north position first (he instead recommended SBS). Danielou's work shows how Hindu society was organized to preserve certain arts, much like the first labor guilds arose in medieval Europe under various kings as feudalism began to wane, and how it was originally a vast system of universal tolerance. It will undo much of the British propaganda which persists to this very day and have you reconsidering what your western education taught you to believe about the varnas. The Castes (Varnä) MAN is a social animal, which is to say that the human species forms a whole, an organism, whose various cells have their own distinct functions. This is why the different lineages of mankind exist. The qualities and abilities of each improve over the generations so as to form an efficient, harmonious society that is capable of carrying out the role assigned to the human species in the plan of creation. In the same way that the different organs of the body have different functions, even though they originate in cells, so in the plan laid out for the species there exist particular lineages that are more adapted to certain functions and whose abilities, once they are recognized, encouraged, and developed, become hereditary. Each human grouping, each race, each family, must seek to uphold its integrity, to improve its particular speciality, and to play the social role corresponding to its nature, and above all else to preserve and transmit its own special genetic and cultural heritage. Our virtues are to a great extent transmissible, being connected to aspects of character that can be inherited. This is why they must be cultivated and improved so that we may play our role to the full in the brief span of our existence. There is thus for everyone a natural law (Dharmä) that regulates the use and development of mental and physical characteristics,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Well, I am sure that the traveler wasn't sensitive to modern sensibilities schooled in democratic ideals. Even in modern China and despite Communism's half-assed attempts to get rid of class structure, there is a sharp division among classes--but attempts to make them flexible so as to reward unusual talent or intelligence are increasingly in place. If those systems really are in place, then I really can't object too much about the social classes since it seems that they will, naturally, develop. And then, realistically, who will do all the grunt work for us so we can meditate all day? I only object to them when they are inflexible and that inflexibility is enforced through draconian measures. --- curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great details New, I am reading this with interest. It does not surprise me that a Chinese person, especially from that era would not find the caste system oppressive. Perhaps Angela would like to fill us in on the daily life during that dynasty in China. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fa Hien a Buddhist pilgrim from China visited India around 400 AD. Only the lot of the Chandals he found unenviable; outcastes by reason of their degrading work as disposers of dead, they were universally shunned... But no other section of the population were notably disadvantaged, no other caste distinctions attracted comment from the Chinese pilgrim, and no oppressive caste 'system' drew forth his surprised censure.[28] Yet another Chinese pilgrim Hsuan Tsang's accounts (around 600 AD) indicate that the king of Sind region was of Sudra caste. In this period kings of Sudra and Brahmin origin were as common as those of Kshatriya varna and caste system was not wholly prohibitive and repressive.[29] The castes did not constitute a rigid description of the occupation or the social status of a group. Since British society was divided by class, the British attempted to equate the Indian caste system to their own social class system. They saw caste as an indicator of occupation, social standing, and intellectual ability.[30] Intentionally or unintentionally, the caste system became more rigid during the British Raj, when the British started to enumerate castes during the ten year census and codified the system under their rule. Sociologists have commented on the historical advantages offered by a rigid social structure, such as the caste system and its lack of usefulness in the modern world. Historically, the caste system offered several advantages to the population of the Indian subcontinent. While Caste is nowadays seen by instances that render it anachronistic, in its original form, the caste system served as an important instrument of order in a society where mutual consent rather than compulsion ruled;[31] where the ritual rights as well as the economic obligations of members of one caste or sub-caste were strictly circumscribed in relation to those of any other caste or sub-caste; where one was born into one's caste and retained one's station in society for life; where merit was inherited, where equality existed within the caste, but inter-caste relations were unequal and hierarchical. A well-defined system of mutual interdependence through a division of labour created security within a community.[31].[32] In addition, the division of labour on the basis of ethnicity allowed immigrants and foreigners to quickly integrate into their own caste niches.[33] The caste system played an influential role in shaping economic activities.[34] The caste system functioned much like medieval European guilds, ensuring the division of labour, providing for the training of apprentices and, in some cases, allowing manufacturers to achieve narrow specialisation. For instance, in certain regions, producing each variety of cloth was the speciality of a particular sub-caste. Also, philosophers argue that the majority of people would be comfortable in stratified endogamous groups, and have been in ancient times.[35] Membership in a particular caste, with its associated narrative, history and genealogy, would instill in its members a sense of group accomplishment and cultural pride. Such sentiments are routinely expressed by the Marathas, Rajputs, Iyers, Jats for instance. British Rule The fluidity of the caste system was affected by the arrival of the British. Prior to that, the relative ranking of castes differed from one place to another.[37] The castes did not constitute a rigid description of the occupation or the social status of a group. Since the British society was divided by class, the British attempted to equate the Indian caste system to the class system. They saw caste as an indicator of occupation, social standing, and intellectual ability.[38] During the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Well, there is also the alternative history which doesn't seem to want to go away in spite of denials from the mainstream. According to that history, the Indo-Aryan civilization was the most genocidal in the history of the world, modern times not excepted. And these genocidal missions were all about caste and color. The groupie gopis Krishna's got following him around were, according to these alternative accounts, two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. --- Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis wrote: So you are thinking that perhaps the caste system is peripheral to Hindu theology? Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was of the renounced order, so he would have renounced the Hindu system of 'caste'. From what I've read, SBS did not teach on the basis of caste, having rejected it. If the Swami had upheld the 'caste' system he would not have made Marshy his close confidant. The modern 'caste system' in India is based on 'jati', birth circumstances, not skin color. But the word 'caste' when applied to Indian religions is a misnomer. The word caste was introduced by Europeans and pertains to skin color. The original Indian system of division of labor apparently had nothing to do with the color of one's skin. The Indian Constitution has outlawed discrimination, since 1947. I've seen no source which indicates that SBS was opposed to the socialist, secular, democratic principles that founded the Indian nation. If you can find any, please post them so that we can read them. But in fact, racial prejudice was introduced into South Asia by Arayan speaking Caucasians during the Vedic Age. Europeans have been racial profiling since before the age of the Celts, who apparently were one of the first to divide people into groups of priests, warriors, farmers and servants. Even today we have remnants of the 'caste system' in our military which divides members into 'officers' and 'enlisted' men. There is far more racial profiling in America than in India. In America we have labor unions as well as race prejudice. That said, I am totally opposed to racism but it doesn't seem to be a factor in the teaching of SBS. You've already admitted that you know next to nothing about what SBS said about anything. For all you know, SBS may have been totally opposed to all kinds of human color profiling. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seelisberg Photos
That first picture of a small pond -- is that the pond I camped next to? Sure looks like it...anyone here know if that pond is just down the hill from Seelisberg about a ten minute walk? Spent a month there right after TTC. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I loved living there, thanks for the trip down memory lane! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: HYPERLINK http://www.kra-page.com/pic/seelisberg/slides/Seelisberg-01.htmlhttp://www .kra-page.com/pic/seelisberg/slides/Seelisberg-01.html No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.15/1426 - Release Date: 5/10/2008 11:12 AM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
On May 12, 2008, at 9:47 AM, new.morning wrote: Along the lines of Danielou, its my understanding that the Brits' having a class system at the time that was rigid and oppressive transformed the Indian caste system. In contrast, the latter was based on tolerance and respect for castes, and strong self-and family esteem for the excellence of the family's crafts, learning, talents, etc. The Brits used caste as a divisive and culturally crude tool of conquest and control using divide and conquor, stimulating caste tensions and rivalries, and playing/pitting one caste against another. Yes, this is precisely what I heard as well. In some cases, as with masters of Indian martial arts who could kill with a mere blow, they were sought out and had their hands cut off. They created caste in their own image of class hatred, loathing and bitterness -- as an exploitive tool. The way to get ahead in this neo-psuedo caste system was to play by British rules. Maharajas were bought off and towed the new party doctrine. And the maharajas supported the priests and clergy who also learned how to play the game. Over 300 years of explotiation, imperialism and racism, the Brits successfully transformed a working system of caste guilds, reasonably benefical to all castes in anagrarian society, into the putrid stew that Curtis critiques. If you are going to damn anyone, I would think the ruling Brit class is far more on target than shanks. One of the things we were taught in Intro. to Soc. was that Britain was a classic example of a stratified social system. Most Brit's can here a few words and know where someones place is in society. Guitar god and singer-songwriter Richard Thomspon speaks of this nasty aspect of British society in his song Crawl Back Under My Stone: Crawl Back (Under My Stone) Written by Richard Thompson Appears on Mock Tudor (1999) Semi-Detached Mock Tudor (2002) Live in Providence DVD EP (2004) live from austin tx DVD CD (2005) This time you hurt me You really did it this time you did Did you count your fingers after shaking my hand God forbid Riff raff crawling from the slums Right there in front of all your chums I swear by the pricking of my thumbs I'll make your day and melt away I'll crawl back under my stone I'll crawl back under my stone I'll crawl back under my stone But you won't have to stand next to me You won't have to introduce me You won't have to think about, talk about, care about, me I'll crawl back I've got a nerve just showing my face don't you think Scruffy little likes ought to know their place don't you think Old boy, sorry to intrude Damn shame pretty bloody rude I should be horsewhipped and sued Then I'll go quietly my tail between my knees I'll crawl back under my stone I'll crawl back under my stone I'll crawl back under my stone But you won't have to stand next to me You won't have to introduce me You won't have to think about, talk about, care about, me I'll crawl back I want to be middle class Floors and ceilings made of glass I just want to be, I just want to be free You had me in a second you had it all reckoned, you did You guessed my game and my name, rank and number, you did Somehow I gave myself away Some code, some word I didn't say I missed one line in the play And the trap shut tight and you did me all right I'll crawl back under my stone I'll crawl back under my stone I'll crawl back under my stone But you won't have to stand next to me You won't have to introduce me You won't have to think about, talk about, care about You won't have to ask about, fuss about, discuss about You won't have to mind about, swear about, forget about, me Crawl back I'll crawl back I'll crawl back Crawl back I'll crawl back Crawl back Crawl back I'll crawl back I was asking Curtis if he knew SBS full or deeper view on caste. While Dandielou is one voice, he echoes a view that presumably stems from SBS via his student K. Precisely why I chose that example. That view does not appear exploitive, oppressive, elitist or hate-based. While it may or may not be useful in a post-industrial age, being originally designed for agrarian societies, I think it is fool hardy to adamantly reject all aspects of it based on a horrid use and mutilation of it by the Brits. Yep. I suggest that genetics as a basis for indentifying and culturing traits that excel in various professions and careers, and having a strong, tolerant and vibrant flows of cultural and genetic heritage may be a good thing. Albeit there are many exploitive scenarios, as in anything, that could also unfold. However, to equate and damn the British rape and bastard child caste system as that which a deeply spiritual culture and generations progressively cultivated -- is quite short-sighted. Danielou adds interestingly that the varna system today is seen in career and educational systems based on IQ (which is largely inherited).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
Angela Mailander wrote: ...who will do all the grunt work for us so we can meditate all day? You and Curtis have really dropped the ball on this discussion. I really expected you two to do your homework before you blasted off with all this misinformation about the 'class' system and denigrating the poor Hindus' religion, without even mentioning the caste system in Europe, Africa, China, Bali, or Japan. But to pick on Swami Brahmananda Saraswati? Go figure. Caste: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste Well, I am sure that the traveler wasn't sensitive to modern sensibilities schooled in democratic ideals. Even in modern China and despite Communism's half-assed attempts to get rid of class structure, there is a sharp division among classes--but attempts to make them flexible so as to reward unusual talent or intelligence are increasingly in place. If those systems really are in place, then I really can't object too much about the social classes since it seems that they will, naturally, develop. I only object to them when they are inflexible and that inflexibility is enforced through draconian measures. Curtis wrote: Great details New, I am reading this with interest. It does not surprise me that a Chinese person, especially from that era would not find the caste system oppressive. Perhaps Angela would like to fill us in on the daily life during that dynasty in China.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just don't see what all the fuss is about. It seems the purpose of all of these methods is liberation. Even if there are more tools in the toolbox from these religions, what does it matter if the goal isn't being reached anyway? It all devolves into my religion is better than your religion. The goal may be liberation, but the religions themselves are dualistic constructs, to which one can become deeply attached. Traditions with lots of techniques and intricate ideation can serve as great hang-outs for those who love to talk about awakening but really don't want to wake up.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Angela Mailander wrote: The groupie gopis Krishna's got following him around were, according to these alternative accounts, two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. According to Hindu mythology, Krishna was a baby' so it's not surprising that he got 'gopis' to follow him around, since he was an infant, named Gopala, but I'm not following you as to how an infant like Krishna could get two 'thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna' is said to have raped.' Was the infant Gopala a commander of an army? Maybe you should read some Indian history. Can you cite any historical evidence that Krishna was a real-life black hero who went around raping white girls? You can't make this stuff up! Richard J. Williams wrote: Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was of the renounced order, so he would have renounced the Hindu system of 'caste'. From what I've read, SBS did not teach on the basis of caste, having rejected it. If the Swami had upheld the 'caste' system he would not have made Marshy his close confidant. The modern 'caste system' in India is based on 'jati', birth circumstances, not skin color.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela Mailander wrote: ...who will do all the grunt work for us so we can meditate all day? You and Curtis have really dropped the ball on this discussion. I really expected you two to do your homework before you blasted off with all this misinformation about the 'class' system and denigrating the poor Hindus' religion, without even mentioning the caste system in Europe, Africa, China, Bali, or Japan. Wow Richard,you really dropped the ball in your criticism. I really expected you to do your homework before you blasted off without even mentioning the extremely rigid class system in Upper Volta and some parts of Ukraine during certain periods of the 18th century. And you forgot some pacific islands... The original point of mine which is getting lost is that Guru Dev was just another traditional religious guy spouting traditional religious crap including his support for the caste system of INDIA. It was not a discussion of every countries social systems. But in Guru Dev's case there was a huge movement lead by Gandhi to correct the unfairness of the caste system which Guru Dev OPPOSED. Now do you understand the limits of the discussion? People suck everywhere. I know that. But the original claim by Edg was the speculation that Guru Dev became extremely special in the woods. My point was that I don't see it. Do you? Can you show me one example of Guru Dev saying something outside the orthodox tradition that spawned him, and thousands of others like him? Now some may feel that the caste system is wonderful, however, I do not. I think that anyone who is put up a a unequally spiritual person who doesn't address the unfairness of it, in their own country, doesn't seem so spiritual to me. My standard. I'm not a big fan of the Pope either if that makes you happy. But to pick on Swami Brahmananda Saraswati? Go figure. Caste: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste Well, I am sure that the traveler wasn't sensitive to modern sensibilities schooled in democratic ideals. Even in modern China and despite Communism's half-assed attempts to get rid of class structure, there is a sharp division among classes--but attempts to make them flexible so as to reward unusual talent or intelligence are increasingly in place. If those systems really are in place, then I really can't object too much about the social classes since it seems that they will, naturally, develop. I only object to them when they are inflexible and that inflexibility is enforced through draconian measures. Curtis wrote: Great details New, I am reading this with interest. It does not surprise me that a Chinese person, especially from that era would not find the caste system oppressive. Perhaps Angela would like to fill us in on the daily life during that dynasty in China.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 9:38 AM, sandiego108 wrote: I just don't see what all the fuss is about. It seems the purpose of all of these methods is liberation. Even if there are more tools in the toolbox from these religions, what does it matter if the goal isn't being reached anyway? It all devolves into my religion is better than your religion. Ever hear the expression right tool for the right job? Many techniques or methods may take lifetimes to reach the goal. The idea is with the right approach for the right person is they won't have to wait lifetimes. A perfect example of this is Buddhist Masters of Enchantment : The Lives and Legends of the Mahasiddhas. Here we have kings and beggars, thieves and murderers, whores and renunciates all who obtained Buddhahood in a single lifetime, in their own unique ways. This is certainly not restricted to Buddhism as even in the Hindu tradition they say that initiation based on the person is always better than initiation by puja. Same principle. Another great element of these traditions is that for every conceivable type of realization, there is a practice by which that realization can be obtained. So even the most hardcore skeptic can try it out and decide. Think of it as diagnosis, prescription, and cure: that's what real masters do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seelisberg Photos
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That first picture of a small pond -- is that the pond I camped next to? Sure looks like it...anyone here know if that pond is just down the hill from Seelisberg about a ten minute walk? Spent a month there right after TTC. I think it is Edg. I spent almost 4 months there for TTC, what a slice of heaven! Remember the milk and cream from those doggy-tame cows? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I loved living there, thanks for the trip down memory lane! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: HYPERLINK http://www.kra-page.com/pic/seelisberg/slides/Seelisberg-01.htmlhttp://www .kra-page.com/pic/seelisberg/slides/Seelisberg-01.html No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.15/1426 - Release Date: 5/10/2008 11:12 AM
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Vaj wrote: If one wants to have a real good idea about what the varnas are and how they were intended should read the recently translated works on the varnas by Alain Danielou. [snip] This is why individuals of different races are not at the same level in their evolution. - Alain Danielou WTF? This is outrageous!
[FairfieldLife] Freedom of Speech Turner, Hanity and the american way
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDFcBAs5g4A - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
Curtis wrote: Can you show me one example of Guru Dev saying something outside the orthodox tradition that spawned him, and thousands of others like him? It has already been established that we don't know what SBS said about much of anything, Curtis, since we can't understand much Hindi, but the onus is on you to post something which would support your contention that SBS was in favor of promoting the caste system. It just seems to me that, if SBS wanted to do that, he would have remained in the system, instead of opting out of it. Comparing SBS to Ghandi doesn't seem to be much of an indicator to me, since it is well known that the partition of South Asia was a call to prevent the continuation of the caste system. That's why Pakistan was created, as a protest against the caste system in India. Apparently Swami Karpatri, a student of Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, founded the 'Ram Rajya Parishad', a Hindu political party, in 1948. From what I've read, the Ram Rajya Parishad won three Lok Sabha seats in the 1952 elections and two in the 1962 elections. In 1952, 1957 and 1962, it won several dozens of Vidhan Sabha seats in Rajasthan. If SBS had been in favor of the caste system, this is where I would have expected for it to be promoted. Do you have any evidence that Karpatri's party was opposed to any part of the Indian Constitution? But to pick on Swami Brahmananda Saraswati?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis wrote: Can you show me one example of Guru Dev saying something outside the orthodox tradition that spawned him, and thousands of others like him? It has already been established that we don't know what SBS said about much of anything, Curtis, since we can't understand much Hindi, but the onus is on you to post something which would support your contention that SBS was in favor of promoting the caste system. It just seems to me that, if SBS wanted to do that, he would have remained in the system, instead of opting out of it. So you think caste is an optional concept for an orthodox Hindu? In what sense did he opt out of it? He didn't appoint Maharishi after his death, he picked a Brahman just like himself. Maharishi himself is a supporter of the caste system and has spoken of its virtues on many occasions, that requires no further proof. Comparing SBS to Ghandi doesn't seem to be much of an indicator to me, since it is well known that the partition of South Asia was a call to prevent the continuation of the caste system. That's why Pakistan was created, as a protest against the caste system in India. Apparently Swami Karpatri, a student of Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, founded the 'Ram Rajya Parishad', a Hindu political party, in 1948. From what I've read, the Ram Rajya Parishad won three Lok Sabha seats in the 1952 elections and two in the 1962 elections. In 1952, 1957 and 1962, it won several dozens of Vidhan Sabha seats in Rajasthan. If SBS had been in favor of the caste system, this is where I would have expected for it to be promoted. Do you have any evidence that Karpatri's party was opposed to any part of the Indian Constitution? But to pick on Swami Brahmananda Saraswati?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev really Santa? Let's compare beards! ( Was: Cornering Curtis)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lots of interesting stuff here Edg. And Jim and New have broadened the discussion. I agree that Guru Dev's support of the traditional social systems of his day should be expected. He had to pick his battles as you say, and that was not one of them. I was using it just as an example of an area where he could have shown up as extra special, and in my opinion did not. But let's drop that focus. (although I will still search for that Maharishi's quote that links Guru Dev to support of caste since I made such a big deal about it) My original point was that the movement speaks of Guru Dev in the most Liberachi inspired hyperbole. His name includes His Divinity, because Maharishi says His Holiness was not enough. So he set the bar really really high. Now why do some people in the movement believe that about him? It is so core to the mythology of the movement that we literally worship him when we teach TM. People were asked to do pujas to him every day before Maharishi died to improve the world. A worship ritual for a dead guy to improve the world. So I ask my favorite question: WTF? We don't see that exceptional genius and divinessinhoodedmentitude in his quotes, do we? Standard religious guy raps IMO. snip Great question-- My take on it is that the movement reveres SBS because it is Maharishi's movement, and he did. Why did MMY? I think it is all in the vibe that SBS gives off. I did have a relationship with him, though he wasn't here on earth, for a long, long time-- constant communication through telepathy and feelings for a couple of decades. Asking questions, getting answers, but more importantly just tuning into his energy, and getting my answers that way. As unprovable as that is, and as difficult as it is to describe, it was 100% tangible and very useful for me at the time. Anyway, the point being that I was and am very familiar with the vibe that SBS radiates and it is at least for me very inspiring, wise, commanding, and life changing in no uncertain terms. The most awe inspiring individual I have ever come across. So I am assuming MMY got the full dose 24x7 in SBS's physical presence, for years and years. Hence all of the reverence. I can dig that. He definitely had and has something-- very powerful dude, like Shiva incarnate, or something. I am not justifying the way in which he is revered in the movement or the pujas or anything else, just commenting from my own experience.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 12, 2008, at 9:38 AM, sandiego108 wrote: I just don't see what all the fuss is about. It seems the purpose of all of these methods is liberation. Even if there are more tools in the toolbox from these religions, what does it matter if the goal isn't being reached anyway? It all devolves into my religion is better than your religion. Ever hear the expression right tool for the right job? Many techniques or methods may take lifetimes to reach the goal. The idea is with the right approach for the right person is they won't have to wait lifetimes. A perfect example of this is Buddhist Masters of Enchantment : The Lives and Legends of the Mahasiddhas. Here we have kings and beggars, thieves and murderers, whores and renunciates all who obtained Buddhahood in a single lifetime, in their own unique ways. This is certainly not restricted to Buddhism as even in the Hindu tradition they say that initiation based on the person is always better than initiation by puja. Same principle. Another great element of these traditions is that for every conceivable type of realization, there is a practice by which that realization can be obtained. So even the most hardcore skeptic can try it out and decide. Think of it as diagnosis, prescription, and cure: that's what real masters do. My point remains that you consistently hold the options available through your path above those offered through TM, and yet at the end of the day, it appears there is no greater percentage of practitioners gaining liberation through Buddhism, than through TM or any other practice. So I don't get what you are going on about. If it is purely to discredit TM, OK-- everyone has an opinion on that I suppose. But frankly, unless you can explicitly say practice A is clearly more effective than practice B, what is the point, other than offering an opinion?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: I just don't see what all the fuss is about. It seems the purpose of all of these methods is liberation. Even if there are more tools in the toolbox from these religions, what does it matter if the goal isn't being reached anyway? It all devolves into my religion is better than your religion. The goal may be liberation, but the religions themselves are dualistic constructs, to which one can become deeply attached. Traditions with lots of techniques and intricate ideation can serve as great hang- outs for those who love to talk about awakening but really don't want to wake up. I agree- its like spiritual junk food.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find many adherents of TM, due to conceptual indoctrination, often have a hard time getting Buddhist metaphysics because they accepted the beliefs on PC as true and absolute. So, I gather in your opinion Pure Consciousness, as presented by Patañjali, is a skandha.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev really Santa? Let's compare beards! ( Was: Cornering Curtis)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lots of interesting stuff here Edg. And Jim and New have broadened the discussion. I agree that Guru Dev's support of the traditional social systems of his day should be expected. He had to pick his battles as you say, and that was not one of them. I was using it just as an example of an area where he could have shown up as extra special, and in my opinion did not. But let's drop that focus. (although I will still search for that Maharishi's quote that links Guru Dev to support of caste since I made such a big deal about it) My original point was that the movement speaks of Guru Dev in the most Liberachi inspired hyperbole. His name includes His Divinity, because Maharishi says His Holiness was not enough. So he set the bar really really high. Now why do some people in the movement believe that about him? It is so core to the mythology of the movement that we literally worship him when we teach TM. People were asked to do pujas to him every day before Maharishi died to improve the world. A worship ritual for a dead guy to improve the world. So I ask my favorite question: WTF? We don't see that exceptional genius and divinessinhoodedmentitude in his quotes, do we? Standard religious guy raps IMO. We have no proof that Maharishi got his techniques from Guru Dev and a lot of evidence that it was a pretty traditional practice with an excellent teaching method developed by Maharishi himself. Maharishi was a fascinating guy and I like TM, but I'm not buying that he has changed the world into an Age of Enlightenment, I read the news. So the claim that Guru Dev made him as the proof of his super- duperness doesn't cut it for me. He did a good job marketing a nice meditation practice but Maharishi ended up drinking a bit too much of his own Cool-aid IMO, starting with the World Government and ending with the Burger King squad. So what is the reason for people's belief that Guru Dev was so head and shoulders above lots of traditional Hindu guys warning us not to die in a state of sin, and to be mindful of God, and to think about and worship God all the time, and not to get so busy that we forget to kiss a little divinity ass regularly, and to be good little Hindus and mind our P's and Q's and this will make us so full of God and other good things will happen, and when we die in our virtue we will not go to hell with all of those bad things imagined about hell, and you can just forget about using your dick because that is a bad part that God just happened to load up with more pleasure neurons than ANY other part of your body, and if you follow all the little rules, (no Philly Cheesesteaks for you buddy) and devote your life to God, you will avoid having your life compared to spinach. (which happens to be awesome with a little paneer and Vindaloo curry) Nice rap, and spinach is said to contain lots of lutein and thus should be good for your retinas, and stuff.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev really Santa? Let's compare beards! ( Was: Cornering Curtis)
So I am assuming MMY got the full dose 24x7 in SBS's physical presence, for years and years. Hence all of the reverence. I can dig that. He definitely had and has something-- very powerful dude, like Shiva incarnate, or something. I am not justifying the way in which he is revered in the movement or the pujas or anything else, just commenting from my own experience. I remember our discussion of your experiences. I may have mentioned that while at sidhaland rounding I had a very similar experience of what I believed to e Guru Dev including a wonderfully entertaining living visual image of him, all the darshon vibe and directions about what I was supposed to do as my next step in the movement in detail. So I am familiar with the compelling nature of such an experience. But despite the compelling nature of the experience with its seeming self-evident and indisputable qualities, we come to a decision about what we choose to believe about it at some point, and there you and I part ways in our perspective. I would contend that we did not know Guru Dev from this experience because he is dead. What we experienced was an example of the extremely generative and amazing quality of our own mind and an excellent insight into how the experience of darshon with living people works, as a self-generated, but unconscious capacity of our own minds. This also helps explain how literally millions of Chinese people could describe the mystical power emanating from Mao to the point of claiming he as an actual God on earth, when in fact he was one of the most ruthless mass murders in history. So I don't question either of our experiences as an experience. But after the experience we consciously choose our point of view about its meaning. Same with the darshon experiences I have had with Maharishi personally. They were wonderful enriching experiences even when my interpretation of what they mean has changed completely. Now I don't think it was evidence of Maharishi being so wonderful (especially since if you hang out long enough it can come and go), but of the wonderful and not yet understood aspects of our mind's capacity to generate such a powerful experience. I'll bet you are right about Maharishi's experience of Guru Dev while he was alive. I'm not sure our experience really adds to our ability to evaluate Guru Dev outside our own minds. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Lots of interesting stuff here Edg. And Jim and New have broadened the discussion. I agree that Guru Dev's support of the traditional social systems of his day should be expected. He had to pick his battles as you say, and that was not one of them. I was using it just as an example of an area where he could have shown up as extra special, and in my opinion did not. But let's drop that focus. (although I will still search for that Maharishi's quote that links Guru Dev to support of caste since I made such a big deal about it) My original point was that the movement speaks of Guru Dev in the most Liberachi inspired hyperbole. His name includes His Divinity, because Maharishi says His Holiness was not enough. So he set the bar really really high. Now why do some people in the movement believe that about him? It is so core to the mythology of the movement that we literally worship him when we teach TM. People were asked to do pujas to him every day before Maharishi died to improve the world. A worship ritual for a dead guy to improve the world. So I ask my favorite question: WTF? We don't see that exceptional genius and divinessinhoodedmentitude in his quotes, do we? Standard religious guy raps IMO. snip Great question-- My take on it is that the movement reveres SBS because it is Maharishi's movement, and he did. Why did MMY? I think it is all in the vibe that SBS gives off. I did have a relationship with him, though he wasn't here on earth, for a long, long time-- constant communication through telepathy and feelings for a couple of decades. Asking questions, getting answers, but more importantly just tuning into his energy, and getting my answers that way. As unprovable as that is, and as difficult as it is to describe, it was 100% tangible and very useful for me at the time. Anyway, the point being that I was and am very familiar with the vibe that SBS radiates and it is at least for me very inspiring, wise, commanding, and life changing in no uncertain terms. The most awe inspiring individual I have ever come across. So I am assuming MMY got the full dose 24x7 in SBS's physical presence, for years and years. Hence all of the reverence. I can dig that. He definitely had and has something-- very powerful dude, like Shiva incarnate, or something. I am not justifying the way in which he is
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
Curtis wrote: The original point of mine which is getting lost is that Guru Dev was just another traditional religious guy spouting traditional religious crap including his support for the caste system of INDIA. But wasn't Gandhi just another 'traditional religious guy' who read from the Bhagavad Gita on a daily basis? I mean, they called him a 'Mahatma and he was a major spiritual leader. If so, wouldn't you be able to point out in the Gita where it says that the caste system is a good or a bad thing? I mean, if the Gita supported the corrupted caste system, why would a person like Gandhi be reading it? All you've done in this thread is show your prejudice against an Indian religious teacher, and you're not even making any sense at that. You don't even seem to be very informed. From what I've read, most of the religious teachers in India all supported the idea of 'varnashramadharma', the four stages of life, not the so-called caste system. Can you cite a single religious teacher from India that supported the corrupted Indian caste system? My life has been full of tragedies and if they have not left any visible and indelible effect on me, I owe it to the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. - Mahatma Gandhi It was not a discussion of every countries social systems. My point was that the 'caste' system was imported - it was probably not a part of the native religion. In fact, the most racist caste systems have been in the West, where the white people live. But in Guru Dev's case there was a huge movement lead by Gandhi to correct the unfairness of the caste system... Maybe so. ...which Guru Dev OPPOSED. Well, I guess we're all waiting for you to post some evidence about this. So far, I haven't seen any. Dr. Ambedkar was the chief architect of the Indian Constitution. B. R. Ambedkar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar
Re: [FairfieldLife] Faith Blindness
The funniest thing about BSG is that the Republicans were big fans of it until they noticed in I think the third season that the crew was stranded in a place like Baghdad where the Cylons were the occupiers. :D IOW, it also became a metaphor for the Bush administration and their war on terror. And of course the Cylons were also like the Religious Right. I had noticed this all from the first episode especially when the holographed attack they were watching resembled 9-11. Of course there is also an astrology connection too as the crew believes more in an astrology based mythology. Caprica = Capricorn. TurquoiseB wrote: I ran across an interesting fact today, one that left me pondering the nature of faith, and its relationship or non-relationship to reality. It started with sitting down to watch the latest episode of Battlestar Galactica (synchronistically titled Faith), and realizing again what a good series it is. If Firefly could be legitimately characterized as outlaws in space, BG can be legitimately charact- erized as religion in space. The series has dealt since day one with fundamental issues of religion and faith. There have been miracles and spiritual leaders, visions, and visionary prophets leading their people to the promised land. I have literally seen reviews in the mainstream press describing this last season as building up to the Rapture.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 12:18 PM, sandiego108 wrote: My point remains that you consistently hold the options available through your path above those offered through TM, and yet at the end of the day, it appears there is no greater percentage of practitioners gaining liberation through Buddhism, than through TM or any other practice. Well actually, in your typical enlightened fashion you non sequitured off course to anything I originally said. I commented on the differences between two systems of awakening, then you got all defensive about Buddhism vs. TM. After all, it was MMY who popularized the idea that CC (the alleged result of TM) was dualistic AND the tradition of yoga-darshana holds the same thing. Maybe you should contact MMY with your Ouija board? :-) I've never knew of anyone being enlightened in the TM tradition. And maybe some day they will find some acceptable evidence for samadhi. As far as I am aware, the only people recognized by MMY were Bevan and King Tony. I tend to agree with Dana Sawyer that we'll never see anyone enlightened from TM--although that certainly hasn't stopped anyone from claiming so or talking endlessly about it! So I don't get what you are going on about. If it is purely to discredit TM, OK-- everyone has an opinion on that I suppose. But frankly, unless you can explicitly say practice A is clearly more effective than practice B, what is the point, other than offering an opinion? Not sure why you non sequitured off track either. You may want to look at the original comments you're responding to. I've posted those comments below for reading enjoyment. If you have a problem with MMY's assertion that CC is a dualistic type of enlightenment then you'd have to take that up with Tony or whoever's in charge of TM Enlightenment Laws these days. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 11, 2008, at 11:34 AM, cardemaister wrote: I can't help feeling that for you pure consciousness is some low level asaMprajñaata-ish-samaadhi, like for instance nirvitarka or nirvicaara. I don't understand what dualistic has to do with this. In my understanding saaMkhya holds that puruSa is kevala, and thus has nothing to do with the three guNas, that is, prakRti. It's a dualistic style of enlightenment, that's all--what TMers would call Cosmic Consciousness--there is a permanent witness which isn't resolved. So from a Buddhist perspective, it would not be similar to the style of enlightenment in Buddhism, which was more similarity with Advaita Vedanta style realization.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 12:20 PM, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find many adherents of TM, due to conceptual indoctrination, often have a hard time getting Buddhist metaphysics because they accepted the beliefs on PC as true and absolute. So, I gather in your opinion Pure Consciousness, as presented by Patañjali, is a skandha. What word are you translating as Pure Consciousness? What Sanskrit word or words do you think that MMY meant when he used the term Pure Consciousness? Pure Consciousness is an English term and therefore unless pointing specifically to an original word in Sanskrit, is quite meaningless to me. It can be redefined as desired. Words from the tradition are however precisely defined.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Did I say he was black and raped white girls? I suggested that the Indo-Aryan invasion was guilty of genocide against the indigenous population which was darker skinned. I'll get the references later--maybe much later since I gotta be ready to my my ass to Minnesota in two weeks. --- Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela Mailander wrote: The groupie gopis Krishna's got following him around were, according to these alternative accounts, two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. According to Hindu mythology, Krishna was a baby' so it's not surprising that he got 'gopis' to follow him around, since he was an infant, named Gopala, but I'm not following you as to how an infant like Krishna could get two 'thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna' is said to have raped.' Was the infant Gopala a commander of an army? Maybe you should read some Indian history. Can you cite any historical evidence that Krishna was a real-life black hero who went around raping white girls? You can't make this stuff up! Richard J. Williams wrote: Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was of the renounced order, so he would have renounced the Hindu system of 'caste'. From what I've read, SBS did not teach on the basis of caste, having rejected it. If the Swami had upheld the 'caste' system he would not have made Marshy his close confidant. The modern 'caste system' in India is based on 'jati', birth circumstances, not skin color. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis wrote: The original point of mine which is getting lost is that Guru Dev was just another traditional religious guy spouting traditional religious crap including his support for the caste system of INDIA. But wasn't Gandhi just another 'traditional religious guy' who read from the Bhagavad Gita on a daily basis? I mean, they called him a 'Mahatma and he was a major spiritual leader. If so, wouldn't you be able to point out in the Gita where it says that the caste system is a good or a bad thing? I mean, if the Gita supported the corrupted caste system, why would a person like Gandhi be reading it? Gandhi has his downsides but I appreciated his opposition to the caste system. I don't know why he read the Gita, maybe he found other parts inspiring like a lot of us do who read scriptures and choose what we like in them rather than accepting it all as the word of God. All you've done in this thread is show your prejudice against an Indian religious teacher, Oh the ad hominem angle, slick move there. The problem is my prejudice. and you're not even making any sense at that. You don't even seem to be very informed. From what I've read, most of the religious teachers in India all supported the idea of 'varnashramadharma', the four stages of life, not the so-called caste system. Can you cite a single religious teacher from India that supported the corrupted Indian caste system? Guru Dev. It is a fundamental of Sanatana Dharma. My life has been full of tragedies and if they have not left any visible and indelible effect on me, I owe it to the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. - Mahatma Gandhi It was not a discussion of every countries social systems. My point was that the 'caste' system was imported - it was probably not a part of the native religion. In fact, the most racist caste systems have been in the West, where the white people live. It is discussed in the major scriptures. If you want to run the self loathing white guilt program, you are on your own. But in Guru Dev's case there was a huge movement lead by Gandhi to correct the unfairness of the caste system... Maybe so. ...which Guru Dev OPPOSED. Well, I guess we're all waiting for you to post some evidence about this. So far, I haven't seen any. The split between orthodox Hindus and Gandhi's movement is an historical fact. Crack a book. I suggests : Freedom at Midnight (1975)by Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins. As far as Guru Dev, the Pope of Hinduism, supporting one of its theological cornerstones...this discussion is getting kind of silly. It is not exactly a hidden teaching in the religion that he was a figurehead for. And BTW the Pope supports the belief in the transmutation of bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Christ. Do you need a quote to back my claim up? Dr. Ambedkar was the chief architect of the Indian Constitution. B. R. Ambedkar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Angela Mailander wrote: Did I say he was black and raped white girls? Oh, I'm sorry, maybe you meant that the infant Gopala was white and he raped black girls. But, who, exactly, said this anyway? Never heard of an infant raping anyone, black or white. For what purpose would an infant do this, either way? You can't make this stuff up! two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. I suggested that the Indo-Aryan invasion was guilty of genocide against the indigenous population which was darker skinned. So, where did you get this information? Maybe the Indo-Aryans were South Asians in the first place and they were mixed, dark and white from the beginning. Is there any evidence that the Indo-Aryans invaded South Asia and committed 'genocide against the indigenous population which was darker skinned'? Is there any evidence for an 'invasion' by any Indo-Aryans in the first place? Maybe they spread *out* from South Asia instead of coming *in* to South Asia. I guess there would be some archaeological or epigraphic evidence somewhere for an invasion. If the Indo-Aryans invaded South Asia, where do you suppose the original inhabitants came from? I'll get the references later--maybe much later since I gotta be ready to my my ass to Minnesota in two weeks. Maybe so. Angela Mailander wrote: The groupie gopis Krishna's got following him around were, according to these alternative accounts, two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. Richard J. Williams wrote: According to Hindu mythology, Krishna was a baby' so it's not surprising that he got 'gopis' to follow him around, since he was an infant, named Gopala, but I'm not following you as to how an infant like Krishna could get two 'thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna' is said to have raped.' Was the infant Gopala a commander of an army? Maybe you should read some Indian history. Can you cite any historical evidence that Krishna was a real-life black hero who went around raping white girls? You can't make this stuff up!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
According to my sources on the Indo-Aryan invasion and the resultant holocausts, he was not an infant--that was your take on him, not mine. I'll supply the documentation when I can, meanwhile, rest assured that it can be documented. However, it is not what main stream historians accept. Living in different cultures all of my life, however, I have seen incontrovertible evidence that main stream histories are not to be trusted. That doesn't mean alternative histories can be trusted, but it is at least a place to start to get a sense of what really happened. --- Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela Mailander wrote: Did I say he was black and raped white girls? Oh, I'm sorry, maybe you meant that the infant Gopala was white and he raped black girls. But, who, exactly, said this anyway? Never heard of an infant raping anyone, black or white. For what purpose would an infant do this, either way? You can't make this stuff up! two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. I suggested that the Indo-Aryan invasion was guilty of genocide against the indigenous population which was darker skinned. So, where did you get this information? Maybe the Indo-Aryans were South Asians in the first place and they were mixed, dark and white from the beginning. Is there any evidence that the Indo-Aryans invaded South Asia and committed 'genocide against the indigenous population which was darker skinned'? Is there any evidence for an 'invasion' by any Indo-Aryans in the first place? Maybe they spread *out* from South Asia instead of coming *in* to South Asia. I guess there would be some archaeological or epigraphic evidence somewhere for an invasion. If the Indo-Aryans invaded South Asia, where do you suppose the original inhabitants came from? I'll get the references later--maybe much later since I gotta be ready to my my ass to Minnesota in two weeks. Maybe so. Angela Mailander wrote: The groupie gopis Krishna's got following him around were, according to these alternative accounts, two thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna is said to have raped. Richard J. Williams wrote: According to Hindu mythology, Krishna was a baby' so it's not surprising that he got 'gopis' to follow him around, since he was an infant, named Gopala, but I'm not following you as to how an infant like Krishna could get two 'thousand women whom the real-life military commander Krishna' is said to have raped.' Was the infant Gopala a commander of an army? Maybe you should read some Indian history. Can you cite any historical evidence that Krishna was a real-life black hero who went around raping white girls? You can't make this stuff up! Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. It was the first book I read of his and I am taking this from its first printing in 1968, years before I actually started TM. P 46 The very physical structure of the child is cultured like that in order to pronounce those hymns with perfect rhythm to produce that particular effect. That is why they have the caste system in India:this caste will do this work an that caste will do that work. Someone does this work and in this way he is brought up and then this is the yagya for him. This is like the different types of radios to tune to different wave lengths. It has a very great significance. People forget about the greatness and fineness of this division of labor in society and begin to mingle.(MMY's caps here) THAT IS JUST NOT KNOWING THE DEEP SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE. Not having that knowledge and thinking that all should get a chance for everything, what a terrible mess it is. Me: He then goes on to explain that society wont have the right number of people to do the right jobs if everyone chooses their own occupation. He was the one who put caps on the claim that societies jobs are based on a person's state of evolution. I find this statement to be highly repugnant. So who wants to claim that Maharishi made all this up and this was not a part of Guru Dev's perspective? He uses the phrase thinking that all should get a chance for everything as causing the mess society is in. I'd like to hear someone tell that to the science wiz son of a Hispanic field hand immigrant whose family risked death to put him in a situation where his full potential could blossom through education. Please note that nowhere is it mentioned that today's version of the system is either an import, a corruption of the British, or not as the old Vedic version. Know your place you lower caste laborers, God wants you picking cotton and your kids picking cotton, and their kids picking cotton. Know your place and know your DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION. If you get uppity you'll just mess up the society. Excuse me while I throw up in my mouth from all this enlightened spiritual perspective.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 12, 2008, at 12:18 PM, sandiego108 wrote: My point remains that you consistently hold the options available through your path above those offered through TM, and yet at the end of the day, it appears there is no greater percentage of practitioners gaining liberation through Buddhism, than through TM or any other practice. Well actually, you non sequitured off course to anything I originally said. I commented on the differences between two systems of awakening, then you got all defensive about Buddhism vs. TM. snip I did not get defensive in the least. I have no interest in practicing Buddhism, and know almost nothing about its actual practice, so I certainly would not get all defensive about TM with regard to it. I also did not realize that your discussion with carde was strictly limited to discussion of two styles of awakening. I thought I discerned a larger motive and intent in your writings to both denigrate TM and glorify Buddhism. This was the basis for my statement that Buddhism despite all of the centuries it has existed hasn't been proven to be a superior method of liberation when compared to TM or any other practice.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste System
Can you cite a single religious teacher from India that supported the corrupted Indian caste system? Curtis wrote: Guru Dev. So, where is the evidence? That's all I'm asking. I might be willing to take your word for it, but I'd really like to see some evidence. Maybe an excerpt from one of SBS's talks or somehting, anything. But if it's just your opinion, fine. It is a fundamental of Sanatana Dharma. Is that what 'Sanatana Dharma' means, the corrupted Indian caste system? I always thought that Sanatan Dharma referred to the 'Four Aims of Life', from the Sanskrit word 'sanatan' and 'dharma'. Where does the Portuguese word 'caste' appear in the Vedas? This dialog would be alot more interesting if you would do a little research before you post this kind of misinformation, Curtis. But it does prove my point that some, if not most, TM teachers are really ignorant of comparative religion and most ex-TM teachers can really be prejudiced against Indians. Being casted into a class because of what parents he was born from was a political problem and not from the actual science of the religion. Read more: Hinduism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism Sanatana Dharma FAQ: http://www.dharmacentral.com/faq.htm
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
On May 12, 2008, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. It was the first book I read of his and I am taking this from its first printing in 1968, years before I actually started TM. P 46 The very physical structure of the child is cultured like that in order to pronounce those hymns with perfect rhythm to produce that particular effect. That is why they have the caste system in India:this caste will do this work an that caste will do that work. Someone does this work and in this way he is brought up and then this is the yagya for him. This is like the different types of radios to tune to different wave lengths. It has a very great significance. People forget about the greatness and fineness of this division of labor in society and begin to mingle.(MMY's caps here) THAT IS JUST NOT KNOWING THE DEEP SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE. Not having that knowledge and thinking that all should get a chance for everything, what a terrible mess it is. Me: He then goes on to explain that society wont have the right number of people to do the right jobs if everyone chooses their own occupation. He was the one who put caps on the claim that societies jobs are based on a person's state of evolution. I find this statement to be highly repugnant. So who wants to claim that Maharishi made all this up and this was not a part of Guru Dev's perspective? He uses the phrase thinking that all should get a chance for everything as causing the mess society is in. I'd like to hear someone tell that to the science wiz son of a Hispanic field hand immigrant whose family risked death to put him in a situation where his full potential could blossom through education. Please note that nowhere is it mentioned that today's version of the system is either an import, a corruption of the British, or not as the old Vedic version. Know your place you lower caste laborers, God wants you picking cotton and your kids picking cotton, and their kids picking cotton. Know your place and know your DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION. If you get uppity you'll just mess up the society. Excuse me while I throw up in my mouth from all this enlightened spiritual perspective. Well, as numerous people like Paul Mason have shown, a close look at Guru Dev's own teachings do indicate that Mahesh's teachings are a distortion of SBS's teaching. Purity of the tradition? Ha, that was lost long ago. I wouldn't expect M's teachings to be representative of SBS, who was elected as a representative of the tradition of Shankara and Smarta-style Hinduism and M. just a pretender.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Curtis wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. And you followed this guy for years and taught the Vedic religion in his name? What were you thinking back then, Curtis? You're just another super religious guy who is now feeling guilty. All this proves is that you and the Marshy were almost totally misinformed. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. It was the first book I read of his and I am taking this from its first printing in 1968, years before I actually started TM. P 46 The very physical structure of the child is cultured like that in order to pronounce those hymns with perfect rhythm to produce that particular effect. That is why they have the caste system in India:this caste will do this work an that caste will do that work. Someone does this work and in this way he is brought up and then this is the yagya for him. This is like the different types of radios to tune to different wave lengths. It has a very great significance. People forget about the greatness and fineness of this division of labor in society and begin to mingle.(MMY's caps here) THAT IS JUST NOT KNOWING THE DEEP SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE. Not having that knowledge and thinking that all should get a chance for everything, what a terrible mess it is. Me: He then goes on to explain that society wont have the right number of people to do the right jobs if everyone chooses their own occupation. He was the one who put caps on the claim that societies jobs are based on a person's state of evolution. I find this statement to be highly repugnant. So who wants to claim that Maharishi made all this up and this was not a part of Guru Dev's perspective? And furthermore, who wants to claim that *either* of them had a handle on the different specific states of evolution of people. I suspect that both were as clueless as everyone else. They just repeated the same bullshit that had been told to them and hoped others would buy it as completely as they had. He uses the phrase thinking that all should get a chance for everything as causing the mess society is in. I'd like to hear someone tell that to the science wiz son of a Hispanic field hand immigrant whose family risked death to put him in a situation where his full potential could blossom through education. Please note that nowhere is it mentioned that today's version of the system is either an import, a corruption of the British, or not as the old Vedic version. Know your place you lower caste laborers, God wants you picking cotton and your kids picking cotton, and their kids picking cotton. Know your place and know your DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION. The way that WE do. Of course, our place is at the top of the power pyramid and yours is on one of the much, much, much lower levels, but think of all the people YOU are higher than. If you get uppity you'll just mess up the society. Excuse me while I throw up in my mouth from all this enlightened spiritual perspective. Excuse me while I join you. I find it particularly fascinating that Westerners who would be casteless and thus lower than untouchables would find a way to support the caste system. Maharishi was trolling for elitists in this early book, and obviously found them. I wonder how they would have reacted if Maharishi had been honest with them about how he regarded *them*. That is, as disposable cash cows. Instead, he convinced them what *important* cash cows they were. They can't think clearly about the caste system or anything that they were told was Vedic and thus good because if they doubted any of that, they would have to doubt their unshakable belief that they as important and highly evolved as he told them they were, and as they wanted to be. In my book, knowing your place actually DOES have a value. Our place is at EXACTLY the same level as every other human being on the planet.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 1:50 PM, sandiego108 wrote: I did not get defensive in the least. I have no interest in practicing Buddhism, and know almost nothing about its actual practice, so I certainly would not get all defensive about TM with regard to it. I also did not realize that your discussion with carde was strictly limited to discussion of two styles of awakening. I thought I discerned a larger motive and intent in your writings to both denigrate TM and glorify Buddhism. They're different. TM denigrates itself, it does not need me to do that. If you have a samadhi practice and still, after several decades you've provided zero evidence for samadhi, despite all sorts of advertising of scientific research; I don't know about you, but I'd say that's pretty damning in and of itself. :-) This was the basis for my statement that Buddhism despite all of the centuries it has existed hasn't been proven to be a superior method of liberation when compared to TM or any other practice. If you understand that other paths do not lead to Buddhahood than it's kind of a moot point isn't it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. It was the first book I read of his and I am taking this from its first printing in 1968, years before I actually started TM. P 46 The very physical structure of the child is cultured like that in order to pronounce those hymns with perfect rhythm to produce that particular effect. That is why they have the caste system in India:this caste will do this work an that caste will do that work. Someone does this work and in this way he is brought up and then this is the yagya for him. This is like the different types of radios to tune to different wave lengths. It has a very great significance. People forget about the greatness and fineness of this division of labor in society and begin to mingle.(MMY's caps here) THAT IS JUST NOT KNOWING THE DEEP SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE. Not having that knowledge and thinking that all should get a chance for everything, what a terrible mess it is. Me: He then goes on to explain that society wont have the right number of people to do the right jobs if everyone chooses their own occupation. He was the one who put caps on the claim that societies jobs are based on a person's state of evolution. I find this statement to be highly repugnant. So who wants to claim that Maharishi made all this up and this was not a part of Guru Dev's perspective? And furthermore, who wants to claim that *either* of them had a handle on the different specific states of evolution of people. I suspect that both were as clueless as everyone else. They just repeated the same bullshit that had been told to them and hoped others would buy it as completely as they had. He uses the phrase thinking that all should get a chance for everything as causing the mess society is in. I'd like to hear someone tell that to the science wiz son of a Hispanic field hand immigrant whose family risked death to put him in a situation where his full potential could blossom through education. Please note that nowhere is it mentioned that today's version of the system is either an import, a corruption of the British, or not as the old Vedic version. Know your place you lower caste laborers, God wants you picking cotton and your kids picking cotton, and their kids picking cotton. Know your place and know your DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION. The way that WE do. Of course, our place is at the top of the power pyramid and yours is on one of the much, much, much lower levels, but think of all the people YOU are higher than. If you get uppity you'll just mess up the society. Excuse me while I throw up in my mouth from all this enlightened spiritual perspective. Excuse me while I join you. I find it particularly fascinating that Westerners who would be casteless and thus lower than untouchables would find a way to support the caste system. Maharishi was trolling for elitists in this early book, and obviously found them. I wonder how they would have reacted if Maharishi had been honest with them about how he regarded *them*. That is, as disposable cash cows. Instead, he convinced them what *important* cash cows they were. They can't think clearly about the caste system or anything that they were told was Vedic and thus good because if they doubted any of that, they would have to doubt their unshakable belief that they as important and highly evolved as he told them they were, and as they wanted to be. In my book, knowing your place actually DOES have a value. Our place is at EXACTLY the same level as every other human being on the planet. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen during his debate with Dan Quayle: You're no Guru Dev, Senator. It all comes down to the motives you discern for MMY and SBS. If you see them as elitist power trippers, intent on scamming as many fools as they could, and living off the resulting bounty for personal wealth and self aggrandizement, then that is your interpretation of what they wrote, and why they wrote it. From that perspective, both MMY and SBS sound like borderline sociopaths and I am surprised anyone with half a brain had anything to do with them. No better than any other garden variety cult leaders. Who can argue with that? I'll leave your interpretation to you, and let you own it. I have my own, with no intent to change anyone's mind.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. And you followed this guy for years and taught the Vedic religion in his name? What were you thinking back then, Curtis? You're just another super religious guy who is now feeling guilty. I thought it was all great when I taught it. Loved the stuff and idealistically thought I was getting enlightened and improving the world. Haven't you changed any of your perspectives over the years Richard? I bought in when I was 16 years old. I've done a bit more reading since then. As Lincoln responded to a similar dig: I don't respect a man who doesn't know more today than he did yesterday. All this proves is that you and the Marshy were almost totally misinformed. Go figure. Well we agree on that but perhaps for different reasons.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 12, 2008, at 1:50 PM, sandiego108 wrote: I did not get defensive in the least. I have no interest in practicing Buddhism, and know almost nothing about its actual practice, so I certainly would not get all defensive about TM with regard to it. I also did not realize that your discussion with carde was strictly limited to discussion of two styles of awakening. I thought I discerned a larger motive and intent in your writings to both denigrate TM and glorify Buddhism. They're different. TM denigrates itself, it does not need me to do that. If you have a samadhi practice and still, after several decades you've provided zero evidence for samadhi, despite all sorts of advertising of scientific research; I don't know about you, but I'd say that's pretty damning in and of itself. :-) This was the basis for my statement that Buddhism despite all of the centuries it has existed hasn't been proven to be a superior method of liberation when compared to TM or any other practice. If you understand that other paths do not lead to Buddhahood than it's kind of a moot point isn't it? Sure that point is moot, but my point is that even Buddhist practice doesn't lead many to Buddhahood, given the centuries of its existence. Same lack of evidence as you claim with TM. I am not arguing for the superiority of TM at all, just recognizing that Buddhism doesn't deliver the goods.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
It all comes down to the motives you discern for MMY and SBS. If you see them as elitist power trippers, intent on scamming as many fools as they could, and living off the resulting bounty for personal wealth and self aggrandizement, then that is your interpretation of what they wrote, and why they wrote it. From that perspective, both MMY and SBS sound like borderline sociopaths and I am surprised anyone with half a brain had anything to do with them. No better than any other garden variety cult leaders. Who can argue with that? I'll leave your interpretation to you, and let you own it. I have my own, with no intent to change anyone's mind. This is a false alternative. I am not saying any of those things about them. Just that I don't see him as more than a super religious guy. I assume they believed their own rap, I have no reason not to. People's pure motives don't mean they are right. By saying that I don't get the big stink made about Guru Dev, that he was more special than other orthodox Hindu leaders, doesn't in any way mean that I think he was any nuttier than other religious leaders who believe in what they are doing. I am just not buying into the His Divinity movement myth. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. It was the first book I read of his and I am taking this from its first printing in 1968, years before I actually started TM. P 46 The very physical structure of the child is cultured like that in order to pronounce those hymns with perfect rhythm to produce that particular effect. That is why they have the caste system in India:this caste will do this work an that caste will do that work. Someone does this work and in this way he is brought up and then this is the yagya for him. This is like the different types of radios to tune to different wave lengths. It has a very great significance. People forget about the greatness and fineness of this division of labor in society and begin to mingle.(MMY's caps here) THAT IS JUST NOT KNOWING THE DEEP SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE. Not having that knowledge and thinking that all should get a chance for everything, what a terrible mess it is. Me: He then goes on to explain that society wont have the right number of people to do the right jobs if everyone chooses their own occupation. He was the one who put caps on the claim that societies jobs are based on a person's state of evolution. I find this statement to be highly repugnant. So who wants to claim that Maharishi made all this up and this was not a part of Guru Dev's perspective? And furthermore, who wants to claim that *either* of them had a handle on the different specific states of evolution of people. I suspect that both were as clueless as everyone else. They just repeated the same bullshit that had been told to them and hoped others would buy it as completely as they had. He uses the phrase thinking that all should get a chance for everything as causing the mess society is in. I'd like to hear someone tell that to the science wiz son of a Hispanic field hand immigrant whose family risked death to put him in a situation where his full potential could blossom through education. Please note that nowhere is it mentioned that today's version of the system is either an import, a corruption of the British, or not as the old Vedic version. Know your place you lower caste laborers, God wants you picking cotton and your kids picking cotton, and their kids picking cotton. Know your place and know your DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF EVOLUTION. The way that WE do. Of course, our place is at the top of the power pyramid and yours is on one of the much, much, much lower levels, but think of all the people YOU are higher than. If you get uppity you'll just mess up the society. Excuse me while I throw up in my mouth from all this enlightened spiritual perspective. Excuse me while I join you. I find it particularly fascinating that Westerners who would be casteless and thus lower than untouchables would find a way to support the caste system. Maharishi was trolling for elitists in this early book, and obviously found them. I wonder how they would have reacted if Maharishi had been honest with them about how he regarded *them*. That is, as disposable cash cows. Instead, he convinced them what *important* cash cows they were. They can't think clearly
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Angela Mailander wrote: According to my sources on the Indo-Aryan invasion and the resultant holocausts, he was not an infant--that was your take on him, not mine. But, you said 'gopis', that indicates that you were talking about the infant 'Gopala', the cow herd boy of Indian mythology. And most of those myths say that Krishna was black, since the Sanskrit word for black is 'Krishna', the 'Dark Lord'. I guess what you're saying is that the Indo-Aryans invaded South Asia and tried to kill the infant Gopala and take his cows and his wives that he raped. Hell, I don't even know what you're talking about! But the Indian myth has Gopala killing the tyrant Kamsa; I didn't know that Kamsa was an Indo-Aryan from Buddhapest - I always thought that Kamsa was from Mathura. Wasn't Gopala the eighth son born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva, according to the Bhagavata Purana? But you're saying Gopala the infant invaded India and raped a bunch of black girls and wiped out all the white people? But, Angela, maybe it was Radha, the white married cow girl, who raped the black infant boy Gopala - have ever considered reading Indian mythology? Angela Mailander wrote: Did I say he was black and raped white girls? Richard J. Williams wrote: Oh, I'm sorry, maybe you meant that the infant Gopala was white and he raped black girls. But, who, exactly, said this anyway? Never heard of an infant raping anyone, black or white. For what purpose would an infant do this, either way? You can't make this stuff up!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
Total nonsense. Where do these people get this stuff? Obviously it's a mind control tactic. michael wrote: Dear Friends, We recently had a visit by a long-term governor who had spent a lot of time close to Maharishi. She told me the following story which I thought I you might be interested in. An initiator was teaching outside of the movement, and Maharishi had a meeting with him. Maharishi said to him in the strongest terms: ?Don? t you realize that when you initiate a person you are promising him enlightenment and if you initiate him outside of the movement you are taking that karma onto yourself and you will have to follow him lifetime after lifetime until the promise is fulfilled. When you initiate under the umbrella of the movement, the Holy Tradition takes on the karma of enlightening the person. You do not want to take that karma onto yourself!? Jai Guru Dev, David
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Quit trying to guess what I'm saying. You're getting it wrong every time. Moreover, it isn't worth arguing about. --- Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela Mailander wrote: According to my sources on the Indo-Aryan invasion and the resultant holocausts, he was not an infant--that was your take on him, not mine. But, you said 'gopis', that indicates that you were talking about the infant 'Gopala', the cow herd boy of Indian mythology. And most of those myths say that Krishna was black, since the Sanskrit word for black is 'Krishna', the 'Dark Lord'. I guess what you're saying is that the Indo-Aryans invaded South Asia and tried to kill the infant Gopala and take his cows and his wives that he raped. Hell, I don't even know what you're talking about! But the Indian myth has Gopala killing the tyrant Kamsa; I didn't know that Kamsa was an Indo-Aryan from Buddhapest - I always thought that Kamsa was from Mathura. Wasn't Gopala the eighth son born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva, according to the Bhagavata Purana? But you're saying Gopala the infant invaded India and raped a bunch of black girls and wiped out all the white people? But, Angela, maybe it was Radha, the white married cow girl, who raped the black infant boy Gopala - have ever considered reading Indian mythology? Angela Mailander wrote: Did I say he was black and raped white girls? Richard J. Williams wrote: Oh, I'm sorry, maybe you meant that the infant Gopala was white and he raped black girls. But, who, exactly, said this anyway? Never heard of an infant raping anyone, black or white. For what purpose would an infant do this, either way? You can't make this stuff up! Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It all comes down to the motives you discern for MMY and SBS. If you see them as elitist power trippers, intent on scamming as many fools as they could, and living off the resulting bounty for personal wealth and self aggrandizement, then that is your interpretation of what they wrote, and why they wrote it. From that perspective, both MMY and SBS sound like borderline sociopaths and I am surprised anyone with half a brain had anything to do with them. No better than any other garden variety cult leaders. Who can argue with that? I'll leave your interpretation to you, and let you own it. I have my own, with no intent to change anyone's mind. This is a false alternative. I am not saying any of those things about them. Just that I don't see him as more than a super religious guy. I assume they believed their own rap, I have no reason not to. Exactly. But the fact that they did believe it, and had never bothered to look *beyond* their religious rap to what it meant for other people says more about them IMO than what they chose to believe. People's pure motives don't mean they are right. Think of all those Inquisitors who were *firmly* convinced that by torturing these heretics until they confessed was good for their souls. They had pure motives, too. And they believed *their* rap, too. That doesn't make the rap valid. By saying that I don't get the big stink made about Guru Dev, that he was more special than other orthodox Hindu leaders, doesn't in any way mean that I think he was any nuttier than other religious leaders who believe in what they are doing. I am just not buying into the His Divinity movement myth. In my opinion it's a self importance thing on the part of the students. Maharishi had to believe that Guru Dev was the best because *he* wanted to believe that he was worthy of hanging with the best. Many of Maharishi's students feel the same way about both MMY and GD. They put them on a pedestal because they were the ones who got to hang around the base of the pedestal fawning over them, and they want to believe that was meaningful.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It all comes down to the motives you discern for MMY and SBS. If you see them as elitist power trippers, intent on scamming as many fools as they could, and living off the resulting bounty for personal wealth and self aggrandizement, then that is your interpretation of what they wrote, and why they wrote it. From that perspective, both MMY and SBS sound like borderline sociopaths and I am surprised anyone with half a brain had anything to do with them. No better than any other garden variety cult leaders. Who can argue with that? I'll leave your interpretation to you, and let you own it. I have my own, with no intent to change anyone's mind. This is a false alternative. I am not saying any of those things about them. Just that I don't see him as more than a super religious guy. I assume they believed their own rap, I have no reason not to. People's pure motives don't mean they are right. By saying that I don't get the big stink made about Guru Dev, that he was more special than other orthodox Hindu leaders, doesn't in any way mean that I think he was any nuttier than other religious leaders who believe in what they are doing. I am just not buying into the His Divinity movement myth. I see where you are going with this, and strongly agree in principle with your method-- I really enjoy re-examining stuff I once took for granted. A very healthy thing to do imo. In this case though, it is all experiential for me, and in this instance there is nothing to re- examine. Its probably like finding out that my dad went out with a BB gun as a teenager and shot out a bunch of street lights. Tarnishes the image slightly but basically nothing changes. Anyway, it would be cool if you, me and SB could meet up one of these days (eons?), have a pow wow, and just talk about stuff.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What word are you translating as Pure Consciousness? Good question! Let's say, kaivalyam. Like for instance: sattva-puruSayoH shuddhi-saamye kaivalyam. (The last suutra of vibhuuti-paada.) And: puruSaartha-shuunyaanaaM guNaanaaM pratiprasavaH kaivalyaM sva-ruupa-pratiSThaa vaa citi-shakter iti. Taimni's translation: /Kaivalya/ is the state (of Enlightenment) following re-mergence of the guNas because of their becoming devoid of the object of /puruSa/. In this state the /puruSa/ is established in his Real nature which is pure Consciousness. Finis. What Sanskrit word or words do you think that MMY meant when he used the term Pure Consciousness? Probably 'turiiya', or '(kSaNika-)samaadhi'? Pure Consciousness is an English term and therefore unless pointing specifically to an original word in Sanskrit, is quite meaningless to me. It can be redefined as desired. Words from the tradition are however precisely defined.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Curtis, MMY said in the past that once you've been initiated into the tradition, the effects of of the mantra stays with you ad infinitum. If your meditation practice is interrupted in this lifetime, you will probably pick it up again in the next one. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Curtis wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. And you followed this guy for years and taught the Vedic religion in his name? What were you thinking back then, Curtis? You're just another super religious guy who is now feeling guilty. I thought it was all great when I taught it. Loved the stuff and idealistically thought I was getting enlightened and improving the world. Haven't you changed any of your perspectives over the years Richard? I bought in when I was 16 years old. I've done a bit more reading since then. As Lincoln responded to a similar dig: I don't respect a man who doesn't know more today than he did yesterday. All this proves is that you and the Marshy were almost totally misinformed. Go figure. Well we agree on that but perhaps for different reasons.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
Anyway,it would be cool if you, me and SB could meet up one of these days(eons?), have a pow wow, and just talk about stuff. Sounds like more fun if we ditched the square. He could join us on the condition that he would be willing to start the night with a few shots of Reposito Tequila that had spent about 18 months in an oak cask, and was ready to bust out all the pranks he pulled on young Bal Brahmachari Mahesh back in the day... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It all comes down to the motives you discern for MMY and SBS. If you see them as elitist power trippers, intent on scamming as many fools as they could, and living off the resulting bounty for personal wealth and self aggrandizement, then that is your interpretation of what they wrote, and why they wrote it. From that perspective, both MMY and SBS sound like borderline sociopaths and I am surprised anyone with half a brain had anything to do with them. No better than any other garden variety cult leaders. Who can argue with that? I'll leave your interpretation to you, and let you own it. I have my own, with no intent to change anyone's mind. This is a false alternative. I am not saying any of those things about them. Just that I don't see him as more than a super religious guy. I assume they believed their own rap, I have no reason not to. People's pure motives don't mean they are right. By saying that I don't get the big stink made about Guru Dev, that he was more special than other orthodox Hindu leaders, doesn't in any way mean that I think he was any nuttier than other religious leaders who believe in what they are doing. I am just not buying into the His Divinity movement myth. I see where you are going with this, and strongly agree in principle with your method-- I really enjoy re-examining stuff I once took for granted. A very healthy thing to do imo. In this case though, it is all experiential for me, and in this instance there is nothing to re- examine. Its probably like finding out that my dad went out with a BB gun as a teenager and shot out a bunch of street lights. Tarnishes the image slightly but basically nothing changes. Anyway, it would be cool if you, me and SB could meet up one of these days (eons?), have a pow wow, and just talk about stuff.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis, MMY said in the past that once you've been initiated into the tradition, the effects of of the mantra stays with you ad infinitum. If your meditation practice is interrupted in this lifetime, you will probably pick it up again in the next one. And how do you imagine a human being could know such a thing? I think it is just a way for mediators to deal with drop outs. Can you see how it might be viewed as a bit condescending? I don't assume that TM is good for everyone, do you? Anyway I've been meditating regularly as a test since February. I am trying to understand its value as a practice without all the beliefs in the system. (at least the ones I am conscious of and have discarded) So far so good, so I guess my magic mantra found me again in this life. At least for now. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Curtis wrote: Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. And you followed this guy for years and taught the Vedic religion in his name? What were you thinking back then, Curtis? You're just another super religious guy who is now feeling guilty. I thought it was all great when I taught it. Loved the stuff and idealistically thought I was getting enlightened and improving the world. Haven't you changed any of your perspectives over the years Richard? I bought in when I was 16 years old. I've done a bit more reading since then. As Lincoln responded to a similar dig: I don't respect a man who doesn't know more today than he did yesterday. All this proves is that you and the Marshy were almost totally misinformed. Go figure. Well we agree on that but perhaps for different reasons.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway,it would be cool if you, me and SB could meet up one of these days(eons?), have a pow wow, and just talk about stuff. Sounds like more fun if we ditched the square. He could join us on the condition that he would be willing to start the night with a few shots of Reposito Tequila that had spent about 18 months in an oak cask, and was ready to bust out all the pranks he pulled on young Bal Brahmachari Mahesh back in the day... That would be great- we'd be laughing our asses off no doubt!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
On May 12, 2008, at 1:11 PM, michael wrote: An initiator was teaching outside of the movement and Maharishi had a meeting with him. Maharishi said to him in the strongest terms: ?Don? t you realize that when you initiate a person you are promising him enlightenment and if you initiate him outside of the movement you are taking that karma onto yourself and you will have to follow him lifetime after lifetime until the promise is fulfilled. When you initiate under the umbrella of the movement, the Holy Tradition takes on the karma of enlightening the person. English translation: Give us the $$ you make from the initiations, Bucko, or we'll sure you to Kingdom Come. Dig *that* karma. Jai Guru Dev. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Clinton vs Obama - the Sunday roundup
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLUw1GLQSjI
[FairfieldLife] Hey Vaj
Hi Vaj, in which peer-reviewed scientific journal (dates etc?) are you seeing results of Buddhist meditation published and other techniques? I want to compile research abstracts on all techniques. Thanks OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Bodhisattva on MOU channel
article: http://tinyurl.com/3n6qmo MOU schedule: http://mou.org/maharishi_channel/schedule/n_america_grid.html (Bodhisattva 9:30PM CDT Tues)
[FairfieldLife] Free ring tones: Hillary laugh or Wright gawdam
http://www.slate.com/id/2189303/
[FairfieldLife] Another woman's view of Hillary
Published on Monday, May 12, 2008 by The Huffington Post Hillary’s Gift to Women by Barbara Ehrenreich In Friday’s New York Times, Susan Faludi rejoiced over Hillary Clinton’s destruction of the myth of female prissiness and innate moral superiority, hailing Clinton’s “no-holds-barred pugnacity” and her media reputation as “nasty” and “ruthless.” Future female presidential candidates will owe a lot to the race of 2008, Faludi wrote, “when Hillary Clinton broke through the glass floor and got down with the boys.” I share Faludi’s glee — up to a point. Surely no one will ever dare argue that women lack the temperament for political combat. But by running a racially-tinged campaign, lying about her foreign policy experience, and repeatedly seeming to favor McCain over her Democratic opponent, Clinton didn’t just break through the “glass floor,” she set a new low for floors in general, and would, if she could have got within arm’s reach, have rubbed the broken glass into Obama’s face. A mere decade ago Francis Fukuyama fretted in Foreign Affairs that the world was too dangerous for the West to be entrusted to graying female leaders, whose aversion to violence was, as he established with numerous examples from chimpanzee society, “rooted in biology.” The counter-example of Margaret Thatcher, perhaps the first of head of state to start a war for the sole purpose of pumping up her approval ratings, led him to concede that “biology is not destiny.” But it was still a good reason to vote for a prehistoric-style club- wielding male. Not to worry though, Francis. Far from being the stereotypical feminist-pacifist of your imagination, the woman to get closest to the Oval Office has promised to “obliterate” the toddlers of Tehran — along, of course, with the bomb-builders and Hezbollah supporters. Earlier on, Clinton foreswore even talking to presumptive bad guys, although women are supposed to be the talk addicts of the species. Watch out — was her distinctly unladylike message to Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong-Il, and the rest of them — or I’ll rip you a new one. There’s a reason why it’s been so easy for men to overlook women’s capacity for aggression. As every student of Women’s Studies 101 knows, what’s called aggression in men is usually trivialized as “bitchiness” in women: Men get angry; women suffer from bouts of inexplicable, hormonally-driven, hostility. So give Clinton credit for defying the belittling stereotype: She’s been visibly angry for months, if not decades, and it can’t all have been PMS. But did we really need another lesson in the female capacity for ruthless aggression? Any illusions I had about the innate moral superiority of women ended four years ago with Abu Ghraib. Recall that three out of the five prison guards prosecuted for the torture and sexual humiliation of prisoners were women. The prison was directed by a woman, Gen. Janis Karpinski, and the top U.S. intelligence officer in Iraq, who also was responsible for reviewing the status of detainees before their release, was Major Gen. Barbara Fast. Not to mention that the U.S. official ultimately responsible for managing the occupation of Iraq at the time was Condoleezza Rice. Whatever violent and evil things men can do, women can do too, and if the capacity for cruelty is a criterion for leadership, as Fukuyama suggested, then Lynndie England should consider following up her stint in the brig with a run for the Senate. It’s important — even kind of exhilarating — for women to embrace their inner bitch, but the point should be to expand our sense of human possibility, not to enshrine aggression as a virtue. Women can behave like the warrior queen Boadicea, credited with slaughtering 70,000, many of them civilians, or like Margaret Thatcher, who attempted to dismantle the British welfare state. Men, for their part, are free to take as their role models the pacifist leaders Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. Biology conditions us in all kinds of ways we might not even be aware of yet. But virtue is always a choice. Hillary Clinton smashed the myth of innate female moral superiority in the worst possible way — by demonstrating female moral inferiority. We didn’t really need her racial innuendos and free- floating bellicosity to establish that women aren’t wimps. As a generation of young feminists realizes, the values once thought to be uniquely and genetically female — such as compassion and an aversion to violence — can be found in either sex, and sometimes it’s a man who best upholds them. Barbara Ehrenreich, the author of Nickel and Dimed (Owl), is the winner of the 2004 Puffin/Nation Prize. Copyright © 2008 HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/05/12/8904/ Click here to print.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: snip I was commenting on the meaning of statistical power vs statstical significance. The power of a smalish study with a smalish effect (which the BP studies on TM were and suggest), is likely less than .5, so, you would expect less than 50% of the studies on TM and BP to show an effect, due to the small power. On the other hand, and perhaps I didn't make it clear, the statistical significance of all of those studies was likely p 0.05, which says that only 5% or 1/20th of the studies would show a false positive, so the 4 studies out of 10 that showed a positive effect from TM were in-line with the hypothesis that TM had an effect, and NOT inline with the hypothesis that TM had no effect. I apparently didn't make my point clear. Have I done so now? Lawson I jumped over too many things in my last post and thus I did a crappy job. I previously said: We are getting there. I understand what you are saying but I stumble on the conclusions you draw for reasons I stated above. One is that if a study has as you say small power then the study should likely be rejected. Lawson said: Who does he rejecting and why? Small power is a numerical quality. An intervention with small effect size would likely not show up as statistically significant a substantial percentage of the time in studies with small sample size. I clarify: Who does the rejecting and why is the issue. The problem ties into what gets published. A low power no result study likely will not get published. If you include the low power but results studies in your meta-analysis you are running the risk of magnifying your type 1 errors, your false positives. It is a publication bias problem. In any event, most journal editors want alpha to be no greater than .05. I said: However, even if studies at issue were powerful, either because of large sample size or small effect size, there still remains the tendency for multiple comparisons to yield spurious significant differences even where the hypothesis is incorrect. Lawson said: Since when are studies powerful if they have small effect size (with small sample size, which is the implication of your or). My bad! As you are well aware, the best way to increase power is through increased sample size. Alternatively, if you just can't increase your sample there are other things you can do. For example, you can increase the significance level. This results in a less rigorous test which might show results that might include type 1 errors, or false positives.So, you can have small differences between groups that are found signficant when in fact the differences are due to sampling error. Hope that is clearer. I should not have used the phrase small effect size because it is a term of art. For example, you could increase power by heavy sampling at the extremes, like taking people with really high BP and having them meditate, rather than taking people with normal or near normal BP. We weren't talking about that sort of methodology. I said: there still remains the tendency for multiple comparisons to yield spurious significant differences even where the hypothesis is incorrect. As I mentioned above, one problem is the tendency to not publish no result research. Lawson said: That's always a risk, especially with studies done by believers. However, the cardiology studies have been done mostly by teams with both TM and non-TM researchers, usually on subjects found at places away from Fairfield, IA. I said: And we still have the big problem of methodological issues which can be magnified in your analysis if all the positives had the same methodological weaknesses, which as you said in your post, is an issue raised by Cantor. (Question--I thought Cantor reviewed some cognitive research, not BP research?) Lawson said: That is inded an issue that Canter raised for various reasons, but, as I pointed out, one of Canter's objections is that research was done only on subjects with a predisposition to learn meditation. It would be highlyunlikely to get subjects to practice meditation 20 minutes twice daily if they weren't already motivated to try it. This isn't a simple pill, but a substantial commitment of time, at least by comparison. No real disagreement here. It is tough to get a good design. So, I think we can tie this up. Yes, power and statistical significance are all about math. But reviewing meta-analysis is more than math, as the analysis can magnify errors if the underlying research has methodological issues. There are also concerns when including low power studies and how to use them because of the publication bias issues. One of my
Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Vaj
That would be a great service to everyone. Thanks. --- off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Vaj, in which peer-reviewed scientific journal (dates etc?) are you seeing results of Buddhist meditation published and other techniques? I want to compile research abstracts on all techniques. Thanks OffWorld Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Vaj
Hey Offworld: On May 12, 2008, at 5:12 PM, off_world_beings wrote: Hi Vaj, in which peer-reviewed scientific journal (dates etc?) are you seeing results of Buddhist meditation published and other techniques? I want to compile research abstracts on all techniques. I'd check Medline.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 3:35 PM, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What word are you translating as Pure Consciousness? Good question! Let's say, kaivalyam. Like for instance: sattva-puruSayoH shuddhi-saamye kaivalyam. (The last suutra of vibhuuti-paada.) And: puruSaartha-shuunyaanaaM guNaanaaM pratiprasavaH kaivalyaM sva-ruupa-pratiSThaa vaa citi-shakter iti. Taimni's translation: /Kaivalya/ is the state (of Enlightenment) following re-mergence of the guNas because of their becoming devoid of the object of /puruSa/. In this state the /puruSa/ is established in his Real nature which is pure Consciousness. Finis. What Sanskrit word or words do you think that MMY meant when he used the term Pure Consciousness? Probably 'turiiya', or '(kSaNika-)samaadhi'? I honestly cannot see any of those as a source for Pure Consciousness.
[FairfieldLife] Judy's going to love this one...:)
From the Los Angeles TimesCAMPAIGN '08Hillary Clinton failed to master the female approach, former mentor saysScholar and philosopher Jean Houston reflects on where the first viable woman presidential candidate may have gone wrong.By Robin AbcarianLos Angeles Times Staff WriterMay 12, 2008ASHLAND, ORE. — Recently, as New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaigned in Eugene, her onetime friend and mentor Jean Houston was at home in her double geodesic dome, a style that is not out of place here in this town of theater lovers and spiritual seekers."I could have probably gone down to see her, and she would have hugged me and it would have been nice," said Houston, as she sat on a sofa surrounded by art from Bali and Greece in her circular living room. "I could have been very useful to her. But there would have been cameras, and they would have said, 'Oh, now, Hillary's so desperate, she's gone to the spiritualist.' "Houston was not Clinton's spiritualist, but when Clinton was at her lowest -- after the 1994 defeat of her healthcare initiative, the Republican takeover of Congress, seemingly interminable investigations and intense vilification -- Houston, a pioneer of the human potential movement, was something of a secret emotional life raft for the first lady.The friendship ended after Bob Woodward revealed in a 1996 book that Houston had helped guide a devastated Hillary Clinton in imaginary conversations with her hero Eleanor Roosevelt.Houston rarely speaks about her relationship with Clinton. As Clinton's nomination seemed on the verge of hitting the skids, Houston reflected on Clinton's style of politics and where the country's first viable female presidential candidate may have gone wrong.Houston is a scholar and philosopher who travels the world giving seminars on human potential and what she calls "social artistry," applying myth, history and spirituality to help effect social, political or personal change.During President Bill Clinton's first term, Houston and cultural anthropologist Mary Catherine Bateson, a friend of Houston, helped Hillary Clinton arrive at a new understanding of the symbolic power of her office and tutored her in what would become her most successful ventures as first lady -- a trip to South Asia, her first book, and a speech in Beijing about human rights that many would consider her finest moment.Houston is a prolific author whose associates have included Margaret Mead (Bateson's mother) and mythology professor Joseph Campbell. She got to know Eleanor Roosevelt as a high school student in New York.Houston sees the presidential race through a mythic lens."The current election is a look at archetypal structures," said Houston, a handsome 71-year-old with a broad smile. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has "a shamanic personality, of course," she said. Clinton is "the classical wise woman or priestess, if you will." The presumptive Republican nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain, she added, is "the warrior."The 'rising feminine'Houston believes Obama is on the verge of winning the nomination partly because he has promoted himself as the embodiment of a new kind of politics, and partly because Clinton has had trouble portraying her authentic self."She is funny, hilarious, generous, warm, given to acts of kindness that are extraordinary," Houston said. "She is a deep woman, not just a very bright woman. But she is part of a dying breed, an archaic sensibility."The biggest change in human history over the last 5,000 years, Houston said, "is the rise of the feminine . . . slowly, but surely, to full partnership with men over the whole domain of human affairs. This is shifting everything." This was what Houston and Bateson tried to convey to Clinton in 1995 when they helped her understand why, quite apart from political strife, she was the object of so much loathing."It's the fear of the 'rising feminine,' " Houston said.Ironically, Clinton's problem today, Houston said, may be that Obama has given better voice to that new pattern of possibility -- that he embodies a more female, inclusive approach to problem-solving, while Clinton has become mired in proving herself capable of emulating the male model, which requires combat and the demonization of enemies.Houston got to know the Clintons at the end of 1994, when they invited a small group of bestselling self-help authors -- Marianne Williamson, Anthony Robbins and Stephen R. Covey -- to Camp David over New Year's Eve. Both Bill and Hillary Clinton were reeling from their defeats and searching for a way to get back on track.It was a time, as Woodward noted in "The Choice," when Hillary Clinton seemed "jerked around by the muddled role of first lady, as she swung between New Age feminist and national housewife."In her 2003 memoir, "Living History," Clinton seemed to agree: "As much as I loved my husband and my country, adjusting to being a full-time surrogate was difficult for me. Mary Catherine and Jean helped me better understand that the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
On May 12, 2008, at 3:59 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis, MMY said in the past that once you've been initiated into the tradition, the effects of of the mantra stays with you ad infinitum. If your meditation practice is interrupted in this lifetime, you will probably pick it up again in the next one. And how do you imagine a human being could know such a thing? Ever hear of the subconscious? :-) What if you had access to it's database (every sensory contact you'd had in this lifetime, for example)? And a technique--and later--an innate ability to do so. There's a very elaborate metaphysic which describes how this type of thing is stored and then re-imprinted on a new set of DNA (a new life). But to grok it in scientific terms you come face to face with so-called fringe science: morphogenetic fields (memories retained in nature over time, like, for example that of the lineal masters of the wonderful Holy tradition) or Wilhelm Reich and the alleged scientific discovery of prana (what he called orgone LOL). If I had a day with a total sceptic, who at least was someone who tried meditation in earnest for years like yourself, and got a day in Reich's laboratory, you'd actually find yourself--despite an utter lack of mainstream science to support it, seriously consider that their was a heretofore unknown force the Hindus call prana. (although I think the word orgone is really just waiting for a B/W 1950's sci-fi spoof, I gotta admit) Every hear of Intrauterine Psychiatry? It's actually a modern scientific field. These are the ideas we are into when we ask the deep questions you challenge...and certainly ones worth at least trying to answer. But given a weekend, I could turn your logical perception of reality.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Anyway I've been meditating regularly as a test since February. I am trying to understand its value as a practice without all the beliefs in the system. (at least the ones I am conscious of and have discarded) So far so good, so I guess my magic mantra found me again in this life. At least for now. So off your very interesting topic, so you might want to start a new topic if you respond, but how is the practice going? Is it the same as it ever was? I tried going back for a bit, but I was too twitchy to stay with it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
Mullquist wrote: Probably 'turiiya', or '(kSaNika-)samaadhi'? Vaj wrote: I honestly cannot see any of those as a source for Pure Consciousness. This is just plain outrageous!!! The fourth state (turîya avasthâ) (see turiya) corresponds to the silence that ensues after one has steadily pronounced aum. It is the state of no matra (amâtrâ). In that silence Consciousness alone is present; there is nothing else. Mandukya Upanishad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandukya_Upanishad Mandukya Upanishad: http://tinyurl.com/6zv5qz
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 12, 2008, at 3:35 PM, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: What word are you translating as Pure Consciousness? Good question! Let's say, kaivalyam. Like for instance: sattva-puruSayoH shuddhi-saamye kaivalyam. (The last suutra of vibhuuti-paada.) And: puruSaartha-shuunyaanaaM guNaanaaM pratiprasavaH kaivalyaM sva-ruupa-pratiSThaa vaa citi-shakter iti. Taimni's translation: /Kaivalya/ is the state (of Enlightenment) following re-mergence of the guNas because of their becoming devoid of the object of /puruSa/. In this state the /puruSa/ is established in his Real nature which is pure Consciousness. Finis. What Sanskrit word or words do you think that MMY meant when he used the term Pure Consciousness? Probably 'turiiya', or '(kSaNika-)samaadhi'? I honestly cannot see any of those as a source for Pure Consciousness. turiya isn't pure consciousness? What planet are you from? Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self (in the three states), It (Turiya) is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss, and non-dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman (Self), and this has to be realised. --mandukya upanishad, v 6
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip Anyway I've been meditating regularly as a test since February. I am trying to understand its value as a practice without all the beliefs in the system. (at least the ones I am conscious of and have discarded) So far so good, so I guess my magic mantra found me again in this life. At least for now. So off your very interesting topic, so you might want to start a new topic if you respond, but how is the practice going? Is it the same as it ever was? I tried going back for a bit, but I was too twitchy to stay with it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
On May 12, 2008, at 7:30 PM, sparaig wrote: turiya isn't pure consciousness? What planet are you from? Earth. turiya (turIya) means of the fourth. Any mention of Pure or Purity there? How about Consciousness? Well at least there should be being or something like that, right? Nope, not a one. Just the fourth. Monier-Williams says consisting of 4 parts. Hmmm. No pure nor any consciousness there either. WTF? Well, what about Capeller's, the other popular dictionary--surely it has some epithet of 'consciousness' or 'pure'? Nope, wrong again: the fourth, consisting of four; n. one fourth. Well I guess I'll let you, like Card, try try again. :-) Really this is a contest. Find the TMO word. What, you guys never ever really wondered?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
Don't you realize that when you initiate a person you are promising him enlightenment... Bhairitu wrote: Total nonsense. Well, we finally agree on something. This is total nonsense. I don't see how the Marshy ever got you two Barry's to go around promising people enlightenment in 5-7 years. This is totally outrageous nonsense! You can't promise anyone enlightenemnt even in a million years. I'll never understand how you two could pass out leaflets and put up posters with some bull crap like that on them. The other Barry then went over to another fakir, Zen Master Rama, and started to put up posters promising 'instant' enlightenment. This is even more outrageous! Where do these people get this stuff? You can't make this stuff up. Who in their right mind would think that a guy as smart as the Marshy would say such a dumb thing: promising enlightemnet to anyone. He had at least five close students that had been practicing TM for over ten years when the Marshy supposedly made this promise, but there's no indication that any of them got enlightened in over forty years. Go figure. Obviously it's a mind control tactic. Obviously. Why can't you TM teachers just be honest? You're not going to get anymore enlightenment than you are going to get. Why do you guys have to make up stuff?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
Lawson wrote: turiya isn't pure consciousness? 'Turiya' is the fourth state of consciousness as described in the Upanishads. Turiya means fourth in Sanskrit. Gaudapada indicates that the fourth state of consciousness is 'pure consciousness, the absolute silence that comes after experiencing waking, dreaming, and sleep states. What planet are you from? The fourth state (turîya avasthâ) (see turiya) corresponds to the silence that ensues after one has steadily pronounced aum. It is the state of no matra (amâtrâ). In that silence Consciousness alone is present; there is nothing else. Mandukya Upanishad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandukya_Upanishad
[FairfieldLife] McCain wins values identity matchup
In a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, only 45% of the American electorate said they can identify with Mr. Obama's values, compared to 54% who say they can identify with John McCain's values. http://tinyurl.com/3qynxj
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
Lawson wrote: turiya isn't pure consciousness? Vaj wrote: Really this is a contest. turIya - the 4th state of spirit (pure impersonal Spirit or Brahma). Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: http://tinyurl.com/b3coq
[FairfieldLife] Re: Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
---No. The SIMS literature indicated CC in so many words in 5-7 years. No mention of Enlightenment in any of the TMO literture. Nevertheless, you are correct: nonsense. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't you realize that when you initiate a person you are promising him enlightenment... Bhairitu wrote: Total nonsense. Well, we finally agree on something. This is total nonsense. I don't see how the Marshy ever got you two Barry's to go around promising people enlightenment in 5-7 years. This is totally outrageous nonsense! You can't promise anyone enlightenemnt even in a million years. I'll never understand how you two could pass out leaflets and put up posters with some bull crap like that on them. The other Barry then went over to another fakir, Zen Master Rama, and started to put up posters promising 'instant' enlightenment. This is even more outrageous! Where do these people get this stuff? You can't make this stuff up. Who in their right mind would think that a guy as smart as the Marshy would say such a dumb thing: promising enlightemnet to anyone. He had at least five close students that had been practicing TM for over ten years when the Marshy supposedly made this promise, but there's no indication that any of them got enlightened in over forty years. Go figure. Obviously it's a mind control tactic. Obviously. Why can't you TM teachers just be honest? You're not going to get anymore enlightenment than you are going to get. Why do you guys have to make up stuff?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: snip I was commenting on the meaning of statistical power vs statstical significance. The power of a smalish study with a smalish effect (which the BP studies on TM were and suggest), is likely less than .5, so, you would expect less than 50% of the studies on TM and BP to show an effect, due to the small power. On the other hand, and perhaps I didn't make it clear, the statistical significance of all of those studies was likely p 0.05, which says that only 5% or 1/20th of the studies would show a false positive, so the 4 studies out of 10 that showed a positive effect from TM were in-line with the hypothesis that TM had an effect, and NOT inline with the hypothesis that TM had no effect. I apparently didn't make my point clear. Have I done so now? Lawson I jumped over too many things in my last post and thus I did a crappy job. I previously said: We are getting there. I understand what you are saying but I stumble on the conclusions you draw for reasons I stated above. One is that if a study has as you say small power then the study should likely be rejected. Lawson said: Who does he rejecting and why? Small power is a numerical quality. An intervention with small effect size would likely not show up as statistically significant a substantial percentage of the time in studies with small sample size. I clarify: Who does the rejecting and why is the issue. The problem ties into what gets published. A low power no result study likely will not get published. If you include the low power but results studies in your meta-analysis you are running the risk of magnifying your type 1 errors, your false positives. It is a publication bias problem. In any event, most journal editors want alpha to be no greater than .05. Pretty sure all the studies published lately on TM are at p 0.05. Its hard to get published otherwise, though honestly, for quick and dirty experiments, you would WANT to use a more liberal significance criterion just to get the research pointed in the right direction. I said: However, even if studies at issue were powerful, either because of large sample size or small effect size, there still remains the tendency for multiple comparisons to yield spurious significant differences even where the hypothesis is incorrect. Lawson said: Since when are studies powerful if they have small effect size (with small sample size, which is the implication of your or). My bad! As you are well aware, the best way to increase power is through increased sample size. Alternatively, if you just can't increase your sample there are other things you can do. For example, you can increase the significance level. This results in a less rigorous test which might show results that might include type 1 errors, or false positives.So, you can have small differences between groups that are found signficant when in fact the differences are due to sampling error. Hope that is clearer. Sure, but 4 smallish studies positive out of 10 implies a power of .4 and a relatively smallish effect size. There were 6 BP studies cited by Canter, IIRC. (the 10 study meta- analysis was on cognitive studies), one of which he eliminates leaving 5 good studies by his criteria: Three of the five evaluable trials reported statistically significant differences between intervention groups favouring TM and two found no significant differences between intervention groups. None of the five studies was conducted by independent authors without any affiliation to the TM organization. I would objectc slightly to this last comment. While it is true that most of the research is being done by the TM researchers, it is a bit offensive to imply that it is not dependable merely because of that. Even the tobacco industry researchers weren't accused of out and out falsifying data which is what you'd have to do to make the findings of meta-analysis completely worthless. 3 out of 5 studies showing an outcome at a 95% confidence level, would have to be countered by 55 non-published null-finding studies in order to claim that those are all really flukes. In other words, those 3 studies would represent the 1 in 20 false positives in a total pool of 60 studies. The TM researchers don't have the time and resources to do 60 such studies and toss out the bad, certainly not on the money granted to them by the NIH. They do the quick and dirty studieson tiny groups at the 90% confidence level to find issues worth pursuing and then publish the better studies
[FairfieldLife] Re: Hey Vaj
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Offworld: On May 12, 2008, at 5:12 PM, off_world_beings wrote: Hi Vaj, in which peer-reviewed scientific journal (dates etc?) are you seeing results of Buddhist meditation published and other techniques? I want to compile research abstracts on all techniques. I'd check Medline. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 12, 2008, at 7:30 PM, sparaig wrote: turiya isn't pure consciousness? What planet are you from? Earth. turiya (turIya) means of the fourth. Any mention of Pure or Purity there? How about Consciousness? Well at least there should be being or something like that, right? Nope, not a one. Just the fourth. Monier-Williams says consisting of 4 parts. Hmmm. No pure nor any consciousness there either. WTF? Well, what about Capeller's, the other popular dictionary--surely it has some epithet of 'consciousness' or 'pure'? Nope, wrong again: the fourth, consisting of four; n. one fourth. Typical vaj, snipping everything in my reply he doesn't want to respond to: Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self (in the three states), It (Turiya) is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss, and non-dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman (Self), and this has to be realised. --mandukya upanishad, v 6 Well I guess I'll let you, like Card, try try again. :-) Sigh. You're a piece of work. Really this is a contest. Find the TMO word. What, you guys never ever really wondered? Have you ever wondered how you can look at yourself in the mirror and not feel embarrassed? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Part Two Posted: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lawson wrote: turiya isn't pure consciousness? 'Turiya' is the fourth state of consciousness as described in the Upanishads. Turiya means fourth in Sanskrit. Gaudapada indicates that the fourth state of consciousness is 'pure consciousness, the absolute silence that comes after experiencing waking, dreaming, and sleep states. What planet are you from? The fourth state (tur�ya avasth�) (see turiya) corresponds to the silence that ensues after one has steadily pronounced aum. It is the state of no matra (am�tr�). In that silence Consciousness alone is present; there is nothing else. Mandukya Upanishad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandukya_Upanishad He's likely thinking of Patanjalis reference to turiya in the context of pranayama, but even there, the description sounds like that of someone obtaining samadhi via a spontaneous change in consciousness due to breathing exercises which isn't at all implausible by western medical theory. Certainly, when you look at the preliminary study on long term TMers and reduced thalamic activity it isn't a stretch to believe that some form of breath control might activate the limic system in such a way as to induce altered states due, not to gross changes in blood chemistry, but to subtle chagnes in neural function of various brain sybsystems in close physical and connective proximity. Breathing and consciousness states are known to be related in the limbic system, which the thalamus is part of, so this is, well, a no brainer. Lawson Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: McCain wins values identity matchup
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, only 45% of the American electorate said they can identify with Mr. Obama's values, compared to 54% who say they can identify with John McCain's values. http://tinyurl.com/3qynxj Typical WSJ slanting. Obama's original remarks about clinging to religion and guns were part of an answer to fundraisers and volunteers about how to talk to rural Penn. voters about Obama's political issues. He pointed out that while you could bring up his campaign's political talking points, many voters were bitter about trusting campaign promises and instead cling to other issues like religion and guns. Just as Reverent Wright's comments about damning America and Al Gore's comments about inventing the internet were taken out of context, so were Senator Obama's. But the WSJ commentator knows this. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] GOP's New Slogan Already Being Used To Market Anti-depressant
by Jason Linkins, HuffPost 5.12.08 Leave it to the tone deaf GOP to find a way of attaching themselves to this election cycle's change mandate that simultaneously reinforces the fact that their failed policies have messed up the world to such an inhuman extent that many Americans now live their daily lives in a state of free-floating panic and paralyzing anxiety. In today's New York Times' Caucus blog, Carl Hulse reports that House Republicans have got themselves a brand-new slogan: It looks like Republicans will counter the Democratic push for change from the years of the Bush administration with their own pledge to deliver, drum roll please, the change you deserve. The first element of the party agenda developed over the past few months by the leadership and select party members will focus on family issues. Through our Change You Deserve message and through our American Families Agenda, House Republicans will continue our efforts to speak directly to an American public looking for leaders who will offer real solutions for the challenges they confront every day, said the memo prepared for lawmakers. What the GOP doesn't seem to realize, because they are idiots, is that the change you deserve is the registered advertising slogan of Effexor XR, a drug that many of you might have started taking as a result of all the...you know -- terrorism. (Hat tip to Bluestem for catching this gem.) Effexor, also known as Venlafaxine, is approved for the treatment of depression, generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, and panic disorder in adults. Its common side effects are very much in keeping with the world the House Republicans have striven to build: nausea, apathy, constipation, fatigue, vertigo, sexual dysfunction, sweating, memory loss, and - and I swear I am not making this up - electric shock-like sensations also called 'brain zaps.' Its less common side effects are equally awesome in their appropriateness. And when the Food And Drug Administration reviewed the ad copy that included the tagline, The change you deserve, it took issue with Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, which manufactures Effexor, saying that the company made unsubstantiated superiority claims. Sounds like the GOP have picked an ironically accurate tagline for their efforts!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
snip Ruth: So off your very interesting topic, so you might want to start a new topic if you respond, but how is the practice going? Is it the same as it ever was? I tried going back for a bit, but I was too twitchy to stay with it. Me: Thanks for asking. Hardly worth a new topic. I'm just like dozens of guys I taught back in the day who enjoyed meditating but didn't buy into any of the beliefs. (I used to feel sooo superior to guys like me then!) I started out last year, inspired by Sam Harris's call for a secular approach to meditation as a way of self inquiry. It made me wonder how much the belief effected the experience. I started just sitting without the mantra, which seems too long and cumbersome at first. I found that I really enjoyed the experience, it reminded me of how I used to feel in the silence after program before I opened my eyes. So the state I remember came back right away and it reconnected me with a part of my past. My regular TM practice coincided with Maharishi's death with so much time reminiscing about my years immersed in it all. I was catching a nice nostalgia buzz as well as a chance to process who Maharishi had been in my life. It seemed fitting to meditate as I considered his life in detail. Then after sitting for my very open style of meditation for a while, my old mantra started up after 18 years, the whole damn long ass thing. I was actually trying to avoid doing TM as an experiment, but I had spent too many years with that process so it seemed silly to resist what seems to be my style of meditation from Maharishi. I can't say it is any better than what I was doing without the mantra, but it isn't optional, so I am dare I say it, taking it as it comes. I kind of enjoyed the idea of doing my retro Beatles approved groovy old TM! I didn't stop 18 years ago because I didn't have good experiences with TM, I stopped because I thought Maharishi was wrong about the whole belief system around it. That is still where I am with the beliefs. I don't believe in stress release, or expansion of consciousness or even cumulative benifits really. I just enjoy the state itself and I do like how I feel afterwards. I think it must dump endorphins because I am back to the expansive enjoyable states of mind along with the usual thoughts mantra cycle. I can't imagine doing the sidhis again and would be really reluctant to devote any more time to this project. But it is like a well worn pair of shoes, and I am enjoying knocking around in them again. I think the long program was too much of a good thing for me which is why I avoided meditation all these years. I am not a fan of too much dissociation and that is a real issue with long programs IMO. As it is, I do feel the slight separateness from my thinking process is a thinking enhancement. I feel some of the benifits of meditation I used to crow so much about. I am looking back at the phrases Maharishi used to describe the experiences and my jury is not in on how I feel about his metaphors now. It took me a while to get over the oversell factor IMO. Thanks for letting me ramble. Did you ever round? I rounded for years and that may be why it is so easy for me to slip back into the practice without a checking, but you might consider it if you cared to try again. It may be a skill you can lose and you might need a reminder of the process. On the other hand passive relaxation is not for everyone so meditation just may not be for you. Did you used to enjoy it? I loved it from day one and couldn't get enough which became my downfall! (I hope someone else here is savoring the delicious irony of me recommending checking! But I think Maharishi was an excellent meditation teacher so I wouldn't rule it out if you know someone) It feels nice to not shut out meditation as an option for my life. I don't know how long I will stick with it, but I could imagine doing it for the rest of my life, at least occasionally. But I meditated twice today again so I seem to be voting with my ass, it finds the seat! Thanks for letting me process some of my thoughts about it Ruth.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---No. The SIMS literature indicated CC in so many words in 5-7 years. No mention of Enlightenment in any of the TMO literture. Nevertheless, you are correct: nonsense. Well, MMY was obviously optimistic, but there are PLENTY of people who have learned TM who show the preliminary sings of CC. Many of them don't even realize it because it is such a natural state for them. The DSM was changed to acknowledge that meditation might bring about non-pathological derealization due to interviews with TMers reporting CC experiences without calling it that, and Margaret Singer reports of several former TMing clients whose derealization was so permanent that even electro-shock therapy couldn't bring them out of it. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
---What...Electro-shock? Don't you dare tell Tom Cruise and the other Scientologists. He'll jump up and down on Oprah's sofa again having a fit. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero yifuxero@ wrote: ---No. The SIMS literature indicated CC in so many words in 5-7 years. No mention of Enlightenment in any of the TMO literture. Nevertheless, you are correct: nonsense. Well, MMY was obviously optimistic, but there are PLENTY of people who have learned TM who show the preliminary sings of CC. Many of them don't even realize it because it is such a natural state for them. The DSM was changed to acknowledge that meditation might bring about non-pathological derealization due to interviews with TMers reporting CC experiences without calling it that, and Margaret Singer reports of several former TMing clients whose derealization was so permanent that even electro-shock therapy couldn't bring them out of it. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Caste (Was Guru Dev really Santa? )
But given a weekend, I could turn your logical perception of reality. I would be up for it as long as I got the no ball gag rule in writing beforehand. Oh yeah, and no gimp masks. I'm sure you already know all everything a pseudo scientifically minded dipshit like me would need for such a test. I think this could be proven objectively and long before I need to enter any subjective mental states. I don't doubt I could experience my past lives in detail, (or practically anything else) I'm doubting I actually had them, no matter what I think I experienced. But the unconscious mind is wonderland with or without the cat-O-nine tails. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 12, 2008, at 3:59 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: Curtis, MMY said in the past that once you've been initiated into the tradition, the effects of of the mantra stays with you ad infinitum. If your meditation practice is interrupted in this lifetime, you will probably pick it up again in the next one. And how do you imagine a human being could know such a thing? Ever hear of the subconscious? :-) What if you had access to it's database (every sensory contact you'd had in this lifetime, for example)? And a technique--and later--an innate ability to do so. There's a very elaborate metaphysic which describes how this type of thing is stored and then re-imprinted on a new set of DNA (a new life). But to grok it in scientific terms you come face to face with so-called fringe science: morphogenetic fields (memories retained in nature over time, like, for example that of the lineal masters of the wonderful Holy tradition) or Wilhelm Reich and the alleged scientific discovery of prana (what he called orgone LOL). If I had a day with a total sceptic, who at least was someone who tried meditation in earnest for years like yourself, and got a day in Reich's laboratory, you'd actually find yourself--despite an utter lack of mainstream science to support it, seriously consider that their was a heretofore unknown force the Hindus call prana. (although I think the word orgone is really just waiting for a B/W 1950's sci-fi spoof, I gotta admit) Every hear of Intrauterine Psychiatry? It's actually a modern scientific field. These are the ideas we are into when we ask the deep questions you challenge...and certainly ones worth at least trying to answer. But given a weekend, I could turn your logical perception of reality.
Re: [FairfieldLife] GOP's New Slogan Already Being Used To Market Anti-depressant
On May 12, 2008, at 7:55 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: What the GOP doesn't seem to realize, because they are idiots, is that the change you deserve is the registered advertising slogan of Effexor XR, a drug that many of you might have started taking as a result of all the...you know -- terrorism. (Hat tip to Bluestem for catching this gem.) The irony never ends. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Don't Take on The Karma of the Initiate
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---What...Electro-shock? Don't you dare tell Tom Cruise and the other Scientologists. He'll jump up and down on Oprah's sofa again having a fit. My uncle had electro-shock therapy to counter severe depression. Even using the far more sophisticated and gentle methods of today, it is NOT a laughing matter. It can lead to permanent memory loss among other side effects. It is only to be used in the most extreme conditions --like my uncle's-- who was on a hunger strike causing him to starve to death, not because he wanted to die, but simply because he didn't feel like eating any more. It worked, too, but only for a while, and that while got shorter and shorter after every treatment. :-( Lawson
