[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John's interactions with Judy often resembled Barry's interactions, IIRC. And her interactions with everyone else. :-) Judy doesn't suffer fools without challenge and those she consider fools often react to her challenges in similar ways. Some, like John, have not learned yet that Judy has no other choice than to try to start fights. She isn't smart enough to do anything else. There is no question who started this fight, and why. Only a couple of weeks ago I suggested that Judy was so attached to grudges from the past that she went ballistic every time John Knapp's or Andrew Skolnick's names came up. She claimed that this was a lie, and got all indignant. So one of the two appears on FFL and what does she do? She goes ballistic, and tries to start a fight within minutes of his arrival. So much for lies. Fools are best ignored, IMO. I shall now go back to doing so, and suggest that John do so as well. Just because the only way that some people can think of to get attention is to troll for that attention by displaying their limitations does not mean that others are so limited. When you feed the trolls, you feed their behavior. John, given your training, you should know this. Treat her like any other psychopath and get back to helping those who can be helped.
[FairfieldLife] The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
One of the things I cannot help but notice, having been exposed to views of spirituality other than the ones dealt with in TM, is that the TM view often seems blissfully unaware of the occult. The occult deals not with black magic or other low-vibe stuff, but with ENERGY MANAGEMENT. It's the study of life as a series of energy transactions, how to be aware of when such transactions are going on, and how to preserve as much of your own energy as pos- sible *as* they are going on. One of the key teachings in this occult view is How People Choose To Get High, to amp up their energy levels. Some do it the non-occult way, through meditation or other forms of spiritual practice that access univer- sal energy and tap into it. Others up their personal energy levels by (as unintuitive as it seems) *giving away* energy in the form of selfless service, which oddly enough has the effect of increasing their own energy levels. But there is a subset of seekers who never seem to have learned either of these two methods, and who rely on, basically, *stealing* the energy of others to amp up their own energy levels. In the occult biz, these people are referred to as Attention Vampires. They have learned that when they can get others to *focus* on them, they can tap into the other person's energy and steal some of it. They literally get high by getting others to focus their attention on them. If anyone is interested in the negative and debilitating effects of practicing this long-term, ask, and I'll explain further what they are, according to occult theories of energy management. For now, I'll pass along one simple trick or technique from such occult teachings -- how to *tell* when you have an Attention Vampire stalking you, trying to suck your energy by getting you to focus on them. The tech- nique for identifying these people could not possibly be simpler: WITHDRAW YOUR ATTENTION FROM THEM Then watch what they do. If the person doesn't miss a step and just goes about their business, hardly even noticing that you are no longer focusing on them, then perhaps you were wrong about them being an Attention Vampire. On the other hand, if the person in question reacts to the withdrawal of your attention by trying even harder to get it, get- ting more and more desperate every day, then what you have on your hands is a Class A Attention Vampire. Class A Attention Vampires sometimes continue their attempts to suck attention from their victims for days or weeks or months after the victim has withdrawn their attention from them. In extreme cases, it can go on for years. The Attention Vampires become almost pathetic in their attempts to do *anything* they possibly can to get the former victim to focus on them again. 'Nuff said. You've all seen the syndrome, and now you have a name for it. If preserving your own attention and energy levels is of importance to you in your ongoing self discovery, now you have an occult technique to help you achieve that. When you have identified an Attention Vampire who is trying his or her best to get you to focus on them, JUST SAY NO. Ignore them. Simple as that. You'll preserve your own energy and stay out of the misery, as Maharishi used to say, and the Attention Vampire will react the same way that real vampires do, by becoming hungrier and hungrier, and as desperate for attention as real vampires are for blood. That's not really your problem. Let them do anything they can think of to try to suck your attention again -- whine, pretend to be nice, insult, cajole, whatever. Once you've identified them as what they are and have WITHDRAWN YOUR ATTENTION, any attempt to grab your attention later is just that, an attempt to grab your attention and feed off of it. Allowing the Attention Vampire to do so merely delays the day that they learn how to increase their own energy levels without stealing that energy from others, and therefore is the opposite of compassion.
[FairfieldLife] BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Anabhibhavam: not being overpowered; Cha: and; Darsayati: the scripture shows, the Srutis declare. The previous topic is concluded here. This Sutra points out a further indicatory mark strengthening the conclusion that works cooperate towards knowledge. Scripture also declares that he who is endowed with such means as Brahmacharya, etc.. is not overpowered by such afflictions as passion, anger and the like. For that Self does not perish which one attains by Brahmacharya (Chh. Up. VIII.5.3). This passage indicates that like work, Brahmacharya, etc., are also means to knowledge. He who is endowed with celibacy is not overcome by anger, passion, jealousy, hatred. His mind is ever peaceful. As his mind is not agitated, he is able to practise deep and constant meditation which leads to the attainment of knowledge. It is thus a settled conclusion that works are obligatory on the Ashramas and are also means to knowledge.
[FairfieldLife] Well, api c(h)a smaryate (BS III 4.30)
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-07.html Api cha smaryate III.4.30 (455) And moreover the Smritis say so. Api: also; Cha: moreover; Smaryate: the Smriti says so, it is seen in the Smritis, it is prescribed by Smriti. The previous topic is continued. Smriti also states that when life is in danger both he who has knowledge and he who has not can take any food. He who eats food procured from anywhere when life is in danger, is not tainted by sin, as a lotus leaf is not wetted by water. On the contrary many passages teach that unlawful food is to be avoided. The Brahmana must permanently forego intoxicating liquor. Let them pour boiling spirits down the throat of a Brahmana who drinks spirits. Spirit-drinking worms grow in the mouth of the spirit-drinking man, because he enjoys what is unlawful. From this it is inferred that generally clean food is to be taken except in the case of extreme starvation or in times of distress only. When the Upanishad says that the sage may eat all kinds of food, it must be interpreted as meaning that he may eat all kinds of food, in times of distress only. The text of the Upanishad should not be construed as an injunction in favour of eating unlawful food.
[FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Anabhibhavam: not being overpowered; Cha: and; Darsayati: the scripture shows, the Srutis declare. The previous topic is concluded here. This Sutra points out a further indicatory mark strengthening the conclusion that works cooperate towards knowledge. Scripture also declares that he who is endowed with such means as Brahmacharya, etc.. is not overpowered by such afflictions as passion, anger and the like. For that Self does not perish which one attains by Brahmacharya (Chh. Up. VIII.5.3). This passage indicates that like work, Brahmacharya, etc., are also means to knowledge. He who is endowed with celibacy is not overcome by anger, passion, jealousy, hatred. His mind is ever peaceful. As his mind is not agitated, he is able to practise deep and constant meditation which leads to the attainment of knowledge. It is thus a settled conclusion that works are obligatory on the Ashramas and are also means to knowledge. Makes sense to me...
[FairfieldLife] The Down Side Of Seeking Attention
[ Apologies in advance. This subject continues to be fascinating to me this Get-Out-Of-The-House- And-Go-Write-In-A-Cafe-And-See-What-Comes-Out Sunday. So I'm going to follow up on my own rap about occult principles and how they can be of use to some along the spiritual path. Mea culpa. ] This is a difficult aspect of occult teachings to talk about in modern society, because so much of the predominant cultural mythos revolves *around* seeking Attention, and getting as much of it as possible. Who do we revere -- in our politicians, in our movie stars and TV stars and our media darlings, in our immediate circle of peers? Well, more often than not in modern society (as evidenced by Web hits and media ratings and who is deemed to be success- ful and who is not) we tend to revere and admire the ones who can capture the most eyeballs. Success itself is often measured by who can capture the most Attention. We see it in the media, we see it in business, and we even see it in spirituality. Which teacher draws the biggest crowds? Which teacher has enlightened the most people? The answer often feels like a spiritual McDonalds 600 Billion Served sign. And we've all been taught that *getting* Attention is Good. We get stroked by our parents when we stop pooping in our diapers and start pooping where we should, we get stroked by our teachers when we get the right answer to a question, and we get stroked by our peers when we get a promotion at work or make a shitload of money on our latest investment deal. Strokes = Attention. Attention = Good. But is there a down side to this Attention seeking, for seekers of enlightenment? Some say that there is. Some might be crazy, but here are a few of their ideas, just in case they're onto something. One of the down sides of seeking Attention is the trap of growing to rely on it. The hit one gets psychically and energetically from capturing the Attention of others has two spiritual traps built into it. The first is that for some it's *easier* to get that energy hit by stealing it from others than it is to generate it yourself, from within. Over time, Attention Vampires tend to become dependent on sucking the Attention of others for their energy hit, and abandon the path of seeking it from within. The other trap inherent in sucking Attention from others is that the Attention itself doesn't come baggage-free. It carries with it the overall energy field and aura and mindset of every person whose Attention you manage to capture. When you focus on another person, or on their writing, you pick up some of their aura. Just can't help doing so. So if the person is a cool frood, say some high spiritual teacher whose writings consistently inspire you, focusing on them has the up side of allowing you to pick up some of their overall aura or mindset. But what if the person whose writing you are focusing on is a total creepazoid, possibly one with evil intent? [ Sensible people who have read this far should stop at this point and really think about whether they wish to continue reading. :-) ] The prevailing mythos of America and, sadly, planet Earth is that it's GOOD to capture the Attention of as many people as possible. But now consider the case of, say, a Playboy Playmate Of The Month, or one of them in particular, Marilyn Monroe. What exactly is it that she was attracting by being so good at attracting Attention? What was the mindset or aura of the people who were gazing at her photos in magazines? And what were they doing with their other hand as they gazed at them? Marilyn won a fuckin' Gold Medal in capturing Attention. She had the Attention of every man and woman in America in her hip pocket. But what did she pick up from the collective aura of all that Attention? Well duh...what happened to her? I guess all I'm trying to say by passing along Somebody Else's Teaching here is that this offbeat occult teach- ing is far from the only View of the pathway to enlight- enment and how to get where you want to along it, but it might be of value to some. For those who can *identify* to some extent with the Marilyn Phenomenon, for those to whom capturing Attention has always come naturally, and easily, is this ability you've always taken for granted by definition a Good Thing, just because society thinks it is? If you find that a disproportionate number of the highs you experience every week come from getting other people to focus their Attention on you, *IS* that really a Good Thing? Does the energy hit you get from it come without a cost? Are there alternative ways of getting the same energy hit without picking up other people's mindsets and auras, and possibly aspects of those mindsets and auras that you don't necessarily want in yours? The same people who came up with this weirdass theory of occult energy transactions say that there are. They are called meditation and selfless service. They achieve the same energy hit -- or an even better
[FairfieldLife] Bush's Secret
http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html?uc_full_date=20081207
[FairfieldLife] Conducting With Annotations
Very, very clever. It's like high-tech air guitar, conducting a piece of music with the help of Annotations: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNFQg88naaA
[FairfieldLife] Triumph: cats are c*nts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rbDSwZ6XDcfeature=related
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
On Dec 7, 2008, at 4:15 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Judy doesn't suffer fools without challenge and those she consider fools often react to her challenges in similar ways. Some, like John, have not learned yet that Judy has no other choice than to try to start fights. She isn't smart enough to do anything else. There is no question who started this fight, and why. Only a couple of weeks ago I suggested that Judy was so attached to grudges from the past that she went ballistic every time John Knapp's or Andrew Skolnick's names came up. She claimed that this was a lie, and got all indignant. So one of the two appears on FFL and what does she do? She goes ballistic, and tries to start a fight within minutes of his arrival. So much for lies. Great point. It's funny when you see someone deny what is obvious to most others on a list but, for whatever reason, is missed by the person themselves. It's like the person lecturing everyone on personal appearance who has a big booger hanging from their nose. After so many repeats, you just smile and think ah, there's that girl with big booger hanging from her nose again. :-) On top of that you have this kind of built-in denial system which ignores a very real component of their life- experience. And after repeat after repeat after repeat, that kind of denial dyes a very different cloth than the one they think they are making permanent. Take denial from wholeness and fractured wholeness still remains. United in fractured being, perform disjointed action. Yogasthah boo- boo karmani.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
On Dec 7, 2008, at 12:49 AM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: Chapters 9 to 14 give a detailed description of the early years in which Maharishi established himself in England. The author passed through a variety of spiritual movements and spent about 8 to 10 years meditating with Maharishi and also served in some capacity as his administrator. Her period of involvement was from 1960 to about 1968-70. Fascinating and valuable descriptions of how Maharishi got his start in England. The author provides convincing evidence that his Transcendental Meditation (TM) may have produced dissociative reactions and passivity, from the very beginning. -snip- how can the author provide convincing evidence that his Transcendental Meditation (TM) -may- have produced dissociative reactions and passivity...? I believe it was from first hand experience. She was involved in a large number of early day initiations. if the evidence is in fact convincing, it would show without doubt that TM produced these results, not that TM -may- have produced these results. What's she's describing isn't anything new, it's been known for a long time Dawn. The TM org has always ignored such phenomenon and despite wild claims about their research, hasn't done one (that I'm aware of) on these phenomena. Instead they're glossed over as unstressing. If they were really, truly interested in pure research, here would have been a golden opportunity to catalogue the changes taking place to the human nervous and perhaps shed some light on certain neurological diseases. I am doubtful of this one's credentials, only having practiced TM 8- 10 years. that's what- 15% of one's adult life? i have heard that to master -anything- takes 20 years, so they are only halfway there. According to TM Org research, it only takes about 3 months to level off on it effects. TM is a very powerful technique, and it seems entirely reasonable that the author of this hit piece on the Maharishi would have confronted a rough patch or three during the relatively brief time that they practiced TM. Then to stop, concluding that they had milked the capabilities of the technique and the Maharishi dry, and therefore exhausted their capacity to transcend, is a premature judgment, an immature conclusion, which is why it appeals to you vaj. It appeals to me because it puts up a red flag and serves as a warning that it can be a dangerous technique for some people and thus it has the potential to help relieve human suffering. John Knapp is an excellent person to ask on this because he has documented hundreds of cases AND he's been meditating for many years. But really anyone who's been around long enough will recognize what she's describing. Heck there were whole courses where the rounders had psychotic episodes! It might also help to point out that there are other transcending techniques that produce few minor side effects and no major side- effects and actually work better at transcending. These techniques exist in both Hinduism and Buddhism (and I'm sure others as well). it is a cheap shot, an easy out, a cop out. better to kn Please see the above: three months, according to TMO researchers.
[FairfieldLife] Sympathy for the Devil
Looks like John Lennon showed up for this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuTiTfbfy7Q
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the big burr in everyone's butt on this forum about TM? snip for brevity This is a very old story and tiring story. Like it or not, there's my line in the sand. You don't live here? Proly seems important to some only in that the few hundreds that remain of the TM-movement want to try to get their meditating numbers in the domes above 2500 consistantly. It is relevant because there is a wish there in some so deeply to see the large experiment through. It is very utopian. How's it going here for that? Practically, it does seem there are still close to 3000 old-time adult meditators in the Fairfield area but only some small number of hundreds are willing or welcome to go to the domes to be part of that group. This thread about cult-testing is proly very relevant. Folks do have their own conscience as their own sense of what is fair and right. Evidently there are a lot of old-meditators here who are looking at the TM-movement and seeing that it has not changed enough (any?) since Maharishi died to warrant being involved. i.e., they see too many of the points on that cult test which throw too many flags. You're right this is a very old story in the meditating community, and it ain't through yet by a long shot. It's a pretty good story in human nature. Lot of people here would see themselves as meditators but no longer of the TM-movement. Most meditators i would bet. Indeed, the TM- movement shuns its old meditators too with constant flow of e-mail memos starting, everyone is welcome... and finishing, ...but bring a current dome badge to get admitted. In fact, there is not a lot of meeting ground in the meditating community anymore except for off-campus outside the TM-movement. Their culture of TM-movement proly has a tough row to hoe if it really wants wider acceptance participation or support from most everyone around who is looking. Jai Guru Dev, -Doug in FF
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- On Sun, 12/7/08, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 6:28 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Anabhibhavam: not being overpowered; Cha: and; Darsayati: the scripture shows, the Srutis declare. The previous topic is concluded here. This Sutra points out a further indicatory mark strengthening the conclusion that works cooperate towards knowledge. Scripture also declares that he who is endowed with such means as Brahmacharya, etc.. is not overpowered by such afflictions as passion, anger and the like. For that Self does not perish which one attains by Brahmacharya (Chh. Up. VIII.5.3). This passage indicates that like work, Brahmacharya, etc., are also means to knowledge. He who is endowed with celibacy is not overcome by anger, passion, jealousy, hatred. His mind is ever peaceful. As his mind is not agitated, he is able to practise deep and constant meditation which leads to the attainment of knowledge. It is thus a settled conclusion that works are obligatory on the Ashramas and are also means to knowledge. Makes sense to me... Yes, but only if the sexual energy can be transmuted/sublimated into higher chakras/nadis, then there is great calmness and equinimity. The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. Well said. That's it exactly. To be obsessed enough about whether one is having sex or not to even notice it, much less give it a self- serving name like 'celibacy' or 'brama- charya' is to be obsessed about sex. Those who are gettin' some probably don't think much about sex except while they actually *are* gettin' some. And yet somehow those who extol the virtues of celibacy and label themselves 'celibates' or 'bramacharis' seem to think about sex a LOT. Call me biased, but it really appears to me that the group without the label is a lot more free of attachment than the group that needs a label.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Conducting With Annotations
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Very, very clever. It's like high-tech air guitar, conducting a piece of music with the help of Annotations: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNFQg88naaA Very cool. Loved it. It reminded me of Laban notation. http://tinyurl.com/5t4qmy
[FairfieldLife] The Down Side Of Seeking Attention, Kareoke version
What could be more Attention-seeking than kareoke? And more benevolent, right? There couldn't possibly be a down side to getting up on stage and singing your own version of someone else's song, right? http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/karaoke-killing/?hp Karaoke Killing By Robert Mackey A 23-year-old Malaysian man was killed on Thursday night after reportedly enraging other customers who felt that he hogged the microphone at what Malaysia's Star Online described as a coffeeshop-cum-karaoke outlet in the town of Sandakan, on the island of Borneo. The Guardian's Ian MacKinnon adds some regional context: Karaoke rage is not unheard of in Asia. There have been several reported cases of singers being assaulted, shot or stabbed mid-performance, usually over how songs are sung. Frank Sinatra's My Way has reportedly generated so many outbursts of hostility that some bars in the Philippines now do not offer it on the karaoke menu anymore. In Thailand this year, a gunman shot eight people dead after tiring of their endless renditions of a John Denver tune. As The Telegraph reported in March, that maddening John Denver tune was Country Roads. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Malaysia's official Bernama news agency reports that two men have been arrested in connection with the murder in Sandakan. Last year, Bernama reported that Malaysia's information minister, Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin, had issued a public put-down of karaoke singers by likening them to another group of social misfits: bloggers. Both groups, Mr. Zainuddin said, take pleasure in their own singing but have no influence.
[FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 6:28 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Anabhibhavam: not being overpowered; Cha: and; Darsayati: the scripture shows, the Srutis declare. The previous topic is concluded here. This Sutra points out a further indicatory mark strengthening the conclusion that works cooperate towards knowledge. Scripture also declares that he who is endowed with such means as Brahmacharya, etc.. is not overpowered by such afflictions as passion, anger and the like. For that Self does not perish which one attains by Brahmacharya (Chh. Up. VIII.5.3). This passage indicates that like work, Brahmacharya, etc., are also means to knowledge. He who is endowed with celibacy is not overcome by anger, passion, jealousy, hatred. His mind is ever peaceful. As his mind is not agitated, he is able to practise deep and constant meditation which leads to the attainment of knowledge. It is thus a settled conclusion that works are obligatory on the Ashramas and are also means to knowledge. Makes sense to me... Yes, but only if the sexual energy can be transmuted/sublimated into higher chakras/nadis, then there is great calmness and equinimity. The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. The only place I've successfully been celibate is my 6 month course. And by successful I mean that I didn't drive myself crazy by being tempted every five minutes by scantily-clad fem-bots. We were isolated and nary a female was around, except for the fat, dumpy Yugoslavian house-keepers and The Frau, a middle-aged frau who represented the interests of the hotel owners. Yet after about 4 months of celibacy even The Frau and the Yugoslavians started to look good. Yes, celibacy is a great ideal and I have had the best subjective flashy experiences during the periods I was celibate. But I think it can be damaging in our culture where you're invited to have wood every five minutes by virtue of TV, other media, and the culture in general...and, like Peter indicated, sexual suppression is not the way to do it. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: John's interactions with Judy often resembled Barry's interactions, IIRC. And her interactions with everyone else. :-) Judy doesn't suffer fools without challenge and those she consider fools often react to her challenges in similar ways. Some, like John, have not learned yet that Judy has no other choice than to try to start fights. She isn't smart enough to do anything else. There is no question who started this fight, and why. Right, John did, wildly overreacting to a little tweak from me. Only a couple of weeks ago I suggested that Judy was so attached to grudges from the past that she went ballistic every time John Knapp's or Andrew Skolnick's names came up. She claimed that this was a lie, and got all indignant. Actually Barry's lying when he says I claimed it was a lie. Here's what I said: Rick, seriously, do you realize how utterly absurd this claim is? Or are you sitting there nodding your head thinking, 'Yes, that's right'? If the latter, I'll be happy to explain to you why it's so wildly off base. Barry knows why it's off-base (which I guess makes it a lie). But my offer to Rick or anybody else to explain *why* it's off-base, if it isn't obvious, is still open. (Oh, and he didn't say in the post I was responding to that I went ballistic, despite the quotes.) So one of the two appears on FFL and what does she do? She goes ballistic, and tries to start a fight within minutes of his arrival. So much for lies. And there he goes again. To Barry, poking a little fun at somebody constitutes going ballistic--if it's me that's doing it, that is. In fact, of course, it's John who went ballistic. (And I did the fun-poking about two-and-a-half days after John's arrival, not minutes after.) Fools are best ignored, IMO. I shall now go back to doing so Just two weeks since Barry's last vow to ignore me. Let's see how long it lasts this time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 7, 2008, at 4:15 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Judy doesn't suffer fools without challenge and those she consider fools often react to her challenges in similar ways. Some, like John, have not learned yet that Judy has no other choice than to try to start fights. She isn't smart enough to do anything else. There is no question who started this fight, and why. Only a couple of weeks ago I suggested that Judy was so attached to grudges from the past that she went ballistic every time John Knapp's or Andrew Skolnick's names came up. She claimed that this was a lie, and got all indignant. So one of the two appears on FFL and what does she do? She goes ballistic, and tries to start a fight within minutes of his arrival. So much for lies. Great point. One involving six separate lies: 1. John started the fight. 2. Barry never used the phrase went ballistic. 3. I didn't claim what Barry said was a lie. 4. I didn't go ballistic when John turned up. 5. I didn't try to start a fight with him (see #1). 6. My first post to John was made two-and-a-half days after his arrival, not within minutes. So much for lies indeed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Down Side Of Seeking Attention
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [ Apologies in advance. This subject continues to be fascinating to me this Get-Out-Of-The-House- And-Go-Write-In-A-Cafe-And-See-What-Comes-Out Sunday. So I'm going to follow up on my own rap about occult principles and how they can be of use to some along the spiritual path. Mea culpa. ] I actually wasn't seeking Barry's attention when I poked fun at John, but it seems I managed to capture it in spades. That's three posts already this morning (possibly four, if you count the one about karaoke as another aspect of the theme).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
snip There is no question who started this fight, and why. Right, John did, wildly overreacting to a little tweak from me. How many times have you protested to this group that Barry started a rally of exchanges by insulting you Judy? That your reaction was compelled by his negitive characterization of you that you HAD to correct in the name of fairness? Your shot at John was just that, a shot. Trying to spin it as a tweek doesn't work given your history of rancor. (on both sides) I also don't buy characterizing his reaction as wildly overreacting. Like my big brother in the backseat of the family car just tweeking my ear with his finger, the result was predicable. Your response was unfriendly and unflattering and he took it just how you meant it and responded to the unfriendliness in your intent. You guys don't have any good will to ride on to feign innocence at the reaction. I hope you will think about this a bit Judy and be honest with yourself. I'm willing to speak up if someone takes an unfair shot at you first. But not if you are not going to be honest about the shots you take. We all do our share of this so believe me I am not unaware of my own black pot status on this stove. And you can and do call me out when I'm being a bit slippery. I think you are being a bit slipper here. Only a couple of weeks ago I suggested that Judy was so attached to grudges from the past that she went ballistic every time John Knapp's or Andrew Skolnick's names came up. She claimed that this was a lie, and got all indignant. Actually Barry's lying when he says I claimed it was a lie. Here's what I said: Rick, seriously, do you realize how utterly absurd this claim is? Or are you sitting there nodding your head thinking, 'Yes, that's right'? If the latter, I'll be happy to explain to you why it's so wildly off base. Barry knows why it's off-base (which I guess makes it a lie). But my offer to Rick or anybody else to explain *why* it's off-base, if it isn't obvious, is still open. (Oh, and he didn't say in the post I was responding to that I went ballistic, despite the quotes.) So one of the two appears on FFL and what does she do? She goes ballistic, and tries to start a fight within minutes of his arrival. So much for lies. And there he goes again. To Barry, poking a little fun at somebody constitutes going ballistic--if it's me that's doing it, that is. In fact, of course, it's John who went ballistic. (And I did the fun-poking about two-and-a-half days after John's arrival, not minutes after.) Fools are best ignored, IMO. I shall now go back to doing so Just two weeks since Barry's last vow to ignore me. Let's see how long it lasts this time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip There is no question who started this fight, and why. Right, John did, wildly overreacting to a little tweak from me. How many times have you protested to this group that Barry started a rally of exchanges by insulting you Judy? That your reaction was compelled by his negitive characterization of you that you HAD to correct in the name of fairness? ... Your shot at John was just that, a shot. Trying to spin it as a tweek doesn't work given your history of rancor. ... I hope you will think about this a bit Judy and be honest with yourself. I'm willing to speak up if someone takes an unfair shot at you first. But not if you are not going to be honest about the shots you take. We all do our share of this so believe me I am not unaware of my own black pot status on this stove. And you can and do call me out when I'm being a bit slippery. I think you are being a bit slippery here. As the vocalist in a bluegrass group I used to like was fond of saying, Slipprier than deer guts on a pump handle. For the record, and to declare an absolute level of comfort with my own blackpottedness, my first post this morning was, in fact, a shot at Judy. It wasn't a tweak, it was a full-fledged shot. But that was the only one. The two occult posts were written with a *group* of people in mind. For someone in that group to believe that the posts were only about them is self importance, and deprives the other members of the group of their share of Attention credit. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip There is no question who started this fight, and why. Right, John did, wildly overreacting to a little tweak from me. How many times have you protested to this group that Barry started a rally of exchanges by insulting you Judy? That your reaction was compelled by his negitive characterization of you that you HAD to correct in the name of fairness? First, I'll note that you carefully refrain from chiding Barry for any of the misstatements in his post I was responding to. Second, Barry's insults are rarely as mild as my tweak of John. Third, there was no correction called for in that tweak, unlike most of Barry's insults, which typically involve gross distortions and/or lies. Your shot at John was just that, a shot. Trying to spin it as a tweek doesn't work given your history of rancor. (on both sides) Tweak, shot, what's the difference?? How about jab? Prod? Dig? Poke? I also don't buy characterizing his reaction as wildly overreacting. We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. Like my big brother in the backseat of the family car just tweeking my ear with his finger, the result was predicable. Predictable and overreaction aren't mutually exclusive. Your response was unfriendly and unflattering and he took it just how you meant it and responded to the unfriendliness in your intent. You guys don't have any good will to ride on to feign innocence at the reaction. Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He *could* have responded as you would have done had the tweak/shot been directed at you: acknowledge with a chuckle the irony of what I pointed out, thus defusing any perceived unfriendliness. (And if John is so conditioned by the lack of good will between us that he has to respond with such hostility, what does that say about Barry's claim that the grudge is all on my side?) I hope you will think about this a bit Judy and be honest with yourself. I'm willing to speak up if someone takes an unfair shot at you first. Ah, Curtis, but you don't. Barry's comment was a whole series of unfair and blatantly untrue shots, yet you decided to go after my response to him instead.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
snip I think you are being a bit slippery here. Thanks for correcting my typo! As the vocalist in a bluegrass group I used to like was fond of saying, Slipprier than deer guts on a pump handle. Wow, that really invokes a whole era. You have to skin deer in the Fall when it is cold. (I helped a friend do it once.) The idea that you would have to wash off by pumping a freezing handle with your hands covered with guts really works. We had to pump our morning wash water into a bucket in India instead of using a shower. December in North India was cold. I can remember how that cold handle would fly up out of your hand sometimes even without the deer guts! The more unpleasant reality than pouring that water over yourself while you could see your own breath was the realization that they had built the toilets UPHILL from our water. And the heaters in the drinking water meant to boil never reached boiling,they just heated the water to a nice level to culture some Rambo-gastro bacteria. In some places you can watch the bottom fall out of your world, but in NOIDA we could watch the world fall out of our bottoms! For the record, and to declare an absolute level of comfort with my own blackpottedness, my first post this morning was, in fact, a shot at Judy. It wasn't a tweak, it was a full-fledged shot. But that was the only one. The two occult posts were written with a *group* of people in mind. For someone in that group to believe that the posts were only about them is self importance, and deprives the other members of the group of their share of Attention credit. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip For the record, and to declare an absolute level of comfort with my own blackpottedness, my first post this morning was, in fact, a shot at Judy. It wasn't a tweak, it was a full-fledged shot. But that was the only one. The two occult posts were written with a *group* of people in mind. For someone in that group to believe that the posts were only about them is self importance, and deprives the other members of the group of their share of Attention credit. :-) Never said the latter two were only about me, of course. Barry's intention was certainly to *include* me as one of those he was demonizing, however, and all three posts were the direct result of my having (unintentionally) captured his attention. Which is what I *actually* wrote: I actually wasn't seeking Barry's attention when I poked fun at John, but it seems I managed to capture it in spades. That's three posts already this morning (possibly four, if you count the one about karaoke as another aspect of the theme).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Going out with a song...
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:31 PM, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And Apocalypse Now..Ride Of The Valkyries here: http://tinyurl.com/3zwoul Thanks for that, Raunchy. Lifted my spirits on a Saturday morning. I just love the smell of napalm in the morning. It smells like. It smells like. Breakfast is burning! Oh no.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: John's interactions with Judy often resembled Barry's interactions, IIRC. And her interactions with everyone else. :-) Judy doesn't suffer fools without challenge and those she consider fools often react to her challenges in similar ways. Some, like John, have not learned yet that Judy has no other choice than to try to start fights. She isn't smart enough to do anything else. There is no question who started this fight, and why. Only a couple of weeks ago I suggested that Judy was so attached to grudges from the past that she went ballistic every time John Knapp's or Andrew Skolnick's names came up. She claimed that this was a lie, and got all indignant. So one of the two appears on FFL and what does she do? She goes ballistic, and tries to start a fight within minutes of his arrival. So much for lies. Fools are best ignored, IMO. I shall now go back to doing so, and suggest that John do so as well. Just because the only way that some people can think of to get attention is to troll for that attention by displaying their limitations does not mean that others are so limited. When you feed the trolls, you feed their behavior. John, given your training, you should know this. Treat her like any other psychopath and get back to helping those who can be helped. Er, Barry? Think you blew your New Year's resolution not to talk about Judy... L.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- On Sun, 12/7/08, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 6:28 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Makes sense to me... Yes, but only if the sexual energy can be transmuted/sublimated into higher chakras/nadis, then there is great calmness and equinimity. The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. The only place I've successfully been celibate is my 6 month course. And by successful I mean that I didn't drive myself crazy by being tempted every five minutes by scantily-clad fem-bots. We were isolated and nary a female was around, except for the fat, dumpy Yugoslavian house-keepers and The Frau, a middle-aged frau who represented the interests of the hotel owners. Yet after about 4 months of celibacy even The Frau and the Yugoslavians started to look good. Yes, celibacy is a great ideal and I have had the best subjective flashy experiences during the periods I was celibate. But I think it can be damaging in our culture where you're invited to have wood every five minutes by virtue of TV, other media, and the culture in general...and, like Peter indicated, sexual suppression is not the way to do it. Shemp, I too was celibate for long patches of time on courses and boy, did those Fraus start looking hot. One time on Purusha, when I was successfully surpressing my natural instinct to mate, I was introduced to an attractive female Chinese MIU student. For some reason as she left after meeting me she stroked her exqusite, oriental, delicate, lotus blossom, jade goddess hand across the back of my shoulders. An explosion of lust/passion/love/longing just exploded through my body and psyche and I had instant wood and in the golden dome of pure knowledge too! The horror! The horror! To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: From: BillyG. wgm4u@ Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 6:28 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Makes sense to me... Yes, but only if the sexual energy can be transmuted/sublimated into higher chakras/nadis, then there is great calmness and equinimity. The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. The only place I've successfully been celibate is my 6 month course. And by successful I mean that I didn't drive myself crazy by being tempted every five minutes by scantily-clad fem-bots. We were isolated and nary a female was around, except for the fat, dumpy Yugoslavian house-keepers and The Frau, a middle-aged frau who represented the interests of the hotel owners. Yet after about 4 months of celibacy even The Frau and the Yugoslavians started to look good. Yes, celibacy is a great ideal and I have had the best subjective flashy experiences during the periods I was celibate. But I think it can be damaging in our culture where you're invited to have wood every five minutes by virtue of TV, other media, and the culture in general...and, like Peter indicated, sexual suppression is not the way to do it. Shemp, I too was celibate for long patches of time on courses and boy, did those Fraus start looking hot. One time on Purusha, when I was successfully surpressing my natural instinct to mate, I was introduced to an attractive female Chinese MIU student. For some reason as she left after meeting me she stroked her exqusite, oriental, delicate, lotus blossom, jade goddess hand across the back of my shoulders. An explosion of lust/passion/love/longing just exploded through my body and psyche and I had instant wood and in the golden dome of pure knowledge too! The horror! The horror! For some reason she touched you? Cheee... Don't think the Chinese are big on touching strangers, especially females touching males... not much doubt in my mind why she touched you and you reacted as she intended. Lawson Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
(And if John is so conditioned by the lack of good will between us that he has to respond with such hostility, what does that say about Barry's claim that the grudge is all on my side?) I don't think that the grudge is only on your side. I disagree with Barry on that. I hope you will think about this a bit Judy and be honest with yourself. I'm willing to speak up if someone takes an unfair shot at you first. Ah, Curtis, but you don't. Barry's comment was a whole series of unfair and blatantly untrue shots, yet you decided to go after my response to him instead. I'll think about why this is. Maybe it is because I feel you guys are even. Not that Barry doesn't often shoot first, I believe he does. But trying to go behind you to correct things seems pretty pointless to me. It is true that if you took such a shot at me I might be less reactive because we have established a history of civil posts. Not that you can't get me to react defensively, but that I am inclined to see it with a different balance in our total communication. I don't feel that you have seething contempt for me. (Please don't correct me if this is wrong, this belief is working for me!) I sense that John seems willing to discuss thing on a less hostile level. It might lead to some good discussions between you if you chose to pursue it. I don't believe you and Barry will ever achieve a more cordial relationship, or even want to. But I'll bet you and John could generate some interesting discussions if the contempt (mutal) could be ratcheted down. Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He isn't posting here as anyone's therapist. He is just a guy with computer here. Expecting him to act as if you are having a client session with him seems like an unfair shot at his professional life. Who of us really wants to be judged in our professions for some of the crap we sling here? He reacted in a personal way loaded with the weight of personal history with you. I don't expect either of you to disregard your humanness with all its pettiness while posting here. On reflection I think I should amend my claim to speak up for you when someone posts something unfair about you. It will probably exclude the Barry and Judy show. I like you both for different reasons and getting involved with that has no upside for me. Getting involved with that would require reading a lot of material that doesn't interest me between you guys. You have Raunchy and now ED in your corner for backup. I think that has added some helpful balance to your experience posting here. You'll notice that although I don't try to defend you, I also don't pile on even when I agree with Barry. So I'll try to pull a Switzerland to the best of my ability. We all have to chase our own muse here, and deal with our own personal demons I guess. I've got mine and you've got yours. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip There is no question who started this fight, and why. Right, John did, wildly overreacting to a little tweak from me. How many times have you protested to this group that Barry started a rally of exchanges by insulting you Judy? That your reaction was compelled by his negitive characterization of you that you HAD to correct in the name of fairness? First, I'll note that you carefully refrain from chiding Barry for any of the misstatements in his post I was responding to. Second, Barry's insults are rarely as mild as my tweak of John. Third, there was no correction called for in that tweak, unlike most of Barry's insults, which typically involve gross distortions and/or lies. Your shot at John was just that, a shot. Trying to spin it as a tweek doesn't work given your history of rancor. (on both sides) Tweak, shot, what's the difference?? How about jab? Prod? Dig? Poke? I also don't buy characterizing his reaction as wildly overreacting. We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. Like my big brother in the backseat of the family car just tweeking my ear with his finger, the result was predicable. Predictable and overreaction aren't mutually exclusive. Your response was unfriendly and unflattering and he took it just how you meant it and responded to the unfriendliness in your intent. You guys don't have any good will to ride on to feign innocence at the reaction. Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He *could* have responded as you would have done had the tweak/shot been directed at you: acknowledge with a chuckle the irony of what I pointed out, thus defusing any perceived unfriendliness. (And if John is so conditioned by
[FairfieldLife] Re: Going out with a song...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog wrote: Then compare it to What's Opera, Doc? http://tinyurl.com/3fj6c2 Thanks for this. I've been wanting to watch this classic for a while, but never thought to look online. Now to find the scene from Breaking Away when Daniel Stern's character admits that he finds Bugs Bunny to be attractive when Bugs dresses up like a woman...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't feel that you have seething contempt for me. (Please don't correct me if this is wrong, this belief is working for me!) I'm gonna stop right there, cuz I have to take my son to church and take a walk with my wife. But I'm going out with a good laugh and I'll read the rest of the post later. I sense that John seems willing to discuss thing on a less hostile level. It might lead to some good discussions between you if you chose to pursue it. I don't believe you and Barry will ever achieve a more cordial relationship, or even want to. But I'll bet you and John could generate some interesting discussions if the contempt (mutal) could be ratcheted down. Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He isn't posting here as anyone's therapist. He is just a guy with computer here. Expecting him to act as if you are having a client session with him seems like an unfair shot at his professional life. Who of us really wants to be judged in our professions for some of the crap we sling here? He reacted in a personal way loaded with the weight of personal history with you. I don't expect either of you to disregard your humanness with all its pettiness while posting here. On reflection I think I should amend my claim to speak up for you when someone posts something unfair about you. It will probably exclude the Barry and Judy show. I like you both for different reasons and getting involved with that has no upside for me. Getting involved with that would require reading a lot of material that doesn't interest me between you guys. You have Raunchy and now ED in your corner for backup. I think that has added some helpful balance to your experience posting here. You'll notice that although I don't try to defend you, I also don't pile on even when I agree with Barry. So I'll try to pull a Switzerland to the best of my ability. We all have to chase our own muse here, and deal with our own personal demons I guess. I've got mine and you've got yours. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip There is no question who started this fight, and why. Right, John did, wildly overreacting to a little tweak from me. How many times have you protested to this group that Barry started a rally of exchanges by insulting you Judy? That your reaction was compelled by his negitive characterization of you that you HAD to correct in the name of fairness? First, I'll note that you carefully refrain from chiding Barry for any of the misstatements in his post I was responding to. Second, Barry's insults are rarely as mild as my tweak of John. Third, there was no correction called for in that tweak, unlike most of Barry's insults, which typically involve gross distortions and/or lies. Your shot at John was just that, a shot. Trying to spin it as a tweek doesn't work given your history of rancor. (on both sides) Tweak, shot, what's the difference?? How about jab? Prod? Dig? Poke? I also don't buy characterizing his reaction as wildly overreacting. We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. Like my big brother in the backseat of the family car just tweeking my ear with his finger, the result was predicable. Predictable and overreaction aren't mutually exclusive. Your response was unfriendly and unflattering and he took it just how you meant it and responded to the unfriendliness in your intent. You guys don't have any good will to ride on to feign innocence at the reaction. Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He *could* have responded as you would have done had the tweak/shot been directed at you: acknowledge with a chuckle the irony of what I pointed out, thus defusing any perceived unfriendliness. (And if John is so conditioned by the lack of good will between us that he has to respond with such hostility, what does that say about Barry's claim that the grudge is all on my side?) I hope you will think about this a bit Judy and be honest with yourself. I'm willing to speak up if someone takes an unfair shot at you first. Ah, Curtis, but you don't. Barry's comment was a whole series of unfair and blatantly untrue shots, yet you decided to go after my response to him instead.
[FairfieldLife] Celibacy and loss of essense explained
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Shemp, I too was celibate for long patches of time on courses and boy, did those Fraus start looking hot. One time on Purusha, when I was successfully surpressing my natural instinct to mate, I was introduced to an attractive female Chinese MIU student. For some reason as she left after meeting me she stroked her exqusite, oriental, delicate, lotus blossom, jade goddess hand across the back of my shoulders. An explosion of lust/passion/love/longing just exploded through my body and psyche and I had instant wood and in the golden dome of pure knowledge too! The horror! The horror! [snip] General Ripper may have been insane but he was right: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0he-LZNzVg0 GENERAL RIPPER: Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream. GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE: Lord, Jack. GENERAL RIPPER: You know when fluoridation first began? GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE: I... no, no. I don't, Jack. GENERAL RIPPER: Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works. GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE: Uh, Jack, Jack, listen, tell me, tell me, Jack. When did you first... become... well, develop this theory? GENERAL RIPPER: Well, I, uh... I... I... first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love. GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE: Hmm. GENERAL RIPPER: Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue... a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence. GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE: Hmm. GENERAL RIPPER: I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh... I do not avoid women, Mandrake. GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE: No. GENERAL RIPPER: But I... I do deny them my essence.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Going out with a song...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Check out the German composer Wagner's famous opera Ride of the Valkyries here: http://tinyurl.com/5t5367 And Apocalypse Now..Ride Of The Valkyries here: http://tinyurl.com/3zwoul (I have to say I really resent that this utterly magnificent piece of music will forever be associated in most people's minds with the obscene destruction of Vietnamese villages and villagers.) Recordings are great, but the effect live with a Wagner orchestra is mind-bogglingly intense. When those bass trumpets and contrabass trombones and cymbals come in full force with the main theme about halfway through, the molecules of your very bones vibrate. Here's a video of a concert performance, not just of the orchestral music but of the opening of the act, with the Valkyries singing Ho-jo-to-ho (don't look at them, just listen!--over earphones if you got 'em): http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3mmpcdNNMos The really shattering iteration of the theme in the orchestra comes at about 3:40. At an opera performance, this scene takes place with the Valyries calling to each other from one moutain peak to another amid lightning bolts as a storm gathers. (The set piece is pretty much over by about 6:30, when they begin to get into the actual action of the opera.) snip I found stories about the Valkyries fascinating. Yer talking my language. I've been a Valkyrie fan (of Wagner's Valkyries, at least) from the age of 3. See post #15503 for more. Here's a Wagnerian Valkyrie: http://member.hitel.net/~wcpark/Images/Valkyrie.JPG Here's a poem about the take no prisoners Valkyries: Love it! Did you write this? See! warp is stretched For warriors' fall, Lo! weft in loom 'Tis wet with blood; Now fight foreboding, 'Neath friends' swift fingers, Our grey woof waxeth With war's alarms, Our warp bloodred, Our weft corseblue. This woof is y-woven With entrails of men, This warp is hardweighted With heads of the slain, Spears blood-besprinkled For spindles we use, Our loom ironbound, And arrows our reels; With swords for our shuttles This war-woof we work; So weave we, weird sisters, Our warwinning woof. Now Warwinner walketh To weave in her turn, Now Swordswinger steppeth, Now Swiftstroke, now Storm; When they speed the shuttle How spearheads shall flash! Shields crash, and helmgnawer On harness bite hard! Wind we, wind swiftly Our warwinning woof Woof erst for king youthful Foredoomed as his own, Forth now we will ride, Then through the ranks rushing Be busy where friends Blows blithe give and take. Wind we, wind swiftly Our warwinning woof, After that let us steadfastly Stand by the brave king; Then men shall mark mournful Their shields red with gore, How Swordstroke and Spearthrust Stood stout by the prince. Wind we, wind swiftly Our warwinning woof. When sword-bearing rovers To banners rush on, Mind, maidens, we spare not One life in the fray! We corse-choosing sisters Have charge of the slain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
Shemp, I too was celibate for long patches of time on courses and boy, did those Fraus start looking hot. One time on Purusha, when I was successfully surpressing my natural instinct to mate, I was introduced to an attractive female Chinese MIU student. For some reason as she left after meeting me she stroked her exqusite, oriental, delicate, lotus blossom, jade goddess hand across the back of my shoulders. An explosion of lust/passion/love/longing just exploded through my body and psyche and I had instant wood and in the golden dome of pure knowledge too! The horror! The horror! Reminds me of pleasant hours spent reading Penthouse Letters, Serendipity Section. Nice replacement for my non church attendance on this Sunday Pete, thanks! Oh yeah, and I agree with Lawson,this bird was so done it was time to stick a fork in it. Too bad you had a loincloth full of Purusha purity at the time! I hope you have amended this cultural omission since. Welcome to Shanghai Mr. Bond. Your contact here will be Miss. Jade Lotus... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: From: BillyG. wgm4u@ Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 6:28 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Makes sense to me... Yes, but only if the sexual energy can be transmuted/sublimated into higher chakras/nadis, then there is great calmness and equinimity. The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. The only place I've successfully been celibate is my 6 month course. And by successful I mean that I didn't drive myself crazy by being tempted every five minutes by scantily-clad fem-bots. We were isolated and nary a female was around, except for the fat, dumpy Yugoslavian house-keepers and The Frau, a middle-aged frau who represented the interests of the hotel owners. Yet after about 4 months of celibacy even The Frau and the Yugoslavians started to look good. Yes, celibacy is a great ideal and I have had the best subjective flashy experiences during the periods I was celibate. But I think it can be damaging in our culture where you're invited to have wood every five minutes by virtue of TV, other media, and the culture in general...and, like Peter indicated, sexual suppression is not the way to do it. Shemp, I too was celibate for long patches of time on courses and boy, did those Fraus start looking hot. One time on Purusha, when I was successfully surpressing my natural instinct to mate, I was introduced to an attractive female Chinese MIU student. For some reason as she left after meeting me she stroked her exqusite, oriental, delicate, lotus blossom, jade goddess hand across the back of my shoulders. An explosion of lust/passion/love/longing just exploded through my body and psyche and I had instant wood and in the golden dome of pure knowledge too! The horror! The horror! To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (And if John is so conditioned by the lack of good will between us that he has to respond with such hostility, what does that say about Barry's claim that the grudge is all on my side?) I don't think that the grudge is only on your side. I disagree with Barry on that. I hope you will think about this a bit Judy and be honest with yourself. I'm willing to speak up if someone takes an unfair shot at you first. Ah, Curtis, but you don't. Barry's comment was a whole series of unfair and blatantly untrue shots, yet you decided to go after my response to him instead. I'll think about why this is. Maybe it is because I feel you guys are even. Not that Barry doesn't often shoot first, I believe he does. But trying to go behind you to correct things seems pretty pointless to me. (Not sure what you mean by go behind.) You might want to go back and do a sort of tally of your chiding posts. I think you'll find the majority of them are to the women here. You almost never chide Barry or Vaj, even when they've attacked somebody other than me. In any case, your choice to criticize my shot at John via my response to Barry wasn't ideal, given the gross unfairness of what Barry said. You should perhaps have commented on the shot itself. It is true that if you took such a shot at me I might be less reactive because we have established a history of civil posts. Not that you can't get me to react defensively, but that I am inclined to see it with a different balance in our total communication. Sure. But as a therapist shilling for business, John ought to be able to drop his grudge against me and respond the way you would, if all he's dealing with is a really piddling shot/tweak/jab. I don't feel that you have seething contempt for me. (Please don't correct me if this is wrong, this belief is working for me!) Not seething contempt, no. Let's just say you frequently disappoint me. I sense that John seems willing to discuss thing on a less hostile level. Exactly what he intends for you to sense. It's a tactic to make himself look good. It might lead to some good discussions between you if you chose to pursue it. See, he's done this before, several times, including via email. In his first response here he was hostile, then in his subsequent responses he made a show of attempting some kind of rapprochement. I've never taken him up on these attempts because I have no reason to trust him. He's made some cosmetic changes to his persona since alt.m.t (this was before your time), but I see no signs at all that he's any different underneath the facade and many indications that he hasn't changed a whit. The only other person here who knows the history-- and there's a great deal to it--is Lawson. snip Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He isn't posting here as anyone's therapist. He is just a guy with computer here. Good grief, Curtis, his whole reason for posting was to recruit clients for the two therapy groups he's starting. Didn't you see his first post? Expecting him to act as if you are having a client session with him No, that's what *he* was trying to turn it into. Look at the questions in his response. But he wants to have it both ways: to address me both as a therapist and as a (hostile) peer. And taking up his therapist role with me, putting me in the role of a client, is in itself a hostile act. seems like an unfair shot at his professional life. Who of us really wants to be judged in our professions for some of the crap we sling here? In his other posts he's busy explaining how he does therapy. His whole presentation of himself this time around (and previous times too, as I recall) is as a therapist. He didn't just come by for a little friendly chat with old TM buddies. He's looking for clients, talking up his services. Would you want a therapist who could get so unsettled over a little jab/shot/tweak from somebody in a peer- to-peer situation? Even if there *is* a history, he should be able to show he can put it aside without getting all riled up if his intention is to demonstrate his capacity to help others with their problems.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
Thanks for the clarification, Steve. What you describe, though, doesn't seem like a pitfall inherent in a spiritual path. What you describe sounds like the ordinary hitches in everyday life. Sometimes we're strong, sometimes we're fragile. As for you being off in a competition of any kind, I've never seen it. Competition switches you on, and raises the voltage to boot. Total presence. Love you too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] When you're balanced, you handle anything thrown at you pretty well. But say you leave your watch at home, or you find out you're missing a button on your shirt. For me, these things have the potential to throw me off. It's much better than it used to be, put it's still something I deal with. Or say you're talking to someone, making a presentation, or important point, and you can't find the word you want. That can throw you off unless you can get past it. Now you may say, Steve, this is basic OC, dude, nothing more. Maybe so, but, when I am on, I feel pretty invinicible. Like I can cut through the crap pretty well, and have a positive influence on my environment. And I am well aware when I am on, and when I am not. Also shows up in my golf game, or ping pong game. :) Love ya. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 7, 2008, at 12:49 AM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: Chapters 9 to 14 give a detailed description of the early years in which Maharishi established himself in England. The author passed through a variety of spiritual movements and spent about 8 to 10 years meditating with Maharishi and also served in some capacity as his administrator. Her period of involvement was from 1960 to about 1968-70. Fascinating and valuable descriptions of how Maharishi got his start in England. The author provides convincing evidence that his Transcendental Meditation (TM) may have produced dissociative reactions and passivity, from the very beginning. -snip- how can the author provide convincing evidence that his Transcendental Meditation (TM) -may- have produced dissociative reactions and passivity...? I believe it was from first hand experience. She was involved in a large number of early day initiations. if the evidence is in fact convincing, it would show without doubt that TM produced these results, not that TM -may- have produced these results. What's she's describing isn't anything new, it's been known for a long time Dawn. you miss my point. saying the evidence is both convincing and that it -may- lead to specific results, is actually saying that the evidence is not so convincing. The TM org has always ignored such phenomenon and despite wild claims about their research, hasn't done one (that I'm aware of) on these phenomena. Instead they're glossed over as unstressing. If they were really, truly interested in pure research, here would have been a golden opportunity to catalogue the changes taking place to the human nervous and perhaps shed some light on certain neurological diseases. I am doubtful of this one's credentials, only having practiced TM 8- 10 years. that's what- 15% of one's adult life? i have heard that to master -anything- takes 20 years, so they are only halfway there. According to TM Org research, it only takes about 3 months to level off on it effects. Never heard that, and certainly never heard the Maharishi say this. this person, and including you, have not practiced TM long enough to have a clue about the full effect of the technique. TM is a very powerful technique, and it seems entirely reasonable that the author of this hit piece on the Maharishi would have confronted a rough patch or three during the relatively brief time that they practiced TM. Then to stop, concluding that they had milked the capabilities of the technique and the Maharishi dry, and therefore exhausted their capacity to transcend, is a premature judgment, an immature conclusion, which is why it appeals to you vaj. It appeals to me because it puts up a red flag and serves as a warning that it can be a dangerous technique for some people and thus it has the potential to help relieve human suffering. again, you haven't practiced the technique for a sufficient amount of time to know what you are talking about. this is what i meant by taking the easy way out. your comments are overly broad and show a clear bias against the technique, which you have very little experience with. John Knapp is an excellent person to ask on this because he has documented hundreds of cases AND he's been meditating for many years. john is running a business, with a strong bias towards finding people who's already present psychological issues have been exarcerbated by overdosing on TM. But really anyone who's been around long enough will recognize what she's describing. yes- you haven't been around long enough, except as some sort of TM vulture. Heck there were whole courses where the rounders had psychotic episodes! It might also help to point out that there are other transcending techniques that produce few minor side effects and no major side- effects and actually work better at transcending. These techniques exist in both Hinduism and Buddhism (and I'm sure others as well). can't be so. the side effects are a direct result of the efficiency with which TM works. much more attention needs to be placed on alleviating those side effects. but claiming that there is a piece of pie in the sky that both achieves what TM does, and more easily, is a load of crap, sold to you by proponents of established religions, especially the buddhism to which you have enslaved yourself. it is a cheap shot, an easy out, a cop out. better to kn Please see the above: three months, according to TMO researchers. the TMO researchers are wrong if they in fact said this as an unqualified statement, though i suspect you are just bullshitting here, as you so often do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
snip I'll think about why this is. Maybe it is because I feel you guys are even. Not that Barry doesn't often shoot first, I believe he does. But trying to go behind you to correct things seems pretty pointless to me. (Not sure what you mean by go behind.) You don't let any detail go unanswered. I meant: after you have done whatever you think needs correction. Often your correction goes way over the top in being critical so I have a hard time siding with you after I read it. You might want to go back and do a sort of tally of your chiding posts. I think you'll find the majority of them are to the women here. You almost never chide Barry or Vaj, even when they've attacked somebody other than me. It happens to be that you and Raunchy are women and also strong personalities. But on the balance of doing more than chiding my harshest targets are men here. I can think of four off the bat that I don't relate to with the respect I show you and Raunchy. They get me at my most dickish. I agree that my tone is not chiding with Turq and Vaj, but I think that is because both of them has established a richer offline relationship with me. I tend to view them in a more complete way than just from their posts here. I have more in common with them. In any case, your choice to criticize my shot at John via my response to Barry wasn't ideal, given the gross unfairness of what Barry said. You should perhaps have commented on the shot itself. I wasn't criticizing you taking a shot at John, but not admitting that you took the first one in this round. You seemed to be avoiding taking any responsibility and accusing John of taking the first shot by responding to your post. That seemed unfair. You and John going at it is none of my business and that wasn't my point. It is true that if you took such a shot at me I might be less reactive because we have established a history of civil posts. Not that you can't get me to react defensively, but that I am inclined to see it with a different balance in our total communication. Sure. But as a therapist shilling for business, John ought to be able to drop his grudge against me and respond the way you would, if all he's dealing with is a really piddling shot/tweak/jab. It all seems piddling when you are on the delivering end right? That might be how Barry feels when he decides to stir up some shit with you. I don't feel that you have seething contempt for me. (Please don't correct me if this is wrong, this belief is working for me!) Not seething contempt, no. Let's just say you frequently disappoint me. As you have disappointed me with your lack of taking responsibility for taking the first shot at John and then blaming him for reacting to it. Aren't we both little judgmental busybodies for judging each other and being disappointed with each other this way! Oh well, I'm having fun if you are. Now let's sit down and wash down some Peffernusse cookies with some Lapsang Souchong tea. Perhaps Raunchy can bring over those divine cucumber sandwiches with the watercress that she makes while we discuss people who disappoint us! Yeah, I'm deep like that. I sense that John seems willing to discuss thing on a less hostile level. Exactly what he intends for you to sense. It's a tactic to make himself look good. Kind of a double bind here. This leaves no room for change. If being nice is always perceived as a tactic then what is left? I guess we wont expect any fireside chats over some hot cocoa with tiny marshmallows floating in it between you two. If he brought some over he would be accused of trying to scald your tongue. It might lead to some good discussions between you if you chose to pursue it. See, he's done this before, several times, including via email. In his first response here he was hostile, then in his subsequent responses he made a show of attempting some kind of rapprochement. I've never taken him up on these attempts because I have no reason to trust him. He's made some cosmetic changes to his persona since alt.m.t (this was before your time), but I see no signs at all that he's any different underneath the facade and many indications that he hasn't changed a whit. Fair enough. It was kind of dweebish for me to suggest it. The only other person here who knows the history-- and there's a great deal to it--is Lawson. snip Evidently that last is true. But John is promoting himself here as a therapist, and he certainly didn't react like one. He isn't posting here as anyone's therapist. He is just a guy with computer here. Good grief, Curtis, his whole reason for posting was to recruit clients for the two therapy groups he's starting. Didn't you see his first post? No, my bad. Expecting him to act as if you are having a client session with him No, that's what *he* was trying to turn it into. Look at the questions in his
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: [...] I am doubtful of this one's credentials, only having practiced TM 8- 10 years. that's what- 15% of one's adult life? i have heard that to master -anything- takes 20 years, so they are only halfway there. According to TM Org research, it only takes about 3 months to level off on it effects. Never heard that, and certainly never heard the Maharishi say this. this person, and including you, have not practiced TM long enough to have a clue about the full effect of the technique. Vaj misunderstood what he read. The gross physical effect of average alpha EEG coherence DURING TM levels off within a few months (though more subtle measures of EEG and brain imaging might show something different). However, the physiological effect of TM practice outside of meditation continues to evolve indefinitely: the dye becomes quite yellow within a few months of practice, but the fading and re-dyeing metaphor still applies indefinitely according to the latest research. The alpha EEG coherence outside meditation continues to rise as practice continues. [...] Please see the above: three months, according to TMO researchers. the TMO researchers are wrong if they in fact said this as an unqualified statement, though i suspect you are just bullshitting here, as you so often do. As I said, the gross measure of average alpha EEG coherence DURING TM levels off within a few months, but changes outside TM continue indefinitely. Also: this was a single-number measure. When researchers analyze things in more detail, such as coherence in specific parts of the brain during TC, TM will probably still show accumulative effects that take longer than 3 months to level off. Certainly, assuming that TC eventually becomes a full-time presence (with breath suspension/etc) during TM practice, no-one has showed the ultimate leveling off of THAT measure (if they had, they'd be fully in CC by MMY's definition). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: i stayed away from mentioning TM deliberately, and focused instead on the benefits of transcending. it is too easy to confuse the practice of transcending with the practice of TM, and miss the point of the practice by vilifying the method. i think that has happened to so many people. when i said that transcendence is necessary in order for us to not be at the affect of the world and our resulting anxieties, that is what i meant. many, if not all, of those that have problems with TM did it too much, for whatever reason, without some balancing action to integrate the practice. too much transcending can cause profound disassociation from the world, keeping the cloth wet with yellow dye, never allowing the cloth to fade and fix in the sunshine of activity. living in an unstable world that continuously and profoundly changes, without stabilizing and settling down, without developing the capacity to have a stable personality; neither fully established in Being, nor wholly absent from it, a deeply uncomfortable place to be. This is why the TMO has a screening process for the Sidhi's looking for signs of mental/emotional/physical imbalance that would cause the applicant difficulty during a long rounding in the vat, soaking in the yellow dye. On my TTC two people had mental breakdowns and left the course. After 6 months of TTC rounding, the only thing that kept me balanced was asnas and food. After AEGTC activity was the only thing that saved me from feeling space-out, wacky and agitated by mood swings. I would force myself to keep physically busy even if I felt inclined to stay in the very enticing bliss of a long program. To get myself moving I invented a self-motivator, Out of the head and into the body and that seemed to work for me. I thought of it as squeezing the bliss from inside to outside, but an occasional hamburger worked almost as well. Folks stop TM for a lot of different reasons. I can see how difficult it is for some to integrate into activity for whatever reason. Unfortunately, they usually find external reasons to blame the TMO, like the claptrap about Maharishi being a lecher, to which I say, So what. I have a long list of complaints as well, but it doesn't diminish the value of TM in my life. I read John's list of psychological disorders, which could be gotten off the internet, and the list of symptoms could apply to anyone regardless of involvement with a cult. out of the head and into the body- what a great mantra that is! yep- i see a few on this board who externalize blame in the direction of TM and the Maharishi and think what a way to go nowhere. putting the Maharishi and TM aside for the moment, to avoid facing our own issues and blaming our external world for our problems and issues is no more imo, than a trick of the ego, a psychological sleight of hand, an ignorance that we do in fact create every mote of our reality, and that the only way to significantly modify that reality is to honestly face and change ourselves. easier said than done, but nonetheless the only way forward. when do we decide that we are no longer children, no longer at the affect of external, powerful authority figures or systems, and that we are solely responsible for our lives, brief as they are?
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: [...] I am doubtful of this one's credentials, only having practiced TM 8- 10 years. that's what- 15% of one's adult life? i have heard that to master -anything- takes 20 years, so they are only halfway there. According to TM Org research, it only takes about 3 months to level off on it effects. Never heard that, and certainly never heard the Maharishi say this. this person, and including you, have not practiced TM long enough to have a clue about the full effect of the technique. Vaj misunderstood what he read. truly shocking -lol. The gross physical effect of average alpha EEG coherence DURING TM levels off within a few months (though more subtle measures of EEG and brain imaging might show something different). However, the physiological effect of TM practice outside of meditation continues to evolve indefinitely: the dye becomes quite yellow within a few months of practice, but the fading and re-dyeing metaphor still applies indefinitely according to the latest research. The alpha EEG coherence outside meditation continues to rise as practice continues. [...] Please see the above: three months, according to TMO researchers. the TMO researchers are wrong if they in fact said this as an unqualified statement, though i suspect you are just bullshitting here, as you so often do. As I said, the gross measure of average alpha EEG coherence DURING TM levels off within a few months, but changes outside TM continue indefinitely. Also: this was a single-number measure. When researchers analyze things in more detail, such as coherence in specific parts of the brain during TC, TM will probably still show accumulative effects that take longer than 3 months to level off. Certainly, assuming that TC eventually becomes a full-time presence (with breath suspension/etc) during TM practice, no-one has showed the ultimate leveling off of THAT measure (if they had, they'd be fully in CC by MMY's definition). Lawson thanks for substantiating what i knew couldn't be accurate about the research into TM, that the practice would reach stasis after 3 months, or even 8-10 years (ludicrous). i said earlier in all earnestness that i didn't consider vaj very bright, and i stand by that. he is in way over his head.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not a cult? That is good. What were the guys thinking when they went in and pulled the levers to take the Kaplan money and shuttle it around? That what Maharishi and they were doing was more important than anything else? Like theft? Jai Guru Dev? If it was out and out theft, he could and should have taken them to court over it. MY understanding was that he verbally told them that certain donations were earmarked for specific projects and they transferred the funds somewhere else. Had he put it in writing, he cold have taken them to court and likely won. Not defending them, just nit-picking for accuracy. Lawson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
On Dec 7, 2008, at 2:51 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: [...] I am doubtful of this one's credentials, only having practiced TM 8- 10 years. that's what- 15% of one's adult life? i have heard that to master -anything- takes 20 years, so they are only halfway there. According to TM Org research, it only takes about 3 months to level off on it effects. Never heard that, and certainly never heard the Maharishi say this. this person, and including you, have not practiced TM long enough to have a clue about the full effect of the technique. Vaj misunderstood what he read. The gross physical effect of average alpha EEG coherence DURING TM levels off within a few months (though more subtle measures of EEG and brain imaging might show something different). However, the physiological effect of TM practice outside of meditation continues to evolve indefinitely: the dye becomes quite yellow within a few months of practice, but the fading and re-dyeing metaphor still applies indefinitely according to the latest research. The alpha EEG coherence outside meditation continues to rise as practice continues. Unfortunately, since TM research fails to show any signs of higher states of consciousness, but instead just continues to show relaxation/ alpha coherence benefits--all within the normal range of alpha for even non-meditators (it's actually statistically not that different from people napping 2 x 20) I understood quite well what I'm reading. At least according to neuroscientists. I just don't interpret it in a TB or OCD framework like yourself. In fact TM research has so repeatedly kept flogging the same dead horse, most independent neuroscientists stopped taking in seriously a long time ago.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
TurquoiseB wrote: One of the things I cannot help but notice, having been exposed to views of spirituality other than the ones dealt with in TM, is that the TM view often seems blissfully unaware of the occult. The occult deals not with black magic or other low-vibe stuff, but with ENERGY MANAGEMENT. It's the study of life as a series of energy transactions, how to be aware of when such transactions are going on, and how to preserve as much of your own energy as pos- sible *as* they are going on. One of the key teachings in this occult view is How People Choose To Get High, to amp up their energy levels. Some do it the non-occult way, through meditation or other forms of spiritual practice that access univer- sal energy and tap into it. Others up their personal energy levels by (as unintuitive as it seems) *giving away* energy in the form of selfless service, which oddly enough has the effect of increasing their own energy levels. But there is a subset of seekers who never seem to have learned either of these two methods, and who rely on, basically, *stealing* the energy of others to amp up their own energy levels. In the occult biz, these people are referred to as Attention Vampires. They have learned that when they can get others to *focus* on them, they can tap into the other person's energy and steal some of it. They literally get high by getting others to focus their attention on them. If anyone is interested in the negative and debilitating effects of practicing this long-term, ask, and I'll explain further what they are, according to occult theories of energy management. For now, I'll pass along one simple trick or technique from such occult teachings -- how to *tell* when you have an Attention Vampire stalking you, trying to suck your energy by getting you to focus on them. The tech- nique for identifying these people could not possibly be simpler: WITHDRAW YOUR ATTENTION FROM THEM Then watch what they do. If the person doesn't miss a step and just goes about their business, hardly even noticing that you are no longer focusing on them, then perhaps you were wrong about them being an Attention Vampire. On the other hand, if the person in question reacts to the withdrawal of your attention by trying even harder to get it, get- ting more and more desperate every day, then what you have on your hands is a Class A Attention Vampire. Class A Attention Vampires sometimes continue their attempts to suck attention from their victims for days or weeks or months after the victim has withdrawn their attention from them. In extreme cases, it can go on for years. The Attention Vampires become almost pathetic in their attempts to do *anything* they possibly can to get the former victim to focus on them again. 'Nuff said. You've all seen the syndrome, and now you have a name for it. If preserving your own attention and energy levels is of importance to you in your ongoing self discovery, now you have an occult technique to help you achieve that. When you have identified an Attention Vampire who is trying his or her best to get you to focus on them, JUST SAY NO. Ignore them. Simple as that. You'll preserve your own energy and stay out of the misery, as Maharishi used to say, and the Attention Vampire will react the same way that real vampires do, by becoming hungrier and hungrier, and as desperate for attention as real vampires are for blood. That's not really your problem. Let them do anything they can think of to try to suck your attention again -- whine, pretend to be nice, insult, cajole, whatever. Once you've identified them as what they are and have WITHDRAWN YOUR ATTENTION, any attempt to grab your attention later is just that, an attempt to grab your attention and feed off of it. Allowing the Attention Vampire to do so merely delays the day that they learn how to increase their own energy levels without stealing that energy from others, and therefore is the opposite of compassion. There was a book on this back in the 1970's that my TM initiator recommended. I didn't buy a copy but read the section he had mentioned on it. And I'm not responding as an Attention Vampire. It's just that you and a few others start topics that aren't the same old dead horses such as the celibacy thread (for chissakes people we're householders not a bunch fucking monks (interesting image) so get over it) or the Maharishi this and that threads. Snore (or look at topics and if none left interesting click on mark folder read). However some people might be thinking that people responding might be attention vampires when it is not the case at all. Then what do we have? A bloated ego, don't we? So it is sometimes that people start a topic as an Attention Vampire. Not saying you do that or anything but just illustrating the inversion. And I still believe that Bram Stoker was writing an allegory about
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] thanks for substantiating what i knew couldn't be accurate about the research into TM, that the practice would reach stasis after 3 months, or even 8-10 years (ludicrous). i said earlier in all earnestness that i didn't consider vaj very bright, and i stand by that. he is in way over his head. Even Travis's englithened test subjects (who report TC 24/7 for at least a year before the study) probably still show SOME further accumulated effect over time, though probably not as fast as beginners do. Also, the term is leveling off, not ceasing to increase completely. It's a tangential thing: with a shallower and shallower curve as time goes on, but eventually I'd expect crude measures like average Alpha EEG coherence to ping the meter since the measures are, well, crude. Newer tests like brain imaging of the thalmus during meditation might show greater effects over time beyond 3 months, for example. If the reduced thalamic activity in the preliminary research is a good measure of the TC-ness of a person's experience, you would expect that. Brain imaging isn't something they can do at MUM though (one of those machines costs as much as the entire new Student Center), so they have to work with other researchers in other places to get that done. In the pilot study, thalamic activity of 3 experienced: meditators were measured at some university. Coincidentally, 3 TM reserachers from MUM and one researcher from the other university who doesn't do TM wrote the pilot study. Reading between the lines of that preliminary study, I think I know the identities of the 3 experienced TMers ;-) Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Unfortunately, since TM research fails to show any signs of higher states of consciousness, but instead just continues to show relaxation/ alpha coherence benefits--all within the normal range of alpha for even non-meditators (it's actually statistically not that different from people napping 2 x 20) I understood quite well what I'm reading. At least according to neuroscientists. I just don't interpret it in a TB or OCD framework like yourself. You've yet to cite peer reviewed research published in the last 20 years that claims that the EEG alpha coherence found during TM is within the normal range. ANd, even if it is (due to the ceiling effect), that doesn't mean that the practice doesn't have accumulative benefits over a longer' period. In fact TM research has so repeatedly kept flogging the same dead horse, most independent neuroscientists stopped taking in seriously a long time ago. Except those that still do. As I have pointed out several times, there is a term used in meditation research circles called Pure Consciousness Episode (or Experience), the physiological correlates of which are taken directly from the TC research on TM. Interested people should google PCE + meditation... E.G.: http://www.ic.arizona.edu/ic/psyc358/358-Lect_21.html Lawson
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 7, 2008, at 4:28 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: One of the things I cannot help but notice, having been exposed to views of spirituality other than the ones dealt with in TM, is that the TM view often seems blissfully unaware of the occult. The occult deals not with black magic or other low-vibe stuff, but with ENERGY MANAGEMENT. Considering how much time they expect you to spend on your program, they sure are unaware of any kind of time management. Don't know how blissful it is, though. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Bush's Secret
TurquoiseB wrote: http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html?uc_full_date=20081207 Brings up another subject which was a news story this week on how many US newspapers are going out of business. Yup, print media has met it's end. I used to subscribe to the San Francisco Chronicle weekend delivery. It was such a deal at $20 for 26 weeks. Then the last bill they sent me was for $52 for 26 weeks so I quit. Today I decided to pick up a Sunday edition mainly to see what the ads look like (I should get a free copy if I do that) and see what Opus is up to. Well Berkeley seems to be pulling another Art Bell and declaring retirement again, so no Opus. The comic section is now down to one piece of paper not two. Ads were plentiful but the news I get more timely online and often more complete. My real bitch with the Chron was their non recyclable plastic delivery bags. I used to mix them in with the recyclable grocery bags but then the stores put up signs prohibiting them. And the newspapers have made no effort to reclaim them so they wind up in land fills. And don't anyone give me clever ideas of how you can use them for different things. I've seen those already and that's for bored housewives.
[FairfieldLife] participants in TM research
Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 7, 2008, at 4:28 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: One of the things I cannot help but notice, having been exposed to views of spirituality other than the ones dealt with in TM, is that the TM view often seems blissfully unaware of the occult. The occult deals not with black magic or other low-vibe stuff, but with ENERGY MANAGEMENT. Considering how much time they expect you to spend on your program, they sure are unaware of any kind of time management. Don't know how blissful it is, though. Well, TM has always had an obviously beneficial effect on me, probably due to my moderately severe OCD/ADHD. For someone like me, extra rounding leds to greater overall clarity of thinking, even DURING the rounding. Unstressing symptoms during the 8 weeks TM sidhis course were quite mild compared to what some people have reported over the years, and I was consistently feeling and acting *better* as the course went on, unlike some, who would go through periods of intense emotional upheaval that even resulted in a near-fistfight during the flying block. I noted consistent bliss save for a few periods of extreme physical discomfort during the flying block that were directly related to NOT hopping or twitching during that YF session. For me, energy management is also directly affected in a postiive way and likewise with time management, when I do extra rounding on courses. YMMV of course. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? If that was ColdBlueIce, I believe he was the subject of a sleep EEG study, not a TC breath suspension study. NOo sure how relevant his apnea would be in that case. I've chatted vor many years with the various researchers at MIU/MUM. interesting group of people. They war contradictory hats, of course, as scientists and marketers, so while I believe that the data in their research is valid, the interpretations they put on it during lectures on TM can be questionable. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? If that was ColdBlueIce, I believe he was the subject of a sleep EEG study, not a TC breath suspension study. NOo sure how relevant his apnea would be in that case. I've chatted vor many years with the various researchers at MIU/MUM. interesting group of people. They war contradictory hats, of course, as scientists and marketers, so while I believe that the data in their research is valid, the interpretations they put on it during lectures on TM can be questionable. Lawson Your recollection about ColdBlueIce fits with mine, though the apnea still may be relevant.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Bush's Secret
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 2:21 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Bush's Secret My real bitch with the Chron was their non recyclable plastic delivery bags. I used to mix them in with the recyclable grocery bags but then the stores put up signs prohibiting them. And the newspapers have made no effort to reclaim them so they wind up in land fills. And don't anyone give me clever ideas of how you can use them for different things. I've seen those already and that's for bored housewives. We use them to pick up dog poop.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
On Dec 7, 2008, at 3:15 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Unfortunately, since TM research fails to show any signs of higher states of consciousness, but instead just continues to show relaxation/ alpha coherence benefits--all within the normal range of alpha for even non-meditators (it's actually statistically not that different from people napping 2 x 20) I understood quite well what I'm reading. At least according to neuroscientists. I just don't interpret it in a TB or OCD framework like yourself. You've yet to cite peer reviewed research published in the last 20 years that claims that the EEG alpha coherence found during TM is within the normal range. ANd, even if it is (due to the ceiling effect), that doesn't mean that the practice doesn't have accumulative benefits over a longer' period. In fact TM research has so repeatedly kept flogging the same dead horse, most independent neuroscientists stopped taking in seriously a long time ago. Except those that still do. As I have pointed out several times, there is a term used in meditation research circles called Pure Consciousness Episode (or Experience), the physiological correlates of which are taken directly from the TC research on TM. Interested people should google PCE + meditation... E.G.: http://www.ic.arizona.edu/ic/psyc358/358-Lect_21.html I'm familiar with the claim, but as has been pointed out numerous times, pure consciousness is simply being redefined, dumbed down if you will, to the researchers whim. A recent major publication found such terms to be misleading since they're merely a phenomenological description. Pure consciousness has been said to be experienced in samadhi, and I guess you could translate that to being a pure consciousness experience which we have seen in real Patanjali yogins and Buddhist yogins as well. It seems to be a somewhat universal phenomenon. However after decades of TM research, we have yet to see anything outside normal alpha coherence levels. This lack of a significant effect was reported as early as the 1980's when many of the TM claims were successfully and definitely refuted by independent scientists and as recently as a few years ago when the first major textbook on the neuroscience of consciousness noted the same lack of effect (and the TMO's tendency to greatly exaggerate). TM researchers maintain the illusion of an increase in alpha coherence in a few novel ways. The most common is through the use of horrendous controls and/or bad study design. This effect was demonstrated years ago using good, solid science: use bad controls, alpha seems to go up-- but then use appropriate controls and alpha coherence (now considered an outdated measurement) actually goes down. So when you hear of alpha coherence rising, you can be pretty sure they're up to their same old tricks again. Putting the con back in con-sciousness once again. The unfortunate thing is, a meditation advertising and marketing cult can seed media outlets and the internet so it appears what they are saying holds some validity. If you repeat a lie enough times, people actually start to believe it. The good news is a new major meditation research center has been funded in Wisconsin. The researchers already have preliminary studies on the neural networks in the major forms of meditation. They fully expect to have definitive answers on all the major types of meditation and mechanisms within a few years.
Re: [FairfieldLife] participants in TM research
On Dec 7, 2008, at 3:22 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? Oh yeah, the guy who the TMO claimed in the Brain-Mind Bulletin was in Cosmic Consciousness. Pretty funny when they got caught in that one!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
I'm just not doing a good job of descibing it. I am just prone to letting little things throw me off balance. That's pretty much it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Steve. What you describe, though, doesn't seem like a pitfall inherent in a spiritual path. What you describe sounds like the ordinary hitches in everyday life. Sometimes we're strong, sometimes we're fragile. As for you being off in a competition of any kind, I've never seen it. Competition switches you on, and raises the voltage to boot. Total presence. Love you too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: [snip] When you're balanced, you handle anything thrown at you pretty well. But say you leave your watch at home, or you find out you're missing a button on your shirt. For me, these things have the potential to throw me off. It's much better than it used to be, put it's still something I deal with. Or say you're talking to someone, making a presentation, or important point, and you can't find the word you want. That can throw you off unless you can get past it. Now you may say, Steve, this is basic OC, dude, nothing more. Maybe so, but, when I am on, I feel pretty invinicible. Like I can cut through the crap pretty well, and have a positive influence on my environment. And I am well aware when I am on, and when I am not. Also shows up in my golf game, or ping pong game. :) Love ya. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
Re: [FairfieldLife] participants in TM research
ruthsimplicity wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? Do you mean TMO sponsored research or any research on TM? I participated in a University of Washington's graduate student's study where he took EEG readings on TM'ers. I asked him when finished if I had much alpha wave activity and he said nope just a bunch of theta. Of course they should have been looking for theta and even delta though I would wonder if the latter would be produced if someone fell asleep while meditating. Just deep breathing can produce alpha waves.
Re: [FairfieldLife] participants in TM research
On Dec 7, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Bhairitu wrote: ruthsimplicity wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? Do you mean TMO sponsored research or any research on TM? I participated in a University of Washington's graduate student's study where he took EEG readings on TM'ers. I asked him when finished if I had much alpha wave activity and he said nope just a bunch of theta. Of course they should have been looking for theta and even delta though I would wonder if the latter would be produced if someone fell asleep while meditating. Just deep breathing can produce alpha waves. It's interesting some of the research out there. In one study, researchers decided to try and find if they could replicate exactly, the anxiety-reducing effect and EEG signature of TM through a carefully constructed control. In one they were told let your mind do whatever it wants. Whatever you do mentally will have little or no impact on the effectiveness of the technique and in the second study they used Deliberately pursue a sequence of cognitive activity that has a positive direction and is comprehensive. That is, simply engage in thought activity that you intend to be positive, that is, good, desirable and interesting, or anything the word positive means to you. These are interesting, because these are expectations you would have if you were a true believer undergoing research. They succeeded in replicating the TM relaxation response and EEG precisely. It's very easy to be conditioned for these simple states, esp. common ones like alpha. That's also why good meditation research should always contain credibility measures in all outcome analyses. If it doesn't, you might as well throw it in the garbage, as this has been known since the 80's.
[FairfieldLife] Institutionalized Sexual Abuse Among Tibetan Buddhist “Masters”
Excerpt from Traveller in Space, a book by June Campbell: The Tibetan Buddhists developed the belief that enlightenment could be accelerated by the decision to enlist the passions in one`s religious practice, rather than to avoid them. The stategy is considered extremely risky yet so efficacious that it could lead to enligthenment in one lifetime. Monks of a lower status confined themselves to visualising an imaginary sexual relationship during meditation. But, her book sets out, the masters reach a point where they decide that they can engage in sex without being tainted by it. The instructions in the so-called secret texts spell out the methods which enable the man to control the flow of semen through yogic breath control and other practices. The idea is to drive the semen upwards, along the spine, and into the head. The more semen in a man`s head, the stronger intellectually and spiritually he is thought to be. The reverse of ordinary sex expresses the relative status of the male and female within the ritual. More than that, he is said to gain additional strength from absorbing the woman`s sexual fluids at the same time as withholding his own. This reverse of ordinary sex, said June Campbell, expresses the relative status of the male and female within the ritual, for it signals the power flowing from the woman to the man. The imbalance is underscored by the insistence by such guru-lamas that their sexual consorts must remain secret, allowing the lamas to maintain control over the women. Since the book was published, I`ve had letters from women all over the world with similar and worse experiences. So why did she stay for almost three years? Personal prestige. The women believe that they too are special and holy. They are entering sacred space. It produces good karma for future lives, an is a test of faith. The combination of religion, sex, power and secrecy can have a potent effect. It creates the Catch 22 of psychological blackmail set out in the words of another lama, Beru Kyhentze Rinpoche: If your guru acts in a seemingly unenlightened manner and you feel it would be hypocritical to think him a Buddha, you should remember that your own opinions are unreliable and the apparent faults you see may only be a reflection of your own deluded state of mind...If your guru acted in a completely perfect manner he would be inaccessible and you would be able to relate to him. It is therefore out of your Guru`s great compassion that he may show apparent flaws... He is mirroring your own faults. The psychological pressure ist often increased by making the woman swear vows of secrecy. In addition June Campbell was told that madness, trouble or even death could follow if she did not keep silent. I was told that in a previous life the lama I was involved with had had a mistress who caused him some trouble, and in order to get rid of her he cast a spell which caused her illness later resulting in her death. There are those Buddhists, like Martine Batchelor - who spent 10 years as a Zen Buddhist nun in a Korean monastery and who now teaches at Scharpham College - who insist the religious techniques the Buddha taught can be separated from the sexist, patriarchal and oppressive culture of many Buddhist countries. But June Campbell is not convinced. You have to ask what is the relationship between belief and how a society structures itself, she said. In Tibetanism, power lies in the hands of men who had often been traumatised by being removed from their mother at the age of two and taken to an all male monastery. Some were allowed visits from their mothers and sisters but always in secrecy - so that they came to associate women with what must be hidden. But there is more to it, she believes than that. Teaching at Sharpham last week she gave the students a whole range of material about different kind of feminism - from the political to the psychotherapeutic. She then asked them how it relates to the fact that there are no female Buddha images or to why in Tantric sex images the woman always has her back to the viewer, or to why Buddhist women are told to pray that they will be reborn into a male body in their next life -for only in a man`s body can they attain full enlightenment.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Request for names of movies that have made you Laugh-Out-Loud
On Dec 4, 2008, at 12:27 PM, Rick Archer wrote: From a friend. Post your recommendations and I’ll forward them to her and post her final collection. American Movie I don't think I ever laughed as much as I did through this movie. Also Mother (Albert Brooks).
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? If that was ColdBlueIce, I believe he was the subject of a sleep EEG study, not a TC breath suspension study. NOo sure how relevant his apnea would be in that case. FWIW, here's where the notion of coldbluice's alleged sleep apnea came from, one of his own posts (#173059 from April of this year): - First of all J. Kesterson could not find any tm style breath suspension...those were claims made by the tmo. The study i was involved in was in regards to witnessing during sleep..i told the researchers that i could from deep sleep control autonomic funtions. Dr. Skip Alexander, PhD miu..first interviewed me for that study-(witnessing deep sleep)..which i proved conclusively that i was being honest. Later (in Summer or 1988) i advised Dr. Skip Alexander, PhD miunot use any of my research for tmo federally funded grants. The scientifically validated control of autonomic functions that i demonstrated i.e.-- g.s.r/core body temp. heart rate breath suspension were done from deep sleep. The study's original protocal-,i was to use a pre- determined signal(as series of rapid eye movements) to indicate to the researchers when i as witnessing deep sleep. Then i suggested that i would signal from 'witnessing sleep that i was to begin controlled periods of breath suspension lowered core body temp heart rate. Later the study evolved into something completely different..Dr. Steven La Berge, PhD of Stanford Univ. (now the with Lucidity Instiute) wanted me to do all sorts of things that the tmo did NOT APPROVE of.. Interestingly, Dr La Berge said at that time that of the thousands of magnetic sleep records he examined mine was the MOST UNIQUE!! Were you ever diagnosed with central sleep apnea? About 1-1/2 yrs ago by a anathesiologist and a ER nurse said i had sleep apnea..when i went in the hospital for a routine minor surgery..The doctors could not figure out why i did not breath when i was sleeping. - Folks can decide for themselves whether they want to consider anything coldbluiceman says as definitive... But *he* obviously doesn't think he suffers from sleep apnea, and his account certainly doesn't constitute hard documentation either way. Yet this is apparently the basis for Ruth's assertion above and Vaj's gleeful claim in response: Oh yeah, the guy who the TMO claimed in the Brain- Mind Bulletin was in 'Cosmic Consciousness'. Pretty funny when they got caught in that one! coldblu discusses the sleep studies he was involved in in another post, #172613, also from April. Partial quote: - Over the last twenty years in all the tm studies performed *NOT ONE tm-er* ever duplicated or repeated what I had demonstrated. People claimed to be in unity consciouness..but not one tm person could scientifically demonstrate it..I did and I can tell you if you had unity consciouness you would not want it. Here is the study..(please personally contact the author- Jayne Gackenback to determine if what I am telling you is the truth) http://sawka.com/spiritwatch/psychologicalconhtm.htm Gackenbach, J., Moorecroft, W., Alexander, C. LaBerge, S.(1987). Consciousness dur-ing sleep in a TM practitioner: Heartrate, respiration and eye movement. Paper pre-sented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Dreams, Arlington,VA. - Interestingly, the link he provides is not to the study he cites but a different one, Psychological Content of 'Consciousness' During Sleep in a TM Practitioner, by Gackenbach and Moorecroft, which does not indicate that it was published anywhere but on the Web site and has to do with lucid dreaming, not breath suspension. (Lawson, if you think Ruth or Vaj should see any of the above, you'll need to quote it, since they both virtuously refrain from reading my posts.)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 2:26 PM, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I so fondly remember my flying block at Cobb Mountain. This oriental guy took off when we started our practice of our flying sutra. He fell on his back and bounded around the flying room on his back. We had a group occupying the cabins close to the lodge who had brought all the fixins and enjoyed before evening program a proper cocktail hour. We had a wonderful group, mostly from California. We had a fiddler from Massachusetts who entertained us at night and we had hoe downs until the course liaisons caught us each night and sent us to bed. It was a wonderful time in the TNO. Went to FF, everybody was friendly and bubbling. Then Maharishi introduced sidha dresses, ayurveda, vastu and it all got really weird. Years later a Mother Divine explained to me the cult of Mother Divine and who so many woman at MIU kept stopping to witness their speech. I don't really care if Raunchy Dog likes our ragging on the TMO as a cult or not. For me, reading about such things helps with the cognitive dissonance. I'm going back on IA for the Christmas holidays. The experiences are great. The mind fuck ain't.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Bush's Secret
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: My real bitch with the Chron was their non recyclable plastic delivery bags. I used to mix them in with the recyclable grocery bags but then the stores put up signs prohibiting them. And the newspapers have made no effort to reclaim them so they wind up in land fills. And don't anyone give me clever ideas of how you can use them for different things. I've seen those already and that's for bored housewives. The Chronical started going downhill when Herb Caen died.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind??
--- On Sun, 12/7/08, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 12:16 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Sun, 12/7/08, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: From: BillyG. wgm4u@ Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BS: celibacy guarantees peace of mind?? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 6:28 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bs_3/bs_3-4-08.html Anabhibhavam cha darsayati III.4.35 (460) And the scripture also declares (that he who is endowed with Brahmacharya) is not overpowered (by passion, anger, etc.). Makes sense to me... Yes, but only if the sexual energy can be transmuted/sublimated into higher chakras/nadis, then there is great calmness and equinimity. The problem is that most people try to be celibate by white knuckling it and and up being more agitated and repressed. Thus the phrase, Boy, do you need to get laid! There is appropriate dharma for your cock and pussy and this dharma is transcended only in spiritual awakening, not in sexual suppression. I think to conceptualize bramacharya as a means for yoga is mistaken. The only place I've successfully been celibate is my 6 month course. And by successful I mean that I didn't drive myself crazy by being tempted every five minutes by scantily-clad fem-bots. We were isolated and nary a female was around, except for the fat, dumpy Yugoslavian house-keepers and The Frau, a middle-aged frau who represented the interests of the hotel owners. Yet after about 4 months of celibacy even The Frau and the Yugoslavians started to look good. Yes, celibacy is a great ideal and I have had the best subjective flashy experiences during the periods I was celibate. But I think it can be damaging in our culture where you're invited to have wood every five minutes by virtue of TV, other media, and the culture in general...and, like Peter indicated, sexual suppression is not the way to do it. Shemp, I too was celibate for long patches of time on courses and boy, did those Fraus start looking hot. One time on Purusha, when I was successfully surpressing my natural instinct to mate, I was introduced to an attractive female Chinese MIU student. For some reason as she left after meeting me she stroked her exqusite, oriental, delicate, lotus blossom, jade goddess hand across the back of my shoulders. An explosion of lust/passion/love/longing just exploded through my body and psyche and I had instant wood and in the golden dome of pure knowledge too! The horror! The horror! For some reason she touched you? Cheee... Don't think the Chinese are big on touching strangers, especially females touching males... not much doubt in my mind why she touched you and you reacted as she intended. Lawson Lawson If I remember correctly, she had just arrived from China. I was really surprised by her touching me like that. I don't think i ever saw her again. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Dec 06 00:00:00 2008 End Date (UTC): Sat Dec 13 00:00:00 2008 174 messages as of (UTC) Mon Dec 08 00:00:14 2008 21 authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14 raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14 TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 13 sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9 off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7 curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7 John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6 Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 I am the eternal [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It? [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Randy Meltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 JoAnn Lang Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Janet Luise [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Dick Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Posters: 35 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
On Dec 7, 2008, at 3:30 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? If that was ColdBlueIce, I believe he was the subject of a sleep EEG study, not a TC breath suspension study. NOo sure how relevant his apnea would be in that case. Spare, the relevance relates to the classical criteria for turiyatita or Cosmic Consciousness as MMY liked to call it. One of these criteria was to be truly beyond the four, that is beyond the four states of consciousness of waking, dreaming, deep sleep and the temporary and honest transcendence of those three states (TC). In the traditional way of thinking that M. knew and was obviously familiar with, once you were truly beyond these, not only were you able to move into any of the three states of waking, dreaming or sleeping, you could switch at will. Want to go to deep sleep? Just go. Wanna get some answers from dreams of your collective storehouse of lifelong neural impressions? Just go. But there was a further option and probably and a very evolutionary possibility: to simply remain beyond the four and remain open and awake. Aware. The real advantage of this is that to a person in ignorance, they cycle through wake, sleep and dreaming--but the unconscious never ever gets a full rest. Residing beyond the four is extremely blissful and relaxing for the whole person. The subconscious actually gets to rest. Because of this yogis progressively need less and less sleep. One also doesn't need to retreat from the senses, so one can remain completely aware of their external environment while their body is sleeping. They, quite literally, become tireless. So therefore if you can prove some awareness of the external sensory environment, while the subject is still (apparently) sleeping (determined by EEG), you can prove one of the major criteria for turiyatita. Unfortunately in Cold Blues case, not only was he not in turiyatita, he actually had some pathology. He was suffering as a result of it. It turns out, he was just being used by a teacher and it's organization to foster this illusion (as is testified by the press release sent to the Brain-Mind bulletin) that the TM org had produced an 'enlightened being'. This is probably why Cold Blue reacts so strongly to TB's: having been abused while he was suffering terribly isn't a fun thing Spare. Having to listen to others tell him that TM is a universal panacea for humankind must be like listening to the collective fingernails of humanity on a cosmic chalkboard. This whole scene is particularly interesting, since if you look at the varied criteria for CC/turiyatita and at TM research, you can see a pattern of constantly--desperately looking for some sign of this state--and the consistent failure to find the actual state or stage, and then a retreat to other criteria. Actually, it could be documented, using existing TM research, and Mahesh's existing comments on the criteria for CC (which actually precisely match the classical Hindu criteria). Where that puts us today, is that they are SO desperate, they're trying to convince us that alpha coherence', a now obsolete measurement, is the cat's meow. They've gotten really quite desperate. The good news is that most neuroscientists familiar with meditational states know it's a boondoggle and so therefore the mainstream of legitimate science continues to ignore their spurious datum. Unforutnately the media hounds aren't nearly as wise. Spreading ignorance on a wire anxious for it's latest sound-bite is still pretty damn easy. (I fully expect, since you have OCD, you'll totally ignore all the warnings in this email.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? If that was ColdBlueIce, I believe he was the subject of a sleep EEG study, not a TC breath suspension study. NOo sure how relevant his apnea would be in that case. FWIW, here's where the notion of coldbluice's alleged sleep apnea came from, one of his own posts (#173059 from April of this year): - First of all J. Kesterson could not find any tm style breath suspension...those were claims made by the tmo. The study i was involved in was in regards to witnessing during sleep..i told the researchers that i could from deep sleep control autonomic funtions. Dr. Skip Alexander, PhD miu..first interviewed me for that study-(witnessing deep sleep)..which i proved conclusively that i was being honest. Later (in Summer or 1988) i advised Dr. Skip Alexander, PhD miunot use any of my research for tmo federally funded grants. The scientifically validated control of autonomic functions that i demonstrated i.e.-- g.s.r/core body temp. heart rate breath suspension were done from deep sleep. The study's original protocal-,i was to use a pre- determined signal(as series of rapid eye movements) to indicate to the researchers when i as witnessing deep sleep. Then i suggested that i would signal from 'witnessing sleep that i was to begin controlled periods of breath suspension lowered core body temp heart rate. Later the study evolved into something completely different..Dr. Steven La Berge, PhD of Stanford Univ. (now the with Lucidity Instiute) wanted me to do all sorts of things that the tmo did NOT APPROVE of.. Interestingly, Dr La Berge said at that time that of the thousands of magnetic sleep records he examined mine was the MOST UNIQUE!! Were you ever diagnosed with central sleep apnea? About 1-1/2 yrs ago by a anathesiologist and a ER nurse said i had sleep apnea..when i went in the hospital for a routine minor surgery..The doctors could not figure out why i did not breath when i was sleeping. - Folks can decide for themselves whether they want to consider anything coldbluiceman says as definitive... But *he* obviously doesn't think he suffers from sleep apnea, and his account certainly doesn't constitute hard documentation either way. Yet this is apparently the basis for Ruth's assertion above and Vaj's gleeful claim in response: -snip- this gleefulness of vaj's is especially troubling in light of the institutionalized sexual abuse practiced by the masters of his preferred religious tradition- tibetan buddhism. women in tibetan buddhist practice are seen as not only inferior to men, but cast in this role from which they can never escape during their lifetime. it explains why in the face of this unbalanced and damaging tradition from tibet, he spends so much time here trying manufacture evidence that the Maharishi's technique and organization is as corrupt and misguided as the one he has sold out to. very disturbing, and sadly informative of vaj's attitudes about women.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 7, 2008, at 3:30 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? If that was ColdBlueIce, I believe he was the subject of a sleep EEG study, not a TC breath suspension study. NOo sure how relevant his apnea would be in that case. Spare, the relevance relates to the classical criteria for turiyatita or Cosmic Consciousness as MMY liked to call it. One of these criteria was to be truly beyond the four, that is beyond the four states of consciousness of waking, dreaming, deep sleep and the temporary and honest transcendence of those three states (TC). In the traditional way of thinking that M. knew and was obviously familiar with, once you were truly beyond these, not only were you able to move into any of the three states of waking, dreaming or sleeping, you could switch at will. Want to go to deep sleep? Just go. Wanna get some answers from dreams of your collective storehouse of lifelong neural impressions? Just go. But there was a further option and probably and a very evolutionary possibility: to simply remain beyond the four and remain open and awake. Aware. The real advantage of this is that to a person in ignorance, they cycle through wake, sleep and dreaming--but the unconscious never ever gets a full rest. Residing beyond the four is extremely blissful and relaxing for the whole person. The subconscious actually gets to rest. -snip- once again you are inconsistent in your language, indicating your utter ignorance of enlightenment, vaj (btw, aren't you embarassed taking such an exalted name for your waking state consciousness? its as pathetic as referring to stretching exercises as yoga). anyway, you say above that the subconscious gets to rest. ask any yogi worth his or her salt if they -have- a subconscious. they don't. being cosmically awake precludes such a concept. you first refer to this psychological landscape that is beyond what you know exclusively (the waking state), as the unconscious, then in the same paragraph, you consider the unconscious synonymous with the subconscious. your lack of resolute intellect is to blame, as the waking state from which you write is incapable of establishment in Being, a stable and unchanging reality. and then you have the audacity to set yourself up as an authority on enlightenment. laughable and sad. further, please recognize for your own good that the tradition you are involved with inherently denegrates women, and the dodging of this fact is probably what keeps you here on a board that has nothing to do with tibetan buddhism. last, any real Buddha would have trouble not laughing out loud at you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
Because Vaj doesn't read my posts, he isn't aware that I just cited and quoted from posts of coldbluice's from April in which he describes his situation and the testing totally differently: no suffering mentioned, no sleep apnea as far as he was concerned, and all kinds of spectacular results on the testing proving his claim to Unity consciousness. He asserts that he is the only TMer EVER to demonstrate breath suspension, and that he did it *intentionally* during the deep sleep state. As I noted, it's up to the reader to decide whether coldbluice's testimony is reliable. But it sure as heck isn't the same as what Vaj claims he said. See my other post today on this, or look up the posts of coldbluiece's I cited: #173059 and #172613. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Unfortunately in Cold Blues case, not only was he not in turiyatita, he actually had some pathology. He was suffering as a result of it. It turns out, he was just being used by a teacher and it's organization to foster this illusion (as is testified by the press release sent to the Brain-Mind bulletin) that the TM org had produced an 'enlightened being'. This is probably why Cold Blue reacts so strongly to TB's: having been abused while he was suffering terribly isn't a fun thing Spare.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
it just shows how lost vaj really is. even impartial facts can't reach through the depths of his spiritual slavery. whether he reads what i have written or not is certainly of no concern to me, though for his own good, he may want to. ok, enough about this guy. have a good evening. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because Vaj doesn't read my posts, he isn't aware that I just cited and quoted from posts of coldbluice's from April in which he describes his situation and the testing totally differently: no suffering mentioned, no sleep apnea as far as he was concerned, and all kinds of spectacular results on the testing proving his claim to Unity consciousness. He asserts that he is the only TMer EVER to demonstrate breath suspension, and that he did it *intentionally* during the deep sleep state. As I noted, it's up to the reader to decide whether coldbluice's testimony is reliable. But it sure as heck isn't the same as what Vaj claims he said. See my other post today on this, or look up the posts of coldbluiece's I cited: #173059 and #172613. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: snip Unfortunately in Cold Blues case, not only was he not in turiyatita, he actually had some pathology. He was suffering as a result of it. It turns out, he was just being used by a teacher and it's organization to foster this illusion (as is testified by the press release sent to the Brain-Mind bulletin) that the TM org had produced an 'enlightened being'. This is probably why Cold Blue reacts so strongly to TB's: having been abused while he was suffering terribly isn't a fun thing Spare.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip this gleefulness of vaj's is especially troubling in light of the institutionalized sexual abuse practiced by the masters of his preferred religious tradition- tibetan buddhism. women in tibetan buddhist practice are seen as not only inferior to men, but cast in this role from which they can never escape during their lifetime. it explains why in the face of this unbalanced and damaging tradition from tibet, he spends so much time here trying manufacture evidence that the Maharishi's technique and organization is as corrupt and misguided as the one he has sold out to. I dunno, e.d., the connection you're making here strikes me as a bit of a stretch, but you could be right. In any case, what isn't in any doubt whatsoever is that Vaj's discourses on TM--theory, practice, and research--demonstrate with great clarity that he doesn't know what the freak he's talking about. What he says is so horrendously garbled and embodies so much misunderstanding--as well as a good bit of deliberate misrepresentation--that it's impossible to correct; it doesn't make enough *sense* to correct. It's also not possible to discuss it with him; any time a point is made, he goes into a whirling-dervish dance to obscure the issue and then starts in again from someplace completely different. What's really troubling is that his brand of double- and triple-talk has fooled many people here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip ok, enough about this guy. have a good evening. Thanks, and to you as well!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
This battle between Vaj, Judy and E.Dawn aside, I always found Coldblueice's claims to be a little strange because of the importance he placed on breath suspension. IMHE if you are clearly experiencing pure consciousness while the mind functions in waking, dreaming, and sleeping, the last thing you'd care about would be what happens to the physiology of the waking state body and telling people about it! You might wax on about the nature of consciousness awake to itself, but the body? Who gives a shit about a thought! --- On Sun, 12/7/08, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 9:02 PM it just shows how lost vaj really is. even impartial facts can't reach through the depths of his spiritual slavery. whether he reads what i have written or not is certainly of no concern to me, though for his own good, he may want to. ok, enough about this guy. have a good evening. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because Vaj doesn't read my posts, he isn't aware that I just cited and quoted from posts of coldbluice's from April in which he describes his situation and the testing totally differently: no suffering mentioned, no sleep apnea as far as he was concerned, and all kinds of spectacular results on the testing proving his claim to Unity consciousness. He asserts that he is the only TMer EVER to demonstrate breath suspension, and that he did it *intentionally* during the deep sleep state. As I noted, it's up to the reader to decide whether coldbluice's testimony is reliable. But it sure as heck isn't the same as what Vaj claims he said. See my other post today on this, or look up the posts of coldbluiece's I cited: #173059 and #172613. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: snip Unfortunately in Cold Blues case, not only was he not in turiyatita, he actually had some pathology. He was suffering as a result of it. It turns out, he was just being used by a teacher and it's organization to foster this illusion (as is testified by the press release sent to the Brain-Mind bulletin) that the TM org had produced an 'enlightened being'. This is probably why Cold Blue reacts so strongly to TB's: having been abused while he was suffering terribly isn't a fun thing Spare. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: snip this gleefulness of vaj's is especially troubling in light of the institutionalized sexual abuse practiced by the masters of his preferred religious tradition- tibetan buddhism. women in tibetan buddhist practice are seen as not only inferior to men, but cast in this role from which they can never escape during their lifetime. it explains why in the face of this unbalanced and damaging tradition from tibet, he spends so much time here trying manufacture evidence that the Maharishi's technique and organization is as corrupt and misguided as the one he has sold out to. I dunno, e.d., the connection you're making here strikes me as a bit of a stretch, but you could be right. In any case, what isn't in any doubt whatsoever is that Vaj's discourses on TM--theory, practice, and research--demonstrate with great clarity that he doesn't know what the freak he's talking about. What he says is so horrendously garbled and embodies so much misunderstanding--as well as a good bit of deliberate misrepresentation--that it's impossible to correct; it doesn't make enough *sense* to correct. It's also not possible to discuss it with him; any time a point is made, he goes into a whirling-dervish dance to obscure the issue and then starts in again from someplace completely different. What's really troubling is that his brand of double- and triple-talk has fooled many people here. i don't think many have been fooled. like you say, any critical reading of his words result in complete nonsense. as people gain the ability to think clearly, it is impossible to be fooled by his incoherent rambling.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
i agree that there is no need to focus on such a thing- integration of all states of consciousness through the unity of being make such parlor tricks irrelevant, at best. last, there is no battle between me and vaj-- just felt like getting out the flashlight for awhile. bullshitters get on my nerves. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This battle between Vaj, Judy and E.Dawn aside, I always found Coldblueice's claims to be a little strange because of the importance he placed on breath suspension. IMHE if you are clearly experiencing pure consciousness while the mind functions in waking, dreaming, and sleeping, the last thing you'd care about would be what happens to the physiology of the waking state body and telling people about it! You might wax on about the nature of consciousness awake to itself, but the body? Who gives a shit about a thought! --- On Sun, 12/7/08, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 9:02 PM it just shows how lost vaj really is. even impartial facts can't reach through the depths of his spiritual slavery. whether he reads what i have written or not is certainly of no concern to me, though for his own good, he may want to. ok, enough about this guy. have a good evening. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Because Vaj doesn't read my posts, he isn't aware that I just cited and quoted from posts of coldbluice's from April in which he describes his situation and the testing totally differently: no suffering mentioned, no sleep apnea as far as he was concerned, and all kinds of spectacular results on the testing proving his claim to Unity consciousness. He asserts that he is the only TMer EVER to demonstrate breath suspension, and that he did it *intentionally* during the deep sleep state. As I noted, it's up to the reader to decide whether coldbluice's testimony is reliable. But it sure as heck isn't the same as what Vaj claims he said. See my other post today on this, or look up the posts of coldbluiece's I cited: #173059 and #172613. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: snip Unfortunately in Cold Blues case, not only was he not in turiyatita, he actually had some pathology. He was suffering as a result of it. It turns out, he was just being used by a teacher and it's organization to foster this illusion (as is testified by the press release sent to the Brain-Mind bulletin) that the TM org had produced an 'enlightened being'. This is probably why Cold Blue reacts so strongly to TB's: having been abused while he was suffering terribly isn't a fun thing Spare. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ruthsimplicity wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? Do you mean TMO sponsored research or any research on TM? I participated in a University of Washington's graduate student's study where he took EEG readings on TM'ers. I asked him when finished if I had much alpha wave activity and he said nope just a bunch of theta. Of course they should have been looking for theta and even delta though I would wonder if the latter would be produced if someone fell asleep while meditating. Just deep breathing can produce alpha waves. What else do you remember? Did he measure you while meditating and while not meditating? Do you know if anything was published?
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 7, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Bhairitu wrote: ruthsimplicity wrote: Anyone here ever participate in any TM research as a subject? I know we did have one guy drop by who also apparently suffered from sleep apnea. Anyone else? Do you mean TMO sponsored research or any research on TM? I participated in a University of Washington's graduate student's study where he took EEG readings on TM'ers. I asked him when finished if I had much alpha wave activity and he said nope just a bunch of theta. Of course they should have been looking for theta and even delta though I would wonder if the latter would be produced if someone fell asleep while meditating. Just deep breathing can produce alpha waves. It's interesting some of the research out there. In one study, researchers decided to try and find if they could replicate exactly, the anxiety-reducing effect and EEG signature of TM through a carefully constructed control. In one they were told let your mind do whatever it wants. Whatever you do mentally will have little or no impact on the effectiveness of the technique and in the second study they used Deliberately pursue a sequence of cognitive activity that has a positive direction and is comprehensive. That is, simply engage in thought activity that you intend to be positive, that is, good, desirable and interesting, or anything the word positive means to you. These are interesting, because these are expectations you would have if you were a true believer undergoing research. They succeeded in replicating the TM relaxation response and EEG precisely. It's very easy to be conditioned for these simple states, esp. common ones like alpha. That's also why good meditation research should always contain credibility measures in all outcome analyses. If it doesn't, you might as well throw it in the garbage, as this has been known since the 80's. You have a cite?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
It sounds to me like you're confusing ColdBlue's claims and those of the TMO. From our conversations, it wasn't he who was so interested in the breath suspension, other than to get some understanding of what was going on. He was lead to believe it was related to his state of consciousness. Sadly, that was not the case--he was mislead. It turned out he wasn't in some higher state of consciousness, but one suffering from a severe form of sleep apnea. Nor was he someone who was yogically conscious during deep sleep. What happens when the body is oxygen deprived during sleep is that instead of going through the normal cycles of sleep, because the body is lacking oxygen, it keeps one is this limbo state just below wakefulness--but not quite enough asleep to give the body the rest it truly needs. In other words one doesn't descend into lower metabolic rates, the brain will automatically force you into a more awake state. So one wakes up feeling groggy, often with a headache. It ain't an enlightened state. But it closely resembles the physiologic state of yoga-nidra--yogic sleep--and so could be used to provide data to show that the TMO actually had someone who became enlightened. That is, if that person cooperated. This gentleman did not. On Dec 7, 2008, at 9:59 PM, Peter wrote: This battle between Vaj, Judy and E.Dawn aside, I always found Coldblueice's claims to be a little strange because of the importance he placed on breath suspension. IMHE if you are clearly experiencing pure consciousness while the mind functions in waking, dreaming, and sleeping, the last thing you'd care about would be what happens to the physiology of the waking state body and telling people about it! You might wax on about the nature of consciousness awake to itself, but the body? Who gives a shit about a thought!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
Dawn, seen from the outside it does seem like a battle. I'm not going to caste the first stone because I certainly have been guilty of such battles before with people. The only people who care about these battles are the ones involved. Nobody else really cares. But, I know, its hard to stop! --- On Sun, 12/7/08, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 10:13 PM i agree that there is no need to focus on such a thing- integration of all states of consciousness through the unity of being make such parlor tricks irrelevant, at best. last, there is no battle between me and vaj-- just felt like getting out the flashlight for awhile. bullshitters get on my nerves. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This battle between Vaj, Judy and E.Dawn aside, I always found Coldblueice's claims to be a little strange because of the importance he placed on breath suspension. IMHE if you are clearly experiencing pure consciousness while the mind functions in waking, dreaming, and sleeping, the last thing you'd care about would be what happens to the physiology of the waking state body and telling people about it! You might wax on about the nature of consciousness awake to itself, but the body? Who gives a shit about a thought! --- On Sun, 12/7/08, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 9:02 PM it just shows how lost vaj really is. even impartial facts can't reach through the depths of his spiritual slavery. whether he reads what i have written or not is certainly of no concern to me, though for his own good, he may want to. ok, enough about this guy. have a good evening. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Because Vaj doesn't read my posts, he isn't aware that I just cited and quoted from posts of coldbluice's from April in which he describes his situation and the testing totally differently: no suffering mentioned, no sleep apnea as far as he was concerned, and all kinds of spectacular results on the testing proving his claim to Unity consciousness. He asserts that he is the only TMer EVER to demonstrate breath suspension, and that he did it *intentionally* during the deep sleep state. As I noted, it's up to the reader to decide whether coldbluice's testimony is reliable. But it sure as heck isn't the same as what Vaj claims he said. See my other post today on this, or look up the posts of coldbluiece's I cited: #173059 and #172613. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: snip Unfortunately in Cold Blues case, not only was he not in turiyatita, he actually had some pathology. He was suffering as a result of it. It turns out, he was just being used by a teacher and it's organization to foster this illusion (as is testified by the press release sent to the Brain-Mind bulletin) that the TM org had produced an 'enlightened being'. This is probably why Cold Blue reacts so strongly to TB's: having been abused while he was suffering terribly isn't a fun thing Spare. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Online Recovery Support Groups Starting in January
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I'll think about why this is. Maybe it is because I feel you guys are even. Not that Barry doesn't often shoot first, I believe he does. But trying to go behind you to correct things seems pretty pointless to me. (Not sure what you mean by go behind.) You don't let any detail go unanswered. ?? I meant: after you have done whatever you think needs correction. How about before? snip In any case, your choice to criticize my shot at John via my response to Barry wasn't ideal, given the gross unfairness of what Barry said. You should perhaps have commented on the shot itself. I wasn't criticizing you taking a shot at John, but not admitting that you took the first one in this round. Are you going to base your entire criticism on the fact that I called it a tweak instead of a shot? snip You and John going at it is none of my business and that wasn't my point. Oh, I don't think you can separate the two that easily. The history is what you're using, after all, to justify his comeback. If it weren't for the history, presumably you'd take what I said to him the same way you'd have taken it if I had said it to you--as a little gentle mockery. And you'd then then have had to acknowledge that it was he who actually started the fight. snip Sure. But as a therapist shilling for business, John ought to be able to drop his grudge against me and respond the way you would, if all he's dealing with is a really piddling shot/tweak/jab. It all seems piddling when you are on the delivering end right? That might be how Barry feels when he decides to stir up some shit with you. I usually don't respond, or respond mildly, when Barry's shot/tweak/jab at me is as piddling as mine at John was. snip I sense that John seems willing to discuss thing on a less hostile level. Exactly what he intends for you to sense. It's a tactic to make himself look good. Kind of a double bind here. This leaves no room for change. If being nice is always perceived as a tactic then what is left? Depends on whether the perception is valid, doesn't it? There's always plenty of room for real change. If I didn't perceive that you've changed since alt.m.t, I wouldn't have anything to be disappointed about in your behavior when I see you falling back. You've raised my expectations of you. John has not. If you're interested, I can give you a demonstration of why I don't believe there's been any change, just on the basis of this one exchange I had with him. You might also want to have a look at my post pointing out the discrepancies between what he's said here about his therapeutic approach and what he says about it on his Web site. snip And taking up his therapist role with me, putting me in the role of a client, is in itself a hostile act. I react strongly to perceived condescension which is implied if someone tried to pull that kind of role with you. If that is what he was doing, I wouldn't put up with it either. It's not just me he's done it with, either. snip He didn't just come by for a little friendly chat with old TM buddies. He's looking for clients, talking up his services. I can't imagine he thinks any of this crew are prospects, but I guess it could be true. Lurkers, and possibly referrals. To my knowledge, he's always had something in mind when he's popped in here--publicizing his blog, or his therapy services. He's never come here just to chat. Would you want a therapist who could get so unsettled over a little jab/shot/tweak from somebody in a peer-to-peer situation? Even if there *is* a history, he should be able to show he can put it aside without getting all riled up if his intention is to demonstrate his capacity to help others with their problems. I don't know how valid this criticism is. I know plenty of therapists who can do good work but who are not the most balanced people IMO. They sure aren't the ones I'd want as a therapist. In any case, the point is that if you can't control your imbalances when you're in the process of advertising your therapeutic services, that really says a lot about just how much balance is lacking.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This battle between Vaj, Judy and E.Dawn aside, I always found Coldblueice's claims to be a little strange because of the importance he placed on breath suspension. Coldbluice is very strange in many respects.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
When Maharishi introduced the theme of invincibility to MIU in 1977, Larry Domash started looking for physical examples of how invincibility works - or is compromised. For example, Domash pointed out that a pinprick of a hole in a ship's hull could generate a crack along the length of the hull. Hence the need for invincibility, for without it, all of us are subject to such cracks in our lives. (Another example that comes to mind, one much closer to home, is when a pit in a windshield expands to become a crack that spans the windshield.) That rumination of Domash's is what I think of as I read your description of being thrown off balance by petty stuff. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I'm just not doing a good job of descibing it. I am just prone to letting little things throw me off balance. That's pretty much it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Steve. What you describe, though, doesn't seem like a pitfall inherent in a spiritual path. What you describe sounds like the ordinary hitches in everyday life. Sometimes we're strong, sometimes we're fragile. As for you being off in a competition of any kind, I've never seen it. Competition switches you on, and raises the voltage to boot. Total presence. Love you too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: [snip] When you're balanced, you handle anything thrown at you pretty well. But say you leave your watch at home, or you find out you're missing a button on your shirt. For me, these things have the potential to throw me off. It's much better than it used to be, put it's still something I deal with. Or say you're talking to someone, making a presentation, or important point, and you can't find the word you want. That can throw you off unless you can get past it. Now you may say, Steve, this is basic OC, dude, nothing more. Maybe so, but, when I am on, I feel pretty invinicible. Like I can cut through the crap pretty well, and have a positive influence on my environment. And I am well aware when I am on, and when I am not. Also shows up in my golf game, or ping pong game. :) Love ya. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It sounds to me like you're confusing ColdBlue's claims and those of the TMO. From our conversations, it wasn't he who was so interested in the breath suspension, other than to get some understanding of what was going on. He was lead to believe it was related to his state of consciousness. Sadly, that was not the case--he was mislead. It turned out he wasn't in some higher state of consciousness, but one suffering from a severe form of sleep apnea. Nor was he someone who was yogically conscious during deep sleep. Again, that is most definitively *not* what he's said in his posts here, or on alt.m.t, for that matter. If he has told Vaj something different privately, then how do we know when he's telling the truth about anything? Vaj has now seen my cites to coldbluice's posts, by the way, because they were quoted in the post he's responding to. So he's aware that those posts say something quite different from what Vaj claims. Yet Vaj doesn't address the gross discrepancy and instead accuses Peter of being confused. Isn't that odd?
[FairfieldLife] Skip the recycling
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/08/business/08recycle.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
I think that's a good example. I get the pin pricks all today. And unfortunately they can have the effect of throwing me off. Finally after after about 25 years of functioning in this manner, I feel I have the upper hand. On the other hand, events are always going to be out of balance, and that's what keeps things interesting. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When Maharishi introduced the theme of invincibility to MIU in 1977, Larry Domash started looking for physical examples of how invincibility works - or is compromised. For example, Domash pointed out that a pinprick of a hole in a ship's hull could generate a crack along the length of the hull. Hence the need for invincibility, for without it, all of us are subject to such cracks in our lives. (Another example that comes to mind, one much closer to home, is when a pit in a windshield expands to become a crack that spans the windshield.) That rumination of Domash's is what I think of as I read your description of being thrown off balance by petty stuff. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I'm just not doing a good job of descibing it. I am just prone to letting little things throw me off balance. That's pretty much it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Steve. What you describe, though, doesn't seem like a pitfall inherent in a spiritual path. What you describe sounds like the ordinary hitches in everyday life. Sometimes we're strong, sometimes we're fragile. As for you being off in a competition of any kind, I've never seen it. Competition switches you on, and raises the voltage to boot. Total presence. Love you too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: [snip] When you're balanced, you handle anything thrown at you pretty well. But say you leave your watch at home, or you find out you're missing a button on your shirt. For me, these things have the potential to throw me off. It's much better than it used to be, put it's still something I deal with. Or say you're talking to someone, making a presentation, or important point, and you can't find the word you want. That can throw you off unless you can get past it. Now you may say, Steve, this is basic OC, dude, nothing more. Maybe so, but, when I am on, I feel pretty invinicible. Like I can cut through the crap pretty well, and have a positive influence on my environment. And I am well aware when I am on, and when I am not. Also shows up in my golf game, or ping pong game. :) Love ya. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Skip the recycling
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/08/business/08recycle.html Recycling is the biggest scam. And for those that are believers in catastrophic man-made global warming, I suspect that recycling causes about 5 times the carbon than just taking this crap and putting it in landfill.
[FairfieldLife] Re: participants in TM research
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dawn, seen from the outside it does seem like a battle. I'm not going to caste the first stone because I certainly have been guilty of such battles before with people. The only people who care about these battles are the ones involved. Nobody else really cares. But, I know, its hard to stop! guilt, casting the first stone...strange language. i'll be done when i'm done. you seem to find vaj pretty fascinating, so sit back, relax, and enjoy his bullshit. because you know, and i know, that is all it is.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Skip the recycling
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/08/business/08recycle.html Recycling is the biggest scam. And for those that are believers in catastrophic man-made global warming, I suspect that recycling causes about 5 times the carbon than just taking this crap and putting it in landfill. Apparently not: http://tinyurl.com/69dbr9 Scientists have conducted hundreds of life-cycle analyses to compare recycling with other options like landfill and incineration, following the entire chain of events from the manufacture of a product (using either virgin or recycled materials) to its disposal. The dominant factor in virtually every case is the enormous amount of energy required to turn raw materials into metals and plastics compared to the energy needed to reprocess products that already exist. A study by Morris found that it takes 10.4 million Btu to manufacture products from a ton of recyclables, compared to 23.3 million Btu for virgin materials. In contrast, the total energy for collecting, hauling and processing a ton of recyclables adds up to just 0.9 million Btu. The bottom line: We don't need to worry that recycling trucks are doing more harm than good.
