[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jeff.evans60 jeff.evan...@... wrote: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Debunking_New_Age.htm List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality, which they seem to avoid for some reason. Great find and great rant, Jeff. I wouldn't expect any answers from those on this forum who believe this. But I'll provide an answer from a more Buddhist perspective before having fun with dreaming one's reality in my own rant. :-) What the New Agers don't understand is that reality is a consensus phenomenon. Yeah, you might be trying to dream your reality, but reality is also trying to dream you. That is, every sentient being in the universe may be trying to dream its *own* reality into existence, but what appears and wins is the consensus, the Grand Total of all of the disparate dreams. New Agers seem to have mistaken a useful truism (What you focus on you become) for an ego- stoking and non-useful illusion (What I believe will happen happens). Every sentient being has the ability to *focus* on what he or she wants to, and therein lies some usefulness and power. If this ability did not exist, meditation could not exist; if the constant flow of thoughts was *all* of reality, one could never still them. Similarly, in the practice of mindfulness one learns to focus on that which is useful in terms of emotions and the ups and downs of consensus reality. But some take this ability and use it stupidly, choosing instead to focus on really dumb shit. For example, one *could* go to see a movie and, rather than enjoy it as the uplifting fable it is, choose to focus on and go all deja vu on some trauma from one's own early life in which one was told over and over again to go comb their unruly hair. A sane person would enjoy the movie. A less sane person might get so caught up in their own drama as to turn the uplifting film into a story about how unruly hair is really a form of subconscious bigotry, being used to degrade and vilify the very people the movie is...uh...about and whose lifestyle it celebrates. In such a case, one could say that the insane movie viewer had *indeed* created their own reality by ignoring the Big Picture and focusing on a nit and picking at it. A more sane person can enjoy and find beauty even in a film (or a reality) that is less beau- tiful or enjoyable. That's the magic of What you focus on you become, or mindfulness. One does *not* have to fall prey to one's samskaras and re-run the same petty ego-dramas over and over in one's head forever; at any point one can choose to focus on something else. If one were to buy into the logic that allowing an actress to use her own judgment and wear her hair the way she thinks best suits her character is in reality an attempt to denigrate and cast aspersions on lesser Native Americans by an unfeeling director, what are Maharishi's Raja costumes? I mean, the man forced his followers to dress up in silly costumes *that cannot be found in Indian history*. He decreed that all of these no-caste untouchables (in the Indian caste system he believed in as a reflection of the Laws Of Nature or God's will) had to not only wear such silly costumes but prance around in them pretending to be kings of an imaginary country. What act in history has *ever* been more degrading to the people forced to act it out than that? It could be viewed as a form of Look what a smart Indian like myself can make these stupid, no-caste Westerners do, *while paying me a million dollars* for the privilege of doing it to them? In a very real sense, if Mary McDonnell's hairstyle in Dances With Wolves can be seen as an attempt to denigrate Native Americans, I don't see how Maharishi playing dress-up with his Rajas can be seen as anything *but* an attempt to denigrate them, and Westerners in general. The whole scene just *screams* Look at what a smart Indian like myself can make these retarded no-caste Westerners do! Just having fun with the concept, Jeff. I doubt that Maharishi ever *consciously* set out to make his followers look like idiots. It was more subconscious and insidious, like Kevin Costner's real moti- vation for making Mary McDonnell look like a slattern in Dances With Wolves was subconscious. :-) My point is that whatever case one might make for Maharishi being a Class A Vedic Supremacy Bigot, one does not have to place one's focus there. One *could* focus instead on all the millions of people he helped by using the TMO's millions to teach TM cheaply or for free everywhere. Instead of, say, pissing his last years away extorting even more money from them and playing dress-up with a bunch of Ken and Barbie dolls. Oh. Never mind. :-)
[FairfieldLife] My idea of a nice, relaxing hike
Really. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM_SbAs5lxE
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jeff.evans60 jeff.evans60@ wrote: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Debunking_New_Age.htm List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality, which they seem to avoid for some reason. Great find and great rant, Jeff. I wouldn't expect any answers from those on this forum who believe this. But I'll provide an answer from a more Buddhist perspective before having fun with dreaming one's reality in my own rant. :-) What the New Agers don't understand is that reality is a consensus phenomenon. Yeah, you might be trying to dream your reality, but reality is also trying to dream you. That is, every sentient being in the universe may be trying to dream its *own* reality into existence, but what appears and wins is the consensus, the Grand Total of all of the disparate dreams. New Agers seem to have mistaken a useful truism (What you focus on you become) for an ego- stoking and non-useful illusion (What I believe will happen happens). Every sentient being has the ability to *focus* on what he or she wants to, and therein lies some usefulness and power. If this ability did not exist, meditation could not exist; if the constant flow of thoughts was *all* of reality, one could never still them. Similarly, in the practice of mindfulness one learns to focus on that which is useful in terms of emotions and the ups and downs of consensus reality. But some take this ability and use it stupidly, choosing instead to focus on really dumb shit. For example, one *could* go to see a movie and, rather than enjoy it as the uplifting fable it is, choose to focus on and go all deja vu on some trauma from one's own early life in which one was told over and over again to go comb their unruly hair. A sane person would enjoy the movie. A less sane person might get so caught up in their own drama as to turn the uplifting film into a story about how unruly hair is really a form of subconscious bigotry, being used to degrade and vilify the very people the movie is...uh...about and whose lifestyle it celebrates. In such a case, one could say that the insane movie viewer had *indeed* created their own reality by ignoring the Big Picture and focusing on a nit and picking at it. A more sane person can enjoy and find beauty even in a film (or a reality) that is less beau- tiful or enjoyable. That's the magic of What you focus on you become, or mindfulness. One does *not* have to fall prey to one's samskaras and re-run the same petty ego-dramas over and over in one's head forever; at any point one can choose to focus on something else. If one were to buy into the logic that allowing an actress to use her own judgment and wear her hair the way she thinks best suits her character is in reality an attempt to denigrate and cast aspersions on lesser Native Americans by an unfeeling director, what are Maharishi's Raja costumes? I mean, the man forced his followers to dress up in silly costumes *that cannot be found in Indian history*. He decreed that all of these no-caste untouchables (in the Indian caste system he believed in as a reflection of the Laws Of Nature or God's will) had to not only wear such silly costumes but prance around in them pretending to be kings of an imaginary country. What act in history has *ever* been more degrading to the people forced to act it out than that? It could be viewed as a form of Look what a smart Indian like myself can make these stupid, no-caste Westerners do, *while paying me a million dollars* for the privilege of doing it to them? In a very real sense, if Mary McDonnell's hairstyle in Dances With Wolves can be seen as an attempt to denigrate Native Americans, I don't see how Maharishi playing dress-up with his Rajas can be seen as anything *but* an attempt to denigrate them, and Westerners in general. The whole scene just *screams* Look at what a smart Indian like myself can make these retarded no-caste Westerners do! Just having fun with the concept, Jeff. I doubt that Maharishi ever *consciously* set out to make his followers look like idiots. It was more subconscious and insidious, like Kevin Costner's real moti- vation for making Mary McDonnell look like a slattern in Dances With Wolves was subconscious. :-) My point is that whatever case one might make for Maharishi being a Class A Vedic Supremacy Bigot, one does not have to place one's focus there. One *could* focus instead on all the millions of people he helped by using the TMO's millions to teach TM cheaply or for free everywhere. Instead of, say, pissing his last years away extorting even more money from them and playing dress-up with a bunch of Ken and Barbie dolls. Oh. Never mind. :-) Not sure I follow your logical sequence but
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jeff.evans60 jeff.evan...@... wrote: Not sure I follow your logical sequence but hey its all about creating your own reality isnt it. My logical sequence was merely a parody of Judy's. I just *love* pushing her buttons and then sitting back and watching her react and try to win some argument that is one only in her mind. The whole Dances With Nitpicks thread, with her making 20+ posts simply because I corrected her by pointing out that Mary McDonnell made the decision to wear her hair loose rather than braided has been really, really FUN to watch. BTW When I went to see Dances with Wolves it was a first date with a pretty cute girl called Rosie ( long straight black hair not tied back , definite slattern ). She confessed to me afterwards that she had really needed to pee most of the film but was too embarassed to get up and visit the ladies room, and was actually in quite a bit of pain for most of it ! Just wanted to share with you. Good to know that there are other slattern-lovers out there. :-) In retrospect, the thing I found funniest about the whole Dances With Wolves thang was *not* that Judy failed to address the fact that there is *not a single scene in the film* that portrays Mary McDonnell's hair as dirty or matted the way she claimed it was, but the fact that this whole insane theory of hers *never even occurred to her* until her sister mentioned it. Isn't that classic? On the one hand, it supports my theory that the whole slattern thing is the result of some childhood trauma, in that her sister was *also* told to Go comb your hair, and probably by the same petty tyrant. On the other, it's one of the best examples *ever* of Judy BELIEVING WHAT SOMEONE TOLD HER TO BELIEVE. By her own admission, it never occurred to her that Dances With Wolves could be secretly racist *until someone told her to believe it*. And now, 20 years later, she is still defending what she was told to believe as if it's Truth Incarnate. Classic. P.S. Don't take all of this seriously, Jeff, or see it as an attempt to draw you into the line of fire. This is just me having fun with Judy on the ropes and in Gotta-keep-defending-the-dumb-idea-because- I-can-never-be-seen-as-admitting-I-was-dumb mode. There is so little real content on FFL lately that forms of cheap amusement like this are one of the only things that keep me around.
[FairfieldLife] They almost'll have done it!
Seems like TM-siddhas and Governors shall be able to move the cold weather in Europe at least somewhat eastwards? ;D http://news.bbc.co.uk/weather/forecast/10067
[FairfieldLife] Re: They almost'll have done it!
The sun rose today in Sitges, too. God bless the TM-siddhas and Governors for making that happen. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: Seems like TM-siddhas and Governors shall be able to move the cold weather in Europe at least somewhat eastwards? ;D http://news.bbc.co.uk/weather/forecast/10067
[FairfieldLife] Schedule for 12 January 2010
Inaugurating Maharishi's Third Year of InvincibilityGlobal Raam Raj Global Assembly at MERU, Holland, and connected to national and local assemblies worldwide via the Maharishi Channel (Channel 3 at www.maharishichannel.in http://www.maharishichannel.in ) Celebrating of the supreme blessings of Total Knowledge that we have received from Maharishi, from Guru Dev, and from the eternal tradition of Vedic Masters, in the presence of Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam and the Rajas, Raj Rajeshwaris, and Ministers of the Global Country of World Peace Schedule for 12 January 2010 (all times are Central European Time) 09:55 am morning session starting at auspicious Muhurta Rashtriya Gita (anthem of the Global Country of World Peace) Global Puja to Guru Dev Vedic recitation by Maharishi Vedic Pandits from the Brahmasthan of India and from MERU, Holland (about one and a half hours) Maharishi reflects on the past, present, and future of his global Movement and the source of all achievements: tape from 11 January 2008, MERU, Holland Raja John Hagelin, Raja of Invincible America comments on Maharishi's address Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam's blessing for the New Year, Maharishi's Third Year of InvincibilityGlobal Raam Raj Lunch 3:00 pm afternoon sessionRaising the Flag of the Global Country of World Peace, the Flag of Invincibility for all nations (Maharaja-ji will raise the flag in front of Maharishi's house in MERU, Holland, and the Flag can be raised simultaneously in all countries where convenient, or at Solar noon in other time zones) 3.10pm: Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace Dr Girish Varma, Director General, Global Capital of Raam Raj, Brahmasthan of India (address from the Brahmasthan of India) Raja Harris Kaplan, Raja of Invincible India (address from the Brahmasthan of India) Purusha Rajas at the Brahmasthan of India Maha Raj Rajeshwari's blessing for the New Year 4.30pm: close for afternoon programme 8:30 pm evening sessionDr, Howard Settle birthday celebration, introduced by Raja John Hagelin Kuber, Dr. Benjamin Feldman, Minister of Finance and Planning Raja Steven Rubin, Raja of Invincible China Raj Rajeshwaris 9.30pm: Closing remarks Celebrations will continue on 13 January with inspiring reports from the Rajas, Raj Rajeshwaris, Ministers, and other leaders of Maharishi's world Movement, indicating the rise of Invincibility for all nations and the accelerating progress of Maharishi's Movement all around the world. Jai Guru Dev
[FairfieldLife] Re: Schedule for 12 January 2010
While I understand that some people like these sorts of celebrations, someone should point out that the only event or activity in the list below that would be considered normal or sane by most people on the planet is Lunch. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: Inaugurating Maharishi's Third Year of InvincibilityGlobal Raam Raj Global Assembly at MERU, Holland, and connected to national and local assemblies worldwide via the Maharishi Channel (Channel 3 at www.maharishichannel.in http://www.maharishichannel.in ) Celebrating of the supreme blessings of Total Knowledge that we have received from Maharishi, from Guru Dev, and from the eternal tradition of Vedic Masters, in the presence of Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam and the Rajas, Raj Rajeshwaris, and Ministers of the Global Country of World Peace Schedule for 12 January 2010 (all times are Central European Time) 09:55 am morning session starting at auspicious Muhurta Rashtriya Gita (anthem of the Global Country of World Peace) Global Puja to Guru Dev Vedic recitation by Maharishi Vedic Pandits from the Brahmasthan of India and from MERU, Holland (about one and a half hours) Maharishi reflects on the past, present, and future of his global Movement and the source of all achievements: tape from 11 January 2008, MERU, Holland Raja John Hagelin, Raja of Invincible America comments on Maharishi's address Maharaja Adhiraj Rajaraam's blessing for the New Year, Maharishi's Third Year of InvincibilityGlobal Raam Raj Lunch 3:00 pm afternoon sessionRaising the Flag of the Global Country of World Peace, the Flag of Invincibility for all nations (Maharaja-ji will raise the flag in front of Maharishi's house in MERU, Holland, and the Flag can be raised simultaneously in all countries where convenient, or at Solar noon in other time zones) 3.10pm: Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace Dr Girish Varma, Director General, Global Capital of Raam Raj, Brahmasthan of India (address from the Brahmasthan of India) Raja Harris Kaplan, Raja of Invincible India (address from the Brahmasthan of India) Purusha Rajas at the Brahmasthan of India Maha Raj Rajeshwari's blessing for the New Year 4.30pm: close for afternoon programme 8:30 pm evening sessionDr, Howard Settle birthday celebration, introduced by Raja John Hagelin Kuber, Dr. Benjamin Feldman, Minister of Finance and Planning Raja Steven Rubin, Raja of Invincible China Raj Rajeshwaris 9.30pm: Closing remarks Celebrations will continue on 13 January with inspiring reports from the Rajas, Raj Rajeshwaris, Ministers, and other leaders of Maharishi's world Movement, indicating the rise of Invincibility for all nations and the accelerating progress of Maharishi's Movement all around the world. Jai Guru Dev
[FairfieldLife] Re: Schedule for 12 January 2010
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: While I understand that some people like these sorts of celebrations, someone should point out that the only event or activity in the list below that would be considered normal or sane by most people on the planet is Lunch. I'm glad that at least the Turq consider himself normal and sane :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: My point is that whatever case one might make for Maharishi being a Class A Vedic Supremacy Bigot, one does not have to place one's focus there. One *could* focus instead on all the millions of people he helped by using the TMO's millions to teach TM cheaply or for free everywhere. Oh. Never mind. :-) Instead the Turqey choose to continue to focus his inner demons on Maharishi who's Movement he has not been affiliated with for more than 30 years, day after day, year after year here on FFL. Go figure. I mean, go figure !
[FairfieldLife] Global Family Chats 2010
Global Family Chats 2010 To download the Windows Media Player files, right click on the link and select 'save target as'. The link for any day should be working approximately 24 hours after the chat finishes. Global Family Chats http://streaming.mou.org/MOU/Chat/08_Jan_10.wmv January 10th http://streaming.mou.org/MOU/Chat/10_Jan_10.wmv The auspicious birthday of Maharaja Adhiraj Raja Raam was celebrated in an atmosphere of great bliss and happiness in Maharishi's Brahmasthan at Meru. All the Rajas and Ministers did Puja to Guru Dev with Maharaja-ji and enjoyed wishing fulfilment of Maharishi's plans and goals, and feeling with Maharaja-ji that we are doing well, the progress is good, and this year will bring great transformation. January 9th http://streaming.mou.org/MOU/Chat/09_Jan_10.wmv Dr Eckart Stein reported on three developments in Germany, all reflecting the current demand of the time, which is for the authorities to recognize and implement TM as a means to create higher consciousness, particularly in education. In the first development, a long-time Governor, Gottfried Vollmer, who is also an actor, reported on a documentary film called 'R'Evolution 2012, which has just been released. The film features an international cast of scientists and will be released internationally. It addresses the possible effects of increased sunspot activity predicted by NASA for 2012, that may include influencing the geomagnetic field of the earth and the human brain. In his role as meditation expert Mr Vollmer was able to bring out the effects of TM for higher states of consciousness, and the group effect, citing the research studies from the Washington DC demonstration. The main conclusion of the panel of experts is that there is only one thing one can do to prepare for any such eventuality: Meditate. Dr Stein reported on the second development: a 12-city Stress-Free Schools lecture tour. The concept of handling stress through the consciousness of the teachers and students was well received by many teachers. Dr Stein found a way to access teachers from inside the system, which is easy to organize and fun, through the office of the mayor. Thirdly, Prof. Andreas Koepnick described how he has started a meditation club amongst his students. Their interest is in enhancing their creativity, and they understand the concept of transcending immediately. Prof. Koepnick is now trying to make TM instruction available for the students as part of the curriculum. January 8th http://streaming.mou.org/MOU/Chat/08_Jan_10.wmv Raja Peter introduced the celebration of Maharishi's first visit to London 50 years ago, held on the 13th December 2009. Dr Bevan Morris and Dr Vernon Katz both spoke beautifully and profoundly about the significance of that event for the UK, for Europe, and for the world.
[FairfieldLife] Two trends I hope we see less of on FFL in 2010...
...but that I doubt we will. :-) 1. The I am (or represent) an authority stratagem. Call me crazy, but I don't consider *anyone* on this forum an authority on much of anything, with the possible exception of Rick about search engine place- ment. So I find it amusing when some post *as if* they either were or can cite authority. Especially if they use this invocation of supposed authority as a thought-stopper, as if saying it should end the discussion and get everyone involved to say, You are right and I was wrong...how could I have *been* so stupid. :-) Most galling is when the posters doing this don't have any experience with the things they're claiming to be authorities on. Examples of this might include trying to push an opinion about a film they've never seen. Or trying to speak authoritatively about Maharishi and his thinking while never having met him except on tape or in books. Or making equally authoritative declar- ations about the inner workings of the TM movement *without ever having been a part of that movement* except as a very remote practitioner of TM. Or jumping into a subject one knows nothing about based solely on having Googled it or looked it up on Wikipedia. A little humility here, folks. We're all just bozos on this bus, expressing *opinions*. As far as I can tell, you don't have the right to pose as an authority on something unless you've actually walked the walk of it. The people I respect most on this forum content them- selves with expressing their opinions *as* opinions, without ever trying to present them as facts or truth. 2. The believing that anyone should *care* what you say about them or that saying it affects them stratagem. Again, a little humility seems to be in order. No one here has ever really DONE very much in their lives to give their opinion or what they think of another poster weight or make it matter. As far as I can tell, FFL is composed of a bunch of ordinary folks who like to waste time on the Internet. Just as no one is an authority, no one's opinion of another poster is authoritative or carries any more weight than anyone else's. Folks hurl cyberinsults as if they *mattered*, and as if the people they're hurling them at should be physically or emotionally *hurt* by them. And the fascinating thing from my point of view is that the posters on FFL who seem to do this the most are the ones *whom very few people ever bother to reply to, or even read*. Think it through, people. If someone has clearly decided that you're such a troll or such an intellectual light- weight that they don't even bother to read most of what you write, DO YOU REALLY THINK THEY'LL CARE WHAT YOU *CALL* THEM? And of course everything above applies to me as well if I slip into such ruts in 2010, too.
[FairfieldLife] MAHARISHI slide show Keeper of the Keys by Renie Paver
For this Jan. 12th I am again sharing one of the very first songs I wrote about being a custodian of Vedic knowledge. From the depths of my heart, in all humility and with overwhelming gratitude, I offer all I am and all that I may be to the tradition of knowledge and the great teachers who have shown me the way to the... light at the door- the light of God inside my heart. May we shine that light of peace on this earth. Jai Guru Dev. Renie Praver http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M42h-vPNU_o Beautiful, Renie. Thank you, RD
[FairfieldLife] Re: US special envoy threatens to freeze aid to Israel
If he had full American constitutional rights he would have already have been freed, since there's not one shred of evidence that wasn't obtained without coercion, that is presentable in a U.S. Court, that he committed any crimes in the U.S. You mean, aside from his formal, on-the-record plea to be allowed, along with four of his fellow detainees, to plead guilty to the charges against him? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/us/09gitmo.html Key words here: torture and coercion. Confessions made uner torture are not admissible in U.S. courts. Judy: This plea wasn't made under torture. KSM and his family got shot at by a drone and then after he was kidnapped, the CIA abused his wife and children, denying them food and water for days. He was locked up, naked, in a secret prison for a year, and then tortured 183 times, and kept in isolation for what, seven years, without the benefit of an attorney or even a Red Cross nurse and THEN he confessed? He's probably stark-raving mad by now with huge delusions of grandeur - he wants to be a martyr for the cause - nothing he says now could even be considered to be free-will statements. Almost everything KSM confessed to was probably just bragging. One CIA official cautioned that many of Mohammed's claims during interrogation were 'white noise' designed to send the U.S. on wild goose chases or to get him through the day's interrogation session. Read more: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed It's too late, the U.S. Government blew it big time - KSM should have received a prompt military trial as an enemy combatant and them promptly executed. What purpose does it serve to give KSM full U.S. civil rights? It just doesn't make any sense. In fact, it's a mockery, since the U.S. has not declared war on anyone. Al Qaeda wanted a large soap box and now they have one. This will make the 'Abu Grab' scandal look like a picnic! If 9-11 was a case of civil crime, then we should have let Interpol take care of it. What good does it do to invade Afghanistan, when the terrorists can set up a 'camp' anywhere? It was probably all a big mistake - we should vote all the bums out that got us into this mess! Somebody has got to pay for this gigantic screw-up!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality... You left out a few questions, jeff. The answers to these questions might determine if you are a naive realist, a materialist, or an idealist: 1. Can objects which are known exist independently of their being known? 2. Can objects endure or continue to exist without being experienced by anyone? 3. Does knowing an object create them? 4. If objects have properties, do they derive their existence or nature from the knower? 5. Does knowledge of objects changes their nature? 5. Do we experience objects directly or is there something in between them and our knowledge of them? 6. Do we experience objects exactly as they are or is there some distortion by any intervening medium? 7. Since objects are public, can they be known by more than one person and perceived exactly the same way? 8. Do we perceive objects exactly as they are? Read more: From: Willytex Subject: Things Fall Down Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: February 19, 2002 http://tinyurl.com/y95s9tl
[FairfieldLife] Tibet
This is an amazing look back into the life of the Tibetans worth a few minutes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwBeO6cdGiw
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
What the New Agers don't understand is that reality is a consensus phenomenon. So, you're thinking that when we see an object, we experience it *exactly* like everyone else experiences it? Or, is the object changed or altered in some way the act of perception? For example, I see a thief at night, but my neighbor see a fence post. Yeah, you might be trying to dream your reality, but reality is also trying to dream you. So, you're thinking that things and events are not real, that they are projections, illusions, like those seen in a dream? snip New Agers seem to have mistaken a useful truism (What you focus on you become) for an ego-stoking and non-useful illusion (What I believe will happen happens). So, you're thinking that objects *do not* derive their existence or nature from the knower? And that knowledge of an object *does not* change their nature? Similarly, in the practice of mindfulness one learns to focus on that which is useful in terms of emotions and the ups and downs of consensus reality... Unfortunately, this isn't the definition of 'mindfullness' according to Buddhist teachers. Mindfullness isn't about concentrating on any emotions or focusing on any 'ups and downs'. Mindfullness isn't based on mood-making or any kind of striving. It is a practice that does not require any set of beliefs, such as belief in an individual soul-monad. All you have to do in practicing Buddhist mindfullness is to *sit*, that's all - in Buddhist mindfullness practice, this 'just sitting' IS the enlightened state. That's why, although the Buddha reached enlightenment in 483 BC, he still meditated until he was over eighty years old. Mindfulness practice is simple and completely feasible. Just by sitting and doing nothing, we are doing a tremendous amount. 'How to do Mindfulness Meditation' http://tinyurl.com/y97gmxf snip
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
When I went to see Dances with Wolves it was a first date with a pretty cute girl called Rosie (long straight black hair not tied back, definite slattern)... I'm not convinced that it's a good thing to be calling your date a slut - that doesn't say much about yourself, does it, jeff? slattern [?slæt?n] n a slovenly woman or girl; slut [probably from slattering, from dialect slatter to slop; perhaps from Scandinavian; compare Old Norse sletta to slap] slatternly adj slatternliness n http://www.thefreedictionary.com/slattern
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prominent Scientists now think mini ice age imminent!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG wg...@... wrote: They say that their research shows that much of the warming was caused by oceanic cycles when they were in a `warm mode' as opposed to the present `cold mode'. This challenge to the widespread view that the planet is on the brink of an irreversible catastrophe is all the greater because the scientists could never be described as global warming `deniers' or sceptics. Among the most prominent of the scientists is Professor Mojib Latif, a leading member of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has been pushing the issue of man-made global warming on to the international political agenda since it was formed 22 years ago. Prof Latif, who leads a research team at the renowned Leibniz Institute at Germany's Kiel University, has developed new methods for measuring ocean temperatures 3,000ft beneath the surface, where the cooling and warming cycles start. snip http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mi\ \ ni-ice-age-starts-here.html LOL, BillyGee Whiz eats the horse shit sandwich once again . . . Daily Mail article on global cooling utterly misquotes, misrepresents work of Mojib Latif and NSIDC http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/11/foxnews-wattsupwiththat-climatede\ pot-daily-mail-article-on-global-cooling-mojib-latif/ Latif told me: I don't know what to do. They just make these things up. NSIDC Director Serreze says it is completely false. January 11, 2010 Memo to media and anti-science disinformers (again): If your global cooling piece revolves around Dr. Latif, you probably have the entire story backwards. But, at least for the disinformers, that is the goal. And that goes double if the piece involves the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). In an interview back on October 1, Dr. Latif told me we don't trust our forecast beyond 2015´´ and it is just as likely you'll see accelerated warming after then. Indeed, in his published research, rapid warming is all-but-inevitable over the next two decades. He told me, you can't miss the long-term warming trend in the temperature record, which is driven by the evolution of greenhouse gases. Finally, he pointed out Our work does not allow one to make any inferences about global warming. In an interview today, he confirmed that he accepts the IPCC's finding that most of the warming in the past century was very likely due to human causes definitely, he said. UPDATE: Latif spoke to the UK's Guardian, apparently after we chatted and I emailed him the piece, see Leading climate scientist challenges Mail on Sunday's use of his research: Mojib Latif denies his research supports theory that current cold weather undermines scientific consensus on global warming http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/11/climate-change-global\ -warming-mojib-latif . Latif remains puzzled and dismayed by articles like those in the Daily Mail, Could we be in for 30 years of global COOLING? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1242202/Could-30-years-global-C\ OOLING.html that purport to be based on his work, that supposedly quote him directly, but in fact just make stuff up. Of course, the Daily Mail made up a lot stuff for this article, like this whopper about the NSIDC's work: [Daily Mail] As NSIDC Director wrote me, This is completely false. NSIDC has never made such a statement and we were never contacted by anyone from the Daily Mail. We hope that this is simply a case of very lazy journalism and nothing more. Continue reading: http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/11/foxnews-wattsupwiththat-climatedep\ ot-daily-mail-article-on-global-cooling-mojib-latif/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
TurquoiseB wrote: Good to know that there are other slattern-lovers out there... But, I'm not sure how posting a fake photo of Judy is going to prove you are winning any debates, Turq. I guess you got your own reasons why you think that would prove that Judy is a 'slattern', but the photo was obviously a fake. slattern; Pronunciation: \?sla-t?rn\ Function: noun Etymology: probably from German schlottern to hang loosely, slouch; akin to Dutch slodderen to hang loosely, slodder slut: an untidy slovenly woman; also: slut, prostitute... http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/SLATTERN
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality... You left out a few questions, jeff. The answers to these questions might determine if you are a naive realist, a materialist, or an idealist: 1. Can objects which are known exist independently of their being known? Yes. 2. Can objects endure or continue to exist without being experienced by anyone? Yes. 3. Does knowing an object create them? No. 4. If objects have properties, do they derive their existence or nature from the knower? No. 5. Does knowledge of objects changes their nature? No. 5. Do we experience objects directly or is there something in between them and our knowledge of them? No and yes. 6. Do we experience objects exactly as they are or is there some distortion by any intervening medium? You've just asked this. 7. Since objects are public, can they be known by more than one person and perceived exactly the same way? Yes and maybe. 8. Do we perceive objects exactly as they are? Three times?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Two trends I hope we see less of on FFL in 2010...
TurquoiseB wrote: If someone has clearly decided that you're such a troll or such an intellectual light-weight that they don't even bother to read most of what you write, DO YOU REALLY THINK THEY'LL CARE WHAT YOU *CALL* THEM? Trolls are sometimes caricatured as socially inept. This is often due to the fundamental attribution error, as it is impossible to know the real traits of an individual solely from their online discourse. Indeed, since intentional trolls are alleged to knowingly flout social boundaries, it is difficult to typecast them as socially inept, since they have arguably proven adept at their goal... Read more: Subject: Troll FAQ From: Willytex Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: Fri, Jan 21 2005 http://tinyurl.com/4xtzej
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jeff.evans60 jeff.evan...@... wrote: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Debunking_New_Age.htm List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality, which they seem to avoid for some reason. When I ask them, they tend to either avoid the question or go off into some irrelevant rant and then re-confirming that thought creates reality principle without even addressing any of my points directly. How strange. I would have expected better from so called truth seekers. Nevertheless, here is the list. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to. Why doesn't he just kick a rock? After all, that was how Samuel Johnson settled the issue more than 200 years ago.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Prominent Scientists now think mini ice age imminent!
Is the Daily Mail a right wing rag?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Tibet
Thanks for posting this, Rick. I had seen it before, but to know it's now on YouTube is way cool. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: This is an amazing look back into the life of the Tibetans worth a few minutes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwBeO6cdGiw
[FairfieldLife] Prediction: converts to the Amish religion will increase 1,000 fold
Remember during the Vietnam era how many of those attempting to avoid the draft became priests under bogus religions? Well, here is a real religion people can join and get automatic exemption from ObamaCare! - Amish families exempt from insurance mandate HEALTH REFORM: People with religious objections can opt out By MARC HELLER MAILTO:mhel...@wdt.net TIMES WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT SATURDAY, JANUARY 9, 2010 WASHINGTON Federal health care reform will require most Northern New Yorkers but not all, it turns out to carry health insurance or risk a fine. Hundreds of Amish families in the region are likely to be free from that requirement. The Amish, as well as some other religious sects, are covered by a religious conscience exemption, which allows people with religious objections to insurance to opt out of the mandate. It is in both the House and Senate versions of the bill, making its appearance in the final version routine unless there are last-minute objections. Although the Amish consist of several branches, some more conservative than others, they generally rely upon a community ethic that disdains government assistance. Families rely upon one another, and communities pitch in to help neighbors pay health care expenses. Lawmakers reportedly included the provision at the urging of Amish constituents, although the legislation does not specify that community and the provision could apply to other groups as well, including Old Order Mennonites and perhaps Christian Scientists. A professor and lawyer at Yeshiva University in New York complained last summer that exempting groups for religious reasons could run afoul of the Constitution. Marci A. Hamilton, who teaches at the University's Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, wrote at Findlaw.com in August, If the government can tolerate a religious exemption, then it must do so evenhandedly among religious believers with the same beliefs. This is sheer favoritism for a certain class of religions, or even for one religion. In her column, Ms. Hamilton speculated that lobbyists for the Christian Science Church were responsible for the provision, given their public stance that health care reform bills around the country should include religious exemptions. In an e-mail message Friday, she said she was unaware of the Amish interest in the bill and that their objections to the mandate surprised her because the Amish do buy vehicle insurance, for instance. Ms. Hamilton said the exemption could harm the health of children whose families avoid medical care for religious reasons, although the Amish objections relate more to insurance than to medical care itself. Congressional aides said the exemption is based on a carve-out the Amish have had from Social Security and Medicare taxes since the 1960s. Whether Amish businesses, however, would fall under the bill's mandates is still an open question. Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., who was a key negotiator on the Senate bill, supports the religious exemption, said a spokesman, Maxwell Young, who called the provision a no brainer.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prominent Scientists now think mini ice age imminent!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Is the Daily Mail a right wing rag? According to Wikipedia, the Daily Mail is a British daily tabloid newspaper with a history of sensational libel lawsuits. Besides being a tabloid seemingly like The National Enquirer, it does appear to be a right wing leaning rag: The Mail takes an anti-EU, anti-abortion view, based upon traditional values, and is pro-capitalism and pro-monarchy, as well as, in some cases, advocating stricter punishments for crime. It also often calls for lower levels of taxation. The paper is generally critical of the BBC, which it argues is biased to the left. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail#Libel_lawsuits
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prominent Scientists now think mini ice age imminent!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Is the Daily Mail a right wing rag? Yep, ever so. It's extremely popular too. I use tongs on the rare occasions I read it in case something rubs off on me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Fine Art Of Not Knowing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony...@... wrote: 2012, is coming. Get thee to meditation, so says the science. What does the science say about 2012?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality... You left out a few questions, jeff. The answers to these questions might determine if you are a naive realist, a materialist, or an idealist: 1. Can objects which are known exist independently of their being known? Hugo: Yes. Apparently you are somewhat of a naive realist, Hugo and partly a materialist, but you don't seem to agree with the idealist view. Idealism is the philosophical theory that maintains that the ultimate nature of reality is based on mind or ideas. In the philosophy of perception, idealism is contrasted with realism in which the external world is said to have a so-called absolute existence prior to, and independent of, knowledge and consciousness... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism However, the moment a naive realist reflects upon his view he is no longer completely naive! The questions are really a series of a straw men, set up by epistemologists to represent us in our unreflective moments. This straw man may not be quite like any of us, for most of us have reflected somewhat. Yet, we can recognize that it represents a view we hold much of the time. Six statements summarize the naive realist: 1. Objects which are known exist independently of their being known. They can endure or continue to exist without being experienced by anyone. Knowing the objects does not create them. 2. Objects have qualities, or, if one prefers, properties, characteristics, or attributes, which are parts of the objects. As qualities of objects, they do not derive their exist- ence or nature from the knower. 3. Objects, including their qualities, are not affected merely by being known. Knowledge of objects in no way changes their nature. 4. Objects seem as they are and are as they seem. Or, as we sometimes say, appearances are realities. What seems obviously so is so. 5. Objects are known directly; that is, there is nothing between them and our knowledge of them. They occur in our experience. We experience them exactly as they are without distortion by any intervening medium. 6. Objects are public; that is, they can be known by more than one person. Several people can gee the same object and see it exactly as it is. From: Willytex Subject: Things Fall Down Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: February 19, 2002
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
I would have expected better from so called truth seekers. Nevertheless, here is the list.. Judy: Seems like a lot of trouble to go to. Why doesn't he just kick a rock? After all, that was how Samuel Johnson settled the issue more than 200 years ago. Things fall down, but things are *not* exactly as they seem. There is something in-between the rock and it being percieved. Also, we don't see things as wholes, only parts of wholes. Are appearances realities? Or, is what seems obviously so, really so?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality... You left out a few questions, jeff. The answers to these questions might determine if you are a naive realist, a materialist, or an idealist: 1. Can objects which are known exist independently of their being known? Hugo: Yes. Apparently you are somewhat of a naive realist, Hugo and partly a materialist, but you don't seem to agree with the idealist view. That's coz it's rubbish. Idealism is the philosophical theory that maintains that the ultimate nature of reality is based on mind or ideas. In the philosophy of perception, idealism is contrasted with realism in which the external world is said to have a so-called absolute existence prior to, and independent of, knowledge and consciousness... See! Who in their right mind would believe a load of jibber-jabber like that? I'm actually a Hugoist: Whatever seems the most likely explanation given what we appear to be and perceive is most likely to be correct otherwise a lot of work is being done by someone or something to kid us into believing reality is different. Anyone who tries to tell you that the world isn't more or less how it appears and can be changed by the mind is trying to sell you something. Hugoists are also rather lazy and can't be bothered to find out if this philosophical position has been claimed and labelled by someone else.
[FairfieldLife] Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut [1 Attachment]
Of course we know we never went to the moon because the astronauts would have friend when going through the Van Allen Belt. -- Life isn't like a bowl of cherries or peaches.. it's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: Apparently you are somewhat of a naive realist, Hugo and partly a materialist, I would say mostly materialist but I dislike the naive tag as it implies that I just accept what comes into through my eyes and ears without me ever pondering what reality and consciousness really are. I rarely think about anything else which is a weird idea in itself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Two trends I hope we see less of on FFL in 2010...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip Most galling is when the posters doing this don't have any experience with the things they're claiming to be authorities on. Actually, I don't think anybody here ever makes this claim. They tend instead to simply present whatever evidence they have for their opinions. (What can be galling to some, however, is when they haven't done their homework, and the evidence refutes their opinions.) Examples of this might include trying to push an opinion about a film they've never seen. Such as when somebody ahem insisted that Inland Empire was a silly film before he'd seen it. Or trying to speak authoritatively about Maharishi and his thinking while never having met him except on tape or in books. Right. How absurd, believing that MMY's thinking was actually reflected in what he said on tape and in his books! (One of the most extreme examples we see on FFL of this kind of pretension to being an authority is when folks write lengthy rant after lengthy rant about posters when all they've read of what the posters write is the first few lines in Message View.) snip Folks hurl cyberinsults as if they *mattered*, and as if the people they're hurling them at should be physically or emotionally *hurt* by them. And the fascinating thing from my point of view is that the posters on FFL who seem to do this the most are the ones *whom very few people ever bother to reply to, or even read*. Oh, I don't know, Barry. You may not get an amount of response anywhere near proportional to the effort you put into your posts, but few here do. Don't let the facts that hardly anybody reads or responds to the reams and reams of cyberinsults you hurl at me, and that I'm obviously not physically (physically??) or emotionally hurt by them, upset you so much. Think it through, people. If someone has clearly decided that you're such a troll or such an intellectual light- weight that they don't even bother to read most of what you write, DO YOU REALLY THINK THEY'LL CARE WHAT YOU *CALL* THEM? And of course everything above applies to me as well if I slip into such ruts in 2010, too. Yesterday: -- --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip You wouldn't want to inadvertently help to keep a slattern from freezing, would you? Anybody want to take bets on how many more posts Barry will throw away on this before he can let go of his attachment to it? I'll bet at least three more. More like three hundred. It's a magic word. Every time anyone on this forum hears it, they'll remember the time Judy was so out of control trying to support one of her insupportable theories that she called a woman a slut just because her hair was uncombed. Personally, I think that the more people laugh at her, the better it'll be for her. So she should look at the repetition of this magic word as a form of therapy. -- Barry's made an excellent start on the race for the 2010 Master of Inadvertent Irony title. Clearly he isn't ready to give it up, having held it for the past 15 years (if you count alt.m.t.).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: Of course we know we never went to the moon because the astronauts would have friend when going through the Van Allen Belt. Is this picture the friend of whom you speak?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: Of course we know we never went to the moon because the astronauts would have friend when going through the Van Allen Belt. -- Life isn't like a bowl of cherries or peaches.. it's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: snip I'm actually a Hugoist: Whatever seems the most likely explanation given what we appear to be and perceive is most likely to be correct otherwise a lot of work is being done by someone or something to kid us into believing reality is different. What I've always found interesting is that there's no way to prove materialism, and no way to disprove idealism. Or to put it another way, materialism is in theory falsifiable, whereas idealism is eminently provable. Of course that doesn't mean idealism trumps materialism (so far, at any rate). It's just that every one of materialism's proofs of How Things Are depends on a premise that is itself unprovable, a premise that could be knocked into a cocked hat with one single conclusive demonstration of idealism. Seems counterintuitive somehow.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Hugo richardhughes...@hotmail.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: Of course we know we never went to the moon because the astronauts would have friend when going through the Van Allen Belt. Is this picture the friend of whom you speak? Sorry, that was a fraudian, I mean Fraudian strip. I mean slip. I meant to type fried.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com wrote: *From:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto: fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *John *Sent:* Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html
[FairfieldLife] I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now...
A great Dylan line, and a greater insight IMO. I'm sitting in front of a roaring fire thinking about all of the certainties I've thrown into that fire over the years, and feeling grateful that in my dotage that I know less now than I knew then. I'm thinking that there is a certain quality of *liberation* inherent in being able to look back on certain periods of one's life and the things one was *certain* about at that time and think, WHAT must I have been thinking? I must have been high. And we were. All of us, whether we still feel *certain* about the same things or not. There is a *high* about certainty, and about the mindset that allows one to *feel* certainty. It's like part of us can *relax* and think, Wow. I finally *understand*. I know The Truth. Now I can kick back and coast for the rest of the incarnation. Cool. Cool, I guess. Me, just having turned 64, I find myself FAR more grateful for the things I once was certain about but have since learned were pure illusion than I am about almost anything else in this incarnation. What, after all, do you LEARN from being right? But realizing that you *weren't* right? Now THAT has chops. Being able to look critically at one's self and say, self, WTF could you have been thinking? is really COOL. Think of the character arc implicit in that. A person who was so much older then and thought that he understood or knew things comes to realize that he...uh...didn't. There is *growth* in that. There is *flow* in that, a la the Tao. There is movement from one metaphorical place to another. And the COOL part is that the meta- phorical next place is structured in wonder. Realizing that you were really dumb in the past to think you had everything figured out is a *gift*. Think of the alternative. You've got everything figured out. Now what do you do with the rest of the fuckin' incarnation? Where's the wonder in that? Big whoop. But realizing over and over that one's certainty in the past was *always* an illusion, and look- ing forward to the next such illusion so that one can eventually dump it? Wonderful. In my opinion, of course. YMMV.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Two trends I hope we see less of on FFL in 2010...
TurquoiseB wrote: ...but that I doubt we will. :-) 1. The I am (or represent) an authority stratagem. Call me crazy, but I don't consider *anyone* on this forum an authority on much of anything, with the possible exception of Rick about search engine place- ment. Sucking up to Rick, eh? Bet you wouldn't say that if it wasn't his forum. :-D I think you're wrong on people here being authorities on something. My bet there are a lot of people here who are an authority on something or could at least speak authoritatively about something. They just don't want to bore people here and only come forward if someone raises a question about something in their field or want to alert folks who might be interested about the subject. OTOH, maybe you're just trying to outdo Shemp. Yup, you're probably crazy. :-D
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. I recall Vaishnava scholars who thought that Prabhupada's interpretations of texts like the Srimad Bhagavatam were incorrect. They were kinda fun to read though, especially his rants against the impersonal school as we know what group he was referring to. :-D
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ShempMcGurk Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:03 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. So did Maharishi. I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. So did Maharishi. I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. Cool. Dueling aliens. :-) I mean, as a True Believer, whose spaceship are you going to get on when they descend and offer to take you to a Better Place? The Pitris, of whom pretty much all we know is that Maharishi believed in them? Or the Pleiadeans, whose vergina-like bodies Lou has described to us? Or Nabby's non-defined space brothers, who seem to have no discernible qualities other than, like him, supporting Benny Creme? It's a veritable quandary. I think that personally I'm going to go with the aliens from V, especially if they can hook me up with Anna.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ShempMcGurk Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:03 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. So did Maharishi. I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. You don't mean Rob and Laura Pitri of 148 Bonnie Meadow Road in New Rochelle, NY, do you?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ShempMcGurk Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:03 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. So did Maharishi. I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. It is entirely possible that lifeforms could exist at other frequencies that we can't see and not be dependent on oxygen like us. I think sometimes the human race is pretentious or ignorant when they think that only living things could exist in a realm where we can see them. After all species were found at depths in the ocean where scientists thought nothing could exist.
[FairfieldLife] Dances With Obsession
(If you just want one good belly laugh without having to plow through the rest of this, look down near the end for the paragraph beginning In retrospect...) This is really a case study in delusion and ego attachment. Let's look at posts two and three in Barry's projected three hundred (this will be a continuing series of posts under this subject heading, BTW): For example, one *could* go to see a movie and, rather than enjoy it as the uplifting fable it is, As I said, I thoroughly enjoyed the film each of the three times I saw it. The hair gaffe--which I hadn't even noticed the first two times--didn't detract at all from my appreciation of the film, even after my sister pointed it out. choose to focus on and go all deja vu on some trauma from one's own early life in which one was told over and over again to go comb their unruly hair. Looks as though Barry's projecting a trauma of *his* early life. It certainly wasn't a feature of mine. That's the magic of What you focus on you become, or mindfulness. One does *not* have to fall prey to one's samskaras and re-run the same petty ego-dramas over and over in one's head forever Or if not forever, at least three hundred times, as Barry has declared he's going to do--in public, yet--in an attempt to embarrass me. at any point one can choose to focus on something else. He's got 298 to go, it seems, before he can stop rerunning this particular petty ego-drama. If one were to buy into the logic that allowing an actress to use her own judgment and wear her hair the way she thinks best suits her character is in reality an attempt to denigrate and cast aspersions on lesser Native Americans by an unfeeling director, Total Barryfantasy. The subconscious racism was that they *didn't notice the incongruity*. And here's three (297 to go): The whole Dances With Nitpicks thread, with her making 20+ posts simply because I corrected her by pointing out that Mary McDonnell made the decision to wear her hair loose rather than braided has been really, really FUN to watch. Oh, my. Barry didn't correct me on anything, first of all. Second, most of my posts about this had nothing to do with what Barry reported of the interview.(*) Most weren't addressed to him at all, nor to any of his points. But every one of his dozen-plus posts about this were attacks on me for having brought up the incongruity--including a raft of his own nitpicks. As I said in an earlier post, this has been *Barry's* meltdown, not mine. (Let's recall that his first batch of hysterical rants completely missed the racism angle and accused me instead of being antifeminist because I had, in his deranged view, purportedly demanded that all women wear their hair neatly or be considered prostitutes.) Here's the very best part of Barry's long, strange trip on this to date: In retrospect, the thing I found funniest about the whole Dances With Wolves thang was *not* that Judy failed to address the fact that there is *not a single scene in the film* that portrays Mary McDonnell's hair as dirty or matted the way she claimed it was, (Obviously untrue, but let's leave that aside.) but the fact that this whole insane theory of hers *never even occurred to her* until her sister mentioned it. Isn't that classic? On the one hand, it supports my theory that the whole slattern thing is the result of some childhood trauma, in that her sister was *also* told to Go comb your hair, and probably by the same petty tyrant. On the other, it's one of the best examples *ever* of Judy BELIEVING WHAT SOMEONE TOLD HER TO BELIEVE. By her own admission, it never occurred to her that Dances With Wolves could be secretly racist *until someone told her to believe it*. No, my sister never mentioned subconscious racism. That's my own theory. But in Barry's mind, it's one of the best examples *ever* of my believing WHAT SOMEONE TOLD me to believe. Talk about classic. The thing Barry finds funniest never happened anywhere but in his own head. In fact, it's one of the best examples ever of how Barry creates his own reality. You'd think he'd be up in arms against that skeptic Jeff quoted. Anyway, that's two and three (starting from yesterday). Is Barry having fun yet? I've really barely scratched the surface of the yucks to be found in this extended temper tantrum of Barry's. I think I'm going to collect the whole shootin' match and upload it to the Files section, with expanded commentary, so I can refer readers to it whenever Barry pontificates about ego-drama and attachment and holding grudges and so on. At least, it'll serve as documentation when it comes time to decide who wins the Master of Inadvertent Irony award for 2010. - * As we'll recall, he's given two very different versions of the hair decision. In the interview, he claimed, McDonnell said it was the costumers and makeup artists who had convinced her to wear her hair loose and uncombed because
[FairfieldLife] Re: Simple questions that New Agers avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: List of questions for those who believe that thoughts create reality... You left out a few questions, jeff. The answers to these questions might determine if you are a naive realist, a materialist, or an idealist: 1. Can objects which are known exist independently of their being known? 2. Can objects endure or continue to exist without being experienced by anyone? 3. Does knowing an object create them? 4. If objects have properties, do they derive their existence or nature from the knower? 5. Does knowledge of objects changes their nature? 5. Do we experience objects directly or is there something in between them and our knowledge of them? 6. Do we experience objects exactly as they are or is there some distortion by any intervening medium? 7. Since objects are public, can they be known by more than one person and perceived exactly the same way? 8. Do we perceive objects exactly as they are? Read more: From: Willytex Subject: Things Fall Down Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: February 19, 2002 http://tinyurl.com/y95s9tl The answers depend on whether I am in quantum mode, real life mode or God complex mode on any particular day . Do you believe there are such things as objects ?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:52 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut It is entirely possible that lifeforms could exist at other frequencies that we can't see and not be dependent on oxygen like us. I think sometimes the human race is pretentious or ignorant when they think that only living things could exist in a realm where we can see them. After all species were found at depths in the ocean where scientists thought nothing could exist. I agree. Or at least that's my current understanding.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:52 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut It is entirely possible that lifeforms could exist at other frequencies that we can't see and not be dependent on oxygen like us. I think sometimes the human race is pretentious or ignorant when they think that only living things could exist in a realm where we can see them. After all species were found at depths in the ocean where scientists thought nothing could exist. Well said. Frequencies is the key word and also explains why not all people do see spaceships. I agree. Or at least that's my current understanding. Welcome to the club Rick ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Jan 09 00:00:00 2010 End Date (UTC): Sat Jan 16 00:00:00 2010 270 messages as of (UTC) Tue Jan 12 22:29:12 2010 38 ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@netscape.net 37 authfriend jst...@panix.com 29 WillyTex willy...@yahoo.com 23 TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com 23 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com 16 dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony...@yahoo.com 15 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net 12 do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com 10 It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@gmail.com 8 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com 7 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 7 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com 6 Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@lisco.com 6 Hugo richardhughes...@hotmail.com 6 jeff.evans60 jeff.evan...@yahoo.com 4 off_world_beings no_re...@yahoogroups.com 4 BillyG wg...@yahoo.com 3 Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com 3 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 2 seekliberation seekliberat...@yahoo.com 2 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net 1 suziezuzie msilver1...@yahoo.com 1 m 13 meowthirt...@yahoo.com 1 hermandan0 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 1 Zoran Krneta krneta.zo...@gmail.com 1 wle...@aol.com 1 RayS rayshepar...@yahoo.com 1 PaliGap compost...@yahoo.co.uk 1 John jr_...@yahoo.com 1 Dick Mays dickm...@lisco.com Posters: 30 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Fine Art Of Not Knowing
Om Come all ye 'Followers of Science', I. These portending global changes may well come to pass in the daily and ongoing passage of those 50 full coal trains passing through Fairfield. Daily heading to power plants east; but, these pundits and a Fairfield meditating community may represent a last great antidote to a vapid and ostentatious materialism that hath spun this global change. For, is both meditation and science now shouting, Repent your ignorant sinful spending. In the pundit project and in a disciplined meditating are the bold and far-seeing spiritual works of the fight for global climate. Come join the fight. Come back to meditation for your selves, your friends, your family and a future humanity. Come to action, in meditation. II. If you won't come to meditation, at least hire a meditating substitute in your place. As would off-set the materialism raging of the world. The science so says as does the experience of the age. If you work in the world, particularly in the first world, consider supporting a meditator in Fairfield as a 'fat off-set' to your wicked material way out there in the world. If too busy to meditate, then trade your wages of sin for a meditator. The science on all sides is ever more clear that spiritual regeneration may be our last and best hope. All our hope. Confront your materialism on all sides, come to meditation Transcend, you sinners! This is serious stuff. An incredibly utopian millionaire paying people to meditate and we got disciplined meditators in the domes being docked $15 a month each to heat the domes now. Some lot of people there by the skin of their teeth by the science for us all. On the other hand, we got a guy here working for IBM here walks his dog lurking the naked girls on Spanish beaches. Another, a 'public defender' attorney lurks here and spends his free time surfing. Seems by the science that some are getting off free who should know better. A consciousness gap. That is a 'fine art of not knowing'. Prajapati concludes: The devas communed with by yajna will grant thee the craved-for gifts of life. He who enjoys benefactions of the universal deities without due offerings to them is indeed a thief. III.12
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Fine Art Of Not Knowing
Prajapati concludes: The devas communed with by yajna will grant thee the craved-for gifts of life. He who enjoys benefactions of the universal deities without due offerings to them is indeed a thief. III.12 As even ...the surgical severing of hands in accordance with the punishment for theft. -N Geo 10.09 Om, for some who might should know better? Like these kind who once had the knowledge and just gone off... On the other hand, we got a guy here working for IBM here walks his dog lurking the naked girls on Spanish beaches. Another, a 'public defender' attorney lurks here and spends his free time surfing. Seems by the science that some are getting off free who should know better. A consciousness gap. That is a 'fine art of not knowing'. Om Come all ye 'Followers of Science', I. These portending global changes may well come to pass in the daily and ongoing passage of those 50 full coal trains passing through Fairfield. Daily heading to power plants east; but, these pundits and a Fairfield meditating community may represent a last great antidote to a vapid and ostentatious materialism that hath spun this global change. For, is both meditation and science now shouting, Repent your ignorant sinful spending. In the pundit project and in a disciplined meditating are the bold and far-seeing spiritual works of the fight for global climate. Come join the fight. Come back to meditation for your selves, your friends, your family and a future humanity. Come to action, in meditation. II. If you won't come to meditation, at least hire a meditating substitute in your place. As would off-set the materialism raging of the world. The science so says as does the experience of the age. If you work in the world, particularly in the first world, consider supporting a meditator in Fairfield as a 'fat off-set' to your wicked material way out there in the world. If too busy to meditate, then trade your wages of sin for a meditator. The science on all sides is ever more clear that spiritual regeneration may be our last and best hope. All our hope. Confront your materialism on all sides, come to meditation Transcend, you sinners! This is serious stuff. An incredibly utopian millionaire paying people to meditate and we got disciplined meditators in the domes being docked $15 a month each to heat the domes now. Some lot of people there by the skin of their teeth by the science for us all. On the other hand, we got a guy here working for IBM here walks his dog lurking the naked girls on Spanish beaches. Another, a 'public defender' attorney lurks here and spends his free time surfing. Seems by the science that some are getting off free who should know better. A consciousness gap. That is a 'fine art of not knowing'. Prajapati concludes: The devas communed with by yajna will grant thee the craved-for gifts of life. He who enjoys benefactions of the universal deities without due offerings to them is indeed a thief. III.12
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
On Jan 12, 2010, at 2:44 PM, ShempMcGurk wrote: By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. So did Maharishi. I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. You don't mean Rob and Laura Pitri of 148 Bonnie Meadow Road in New Rochelle, NY, do you? That's Petri, as in petri dish. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, Maharishi knew that Charlie was a big fan of Theosophy, so I guess Charlie knew all about Hindu mythology. Maharishi said the Pitris are called 'pitris' because they are 'spirits'. According to what I've read, they are the origin of our meditative impulses, just like the the dhyani chohans, which are, in reality, our own selves. and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, 'Pitri' is a Sanskrit word meaning 'father' and there are apparently seven or ten of them, arranged in classes. Maharishi said that we are born from the pitris - we are the soul- monads which were sent forth or projected, by the dhyanis. and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. No wonder - 'spirits' don't have physical bodies you can see! They don't breath oxygen like we do. According to the Maharishi, The lunar pitris are those consciousness centers in the human universal constitution which promote coherence, which enliven the brain mentality. You can read more about this in Nader Raam's great book, cited below. In other words, the lunar pitris are said to be - Pure Consciousness. In identifying the human physiology as a precise expression of these underlying laws, Dr Nader establishes that the individual is the expression of the totality of Natural Lawthe individual is cosmic. Read more: 'Human Physiology - Expression of Veda and the Vedic Literature' by Tony Nader, Ph.D., M.D. http://tinyurl.com/yayocly Other titles of interest: 'The Masks of God' Vol. 2: Oriental Mythology By Joseph Campbell Penguin Classics, 1991 'The Story of Civilization' Our Oriental Heritage Vol.1 By Will Durant Simon Schuster, 1949
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
Bhairitu wrote: It is entirely possible that lifeforms could exist at other frequencies that we can't see and not be dependent on oxygen like us... You sure shot-down Hugo's idea of materialism with this little post!
[FairfieldLife] Bevan?
no sight or mention of him Jan 12? new financial controlling group of the Dillbecks, Hagelin and one unamed RajRajeshwari, anyone here know her name?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bevan?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukr...@... wrote: no sight or mention of him Jan 12? new financial controlling group of the Dillbecks, Hagelin and one unamed RajRajeshwari, anyone here know her name? Well that is a sign of rising age of enlightenment even I can believe in! Quietly air brushing him from history won't undo the damage he's done though. A public recognition of his crimes against humanity and a reversal of his actions in excluding people would make a good start in healing the TMO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bevan?
i hear one mention now but no sight of him maybe he will reprise his moderator role yet tommorow but what other role I don' know --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: no sight or mention of him Jan 12? new financial controlling group of the Dillbecks, Hagelin and one unamed RajRajeshwari, anyone here know her name? Well that is a sign of rising age of enlightenment even I can believe in! Quietly air brushing him from history won't undo the damage he's done though. A public recognition of his crimes against humanity and a reversal of his actions in excluding people would make a good start in healing the TMO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. I recall Vaishnava scholars who thought that Prabhupada's interpretations of texts like the Srimad Bhagavatam were incorrect. They were kinda fun to read though, especially his rants against the impersonal school as we know what group he was referring to. :-D Throughout his commentaries of the Srimad Bhagavatam, he has renounced certain teachers of meditation which we can deduce to be MMY.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ShempMcGurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. Prabhupada also believed the same thing. He believed that there are beings there with beautiful mansions. It could be that, in his reasoning, humans cannot see these spiritual beings that exist there as mentioned in the vedic texts. He further stated that there is an abundance of water on the Moon since it is the karaka or significator of the ocean.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, Maharishi knew that Charlie was a big fan of Theosophy, so I guess Charlie knew all about Hindu mythology. Maharishi said the Pitris are called 'pitris' because they are 'spirits'. According to what I've read, they are the origin of our meditative impulses, just like the the dhyani chohans, which are, in reality, our own selves. and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, 'Pitri' is a Sanskrit word meaning 'father' and there are apparently seven or ten of them, arranged in classes. Maharishi said that we are born from the pitris - we are the soul- monads which were sent forth or projected, by the dhyanis. This is an interesting interpretation by MMY. According to the Srimad Bhagavatam, the Pitris married the adopted daughter (Marisa by name) of the Trees. This marriage resulted in the birth of Daksa who begot millions of beings, including humans, which eventually populated the entire universe. The actual mother of Marisa was an apsara, or celestial dancer. It is not mentioned who the father was. and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. No wonder - 'spirits' don't have physical bodies you can see! They don't breath oxygen like we do. According to the Maharishi, The lunar pitris are those consciousness centers in the human universal constitution which promote coherence, which enliven the brain mentality. You can read more about this in Nader Raam's great book, cited below. In other words, the lunar pitris are said to be - Pure Consciousness. In identifying the human physiology as a precise expression of these underlying laws, Dr Nader establishes that the individual is the expression of the totality of Natural Lawthe individual is cosmic. Read more: 'Human Physiology - Expression of Veda and the Vedic Literature' by Tony Nader, Ph.D., M.D. http://tinyurl.com/yayocly Other titles of interest: 'The Masks of God' Vol. 2: Oriental Mythology By Joseph Campbell Penguin Classics, 1991 'The Story of Civilization' Our Oriental Heritage Vol.1 By Will Durant Simon Schuster, 1949
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.ride@ wrote: Of course we know we never went to the moon because the astronauts would have friend when going through the Van Allen Belt. Is this picture the friend of whom you speak? I thought as much ;-) Sorry, that was a fraudian, I mean Fraudian strip. I mean slip. I meant to type fried.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ShempMcGurk Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:03 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of John Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:58 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut Srila Prabhupada of ISKCON fame did not believe humans landed on the Moon, despite the NASA evidence of the historic feat. Using the vedic texts as criteria, he thought that the Moon was farther than the Sun. As such, the astronauts could not have reached the Moon in only a few days journey. I guess that tells us something about the reliability of Srila Prabhupada and Vedic texts, at least as he interpreted them. By contrast, not only did Muktananda believe man went to the moon he insisted that there were beings that lived on the moon. So did Maharishi. I questioned him about it once. I was in a small meeting and Vernon Katz made some mention of the Pitris, and Maharishi commented that they dwelt on the moon, and I asked how anything could live on the moon, and Maharishi looked at me like I was an idiot. It is entirely possible that lifeforms could exist at other frequencies that we can't see and not be dependent on oxygen like us. I think sometimes the human race is pretentious or ignorant when they think that only living things could exist in a realm where we can see them. After all species were found at depths in the ocean where scientists thought nothing could exist. Frequencies? Deep ocean life is descended from the same source as us and has just adapted to living down there. There is still oxygen for them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nobody likes to talk about the 4th Apollo 11 Astronaut
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: Bhairitu wrote: It is entirely possible that lifeforms could exist at other frequencies that we can't see and not be dependent on oxygen like us... You sure shot-down Hugo's idea of materialism with this little post! Not really.
