[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: FW: JULY 4th HISTORY LESSON
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wle...@... wrote: From: FolkSgr1 To: FolkSgr1 BCC: FILLETSEET Sent: 7/1/2009 1:06:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time Subj: JULY 4th HISTORY LESSON Subject: July 4th - History lesson Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Five signers were captured by the B ritish as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War. They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated, but they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if /div they were captured. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags. Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward. Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton. At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt. Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid. Remember: freedom is never free! I hope you will show your support by sending this to as many people as you can, please. It's time we get the word out that patriotism is NOT a sin, and the Fourth of July has more to it than beer, picnics, and baseball games. Thanks for posting this, Bill. Amazing! JohnY
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: So I finally gave in and tried the Xanax. The dosage is 0.5 mg and the pharmacist suggested I take it right before bed because until one knows the effects one shouldn't drive under its influence. So I've taken it three times: the first time about a week ago and then the night before last and then last night. Here are the two results I notice more than anything: 1) It let me sleep longer. I haven't had any problem falling asleep; I am always able to go to sleep about 10 minutes after closing my eyes and I usually go to bed at about 10pm. My problem had been waking up about 2:30 and tossing and turning. the Xanax gave me a few hours more. IMU, that's typical sleep pattern for depression. How much do you exercise?
[FairfieldLife] Amelie Meli-Melo
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, meowthirteen meowthirt...@... wrote: --\ Merci beaucoup for the orange colored day you gave to me De rien. Thought you'd like it. such a gift I have not enjoyed myself so much and had such a good time in a while Want to enjoy yourself even more? Turn someone else who hasn't seen it onto the film. See below. The verbal imagery and the imagery! snip I'm glad you enjoyed it. As you might imagine, having now seen the film, turning someone who has not seen it before on to the magic of Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain feels very much like Amélie's self-assigned mission in the film itself. Amélie came out while I was living in Santa Fe, but as chance would have it I saw it first in another city, while consulting there. I returned home on a Thursday to find that it was opening in Santa Fe the next night. I hastily organized a barbeque/party at my house and afterwards took 30 friends who had never heard of the film to see it. Suffice it to say that like Amélie during that showing I looked around occasionally to see the looks on their faces. It's probably the most fun I have ever had in my life at the movies. The magic of Amélie in my opinion centers on the fact that it is autobiographical and thus springs from real life. All but a few of the incidents you see onscreen actually happened to Jean-Pierre Jeunet. He started working on the film 25 years before he filmed it, in the form of a journal he kept of these incidents. The goldfish story was true; it happened to him as a child. Nino's photo scrapbook is true; it is based on a real scrapbook that Jeunet is the owner of. The traveling garden gnome incident actually happened, although it didn't happen to him personally. Another aspect of the film's magic, of course, is its vision of Paris. Having lived there, I can assure you that it is a fantasy vision; Paris does not look quite like this. But Jeunet had just returned from two years spent in Los Angeles making Alien Resurrection, having missed Paris a great deal, and so he wanted to recreate the vision of Paris that he had missed, not the one with dog shit on all of its streets. I think he succeeded admirably. But for me the heart of the magic at the heart of Amélie is the vow whe makes after finding the child's treasure box. She decides to become a do-gooder and spend her life doing nice things for other people. This is so contrary to the way we are taught these days to become happy that it sounds crazy. The self-help aisles of bookstores are full of books telling you how to become happy by doing for yourself, by satisfying all of your own desires, by focusing on yourself. Every advertisement we see in print or on TV tells us the same thing: Buy this car for yourself and you'll be happy. Wear this and you will be happy. Drink this and you will be happy. And its all a lie. As far as I can tell, the people I've met on this planet who spend the most time focusing on themselves and trying to do thing for themselves are the most miserable people I have ever met. Whereas those people I've met who spend most of their time trying to do nice things for others are the happiest. When Jeunet started writing the script, he was concerned because it was a jumble of 200 unrelated stories, with no center. He had no theme or main idea with which to tie all the stories together. The idea of Amélie dedicating her life to helping other people was just one of the many stories. But then one day it leaped out at him, and he realized he had the center of his film, the solution. Interestingly enough, it is as far as I can tell also the solution of how to find happiness in life. I do like American Beauty, Blue. Glad you like that film, too, but for the record, my screen name has nothing to do with the color blue: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/50856
[FairfieldLife] The Mindfulness Posting Technique :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: shemp, one thing I don't understand... OK, we all get that you don't think GW is a reality (or at least that's what you keep implying, ad nauseum). But why is it so important to you that others, particularly others here, agree with you? If you're secure in your own knowledge, and that's good enough for you, why do you constantly seem to need a group consensus and validation of your opinion? I am really interested in knowing, because to me, at least, the constant attempts at validation and trying to prove others wrong are somewhat fascinating. Sal, while what you say above about Shemp is true, IMO it is *also* true about many other posters here. They rerun the same old arguments more often than a revival theater reruns Casablanca. :-) It's almost as if Fairfield Life was for them a permutation of Maharishi's Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared bullshit. Their version is Every post is a perfect opportunity for me to rerun my favorite attachment/argument, and suck someone else into it. You may find it fascinating; I'm finding it boring after all these years. So my new mindfulness posting approach is to: 1. Don't bother to respond to anyone who has a proven track record of doing this, and who seems to be doing it again. ( In many cases this can be extended to Don't bother to read their posts, because they have established a track record of never writing anything worth reading. ) 2. Try not to do the same thing myself, by qualifying the things I say as pure opinion, not some claim of truth or knowledge. ( This is more difficult because those who *do* claim that the things they believe are worth arguing about assume that everyone else is as limited as they are and believes the same thing. They're so stuck in that gotta prove my self right mindset that they can't see any other possibility. ) 3. Don't bother to say anything unless it a) needs to be said, b) is fun to rap about, c) is neat enough to share, or d) is funny. Those strike me as valid reasons for posting something. ( Arguing with someone about some- thing their self believes in just because they know that self will die soon and they're terrified of losing it *doesn't* strike me as a valid reason for posting. ) As with my previous posting experiments I'll probably get bored with this one after a very short while, but for now it's fun. And it cer- tainly cuts down on the time I waste on FFL. Not bothering to read more than the first two lines of anything posted by the Narcissicism Quints *alone* cuts my FFL reading time in half. :-)
[FairfieldLife] 'More American's Choose- India for Major Medical Procedures'
Heard on 'Air America'... More people headed to India for major medical help... In order to avoid the over-priced medical care in the U.S Many people are going to India, for things like heart surgery... It seems that an operation, that would cost $100,000.00, In the US, would cost about $16,000, in India, including airfare, And three weeks of recovery... Maybe this will finally break the back of the 'American Mafia Medical System'... If they have a little competition, from a less greedy and more efficient system... r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Is celibacy a way of removing weak genes from the genepool?
That's not the point of this article per se, but that's what it made me think of. If regular sex seems to result in stronger sperm with healthier DNA and irregular sex seems to result in weaker sperm with more DNA damage, then those men who choose celibacy as a lifestyle may be intuitively aware of their weak genes and be intuitively protecting future generations by removing their genes from the gene pool. Daily sex 'best for good sperm' By Emma Wilkinson BBC News health reporter in Amsterdam [0] [Sperm] Daily ejaculation may be the best way to improve sperm quality Having sex every day improves sperm quality and could boost the chances of getting pregnant, research suggests. In a study of men with fertility problems, daily ejaculation for a week cut the amount of DNA damage seen in sperm samples. Speaking at a fertility conference, the Australian researcher said general advice for couples had been to have sex every two or three days. Early results from the trial had already shown promising results. But 118 men have now been tested and the benefits for sperm have become clearer. Dr David Greening, from Sydney IVF, told delegates at the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology meeting that eight in ten men taking part showed a 12% drop in sperm DNA damage after the seven days. Although there was a big drop in sperm numbers from 180 million to 70 million over the week, men were still within the normal fertile range. Sperm also became more active over the seven days with a small rise in motility, he added. Damage The theory is the longer sperm hang around in the testes the more likely they are to accumulate DNA damage and the warm environment could also make them more sluggish after a while. Sperm come under attack by free radicals - small reactive molecules which can damage DNA and cause cell death - in the tube that stores and carries sperm away from the testes. Further work is needed to work out if daily sex for men without fertility problems has the same benefits but Dr Greening believes it is likely to be the case. He warns that having daily sex for too long - say a fortnight - would probably cut sperm numbers too much. But recommended lots of sex daily around the time the woman is ovulating. He said it was best to keep the river flowing. As men age they may not have as much sex as they did when they were younger, adding to the problem of infertility, Dr Greening told delegates. We are designed to breed in our youth. Perhaps we have been blaming the women as couples get older but perhaps there's a contribution from the male because we're not behaving as we should be.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. So I issue you a challenge -- describe for me (and our studio audience) something NON-relative, some truth (or anything, for that matter) that can be said to be non-relative or absolute. And you have to do so while using no comparison with anything relative to describe it, and using no relative point of view from which to perceive it. ( Otherwise it's...duh...relative. Right? ) I'll wait. :-) If you can't do it, I have to assume that either this non-relative truth you glorify 1) does not exist, or 2) is irrelevant to relative existence because it can only be experienced or described *via* relative existence. Put up or shut up. Your non-relative truth can either be produced or it cannot. And producing it only in terms of the relative or in comparison to the relative or from a relative point of view is...duh...just one more example of relativism. Have fun. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptyb...@... wrote: Some posters here are so unconsciously absorbed in their relativism that they don't even notice it. Others celebrate it as if it was a triumph. Yep, it's a Triumph des Willens, and quite comical to watch - a sort of burleque show. Isn't this is why *humorous and hubris* go together so well? *** Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. In effect, relativism consists in declaring it to be true that there is no such thing as truth, or in declaring it to be absolutely true that nothing but the relatively true exists; one might just as well say that language does not exist, or write that there is no such thing as writing. In short, every idea is reduced to a relativity of some sort, whether psychological, historical, or social; but the assertion nullifies itself by the fact that it too presents itself as a psychological, historical, or social relativity. The assertion nullifies itself if it is true, and by nullifying itself logically proves thereby that it is false; its initial absurdity lies in the implicit claim to be unique in escaping, as if by enchantment, from a relativity that is declared alone to be possible. (from Logic and Transcendence)
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. So I issue you a challenge -- describe for me (and our studio audience) something NON-relative, some truth (or anything, for that matter) that can be said to be non-relative or absolute. And you have to do so while using no comparison with anything relative to describe it, and using no relative point of view from which to perceive it. ( Otherwise it's...duh...relative. Right? ) I'll wait. :-) OK, just messin'... How about 1. In any right triangle, the square of the length of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the lengths of the two other sides. Or 2. I am in pain (I just bashed my knee on my desk. I wish I could change my point of view, but it ain't so easy...) Or 3. Cogito ergo sum
[FairfieldLife] Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. So I issue you a challenge -- describe for me (and our studio audience) something NON-relative, some truth (or anything, for that matter) that can be said to be non-relative or absolute. And you have to do so while using no comparison with anything relative to describe it, and using no relative point of view from which to perceive it. ( Otherwise it's...duh...relative. Right? ) I'll wait. :-) OK, just messin'... How about 1. In any right triangle, the square of the length of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the lengths of the two other sides. First, the example given is *completely* relative, meaning that it exists in the relative universe. Second (and I don't know the answer to this), you are describ- ing a two-dimensional object. Would this mathematical axiom still be as true in three dimensions, or four, or five? For that matter, just curve the lines of the three sides of the triangle in two- dimensional space and you have rendered the axiom untrue. It's truth depends on the lines being straight. Or 2. I am in pain (I just bashed my knee on my desk. I wish I could change my point of view, but it ain't so easy...) Actually, it is. :-) That's what mindful- ness is all about. But, to keep playing, just for fun, define pain. My bet is that you cannot without relating the state or experience you term as pain to something else (non-pain). So again, you're stuck with a relative truth. Not to *mention* the quagmire you get into if I ask you who and what this I you believe is experiencing pain is. :-) Or 3. Cogito ergo sum Again, what is this I that thinks it is thinking? :-) But, still for fun, when you are NOT think- ing (for example, during deep sleep or under a total anesthetic), do you not exist? If you believe that you do, your choice of statement is not true in all situations, and thus is not absolute. My point in all of this is simply that one can nullify the supposed truth of any state- ment I can think of by merely *shifting one's state of consciousness or POV*. I did so above by comparing the supposed truth of I think, therefore I am as perceived in the waking state and as perceived in the deep sleep state. Now get even kinkier and bring supposed higher states of consciousness into the mix. My larger point is that IMO those who cling to the things they think they know as truths don't radically change their states of consc- iousness very often. If they did, they would experience that what seems to be true from waking state is definitely not when perceived from CC, and that the reality is different again when perceived from UC. Believing things true may be fun when oper- ating *within one fixed realm of existence and state of consciousness* (like math or physics, perceived from normal waking state), but often its truths change even within those same realms and SOCs. For example, is the behavior of atoms (their truth) the same at regular temperatures as it is a near-absolute zero? If not, which of these different behaviors is the truth of how atoms behave? My contention is that *both* are. I reject the notion of hierarchy with regard to truth, the belief that one truth is Truth and reigns supreme. I believe that all of these relative truths coexist and are both equally true and equally false. But of course I wouldn't claim that that belief is true. :-) :-) :-) Thanks for responding, and in such a fun and light way. I *understand* that some people (and especially some people on this forum) get their buttons pushed when someone challenges an assump- tion that they have taken for granted for so long that it has for them become unchallengable. But challenging the unchallengable assumptions (like the existence of something called truth) is what *I* do for fun. I don't know shit. I am not *claiming* to know shit. I'm just having fun challenging pretty much everything I've ever been told in my life was true, to see if I can find a situation or a POV from which it is *not* true. So far I have been unable to find a single truth I cannot do this with. But I'm open to someone producing one. That's why I posted my challenge to Empty. He'll probably respond by quoting more authorities or playing shoot the messenger, as he usually does. I appreciate you playing the game in the spirit in which it was introduced -- something to do for FUN, not to prove anyone right or wrong.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: FW: JULY 4th HISTORY LESSON from the SAR
Thanks 4 the THANKS I did some ( very little) research but most was done by the Sons of The American Revolution of which I am a mbr. Buffalo NY Chapter. Bill Leed Ret.Col.USA In a message dated 7/2/2009 2:28:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, john_youe...@comcast.net writes: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wle...@... wrote: From: FolkSgr1 To: FolkSgr1 BCC: FILLETSEET Sent: 7/1/2009 1:06:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time Subj: JULY 4th HISTORY LESSON Subject: July 4th - History lesson Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Five signers were captured by the B ritish as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War. They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated, but they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if /div they were captured. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags. Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward. Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton. At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt. Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid. Remember: freedom is never free! I hope you will show your support by sending this to as many people as you can, please. It's time we get the word out that patriotism is NOT a sin, and the Fourth of July has more to it than beer, picnics, and baseball games. Thanks for posting this, Bill. Amazing! JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links **Dell Summer Savings: Cool Deals on Popular Laptops – Shop Now! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222696924x1201468348/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D1)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgil...@... wrote: Regardless of whether you heard the program, you might enjoy reading a short excerpt from a book about The Family at the Fresh Air website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 We elect our leaders, he said. Jesus elects his. I'm a bit suspicious of this account because it's written in such a novelistic style, from such a subjective perspective. I'd rather not have quite so much interpretation--e.g., He stared back, holding Raf's gaze like it was a pretty thing he'd found on the ground. Well, maybe that *is* how he held Raf's gaze. Or maybe that description is a function of the writer's intention to portray the guy as negatively and scarily as he can. Are the quotations from the guy's spiel verbatim, or was the writer paraphrasing, with the same intention? It wouldn't surprise me that these people are genuinely scary. I wouldn't mind if the writer said explicitly that *he* found them scary. But I'd rather not be *programmed* by the writer to think they're scary. That excerpt just feels manipulative to me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. What does responsibly mean here? The fundie guy supposedly excuses the brutal excesses--including murder and gross sadism--of King David and Ghengis Khan on the basis that they were presumably God's toys, following a higher purpose. I have trouble seeing that as a parallel with MMY.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip I *understand* that some people (and especially some people on this forum) get their buttons pushed when someone challenges an assump- tion that they have taken for granted for so long that it has for them become unchallengable. But challenging the unchallengable assumptions (like the existence of something called truth) is what *I* do for fun. Thing is, Barry, you don't do it very well. I don't know shit. I am not *claiming* to know shit. I'm just having fun challenging pretty much everything I've ever been told in my life was true, to see if I can find a situation or a POV from which it is *not* true. So far I have been unable to find a single truth I cannot do this with. For example, let's see you do this with your thesis that there are no absolute truths. From what situation or POV would that *not* be true? I.e., from what situation or POV would the nonexistence of absolute truths NOT be true? And for extra credit: From what situation or POV would it NOT be true that people challenge you because they're uncomfortable with your challenging their beliefs?
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. While cleverly evading the actual issue emptybill raised: snip Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Do you even *understand* the issue? Can you state it in your own words? (BTW, in what situation would it NOT be true that what emptybill posts is a function of his jealousy of Vaj and yourself?)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Mindfulness Posting Technique :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip Sal, while what you say above about Shemp is true, IMO it is *also* true about many other posters here. They rerun the same old arguments more often than a revival theater reruns Casablanca. :-) It's almost as if Fairfield Life was for them a permutation of Maharishi's Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared bullshit. Their version is Every post is a perfect opportunity for me to rerun my favorite attachment/argument, and suck someone else into it. Anybody here think Barry himself is not among the posters he describes? Just as one example, Barry has quoted MMY's version of the above perfect opportunity quote *at least* seven times in connection with his contention (proclaimed even more often) that the TMers here are only capable of parroting what they've been taught. snip As with my previous posting experiments I'll probably get bored with this one after a very short while, but for now it's fun. And it cer- tainly cuts down on the time I waste on FFL. Not bothering to read more than the first two lines of anything posted by the Narcissicism Quints *alone* cuts my FFL reading time in half. :-) Looks like Barry edited his post to remove a list of five posters he considers narcissistic-- apparently because it didn't quite jibe with his latest posting experiment (which happens to be an experiment he's announced and run countless times, unsuccessfully)--but forgot to delete the reference above to the Narcissism Quints.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
What part of the Mindfulness Posting Technique did Judy not understand? I guess I'll have to use visual aids. [http://www.timw.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/dumped_lge.gif] [http://www.jak-systems.ca/sites/Joker/Shared%20Documents/dumped-you--.j\ pg] The thing is, we all know that she *still* won't get it, even with the visual aids, and will *continue* to try to suck me and other victims into her never-ending arguments. Maybe if no one has replied to any of her attempts to do so in ten years or so she'll get it. Then again, we're talking Judy, so maybe she won't...[:)] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. While cleverly evading the actual issue emptybill raised: snip Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Do you even *understand* the issue? Can you state it in your own words? (BTW, in what situation would it NOT be true that what emptybill posts is a function of his jealousy of Vaj and yourself?)
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Do you even *understand* the issue? Can you state it in your own words? I'm not Barry, but I think it refers to the paradox that the claim that there are no absolutes in the relative world is itself not absolute.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amelie Meli-Melo(ah ha!)
-- O a rogue! (Stealing a name and of a rascal at that! Ha ha ha!) Very delectable. Ah, the charm of it! Turquoise is blue and so in ignorance I renamed you I agree with you on the movie and life in general as you were mentioning about happiness -Rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints,... -Billy Joel You have a true appreciation of what is lovely I bet your smile is quite warm Bzzz A morning of good to you Bee of blue - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, meowthirteen meowthirteen@ wrote: --\ Merci beaucoup for the orange colored day you gave to me De rien. Thought you'd like it. such a gift I have not enjoyed myself so much and had such a good time in a while Want to enjoy yourself even more? Turn someone else who hasn't seen it onto the film. See below. The verbal imagery and the imagery! snip I'm glad you enjoyed it. As you might imagine, having now seen the film, turning someone who has not seen it before on to the magic of Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain feels very much like Amélie's self-assigned mission in the film itself. Amélie came out while I was living in Santa Fe, but as chance would have it I saw it first in another city, while consulting there. I returned home on a Thursday to find that it was opening in Santa Fe the next night. I hastily organized a barbeque/party at my house and afterwards took 30 friends who had never heard of the film to see it. Suffice it to say that like Amélie during that showing I looked around occasionally to see the looks on their faces. It's probably the most fun I have ever had in my life at the movies. The magic of Amélie in my opinion centers on the fact that it is autobiographical and thus springs from real life. All but a few of the incidents you see onscreen actually happened to Jean-Pierre Jeunet. He started working on the film 25 years before he filmed it, in the form of a journal he kept of these incidents. The goldfish story was true; it happened to him as a child. Nino's photo scrapbook is true; it is based on a real scrapbook that Jeunet is the owner of. The traveling garden gnome incident actually happened, although it didn't happen to him personally. Another aspect of the film's magic, of course, is its vision of Paris. Having lived there, I can assure you that it is a fantasy vision; Paris does not look quite like this. But Jeunet had just returned from two years spent in Los Angeles making Alien Resurrection, having missed Paris a great deal, and so he wanted to recreate the vision of Paris that he had missed, not the one with dog shit on all of its streets. I think he succeeded admirably. But for me the heart of the magic at the heart of Amélie is the vow whe makes after finding the child's treasure box. She decides to become a do-gooder and spend her life doing nice things for other people. This is so contrary to the way we are taught these days to become happy that it sounds crazy. The self-help aisles of bookstores are full of books telling you how to become happy by doing for yourself, by satisfying all of your own desires, by focusing on yourself. Every advertisement we see in print or on TV tells us the same thing: Buy this car for yourself and you'll be happy. Wear this and you will be happy. Drink this and you will be happy. And its all a lie. As far as I can tell, the people I've met on this planet who spend the most time focusing on themselves and trying to do thing for themselves are the most miserable people I have ever met. Whereas those people I've met who spend most of their time trying to do nice things for others are the happiest. When Jeunet started writing the script, he was concerned because it was a jumble of 200 unrelated stories, with no center. He had no theme or main idea with which to tie all the stories together. The idea of Amélie dedicating her life to helping other people was just one of the many stories. But then one day it leaped out at him, and he realized he had the center of his film, the solution. Interestingly enough, it is as far as I can tell also the solution of how to find happiness in life. I do like American Beauty, Blue. Glad you like that film, too, but for the record, my screen name has nothing to do with the color blue: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/50856
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rendezvous with Rama
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/business/energy-environment/01farm.html?_r=1 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip Next up, besides the obvious (yet another attempt to make it appear that the real world fits into the narrow ideas of it dreamed up by Dark Age seers), there is John's reference of the five elements themselves. Not one of them is an element. They are instead Dark Age superstitious notions about four phenomena (earth, air, fire, water) that they saw around them and didn't understand, and so wanted to imbue with made-up mysterious meanings, AS IF they understood them. And dealing with four real phenomena wasn't enough for them, so they had to make up a fifth *imaginary* element (ether) to add to the mix. Lots of errors in the above. First, the notion of the Five Elements didn't originate in the Dark Ages; it's much more ancient. It was prevalent in Classical Greece (from before the time of Socrates), and the Greek philosophers got it from ancient Hinduism and Buddhism. Ancient China and Japan had a similar principle. In most systems it was Five Elements all along, the first four elements having to do with earthly qualities and the fifth with the nature of the heavenly realms. Second, of course, the modern concept of elements referring to the basic constituents of matter *came from* the ancient one; it's a *development* of that concept. Nobody (except Barry, apparently) thinks that referring to the ancient concept as Five Elements is an attempt to apply the modern scientific term incorrectly in order to give it more credibility. To say Not one of the Five Elements is an element is absurd. Everybody (except Barry, apparently) realizes that in both cases the term element means *elementary constituent* (from the Greek elementum). Modern science didn't somehow appropriate the term element so that it could never be legitimately used to mean anything but what's in the periodic table. Third, in dismissing the Five Elements notion as superstitious, Barry completely misses the fact that it was one of the very first attempts to observe and analyze nature *in a scientific manner*. Of course the ancients didn't have modern tools; there was no way they could have taken the analysis to the level of that in the Periodic Table. But the thinking process, the motivation behind the analysis, was identical. I defy John to produce anything in the world of science that vali- dates a belief in the element of ether. Again, the idea of ether was a scientific one. The observation was that everything on earth was always changing, whereas the stars were seen to remain constant, so there must be a special additional category to account for the heavens. That was a logical conclusion, not a superstitious one. Erroneous does not automatically equate with superstitious. snip There are two forms of liberation implicit in real- izing that stuff like this is total projection, and has *nothing whatsoever* to do with reality or knowledge. Which, of course, applies just as much to the notions of modern science. All our scientific systems are no more than projections onto Reality (as, ironically, Barry himself has observed in other contexts when a particular concept of modern science didn't appeal to him--e.g., that the universe had a beginning). The first is becoming liberated from taking oneself seriously, AS IF one actually believed that one HAD knowledge. There is nothing quite as liberating as realizing that one knows diddleysquat. :-) And once again Barry tumbles into infinite regress. He *knows* that one knows diddleysquat. He has *knowledge* that one knows diddleysquat. Plus which, as we've all seen, he is prone to take this position only when he's rejecting things he doesn't agree with. Just for example: But the fact that you cannot see your own TRENDS and see them for what they are does not mean that they do not exist. The fact that you can come up with self-serving claims *about* the TRENDS does not make the claims true. He has no hesitation whatsoever about proclaiming his own projections to be factual and doing his damndest to sell them to everybody else. That, of course, is what he's doing in the post I'm responding to as well: Next up, besides the obvious (yet another attempt to make it appear that the real world fits into the narrow ideas of it dreamed up by Dark Age 'seers')... It's *obvious*, you see. Not just Barry's opinion, but an obvious *fact*. (Of course, it's not a fact at all, as I noted above). The entire post is selling *as a fact* that stuff like this (i.e., the Five Elements concept) is just projection. That is something Barry *knows*. But the second form of liberation implicit in realizing that stuff like this is pure projection is that you can *keep on doing it*, but for a better reason -- FOR FUN. Barry's thinking is so rigid and inflexible that he is unable to conceive of anybody having fun in a way other
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
On Jul 2, 2009, at 9:40 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Do you even *understand* the issue? Can you state it in your own words? I'm not Barry, but I think it refers to the paradox that the claim that there are no absolutes in the relative world is itself not absolute. It's a big debate question among some of the schools of Buddhism (and later, Vedanta) and often among Buddhists in general, esp. those with differing Views or Way-s-of-Seeing Reality: these are the infamous Two Truths, the relative and the absolute. In general it's fruitless to argue across differing Ways-of-Seeing as each View contains it's own logical base. It just ends up being a 'you say to- may-toe I say to-mah-toe' kinda thing. Even if one argues from the POV of the Fruit (i.e. the enlightened POV), presumably the highest POV, if the person you are arguing with is stuck in their mindset and has little realization, it makes little difference, without some one knowledgeable enough to coach the debate. Although some very skillful teachers can use it as a way to point out the Natural Condition, IMO that presumes the arguer is willing to remain open to vulnerability. Fuggetaboutit in an email argument.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Jul 2, 2009, at 9:40 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [quoting emptybill quoting Frithjof Schuon's Logic and Transcendence] Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Do you even *understand* the issue? Can you state it in your own words? I'm not Barry, but I think it refers to the paradox that the claim that there are no absolutes in the relative world is itself not absolute. Close. I'd take out the not. The claim is *for* the existence of an absolute, i.e., that there are absolutely no absolutes. The person declaring that there are no absolutes is making an absolute claim. It's a big debate question among some of the schools of Buddhism (and later, Vedanta) and often among Buddhists in general, esp. those with differing Views or Way-s-of-Seeing Reality: these are the infamous Two Truths, the relative and the absolute. In general it's fruitless to argue across differing Ways-of-Seeing as each View contains it's own logical base. Lectures Vaj, missing the point entirely. I'm not arguing in favor of absolutes. I'm pointing out that Barry doesn't grasp the logical paradox in his claim.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: What part of the Mindfulness Posting Technique did Judy not understand? I guess I'll have to use visual aids. [http://www.timw.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/dumped_lge.gif] [http://www.jak-systems.ca/sites/Joker/Shared%20Documents/dumped-you--.j\ pg] The thing is, we all know that she *still* won't get it, even with the visual aids, and will *continue* to try to suck me and other victims into her never-ending arguments. Maybe if no one has replied to any of her attempts to do so in ten years or so she'll get it. Then again, we're talking Judy, so maybe she won't...[:)] It's a more than safe bet. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. While cleverly evading the actual issue emptybill raised: snip Relativism sets out to reduce every element of absoluteness to a relativity, while making a quite illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Do you even *understand* the issue? Can you state it in your own words? (BTW, in what situation would it NOT be true that what emptybill posts is a function of his jealousy of Vaj and yourself?)
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip The thing is, we all know that she *still* won't get it, even with the visual aids, and will *continue* to try to suck me and other victims into her never-ending arguments. You jes' keep right on telling yourself that what I want is to suck you into arguments, Barry. (Cue Sal and do.rkflex: Ditto, Barry, ditto!) And I'll keep right on posting takedowns, boom boom boom, and having the last word, all on the ever-accumulating record.
[FairfieldLife] Crop Circles on Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfcw7ohkuOU (turn the volume down)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: I used to have that problem of waking between 2 and 4 AM -- it's a Pitta disturbance; Mapi's Deep Rest will let you sleep through: http://pages.citebite.com/p1q5k7i0y1bxk Bob, do you / did you use caffeine in any form? Even a little chocolate during the day has me waking up between 2 a.m. and 4 a.m.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Mindfulness Posting Technique :-)
On Jul 2, 2009, at 3:10 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: shemp, one thing I don't understand... OK, we all get that you don't think GW is a reality (or at least that's what you keep implying, ad nauseum). But why is it so important to you that others, particularly others here, agree with you? If you're secure in your own knowledge, and that's good enough for you, why do you constantly seem to need a group consensus and validation of your opinion? I am really interested in knowing, because to me, at least, the constant attempts at validation and trying to prove others wrong are somewhat fascinating. Sal, while what you say above about Shemp is true, IMO it is *also* true about many other posters here. They rerun the same old arguments more often than a revival theater reruns Casablanca. :-) True, Barry, but yesterday was Pick On Shemp Day--didn't you get the notice from Rick? :) It's almost as if Fairfield Life was for them a permutation of Maharishi's Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared bullshit. Their version is Every post is a perfect opportunity for me to rerun my favorite attachment/argument, and suck someone else into it. You may find it fascinating; I'm finding it boring after all these years. Maybe the others haven't done it as much in a while, because I'm noticing shemp's barrage lately more than anyone else's. I assume one of the points of the articles he posts is to get people to notice them--and yet when somebody does, he retreats and refuses to engage in dialogue. OK. So my new mindfulness posting approach is to: 1. Don't bother to respond to anyone who has a proven track record of doing this, and who seems to be doing it again. ( In many cases this can be extended to Don't bother to read their posts, because they have established a track record of never writing anything worth reading. ) Right. But I often enjoy shemp's posts, whether or not I agree with them--and, in fact, this question of mine has nothing whatsoever to do with GW or whether his views on it are right or wrong as he tried to make it seem I was implying. I am simply interested (at this point, at least) in the methodology--posting very similar articles over and over, and then claiming that a) you're not trying to convince anyone of anything and now b) you're so concerned about the world-wide effect of said policies that you spend much of your spare time and energy posting on a forum read by, at most, a few hundred, if that. 2. Try not to do the same thing myself, by qualifying the things I say as pure opinion, not some claim of truth or knowledge. ( This is more difficult because those who *do* claim that the things they believe are worth arguing about assume that everyone else is as limited as they are and believes the same thing. They're so stuck in that gotta prove my self right mindset that they can't see any other possibility. ) 3. Don't bother to say anything unless it a) needs to be said, b) is fun to rap about, c) is neat enough to share, or d) is funny. Those strike me as valid reasons for posting something. ( Arguing with someone about some- thing their self believes in just because they know that self will die soon and they're terrified of losing it *doesn't* strike me as a valid reason for posting. ) As with my previous posting experiments I'll probably get bored with this one after a very short while, but for now it's fun. And it cer- tainly cuts down on the time I waste on FFL. Not bothering to read more than the first two lines of anything posted by the Narcissicism Quints *alone* cuts my FFL reading time in half. :-) Good points all. Sal
[FairfieldLife] New swirled order (crop circle documentary 2009)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mAdrSvOgwINR=1
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Regardless of whether you heard the program, you might enjoy reading a short excerpt from a book about The Family at the Fresh Air website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 We elect our leaders, he said. Jesus elects his. I'm a bit suspicious of this account because it's written in such a novelistic style, from such a subjective perspective. I'd rather not have quite so much interpretation--e.g., He stared back, holding Raf's gaze like it was a pretty thing he'd found on the ground. Well, maybe that *is* how he held Raf's gaze. Or maybe that description is a function of the writer's intention to portray the guy as negatively and scarily as he can. Are the quotations from the guy's spiel verbatim, or was the writer paraphrasing, with the same intention? It wouldn't surprise me that these people are genuinely scary. I wouldn't mind if the writer said explicitly that *he* found them scary. But I'd rather not be *programmed* by the writer to think they're scary. That excerpt just feels manipulative to me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. What does responsibly mean here? The fundie guy supposedly excuses the brutal excesses--including murder and gross sadism--of King David and Ghengis Khan on the basis that they were presumably God's toys, following a higher purpose. I have trouble seeing that as a parallel with MMY. I don't believe the fundie guy is excusing the excesses of King David and Ghengis Khan. He's saying God selects who's in charge, and if we want to change things for ordinary people, we need to work on those people whom God has placed in power, even if they're not nice people. Such was Maharishi's practice, as it has been the practice of foreign policy pragmatists throughout history. (I'm thinking of American leaders who shook hands with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.) In a related story, there's this op-ed from Roger Cohen in yesterday's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/opinion/02iht-edcohen.html From the column: 'Moussavi was supported by people who have lost faith,' [the conservative cleric] said. 'We [the Iranian power structure] believe legitimacy comes from God. They believe legitimacy comes from the people, from votes.'
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: Regardless of whether you heard the program, you might enjoy reading a short excerpt from a book about The Family at the Fresh Air website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 We elect our leaders, he said. Jesus elects his. I'm a bit suspicious of this account because it's written in such a novelistic style, from such a subjective perspective. I'd rather not have quite so much interpretation--e.g., He stared back, holding Raf's gaze like it was a pretty thing he'd found on the ground. Agreed. But such is New Journalism. By the way, the author is Jeff Sharlet, who founded the Killing the Buddha website: http://killingthebuddha.com/
[FairfieldLife] New Dem health plan has public option, lower cost
WASHINGTON (AP) Democrats on a key Senate Committee outlined a revised and far less costly health care plan Wednesday night that includes a government-run insurance option and an annual fee on employers who do not offer coverage to their workers. The plan carries a 10-year price tag of slightly over $600 billion, and would lead toward an estimated 97 percent of all Americans having coverage, according to the Congressional Budget Office, Sens. Edward M. Kennedy and Chris Dodd said in a letter to other members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The AP obtained a copy. By contrast, an earlier, incomplete proposal carried a price tag of roughly $1 trillion and would have left millions uninsured, CBO analysts said in mid-June. The letter indicated the cost and coverage improvements resulted from two changes. The first calls for a government-run health insurance option to compete with private coverage plans, an option that has drawn intense opposition from Republicans. We must not settle for legislation that merely gestures at reform, the two Democrats wrote. We must deliver on the promise of true change. Additionally, the revised proposal calls for a $750 annual fee on employers for each full-time worker not offered coverage through their job. The fee would be set at $375 for part-time workers. Companies with fewer than 25 employees would be exempt. The fee was forecast to generate $52 billion over 10 years, money the government would use to help provide subsidies to those who cannot afford insurance. The same provision is also estimated to greatly reduce the number of workers whose employers would drop coverage, thus addressing a major concern noted by CBO when it reviewed the earlier proposals. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Dodd, D-Conn., circulated their letter a few days before lawmakers return from their July 4 vacation, with the Health Committee one of several panels expected to take action on health care legislation that President Barack Obama has placed atop his domestic agenda. Kennedy, the committee chairman, was diagnosed with a brain tumor more than a year ago and has been absent from the Senate for weeks, although he and his aides have been heavily involved in the deliberations on a health care bill. Dodd, the next senior Democrat on the committee, has presided at committee sessions and taken an increasingly public role. With its government option, the proposal is unlikely to gain any bipartisan support in the committee. Separately, Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee are at work trying to reach agreement on an alternative that calls for creation of nonprofit cooperatives to sell insurance in competition with private industry. Agreement has been elusive on that and other issues, and it is not clear whether a deal is possible before Democrats opt for a more partisan approach. In their letter, Kennedy and Dodd said the Congressional Budget Office has carefully reviewed our complete bill, and we are pleased to report that CBO has scored it at $611.4 billion over 10 years, with the new coverage provisions scored at $597 billion. ...The completed bill virtually eliminates the dropping of currently covered employees from employer-sponsored health plans. In addition, our bill, combined with the work being done by our colleagues in the Finance Committee, will dramatically reduce the number of uninsured fully 97 percent of Americans will have coverage, a major achievement. Three committees in the House have been at work for weeks on a plan expected to come to a vote by the end of July. ~Associated Press: http://snipurl.com/ln097 [www_google_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
Silly silly Turq. What a childish approach to debating ultimate truth. As if. As if! As if a logical rearranging of concepts could be a spiritual process that was anything but a cul de sac. One of the methods for approaching the Absolute: neti, neti, neti. Egoic attachment is a projection of congruency by one processing (ego) with merely another processing of the brain. Get that? Doesn't seem that you do, widdle Bluey Boy. When neti is practiced, relativity is challenged to pony up something worthy of the ego's projection, and that means that ultimately amness must be presented to the ego -- only amness can satisfy the ego that it has found its soul mate. Neti, neti, neti is the equivalent of holding one's breath until the toddler gets what its little purple face is scrunched up for: being picked up by Mommy. Mother Divine is amness. Taking the TM mantra for a ride is the act of saying neti to all other processing until one gets a processing that satisfies it foreversee? This egoic practice of eschewing attachments weakens the monkey's motivation to jump to another branch without the monkey first saying, Why jump anywhere else? -- it's always just another branch -- not what I'm really looking for. That neti-practiced ability to pause before jumping is the most powerful ability that an ego can acquire. Finally, gaining that power, the ego is resolved into a permanent state of neti and ends up having only itself to attach to -- that is AMNESS is realized as the primal egoic embodiment. And that's the final attachment that must be rent asunder. Having that ability of residing in that amness, and having practiced neti and able to not fall in love with the next passing thought, ego now has the power to begin to resist identification with amness. Ego now has but a loose attachment to amness in that it has mastered avoiding attachment to all of amness' baubles and trinkets -- manifestations only -- except this one last manifest THING -- amness itself, a processing of a brain, the sound OM that can be infinitely modulated to become ANY OTHER THING. Residing in amness, from that POV, the ego realizes its omnipotence and that it is GOD, and also that it can be less than God -- a god of any dimension, a master of time and space, and that it can manifest without restraint in any guise, take on any incarnation, be an atom, a demon, a flower, a single thought, dust on an angel's wing, whatever. Yep, neti, neti, neti teaches you that, because you have to keep saying, in essence, Nope, you can't get me to put my attention there to everything! Ego says: I choose not to attach (ego process refuses to identify with another process,)to any offering of the mind, and by having done so for a long time, I finally have the psychic muscle to rein in this attachment-addiction even when I'm attached to the godhead itself. Only then, ONLY THEN, can one (ego) hope to find that the Absolute can be realized by the ego. Only then can the ego see that amness -- a processing -- cannot be a suitable embodiment for egoic satisfaction, because finally the ego sees that it too is not a suitable symbol of the all the truth that Godel said couldn't be expressed. The ego finally sees that amness is claustrophobic -- the tiniest of gilded prisons that won't even allow one Cosmic Breath to be taken. That's why Brahma rejected the lotus-amness-bliss and tried to get to the Absolute instead. As He traveled down the stalk, He was saying neti to the blossom-heaven. The ego, neti-siddhi empowered, in a magnificent act of surrender, chooses to shut up, stop singing OM, and listen-without-listening to non-sound, non-sense, non-non, for the first time. It dies on purpose. Only by finally doing neti on its own existence, only by stopping everything including itself, can the ego discover that the Absolute is in every interstice between thoughts, between quarks, and between iterations of ego, and most importantly that the Absolute is the real-non-real-unendingness and that it is the only fitting thing for ego to identify with. But, but, but, here's the funny part: now the tables have been fully turned, and the ego sees that all along the Absolute has been informing ego -- not the other way around. Ego (cosmic in status) realizes it is but a manifestation, not an Identity that can attach to a manifestation. Realizing this, the ego becomes a burnt rope: looks like the self, seems to be the self, but just plain ain't. A pile of ash with no ropeness -- except rope-ish form, illusion, a rope mirage in amness' desert. Only then, can the ego say, Even when I'm not operative, THAT, which I am but a symbol of, IS. IS when all of creation isn't. I, cosmic ego, bow to THAT even though I am not worthy of being an embodiment of THAT. Even though I am the best of the best attempts to symbolize THAT, I am but a cup overflowing with THAT and cannot contain IT. That's
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Mindfulness Posting Technique :-)
TurquoiseB wrote: It's almost as if Fairfield Life was for them a permutation of Maharishi's Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared bullshit. Their version is Every post is a perfect opportunity for me to rerun my favorite attachment/argument, and suck someone else into it. authfriend wrote: Anybody here think Barry himself is not among the posters he describes? Remember this quote from Maharishi? 'Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared?' Well, that's how one part of TM Teacher Training works... Read more: From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: TM and transcendence Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: July 22, 2003 http://tinyurl.com/nabgsm
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
bob_brigante wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukr...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: So I finally gave in and tried the Xanax. The dosage is 0.5 mg and the pharmacist suggested I take it right before bed because until one knows the effects one shouldn't drive under its influence. So I've taken it three times: the first time about a week ago and then the night before last and then last night. Here are the two results I notice more than anything: 1) It let me sleep longer. I haven't had any problem falling asleep; I am always able to go to sleep about 10 minutes after closing my eyes and I usually go to bed at about 10pm. My problem had been waking up about 2:30 and tossing and turning. the Xanax gave me a few hours more. 2) Felt a lot of fatigue during the day...instead of the nervousness. . And I rack this up to the fatigue that has been accumulating. no its the Xanax. And it is real addictive. *** I used to have that problem of waking between 2 and 4 AM -- it's a Pitta disturbance; Mapi's Deep Rest will let you sleep through: http://pages.citebite.com/p1q5k7i0y1bxk The reason you feel fatigued is because Xanax or similar drugs interfere with normal sleep patterns -- so you're unconscious, but you're not really sleeping with its restorative effects: Writing prescriptions for sleeping pills or tranquilizers is a reflex for doctors, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the problem. Rather, it produces rebound anxiety, rebound insomnia, and debilitating side effects. Worse, thousands, if not millions of Americans are addicted to these drugs. http://snipurl.com/ll5d8 [mapi_com] I would suspect a pitta disturbance too given where he lives and it IS summer. A few years back I suggested a pitta imbalance to someone on one of these forums and they too had been treating for vata instead. They didn't believe me but did go to a vaidya who told them the same thing. They started treating pitta and the sleeplessness went away. Taking a drug like Xanax for that kind of sleeplessness seems like overkill.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Xanax update
shempmcgurk wrote: So I finally gave in and tried the Xanax. The dosage is 0.5 mg and the pharmacist suggested I take it right before bed because until one knows the effects one shouldn't drive under its influence. So I've taken it three times: the first time about a week ago and then the night before last and then last night. Here are the two results I notice more than anything: 1) It let me sleep longer. I haven't had any problem falling asleep; I am always able to go to sleep about 10 minutes after closing my eyes and I usually go to bed at about 10pm. My problem had been waking up about 2:30 and tossing and turning. the Xanax gave me a few hours more. 2) Felt a lot of fatigue during the day...instead of the nervousness. I rack this up to the fatigue that has been accumulating. I agree with Bob that you may be experiencing a pitta disturbance. I know you've been trying to treat a vata imbalance but I think some people overtreat for that causing other imbalances instead. It IS summer and you like in an area that has extreme heat which can cause pitta imbalances. Our bodies are very flexible and are constantly adjusting to the environment. I like using green tea as a pitta balancing substance because it also helps with kapha too. I get a good nights sleep and have that jump out of bed feeling in the morning compared to drag myself out of bed.
[FairfieldLife] Real effect of Maharishi pundits in India? Gay sex legalized at last.
*Finally* India does something that indicates it's living in this century instead of in dreams of a glorified idealized past that never existed: Your request is being processed... India Decriminalizes Gay Sex http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/02/india-decriminalizes-gay_n_224\ 656.html By Mansi Poddar In what many are calling India's Stonewall, the New Delhi High Court on Thursday decriminalized homosexual intercourse between consenting adults, by striking down section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. This law labels gay sex to be an unnatural offense, punishable with up to ten years in prison. Drafted in 1860, this Colonial-era law was brought into effect by the British, and was in line with similar anti-homosexuality legislation passed in England at the time. In the past decade, gay rights activists and lawyers have strived hard to abrogate Section 377, calling it inhuman, and as the Naz Foundation, which filed the petition to abolition 377 in 2001 argued, a violation of constitutional rights to privacy and equality. No Rain on Their Parade In its ruling today, the Delhi High Court affirmed that claim, saying that Section 377 violated basic human rights. The same court, however, had dismissed a similar petition in 2001. It is clear that this latest ruling is a reflection of increased activism by gay rights groups and high profiled supporters like Bollywood actress and Former Miss World Celina Jaitley, along with a more progressive government. Hot on the heels of gay pride parades in Delhi and Bangalore, which saw the Indian homosexual community and its supporters out in full force and color, this victory gives activists one more reason to celebrate. They were seen on the streets of the capital this morning, distributing sweets and smearing each other with vermillion, the traditional way to mark an auspicious occasion. We have finally entered into the 21st Century, claimed Anjali Gopalan, head of the Naz Foundation, to reporters here. It is very clear now that sex between consenting results would no longer be an offence, added another Naz member. Roadblocks Ahead According to human rights groups like the Humsafar Trust, the archaic Section 377 was often used to blackmail gay couples for money or sexual favors, and posed a great hindrance to HIV/AIDS prevention initiatives, as homosexuals, who, according to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are amongst the groups most susceptible to the disease, were afraid to seek help in fear of prosecution. The HIV/AIDS argument, however, has been used by supporters of Section 377 as well, who claim that increased homosexual intercourse will lead to faster spread of the disease. The ruling has also been vehemently condemned by religious leaders. A member of the India Muslim Personal Law Board told a national newspaper here that [homosexuality] is against all religions... and the culture of Indian society...This practice is unnatural. It should continue as a criminal act. There are also other hurdles to consider: the decision is valid only in New Delhi, and doesn't apply to the rest of the country; it can (and in most probability will) be challenged in the Supreme Court; and it doesn't legalize homosexuality, only decriminalizes it. Ray of Hope Experts here are comparing this decision to the Stonewall Riots, which kicked of the gay movement in America in 1969, and were celebrated in the streets of New York last week. And even if it is eventually overturned by the Supreme Court, the ruling remains a ray of hope. At least today, the brightly-hued gay pride flag will fly high, and in a most unlikely place - traditional India's capital city.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Mindfulness Posting Technique :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex no_re...@... wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: It's almost as if Fairfield Life was for them a permutation of Maharishi's Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared bullshit. Their version is Every post is a perfect opportunity for me to rerun my favorite attachment/argument, and suck someone else into it. authfriend wrote: Anybody here think Barry himself is not among the posters he describes? Just as one example, Barry has quoted MMY's version of the above perfect opportunity quote *at least* seven times in connection with his contention (proclaimed even more often) that the TMers here are only capable of parroting what they've been taught. Remember this quote from Maharishi? 'Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared?' Well, that's how one part of TM Teacher Training works... Read more: From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: TM and transcendence Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: July 22, 2003 http://tinyurl.com/nabgsm I wasn't even counting the instances on alt.m.t, just on FFL. (And I wasn't including his most recent post--so that's really at least *nine* times he's used the quote to make the identical point.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip The thing is, we all know that she *still* won't get it, even with the visual aids, and will *continue* to try to suck me and other victims into her never-ending arguments. Maybe if no one has replied to any of her attempts to do so in ten years or so she'll get it. Then again, we're talking Judy, so maybe she won't...[:)] [Judy wrote:] (Cue Sal and do.rkflex: Ditto, Barry, ditto!) [do.rkflex wrote:] It's a more than safe bet. chuckle
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
Certainly a nice story, nothing more --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgil...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: snip Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. What does responsibly mean here? The fundie guy supposedly excuses the brutal excesses--including murder and gross sadism--of King David and Ghengis Khan on the basis that they were presumably God's toys, following a higher purpose. I have trouble seeing that as a parallel with MMY. I don't believe the fundie guy is excusing the excesses of King David and Ghengis Khan. He's saying God selects who's in charge, and if we want to change things for ordinary people, we need to work on those people whom God has placed in power, even if they're not nice people. I didn't get that he was saying the people (or rather, devout Christians) to make the leaders behave better, but I'll take your word for it. Such was Maharishi's practice, as it has been the practice of foreign policy pragmatists throughout history. (I'm thinking of American leaders who shook hands with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.) In a related story, there's this op-ed from Roger Cohen in yesterday's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/opinion/02iht-edcohen.html From the column: 'Moussavi was supported by people who have lost faith,' [the conservative cleric] said. 'We [the Iranian power structure] believe legitimacy comes from God. They believe legitimacy comes from the people, from votes.' See, here's where I get stuck. MMY always said leaders reflect the level of consciousness of the people, which doesn't seem to me compatible with the notion that leaders are chosen by God regardless of what the people want.
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost1uk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Empty, while I am even more underwhelmed by you spouting dogma than by you acting out your jeal- ousy of Vaj and myself, I perceive the possibility for fun here, so I'm gonna go for it. So I issue you a challenge -- describe for me (and our studio audience) something NON-relative, some truth (or anything, for that matter) that can be said to be non-relative or absolute. And you have to do so while using no comparison with anything relative to describe it, and using no relative point of view from which to perceive it. ( Otherwise it's...duh...relative. Right? ) I'll wait. :-) OK, just messin'... How about 1. In any right triangle, the square of the length of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the lengths of the two other sides. First, the example given is *completely* relative, meaning that it exists in the relative universe. Second (and I don't know the answer to this), you are describ- ing a two-dimensional object. Would this mathematical axiom still be as true in three dimensions, or four, or five? For that matter, just curve the lines of the three sides of the triangle in two- dimensional space and you have rendered the axiom untrue. It's truth depends on the lines being straight. If you want to play, I'm game to pursue this. No 1 first. In this case I think you're missing out on something VERY interesting. It's the diabolically odd mystery that is Mathematics. When you say it exists in the relative universe, well...what is the reference of it? Triangles? That's the funny thing you see. Triangles as described, do not exist like that at all in the relative universe. They are an ideal, a Platonic 'form' if you like. Does that make Pythagoras' theorem so much eyewash? Not at all! On the contrary we all know the power of mathematics and everything that depends on it (not least of course this Interwebby thing we are using right now). Is the truth of Pythagoras' theorem just a trivial truth, just an exercise in the meaning of words? Well no, that seems hardly fair (it's not like the proposition a bachelor is an unmarried man for example). Fair enough, we need to qualify this truth as being a truth about two dimensions. But qualifying a truth does not in itself make the truth a *relative* one does it? So I put it to you that this theorem is an example of a *Truth* that does NOT depend on your point of view, and is not *a matter of opinion*. Now where's my prize? (That wasn't a picture of the prize in your recent post by any chance?) I notice that you have not responded to Judy, EmptyBill and Alex who have all drawn attention to the paradoxical nature of your doctrine. Let's call the Turq docrine about opinion TD. TD seems to be something like Truth is relative to your point of view and there is no Truth (capital 'T'). What does TD have to say about itself? Self-reference is such a peculiar and profound thing. Is TD supposed to be True? Duh! I know you might think that this is a tiresome debating point or some such, and you're itching to be done with it. But it's the elephant in the room of TD, or, as I would prefer to put it, the little white dot in the black half of the Chinese Yin/Yang symbol. I recall you have occasionally quoted Bertrand Russell. When he became aware of just such a simple paradox (in some work he was doing on the foundations of Mathematics) it became the single most important thing of his entire intellectual life. He was aware that most folks would find it extremely puzzling that a grown, intelligent man should fret so much about the set of all sets that are not members of themselves (as I think it went). Did he have something wrong with him? Or was it more that he had the integrity to follow his ideas to the bitter end, rather than just riffing with them? So here's my point. TD ain't *it*. You will deny it, but it appears to me to be a *refuge* for you. There ain't no refuge.
[FairfieldLife] Sarah Palin Taunts John McCain with Her Runaway Caboose
Sarah Palin Taunts John McCain with Her Runaway Caboose - by that delightful author James Wolcott I congratulate colleague Todd Purdum on his Vanity Fair article on Sarah Palin and the fratricidal McCain campaign that has the conservoblogasphere spitting olive pits--a long, methodically researched investigation that proves beyond the shad roe of a doubt that Palin would mow down nuns, elderly people on walkers, and Mitt Romney's entire clan with her snowmobile if they meandered in the path of her Napoleonic presidential ambitions. But in all the hubbub, hullaballoo, and what-have-you, it would be a pity if this feisty nugget extracted by Wonkette from a piece on Annie Oakley in Runner's World were to go unnoticed. There's a whole photo spread, with seven online pictures of Sarah lookin' all perky and athletic and just cold mocking John McCain for being a crippled old man who can't exercise at all: I used to joke around with John McCain during the campaign about coming jogging with me. And once I asked him what his favorite exercise was, and he said, `I go wading.' Wading. He lives on a creek in Arizona, so he goes wading. That cracked me up. Presumably she was going to go all Prefontaine on him while he puffed and gasped behind, her cruel laughter echoing in the air as her fine tush diminished to the size of a dot as it neared the horizon. Though I do have to concede that I found the last sentiment from Palin in the Runner's World Q A praiseworthy: Is there anything else the world should know about you as a runner? The only other thing I'd like to add is I've been very fortunate to be a recipient of all the efforts people put into Title IX all those years ago where girls got equal opportunity to participate in sports and extracurricular activities because sports growing up were my world. I'm so thankful for Title IX allowing equal access to these opportunities, and I'm a huge proponent of girls being able to realize what they're made of by participating in sports, and whatever I can do there I'm going to be doing. That's not going to make the Title IX antagonists over at National Review Online very happy, but maybe they've given up that fight for something equally backward and futile. More links here: http://snipurl.com/lnbfr [www_vanityfair_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Either the story is factual - or it isn't, eh? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost...@... wrote: Let's call the Turq docrine about opinion TD. TD seems to be something like Truth is relative to your point of view and there is no Truth (capital 'T'). Not at all. You are making the same reading error that the rest here are. I stated my position very clearly: I don't *think* that there is any such thing as absolute truth. But I am willing to be convinced otherwise. All you have to do is produce one. Just one. What does TD have to say about itself? Only what it's said already. Live with it. You guys seem to have a need to debate things and defend them. Cool, I guess...if that's the sorta thing that gets you off. It doesn't do much for me. I just say shit. If you wish to refute this par- ticular shit, all that you (or anyone else here) has to do is to produce an absolute truth, one that is equally true from any point of view and when perceived from any state of consciousness. I'll wait. Until then, have fun arguing among yourselves...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Either the story is factual - or it isn't, eh? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development, the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Either the story is factual - or it isn't, eh? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? Similarly, if one looks at the life of Frederick Lenz - Rama, there are compilations of accounts by hundreds of his students (including my accounts) that report any number of phenomena that most would consider miracles or the performance of siddhis. They are equally true, right? :-) And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development... By whom? By people who had a vested interest in protecting their investment of time and energy and their lives into his teachings. You went through the TM movement, and saw how willing people were to pass along rumors and make up stuff to justify *that* investment of time and energy and their lives, right? And you think that things were somehow *different* around Guru Dev? ...the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? Unlike most (if not all) of you on this forum, I have witnessed siddhis being performed. Were they real, in the sense that they would have been captured by a video camera recording the events? Beats the shit outa me. Were they real in the sense that I and hundreds of others witnessed them and reported witnessing them? You betcha. So what makes any of these reports of siddhis any different than the ones you believe that Guru Dev performed? The fact that you feel an emotionoal resonance with him? That's real scientific. :-) It's a story, John. Unless you were there at the time to witness it yourself, you have *no idea* whether it is a true story or not. And my point is that even if you *had* been there you would not know. All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? Similarly, if one looks at the life of Frederick Lenz - Rama, there are compilations of accounts by hundreds of his students (including my accounts) that report any number of phenomena that most would consider miracles or the performance of siddhis. They are equally true, right? :-) And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development... By whom? By people who had a vested interest in protecting their investment of time and energy and their lives into his teachings. You went through the TM movement, and saw how willing people were to pass along rumors and make up stuff to justify *that* investment of time and energy and their lives, right? And you think that things were somehow *different* around Guru Dev? ...the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? Unlike most (if not all) of you on this forum, I have witnessed siddhis being performed. Were they real, in the sense that they would have been captured by a video camera recording the events? Beats the shit outa me. Were they real in the sense that I and hundreds of others witnessed them and reported witnessing them? You betcha. So what makes any of these reports of siddhis any different than the ones you believe that Guru Dev performed? The fact that you feel an emotionoal resonance with him? That's real scientific. :-) It's a story, John. Unless you were there at the time to witness it yourself, you have *no idea* whether it is a true story or not. And my point is that even if you *had* been there you would not know. All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not? One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development, the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Either the story is factual - or it isn't, eh? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost1uk@ wrote: Let's call the Turq docrine about opinion TD. TD seems to be something like Truth is relative to your point of view and there is no Truth (capital 'T'). Not at all. You are making the same reading error that the rest here are. I stated my position very clearly: I don't *think* that there is any such thing as absolute truth. But I am willing to be convinced otherwise. All you have to do is produce one. Just one. No, see, it's you who is making the reading error. We're pointing out to you that you think there *is* an absolute truth. You've stated it many times here, including quite a few times in this current discussion. Nobody needs to produce one for you. You've produced it yourself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject. Understanding based on wishful thinking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? Similarly, if one looks at the life of Frederick Lenz - Rama, there are compilations of accounts by hundreds of his students (including my accounts) that report any number of phenomena that most would consider miracles or the performance of siddhis. They are equally true, right? :-) And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development... By whom? By people who had a vested interest in protecting their investment of time and energy and their lives into his teachings. You went through the TM movement, and saw how willing people were to pass along rumors and make up stuff to justify *that* investment of time and energy and their lives, right? And you think that things were somehow *different* around Guru Dev? ...the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? Unlike most (if not all) of you on this forum, I have witnessed siddhis being performed. Were they real, in the sense that they would have been captured by a video camera recording the events? Beats the shit outa me. Were they real in the sense that I and hundreds of others witnessed them and reported witnessing them? You betcha. So what makes any of these reports of siddhis any different than the ones you believe that Guru Dev performed? The fact that you feel an emotionoal resonance with him? That's real scientific. :-) It's a story, John. Unless you were there at the time to witness it yourself, you have *no idea* whether it is a true story or not. And my point is that even if you *had* been there you would not know. All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not? One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development, the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Either the story is factual - or it isn't, eh? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject. Understanding based on wishful thinking The statement that 'one obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject' is wishful thinking? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? Similarly, if one looks at the life of Frederick Lenz - Rama, there are compilations of accounts by hundreds of his students (including my accounts) that report any number of phenomena that most would consider miracles or the performance of siddhis. They are equally true, right? :-) And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development... By whom? By people who had a vested interest in protecting their investment of time and energy and their lives into his teachings. You went through the TM movement, and saw how willing people were to pass along rumors and make up stuff to justify *that* investment of time and energy and their lives, right? And you think that things were somehow *different* around Guru Dev? ...the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? Unlike most (if not all) of you on this forum, I have witnessed siddhis being performed. Were they real, in the sense that they would have been captured by a video camera recording the events? Beats the shit outa me. Were they real in the sense that I and hundreds of others witnessed them and reported witnessing them? You betcha. So what makes any of these reports of siddhis any different than the ones you believe that Guru Dev performed? The fact that you feel an emotionoal resonance with him? That's real scientific. :-) It's a story, John. Unless you were there at the time to witness it yourself, you have *no idea* whether it is a true story or not. And my point is that even if you *had* been there you would not know. All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not? One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
The statement that 'one obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject' is wishful thinking? -Yes, based on emotions that can change from one moment to the next. If you have strong faith that GD raised someone from the dead, then that's between you and your object of faith, I don't question that. If you would have said I have faith as a disciple of Guru Dev that he can raise someone from the dead. I can accept that since it's a matter of faith. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject. Understanding based on wishful thinking The statement that 'one obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject' is wishful thinking? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? Similarly, if one looks at the life of Frederick Lenz - Rama, there are compilations of accounts by hundreds of his students (including my accounts) that report any number of phenomena that most would consider miracles or the performance of siddhis. They are equally true, right? :-) And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development... By whom? By people who had a vested interest in protecting their investment of time and energy and their lives into his teachings. You went through the TM movement, and saw how willing people were to pass along rumors and make up stuff to justify *that* investment of time and energy and their lives, right? And you think that things were somehow *different* around Guru Dev? ...the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? Unlike most (if not all) of you on this forum, I have witnessed siddhis being performed. Were they real, in the sense that they would have been captured by a video camera recording the events? Beats the shit outa me. Were they real in the sense that I and hundreds of others witnessed them and reported witnessing them? You betcha. So what makes any of these reports of siddhis any different than the ones you believe that Guru Dev performed? The fact that you feel an emotionoal resonance with him? That's real scientific. :-) It's a story, John. Unless you were there at the time to witness it yourself, you have *no idea* whether it is a true story or not. And my point is that even if you *had* been there you would not know. All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not? One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? I've never seen anyone ever do anything but hop based on a sutra for levitation. I think it's possible, however many a supposed Sidha in India have been debunked. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development, the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Either the story is factual - or it isn't, eh? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: TWENTY-FIVE was the age when Shri Maharaj [Guru Dev] accompanied by his Guruji [Swami Krishnand Saraswati] descended from Uttarkashi having completed his study of the scriptures and having discovered the truth about his innermost Self. For about a month, they stopped over at the small picturesque village of Kajliwan, near Rishikesh. Set amidst a dense jungle that supported many wild carnivorous animals, it was a place that nevertheless held a special welcome to the Sadhus and Mahatmas. Maharaj Shri and Guruji were given a rousing reception by the people of Kajliwan and other surrounding villages. Among the throng of darshan-seekers was a Brahmin milkman, whose practice it was to offer milk to the holy guests that visited the place. Maharaj Shri arranged with him to bring everyday half a litre of milk which he would boil and serve to Guruji every night. One day, it so happened that the Brahmin's wife said, The cow has given very little milk today. It will not be enough even for the children. The Brahmin, however, paid no heed to his wife and supplied half a litre as usual to the honoured guests. When Maharaj Shri warmed up the milk and served it to Guruji, he said, There is the woe in the milk today. I shall not drink it. Please return it to milkman and tell him to stop giving it. Maharaj Shri did as he was told. About fifteen days later, as fate would have it, the milkman's son died. The whole place was agog with the rumour that Guruji was displeased with the Brahmin milkman and therefore he had lost his son. Maharaj Shri conveyed this to Guruji, who merely said, When the people take the boy's corpse to the cremation grounds tell them to send for me before making the funeral pyre. That was done. The corpse was placed on the ground pending Guruji's arrival. Guruji came. He had the strings securing the shroud removed the kicked the lifeless head gently with his foot, saying, Why do you sleep so much? And lo, the boy was on his feet! It was a miracle that dazed everyone present. Wonderstruck, they bowed to the great Mahatma in their midst. On reaching their hut, Guruji said to the Maharaj Shri, It's better to leave this place right now before all the dead people here start pestering us for life! And with that Guruji left - leaving Maharaj Shri alone! ~ Excerpt from The Whole Thing - The Real Thing - 'The Recluse' - Chapter 4 http://www.shrigurudevji.com/article.asp?article=recluse
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: The statement that 'one obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject' is wishful thinking? -Yes, based on emotions that can change from one moment to the next. If you have strong faith that GD raised someone from the dead, then that's between you and your object of faith, I don't question that. If you would have said I have faith as a disciple of Guru Dev that he can raise someone from the dead. I can accept that since it's a matter of faith. Okay. Fair enough. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject. Understanding based on wishful thinking The statement that 'one obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject' is wishful thinking? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Do you facts to show this event really happened? Of course you don't, nobody does, so it's a story or perhaps a legend The story appears in two versions of Guru Dev's biography which was essentially a compilation of discourses by Guru Dev written down by his disciples wherein he described his own personal experiences. Maybe he or they lied, eh? Similarly, if one looks at the life of Frederick Lenz - Rama, there are compilations of accounts by hundreds of his students (including my accounts) that report any number of phenomena that most would consider miracles or the performance of siddhis. They are equally true, right? :-) And maybe even though Guru Dev was considered to have reached the highest pinnacle of spiritual development... By whom? By people who had a vested interest in protecting their investment of time and energy and their lives into his teachings. You went through the TM movement, and saw how willing people were to pass along rumors and make up stuff to justify *that* investment of time and energy and their lives, right? And you think that things were somehow *different* around Guru Dev? ...the use of the siddhis is total bullshit after all. Ya think? Unlike most (if not all) of you on this forum, I have witnessed siddhis being performed. Were they real, in the sense that they would have been captured by a video camera recording the events? Beats the shit outa me. Were they real in the sense that I and hundreds of others witnessed them and reported witnessing them? You betcha. So what makes any of these reports of siddhis any different than the ones you believe that Guru Dev performed? The fact that you feel an emotionoal resonance with him? That's real scientific. :-) It's a story, John. Unless you were there at the time to witness it yourself, you have *no idea* whether it is a true story or not. And my point is that even if you *had* been there you would not know. All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not? One obviously accepts what one wishes to accept - and rejects what one wishes to reject.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? The siddhis are possible, I believe. From a personal point of view, I have experienced the siddhi for being small as an atom. I experienced this siddhi soon after getting initiated just using the basic TM method. Even up to the present, I have not gotten any formal training for the TM-Sidhi techniques.
[FairfieldLife] Microsoft Makes Users Sick, Pulls Ad
http://snipurl.com/lnraz [blogs_wsj_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgil...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: I used to have that problem of waking between 2 and 4 AM -- it's a Pitta disturbance; Mapi's Deep Rest will let you sleep through: http://pages.citebite.com/p1q5k7i0y1bxk Bob, do you / did you use caffeine in any form? Even a little chocolate during the day has me waking up between 2 a.m. and 4 a.m. *** Both caffeine and chocolate are pitta-aggravating. Tomatoes are very pitta-ish, and fresh tomatoes especially would do a 2AM wakeup call for me: Minimize your intake of hot and spicy foods, and foods with salty or sour tastes, such as yogurt, sour cream, buttermilk or sour oranges, grapefruit or pineapple. You also want to minimize the intake of vegetables with heating properties such as tomatoes, hot peppers, radishes, beets, onions, garlic and spinach. http://snipurl.com/lnrlx [www_mapi_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
Taking a drug like Xanax for that kind of sleeplessness seems like overkill. It's a Michael Jackson/Heath Ledger please knock me out solution to an anxiety/sleep problem that a gentle Ayurveda approach could handle readily.
[FairfieldLife] Digital dickweeds?
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/01/9473/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Microsoft Makes Users Sick, Pulls Ad
I downloaded IE8 at one time. It didn't make me want to puke, but I got rid of it and went back to the previous version as soon as I could find an online tweak to do so. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_re...@... wrote: http://snipurl.com/lnraz [blogs_wsj_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL Koan Of The Day 3
Duveyoung wrote: Fine, don't believe me, who fucking cares... It not so much that I don't believe you, Edg, although you are a known liar, but that nobody else has reported that they heard the Marshy say anything about promising them enlightenment in 5-7 years. The three informants that I've dialoged with were on the same course in Spain and Italy - Billy Murphy, Barry Wright, and Tom Anderson. But they don't seem to agree with you, at least they didn't respond. So, maybe you didn't get it right; maybe the Marshy was just guessing or estimating. But like Judy said, it would seem that the Marshy was just making a silly statement, not a real promise. But if you believed the Marshy, how in hell would you or anyone else know if someone was in CC or not? It just doesn't make any sense. I know that the Marshy was stupid, but not that stupid. And I know that a lot of TM teachers are stupid, but I didn't know that you were once that stupid. Did your brain turn to mush or what?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: snip Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. What does responsibly mean here? The fundie guy supposedly excuses the brutal excesses--including murder and gross sadism--of King David and Ghengis Khan on the basis that they were presumably God's toys, following a higher purpose. I have trouble seeing that as a parallel with MMY. I don't believe the fundie guy is excusing the excesses of King David and Ghengis Khan. He's saying God selects who's in charge, and if we want to change things for ordinary people, we need to work on those people whom God has placed in power, even if they're not nice people. I didn't get that he was saying the people (or rather, devout Christians) to make the leaders behave better, but I'll take your word for it. Such was Maharishi's practice, as it has been the practice of foreign policy pragmatists throughout history. (I'm thinking of American leaders who shook hands with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.) In a related story, there's this op-ed from Roger Cohen in yesterday's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/opinion/02iht-edcohen.html From the column: 'Moussavi was supported by people who have lost faith,' [the conservative cleric] said. 'We [the Iranian power structure] believe legitimacy comes from God. They believe legitimacy comes from the people, from votes.' See, here's where I get stuck. MMY always said leaders reflect the level of consciousness of the people, which doesn't seem to me compatible with the notion that leaders are chosen by God regardless of what the people want. I see what you mean. I've been conflating chosen by God with power gained by any unseen force, such as karma or collective consciousness. Still, I can't drop the notion that there are parallels between the articles above and Maharishi's policies. For one, he disdained the legitimacy of democracy (although that attitude probably arose out of impatience more than anything). And he praised leaders to the heavens in hopes of persuading them to do good by their people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Please eleborate, what is death in your opinion ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? The siddhis are possible, I believe. From a personal point of view, I have experienced the siddhi for being small as an atom. I experienced this siddhi soon after getting initiated just using the basic TM method. Even up to the present, I have not gotten any formal training for the TM-Sidhi techniques. Nice ! I've had the same experiences. But rather I was; smaller than the smallest and bigger than the biggest simultaneously, which is close to your experience. Wish you all the best for your meditation practise. Nablusoss
[FairfieldLife] My $75,000 Donation to the Raj
I just got back from two days in Coralville with Amma. Among the 17 messages on our answering machine was a rather excited one from the Raj (the AV clinic in FF) thanking me for my offer of a $75,000 donation and offering several ways I might contact them. Did one of my FFL buddies call them on my behalf?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? I've never seen anyone ever do anything but hop based on a sutra for levitation. I think it's possible, however many a supposed Sidha in India have been debunked. Hmmm... perhaps the main purpose of yogic hopping is to try to force kuNDalinii enter into suSumna-nadii? :D
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
On Jul 2, 2009, at 5:01 PM, John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? The siddhis are possible, I believe. From a personal point of view, I have experienced the siddhi for being small as an atom. I experienced this siddhi soon after getting initiated just using the basic TM method. Even up to the present, I have not gotten any formal training for the TM-Sidhi techniques. Something you might want to consider: what is possible mentally. In my personal clear experiences of the TM sidhis I was forced to conclude that they were all mental-plane phenomenon. The exception of course is the muscle-jerking sidhi, i.e. the flying sidhi: it's more of a post- hypnotic suggestion phenom, but still a mentally-mediated phenom. Without a clear understanding of the mental-plane and what that means experientially, it would be impossible to objectively evaluate any TM- Sidhi expereinces IMO. You're easy game. If you fall into believing then, mentally, the experience you describe would be typical. This type of experience can easily be replicated using any acquired belief and a sensory deprivation tank. Of course the fact that the TM technique is a mental technique is inescapable. You should seriously consider this.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? I've never seen anyone ever do anything but hop based on a sutra for levitation. I think it's possible, however many a supposed Sidha in India have been debunked. Hmmm... perhaps the main purpose of yogic hopping is to try to force kuNDalinii enter into suSumna-nadii? :D No. It goes there naturally, automatically. That's why Maharishi refused to use those words you just mention, because historically these names evokes huge misunderstandings.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgil...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: snip I don't believe the fundie guy is excusing the excesses of King David and Ghengis Khan. He's saying God selects who's in charge, and if we want to change things for ordinary people, we need to work on those people whom God has placed in power, even if they're not nice people. I didn't get that he was saying the people (or rather, devout Christians) to make the leaders behave better, but I'll take your word for it. Such was Maharishi's practice, as it has been the practice of foreign policy pragmatists throughout history. (I'm thinking of American leaders who shook hands with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.) In a related story, there's this op-ed from Roger Cohen in yesterday's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/opinion/02iht-edcohen.html From the column: 'Moussavi was supported by people who have lost faith,' [the conservative cleric] said. 'We [the Iranian power structure] believe legitimacy comes from God. They believe legitimacy comes from the people, from votes.' See, here's where I get stuck. MMY always said leaders reflect the level of consciousness of the people, which doesn't seem to me compatible with the notion that leaders are chosen by God regardless of what the people want. I see what you mean. I've been conflating chosen by God with power gained by any unseen force, such as karma or collective consciousness. Still, I can't drop the notion that there are parallels between the articles above and Maharishi's policies. For one, he disdained the legitimacy of democracy (although that attitude probably arose out of impatience more than anything). And he praised leaders to the heavens in hopes of persuading them to do good by their people. I think it may be kinda hard to tell without knowing more about the way the fundy types envision working on the leaders. Would they have praised Bill Clinton to the skies, or would they have told him he was going to crash and burn if he didn't repent and turn to Jesus? I have the sense MMY was a lot more pragmatic about the whole thing; I doubt there was much theology behind it. Just get 'em all meditating, and then Nature would take over and everything would run like clockwork. Somehow I don't think that's what the fundies have in mind; they want a David or a Ghengis Khan to lead them into battle and bring about the End Times. From MMY's perspective, it was to his advantage to deal with a dictator rather than a democracy, because the dictator didn't have to have the people's approval to spend money to institute mass TM programs. On the other hand, I suspect the fundies are vastly more politically sophisticated than MMY was (not hard!). I should probably read the whole book.
[FairfieldLife] New Crop Circle; Milk Hill, Nr Stanton St Bernard, Wiltshire. Reported 2nd July
[Bilde] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mAdrSvOgwI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mAdrSvOgwI
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
That's not what the sutra states --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? I've never seen anyone ever do anything but hop based on a sutra for levitation. I think it's possible, however many a supposed Sidha in India have been debunked. Hmmm... perhaps the main purpose of yogic hopping is to try to force kuNDalinii enter into suSumna-nadii? :D
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
So someone who would witness this would basically see you disappear? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? The siddhis are possible, I believe. From a personal point of view, I have experienced the siddhi for being small as an atom. I experienced this siddhi soon after getting initiated just using the basic TM method. Even up to the present, I have not gotten any formal training for the TM-Sidhi techniques.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Jun 27 00:00:00 2009 End Date (UTC): Sat Jul 04 00:00:00 2009 609 messages as of (UTC) Thu Jul 02 23:25:11 2009 50 Robert babajii...@yahoo.com 44 Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com 42 authfriend jst...@panix.com 41 TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com 40 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com 40 off_world_beings no_re...@yahoogroups.com 37 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 36 WillyTex no_re...@yahoogroups.com 35 shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net 25 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net 23 meowthirteen meowthirt...@yahoo.com 22 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 22 do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com 17 Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@lisco.com 15 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net 12 bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com 10 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com 9 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com 7 sgrayatlarge no_re...@yahoogroups.com 7 Richard M compost...@yahoo.co.uk 6 seekliberation seekliberat...@yahoo.com 6 ruthsimplicity no_re...@yahoogroups.com 6 Patrick Gillam jpgil...@yahoo.com 6 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 5 shukra69 shukr...@yahoo.ca 4 dick.richard...@ymail.com dick.richard...@ymail.com 4 BillyG. wg...@yahoo.com 3 lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net 3 emptybill emptyb...@yahoo.com 3 Peter L Sutphen drpetersutp...@yahoo.com 2 yifuxero yifux...@yahoo.com 2 guyfawkes91 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 wle...@aol.com 2 Nelson nelsonriddle2...@yahoo.com 2 John jr_...@yahoo.com 2 Jason jedi_sp...@yahoo.com 1 wayback71 waybac...@yahoo.com 1 ruffedgrousepa ruffedgrous...@yahoo.com 1 pranamoocher bh...@hotmail.com 1 lesley mc coy meowthirt...@yahoo.com 1 lauren_lee_v lauren_le...@yahoo.com 1 jyouells2000 john_youe...@comcast.net 1 gullible fool ffl...@yahoo.com 1 ffl...@yahoo.com 1 dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony...@yahoo.com 1 azgrey no_re...@yahoogroups.com 1 amarnath anatol_z...@yahoo.com 1 Peter drpetersutp...@yahoo.com 1 Paul Mason premanandp...@yahoo.co.uk 1 Marek Reavis reavisma...@sbcglobal.net 1 Joe Smith msilver1...@yahoo.com 1 It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@gmail.com 1 min.pige min.p...@yahoo.com Posters: 53 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: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:30 PM, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? I've never seen anyone ever do anything but hop based on a sutra for levitation. I think it's possible, however many a supposed Sidha in India have been debunked. Hmmm... perhaps the main purpose of yogic hopping is to try to force kuNDalinii enter into suSumna-nadii? :D You do have a great capacity for rationalization a la Sanskrit, don't you? ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL and the Contradictions of Relativism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost1uk@ wrote: Let's call the Turq docrine about opinion TD. TD seems to be something like Truth is relative to your point of view and there is no Truth (capital 'T'). Not at all. You are making the same reading error that the rest here are. I stated my position very clearly: I don't *think* that there is any such thing as absolute truth. But I am willing to be convinced otherwise. All you have to do is produce one. Just one. Would that mean that an observeable fact might not always be true? For example- we live for varying numbers of years and, then we don't. Has anyone seen it differently?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Crop Circles on Youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfcw7ohkuOU (turn the volume down) With such a large volume of these circles, I have to wonder what size budget are they working with? Regardless of the equipment used, it would seem quite expensive.
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Rick Archer: The Earth has been cooling for 10 years
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Om Shemp, Rick, like 3 quarters or more of town here, were up in Iowa City with Ammachi these last few days on a big spiritual meditating bash. He'll no doubt be back to FFL shortly. You do know, only 2/3's of one percent of atmoshphere regulates the environment here. (?). Only. You think that doubling that won't have an effect on Fairfield and the meditating community here? So you post this stuff here? Is that your interest? That people should just keep on meditating no matter? Even if 2/3's a percent of atmosphere that regulates the planet becomes a percent and a third very shortly? Not even considering exotic gases like refrigerant gases that might be 10,000 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than only carbon dioxide molecule. Methane too? Methane is its own conversation of course in addition to CO2 and refrigerant gases. What in the world do you do for work? Anything practical? Just wondering. Jai Guru Dev, -Doug in FF
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update-alternative thats ok with heat symptoms
Pearl Anshen Wan http://www.cheungstrading.com/index.php?main_page=product_infoproducts_id=261ctcid=1d43051f70a352c99982842dfb9d55b2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: So I finally gave in and tried the Xanax. The dosage is 0.5 mg and the pharmacist suggested I take it right before bed because until one knows the effects one shouldn't drive under its influence. So I've taken it three times: the first time about a week ago and then the night before last and then last night. Here are the two results I notice more than anything: 1) It let me sleep longer. I haven't had any problem falling asleep; I am always able to go to sleep about 10 minutes after closing my eyes and I usually go to bed at about 10pm. My problem had been waking up about 2:30 and tossing and turning. the Xanax gave me a few hours more. IMU, that's typical sleep pattern for depression. How much do you exercise?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
Well in my opinion I would have to say that death is a permanent cessation of all vital functions, basically the end of life. I'm pretty much conventional about your basic run of the mill maeaning of death. For instance in my opinion,Michael Jackson is dead. I'm sure many here would disagree with my opinion, but I'm holding to fast to this. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Certainly a nice story, nothing more Please eleborate, what is death in your opinion ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Microsoft Makes Users Sick, Pulls Ad
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool ffl...@... wrote: I downloaded IE8 at one time. It didn't make me want to puke, but I got rid of it and went back to the previous version as soon as I could find an online tweak to do so. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://snipurl.com/lnraz [blogs_wsj_com] ** I had to dump IE8 beta because of numerous incompatability problems, but I now have a version I am very happy with. In fact, as much as it surprises me, running Vista with SP2 and IE8.0.6~, I am truly satisfied with the speed, looks, and functionality of Microsoft products, and I haven't had a crash for months.
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Rick Archer: The Earth has been cooling for 10 years
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Om Shemp, Rick, like 3 quarters or more of town here, were up in Iowa City with Ammachi these last few days on a big spiritual meditating bash. He'll no doubt be back to FFL shortly. You do know, only 2/3's of one percent of atmoshphere regulates the environment here. (?). Only. You think that doubling that won't have an effect on Fairfield and the meditating community here? So you post this stuff here? Is that your interest? That people should just keep on meditating no matter? Even if 2/3's a percent of atmosphere that regulates the planet becomes a percent and a third very shortly? Not even considering exotic gases like refrigerant gases that might be 10,000 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than only carbon dioxide molecule. Methane too? Methane is its own conversation of course in addition to CO2 and refrigerant gases. What in the world do you do for work? Anything practical? Just wondering. Jai Guru Dev, -Doug in FF Sal, meet Doug. Doug, meet Sal.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
Bob, thanks for the links. I ordered the Deep Rest, Pitta oil, and rose petal preserve. 16 years in florida has really whacked out my pitta-kapha constitution. I'll report back on my experience with the Mapi products and eating pears and rice pudding! Yum, rich, succulent pears! --- On Thu, 7/2/09, bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:52 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukr...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: So I finally gave in and tried the Xanax. The dosage is 0.5 mg and the pharmacist suggested I take it right before bed because until one knows the effects one shouldn't drive under its influence. So I've taken it three times: the first time about a week ago and then the night before last and then last night. Here are the two results I notice more than anything: 1) It let me sleep longer. I haven't had any problem falling asleep; I am always able to go to sleep about 10 minutes after closing my eyes and I usually go to bed at about 10pm. My problem had been waking up about 2:30 and tossing and turning. the Xanax gave me a few hours more. 2) Felt a lot of fatigue during the day...instead of the nervousness. . And I rack this up to the fatigue that has been accumulating. no its the Xanax. And it is real addictive. *** I used to have that problem of waking between 2 and 4 AM -- it's a Pitta disturbance; Mapi's Deep Rest will let you sleep through: http://pages.citebite.com/p1q5k7i0y1bxk The reason you feel fatigued is because Xanax or similar drugs interfere with normal sleep patterns -- so you're unconscious, but you're not really sleeping with its restorative effects: Writing prescriptions for sleeping pills or tranquilizers is a reflex for doctors, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the problem. Rather, it produces rebound anxiety, rebound insomnia, and debilitating side effects. Worse, thousands, if not millions of Americans are addicted to these drugs. http://snipurl.com/ll5d8 [mapi_com] To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip for brevity All that you would know is what you saw, or convinced yourself that you saw. That is not the same thing as truth. I can accept this, having witnessed siddhis. Why can't you, having not? Hi Turqji Yeah, but indeed some of this is my experience Turq. that is my science by scale of experience. Differently though, few years back in FF an indian guy came through and was available for *consultation*. Could meet with him out at the Super8. Pay for play. He manifested bahvooti out of his hand like Sai Baba for my wife and i. Did it off of our shakti. Was interesting to witness but not spiritual. So it was. He was looking for business deals off of the FF spiritual practice community here to advance himself. Was an interesting lesson to witness about the siddhis. Jai Guru Dev, -Doug in FF
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@... wrote: Bob, thanks for the links. I ordered the Deep Rest, Pitta oil, and rose petal preserve. 16 years in florida has really whacked out my pitta-kapha constitution. I'll report back on my experience with the Mapi products and eating pears and rice pudding! Yum, rich, succulent pears! --- Pears are prettily heavily pesticided fruits, so buy 'em organic: http://snipurl.com/lohig http://snipurl.com/lohig [www_treehugger_com] Produce Rankings Scores: 1 (worst) Peaches 100 (highest pesticide load) 2 Apples 89 3 Sweet Bell Peppers 86 4 Celery 85 5 Nectarines 84 6 Strawberries 82 7 Cherries 75 8 Pears 65 9 Grapes (imported) 65 10 Spinach 60 11 Lettuce 59 12 Potatoes 58 13 Carrots 57 14 Green Beans 53 15 Hot Peppers 53 16 Cucumbers 52 17 Raspberries 47 18 Plums 45 19 Grapes (domestic) 43 20 Oranges 42 21 Grapefruit 40 22 Tangerine 38 23 Mushrooms 37 24 Cantaloupe 34 25 Honeydew Melon 31 26 Tomatoes 30 27 Sweet Potatoes 30 28 Watermelon 28 29 Winter Squash 27 30 Cauliflower 27 31 Blueberries 24 32 Papaya 21 33 Broccoli 18 34 Cabbage 17 35 Bananas 16 36 Kiwi 14 37 Sweet peas (frozen) 11 38 Asparagus 11 39 Mango 9 40 Pineapples 7 41 Sweet Corn (frozen) 2 42 Avocado 1 43 (best) Onions 1 (lowest pesticide load) http://snipurl.com/lohti http://snipurl.com/lohti [food_thefuntimesguide_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? snip, Some of us have seen glimpses of them at work- doesn't take too much to verify that they must be possible.
[FairfieldLife] LA gov ran state from mental hospital
http://www.life.com/image/50572511/in-gallery/29022/nutty-and-naughty-go\ vernors http://www.life.com/image/50572511/in-gallery/29022/nutty-and-naughty-g\ overnors http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Earl_K._Long http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Earl_K._Long
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_re...@... wrote: So someone who would witness this would basically see you disappear? Not necessarily. What I experienced was that I saw through my mind's eye the inner structure of the retina. I saw the pink cones and rods that are the mechanisms for receiving light from the outside world. I was floating by these cones wondering what they were. If this can be done by a beginner, it is possible that the more experienced meditators can see other parts of the body at will. Several years later after this incident, I have not been able to replicate this experience again. It's just as well, since it was a very scary event not knowing what you were seeing. JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Raising someone from the dead deserves some scrutiny, unless it's not taken seriously, since I've never heard a big debate on this story. Afterall this book has been around for years and I know many have read it. Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? The siddhis are possible, I believe. From a personal point of view, I have experienced the siddhi for being small as an atom. I experienced this siddhi soon after getting initiated just using the basic TM method. Even up to the present, I have not gotten any formal training for the TM-Sidhi techniques.
[FairfieldLife] Former Marxists are laughing at Obamanomics
No Laughing Matter By: Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, July 02, 2009 Who won the Cold War? That's a no-brainer. The United States prevailed while the Soviet Union collapsed, and the People's Republic of China dumped Marxism; capitalism (free markets and private property) triumphed over socialism (centrally planned markets and state-owned property); an ethos of individual rights proved to be more resilient and healthy than collectivist ideology; relatively small, democratic government clearly was demonstrated to help a society prosper far more effectively than elitist Big Government. How ironic, then, that voices in Russia and China are mocking our current Big Government policies. Those whose countries took the tragic, impoverishing detour through Big Government hell now react with scorn and derision as we Americans charge headlong down that same path. What an amazing spectacle it must be for them to see the victor of the Cold War borrow many pages from the losers' playbook. To read a startling indictment of the American predicament, Google the words American capitalism gone with a whimper, the title of an article by Stanislav Mishin. The author writes, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breath-taking speed. This decline has happened because, according to Mishin, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education that produced millions of Americans who know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in D.C. that directly affects their lives. Mishin also faults the widespread abandonment of Christ's religion in America, our loss of faith. This is the cultural backdrop for a political system that has culminated in Barack Obama's unprecedented spending and money printing. Mishin believes that, under Obamanomics, America at best will resemble the Weimar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. Earlier this year, reports Mishin, Prime Minister Putin warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Mishin has concluded that we are ignoring Putin's warningbased on 70 years of suffering during the nightmarish Soviet experiment in central planningand he concludes, The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world how free he really is. The world will only snicker. When I first read this astounding diatribe, I thought perhaps it had been written as a satire, almost as a spoof of what some libertarian writers in the United States have written. After consulting with a Russian friend, I have concluded that Mishin wrote in complete earnestness. Either waysatire or grim analysiswhat Mishin wrote is no laughing matter. Mishin's is one of many voices, foreign and domestic, warning us of the dangers of faith that government can be omnicompetent and can meet all our economic needs. Adding to the irony of a Russian warning the United States about the dangers of Marxism is the fact that this article appeared in the online publication Pravda.ruthe contemporary version of the Soviet-era newspaper Pravda that served as the official Communist Party channel for pro-communist, anti-American propaganda. Another harsh indictment of our ill-advised embrace of Big Government occurred on June 1, during Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's official visit to China. Speaking at the University of Beijing, Geithner assured a large audience of students that China's large holdings of U.S. Treasury securities were very safe. The students laughed out loud. This reaction might have been unusually rude, but it was brutally honest. They didn't believe Geithner for one second. When the ability of the United States government to repay its debts (or at least, without doing so in significantly depreciated dollars) is perceived as a joke, it is anything but a laughing matter for our country. The Chinese gave us a wakeup call, although we appear not to have heeded it. The Chinese students see what is plain for anyone with eyes to see. For years, fiscal discipline has been eroding in Washington, but President Obama has increased government spending with reckless abandon as the leviathan government absorbs more and more of the private sector. As I wrote in Into the Fiscal Abyss, with Uncle Sam's total financial obligations totaling approximately five times our GDP, there is no way those debts and promises can be honored. The most likely outcome will be Uncle Samthe largest debtor in human historypaying off those debts in greatly depreciated dollars. Indeed, our one-trick Federal Reserve (Motto: When there's a bump in the economic road, inflate) already has begun to create vast sums of new dollars through the mechanism of quantitative easingthe direct purchase of the bonds that the government issues to finance its massive spending agenda. The Chinese students laughing at Geithner told us implicitly what
[FairfieldLife] The Great American Bubble Machine
Matt Tiabbi lays bare Goldman Sachs' role in five bubbles that have rocked the US economy from 1929 to 2009 #1 - The Great Depression (of 1929) #2 - Tech Stocks #3 - The Housing Craze #4 - $4 a Gallon #5 - Rigging the Bailout Goldman Sachs'involvement in the next bubble: #6 - Global Warming If cap-and-trade succeeds, won't we all be saved from the catastrophe of global warming? Maybe - but cap-and-trade, as envisioned by Goldman, is really just a carbon tax structured so that private interests collect the revenues. Instead of simply imposing a fixed government levy on carbon pollution and forcing unclean energy producers to pay for the mess they make, cap-and trade will allow a small tribe of greedy-as-hell Wall Street swine to turn yet another commodities market into a private tax-collection scheme. This is worse than the bailout: It allows the bank to seize taxpayer money before it's even collected. RollingStone article: http://tinyurl.com/l3zn49 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_great_american_bubble_machine/ Matt Tiabbi MSNBC interview: http://tinyurl.com/nqeb3h http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31684154#31684154
[FairfieldLife] Re: My $75,000 Donation to the Raj
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: I just got back from two days in Coralville with Amma. Among the 17 messages on our answering machine was a rather excited one from the Raj (the AV clinic in FF) thanking me for my offer of a $75,000 donation and offering several ways I might contact them. Did one of my FFL buddies call them on my behalf? Sounds to me more like that's their new marketing scheme. Like the insurance companies whose policy was to refuse to pay *all* claims the first time they were submitted, knowing that a certain per- centage of people would never resubmit them, the Raj is trying to claim that all TMers that made a promise to donate, hoping that a certain per- centage of them will be too movement-whipped and stupid *not* to then donate. It's like the Nigerian Internet scams -- if even 1% are stupid enough to go for it, they still make money. This is called Creative Intelligence. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's master brings a boy back to life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Just out of curiosity, do you think that the siddhis are possible? I've never seen anyone ever do anything but hop based on a sutra for levitation. I think it's possible, however many a supposed Sidha in India have been debunked. Hmmm... perhaps the main purpose of yogic hopping is to try to force kuNDalinii enter into suSumna-nadii? :D Perhaps the main purpose of yogic hopping is and always was to force moneyDAlinii into off- shore Channel Island bank accounts. :-)
