[FairfieldLife] Weather in Western Europe vs. Russia!
?The cooling effect of the upcoming Guru-puurNimaa in Vlodrop can *already* be seen for instance here: http://www.fmi.fi/weather/abroad.html Whoa!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Anti-Authoritarian variety), plus Something Darker?
Ahem. It has not escaped my attention that the person who needs 16 lines of sig file to describe who he is just needed 444 lines of message text to do nothing more than practice shoot the messenger against Vaj. There was nothing in the post showing why the personality traits originally posted by Vaj do NOT apply to Maharishi. Mr. Long Winded ignored that completely, and focused instead on doing nothing more than demonizing Vaj. I would think that a real psychologist, life coach, educator, and narcissist enough himself to need that many lines at the end of his posts to describe himself could do more justice to the subject than that. If we'd wanted just another shoot the messenger post, we could have picked one at random by Willytex, Judy, Raunchydog, or Nabby. We don't need a professional for that. :-) Show some balls, Michael. Take Vaj up on his challenge. Go through the list of NPD characteristics one by one and try to make a case for them NOT applying to Maharishi, and pretty damned accurately. To do anything less marks you as pretty much a cultist in Fair Game shoot the messenger mode, not a psychologist. What real psychologist, after all, calls the person he is attacking a rakshasa? If it walks like a cultist and talks like a cultist, I'm gonna go with it being a cultist, no matter how many titles it puts after its name.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judith Bourque expose
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:35 PM, emptybill emptyb...@... wrote: I case you haven't seen this yet, here is some info that may give you pause ... at least to bracket what you have heard or read: http://conny-larsson-exposed.blogspot.com/2009/03/filmmaker-judith-bourque.html So let me get this straight. This guy in Spain who's attracted to FFL like a flies are attracted to shit is actually a woman named Judith. There. Got that right. Uh, Tom (It's just a ride is really Tom Pall). I understand that you're still practicing Tantrum Yoga and not reading my posts. If you were, you might have realized that I was the first person to post this hit piece about Judith Bourque. I did so *proactively*, knowing that cultist sleazebags on this forum would trot it out sooner or later in an attempt to shoot the messenger. Joe provided more information on the author of the hit piece, Gerald Moreno. Google *him* if you want a real education, especially in WHO YOU ARE ACTING LIKE. Per Tom's suggestion that I am actually Judith... not true. Per Tom's suggestion that I am attracted to this place like flies to shit...he said it, not me. :-) C'mon turds. *Surely* after practicing the bestest, most effective form of meditation in the whole world for 30 to 40 years you can do better than act like a bunch of cultist turds. Discuss the real issues here, and see if you can get the smell of shit off of yourselves. Then maybe the flies will go away, and you won't have to swat at them so hard. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:29 PM, feste37 wrote: If you are such a mentally healthy person, why are you so roundly disliked on this forum? Why is no one springing to your defense following Micheal's negative characterization of you? Not a single person has offered a single word in your defense. Can you offer any explanation for this odd but undeniable fact? Have you ever stopped to think about how you come across in your posts? Feste I suspect most saw Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's post as so whacky and weird that it's simply not something worth responding to... despite the fact that many have supported me in the past. When someone totally sidesteps the issue: Mahesh's behavior and it's odd parallel in narcissism, and then tries to attack the deliverer of that message; (I can't speak for others) but it's likely perceived as Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's issue rather than mine. Rather embarrassing situation for him, I'm afraid. In fact he never responded to any of Mahesh's issues at all. Very odd. It seems the latest revelation on M's lack of spiritual and personal integrity pushed a few people over the edge. It was just more than they could bear. So instead of addressing the issue at hand, filled with undigested anger and rage, they transfer all that pent up disappointment upon others. Like I said Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's behavior is well known in FF, where they had to seriously readjust a spiritual gathering's rule system because he would literally 'take over' the proceedings as if he were the sole person there! Knowing that, you tend to take Mike's expression of disappointment with the Maharishi in a different light.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Judith Bourque expose
On Jul 15, 2010, at 9:35 PM, emptybill wrote: This is a quite humorous and emotional reply on your part. You must find it quite threatening to consider anything outside of your own viewpoint. Sorry that your mind is so disturbed and your emotions so agitated. Ain't sansara a bitch? No, not at all. I enjoy such perspectives. I don't have a dog in this fight – any more than in the swirls of accusation around Sai Baba, Swami Rama or others. However I think it unfair that Judith waited until after Maharishi died to make her claims … that way she couldn't be contradicted. That is odd, but I can see two sides to that coin. On the one hand after being taken advantage of by an authority figure, maybe she was not prepared to confront him (and a cadre of TB movement lawyers). Having not read the book, but hearing the excellent reviews by Joe and Curtis, I get the impression she really put some thought into this and needed to have a certain amount of distance from the events themselves--and such distance takes time. How much time, only Judith knows for certain. The problem with the 'she waited till M. was dead to tell her story because she's a chicken 'also is rather weak because the chances are, the maharishi being a world-class businessman with a fine eye for detail (and a privacy freak to boot) would not have wanted such a thing to appear in court and the press. Of course Judith would probably not want her old wounds exposed in public either. I suspect when one is wounded in the the way she was, one wants to control the situation to their liking rather than have circumstances (or movement TB lawyers) determine it for you. That would only serve to re- traumatize.
[FairfieldLife] please re post the cite to obtain Maha Rishis commentary on later chapters 8 9
Thanks from me many who have missed this, in advance, Rick all here.
[FairfieldLife] Spiritual teachers having sex with their students as IDEA
Let's step back from the emotions that Judith Bourque's book have brought up, and the feelings one way or another that we have about Maharishi. Just to see if anyone can do it, I propose a thread in which we keep the situation completely hypothetical, and try to discuss it as if we were not emotionally attached to the situation. Can you do it? We'll see. The hypothetical situation involves an unidentified spir- itual teacher, within an unidentified spiritual tradition. This teacher is regarded with some reverence by his students, some of whom regard him as holy -- so holy that according to the dogma of that spiritual tradition, he can do no wrong. In this tradition, the spiritual teacher in question has absolute power. He can decide on a whim to excommunicate someone from the organization, and has in fact done this, as all of his remaining students know full well. OK, given the above, this hypothetical spiritual teacher springs a big, rock-hard dhoti dolphin for one of his female students. He thinks she's got a marvelous pair of...uh...chakras and would like to caress them. He'd like to ask her to have sex with him. Should he do it? Are there moral and ethical factors that exist in this situation that would not exist if we were talking about some average man and woman on the street? Are there *power differential* issues inherent in asking someone to have sex with you if you have the power not only to fire her and kick her out of your organization but have the power to excommunicate her from what she considers her religion or spiritual path in life? Are there *abuse of trust* issues inherent in the person she came to in innocence and whom she regards as her trusted spiritual teacher suddenly asking her to get naked and have sex with him? I'm throwing this situation out as IDEA, to see if there is anyone here who can discuss it *as* idea, and without conflating the idea with a particular person. I for one think that it would be fun to discuss it that way. I welcome responses from anyone willing to discuss this IDEA *as* idea, and will probably join in the dis- cussion (warning in advance that at this point I only have three more posts I can make until Saturday morning). I will ignore any attempts to turn this idea into a Shoot the messenger or Make it all about Maharishi and defend him or bash him flame-fest. We've got enough of those threads on Fairfield Life already. Can we have one thread that's a discussion between adults, as adults?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
I love the fact that when Michael attacks Vaj as a narcissist, Vaj's response is that he was just told by a psychiatrist that he is one of the healthiest people he knows. A classic narcissistic response. (I'm special because I'm not just ordinary healthy, I'm one of the elite of the healthiest people! and this has been verified by a psychiatrist no less, an expert!) Vaj you show your true colors very well. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:29 PM, feste37 wrote: If you are such a mentally healthy person, why are you so roundly disliked on this forum? Why is no one springing to your defense following Micheal's negative characterization of you? Not a single person has offered a single word in your defense. Can you offer any explanation for this odd but undeniable fact? Have you ever stopped to think about how you come across in your posts? Feste I suspect most saw Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's post as so whacky and weird that it's simply not something worth responding to... despite the fact that many have supported me in the past. When someone totally sidesteps the issue: Mahesh's behavior and it's odd parallel in narcissism, and then tries to attack the deliverer of that message; (I can't speak for others) but it's likely perceived as Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's issue rather than mine. Rather embarrassing situation for him, I'm afraid. In fact he never responded to any of Mahesh's issues at all. Very odd. It seems the latest revelation on M's lack of spiritual and personal integrity pushed a few people over the edge. It was just more than they could bear. So instead of addressing the issue at hand, filled with undigested anger and rage, they transfer all that pent up disappointment upon others. Like I said Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's behavior is well known in FF, where they had to seriously readjust a spiritual gathering's rule system because he would literally 'take over' the proceedings as if he were the sole person there! Knowing that, you tend to take Mike's expression of disappointment with the Maharishi in a different light.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Judith Bourque expose
The spirituals Jerry Springer show! lol. : ) From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 15 July, 2010 8:32:14 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Judith Bourque expose --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptyb...@... wrote: I case you haven't seen this yet, here is some info that may give you pause ... at least to bracket what you have heard or read: http://conny-larsson-exposed.blogspot.com/2009/03/filmmaker-judith-bourq\ \ ue.html Introduction To Judith Bourque A Synopsis Although Conny Larsson continually attempts to portray himself as a sincere and bona fide psychic trance medium, meditation master and Vedic mantra acharya, he acts very much like a cult leader who operates on the premises of suppression and cover-ups. It is a fact that Conny Larsson solicited himself as a psychic trance medium for Maharshi Vyasa. It is also a fact the Conny Larsson and Judith Bourque purposely and knowingly falsified and removed information from the vedicmasterclass.org website in a brazen attempt to cover-up and suppress Conny Larsson's psychic trance medium claims. Instead of giving lip service to love, truth, compassion, healing and spirituality, Judith Bourque should first practice what she preaches. Falsifying testimonies and covering-up information for her psychic Guru do not speak well for Judith Bourque's spiritual integrity. Judith Bourque is an exemplary example of Conny Larsson's pseudo-spirituality. This woman is the person Rick Archer et al is using as a proof against Maharishi ?? Amazing and sad. Given Rick Archer's track record regarding truthfulness it's not surprizing. That fellow will embraze anyone, any lie will do.
Re: [FairfieldLife] A Great Jew in London
What a weird title. Warren says it better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRHIeblmIwsfeature=related From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 15 July, 2010 9:57:30 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] A Great Jew in London http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll7UFxqI2pM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
LOL. It has regressed to intellectual name calling. hahahahaha. From: Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 15 July, 2010 7:28:47 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)? On Jul 15, 2010, at 7:58 PM, It's just a ride wrote: On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Dr. Michael Dean Goodman tan...@cheerful. com wrote: Here's a repeat of my post from earlier this afternoon. The formatting was so garbled that all the lines got broken up and it was very hard to read. Here's a cleaner version. I apologize for the double posting. This one should be much easier on the eyes and the brain. ;) Dear Fairfield Lifers, I'm a professional (Ph.D.) therapist who's worked with over a thousand clients over the the past 38 years. I've quietly read Vaj's numerous postings on this list for many years, since he first joined. Although Vaj has never claimed any professional training or credentials in the counseling world, he repeatedly uses the diagnosis of personality disorders to put down his perceived enemies. This is humorous, and a whopping case of projection, since Vaj's huge body of post- ings reveal that he is a prime candidate for a diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (anti-authoritarian flavor) himself. Let's just take a look: Vaj believes himself to be a psychiatrist. Ask him about the psychiatric practice he was going to buy. I do? I was going to buy a psychiatrist practice? Why didn't anyone tell me?! What an odd day. Despite having several friends, including my best friend (who are psychiatrists) tell me I'm not only one of the most mentally healthy persons they know, I'm told by some TM-bot (who's allegedly no longer championing pro-TM claims) that I have a personality disorder! To top it off the person who tells me I'm a narcissist has observed narcissistic tendencies himself!
[FairfieldLife] Re: A question about post limits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: [ditzyklanmail wrote:] You mean I cannot forward an email to a post count under my user name? I donât understand the question. The language is not at all clear, but it sounds like ditzy wants to forward to FFL a privately emailed reply from Judy. Or publicly reply to Judy's private email on FFL. This was all ditzy's idea. I've never emailed her about anything. Looks like she just wanted to be helpful.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Acoustic Amy Winehouse
yep. Hanna Montana. lol From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 15 July, 2010 11:05:14 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Acoustic Amy Winehouse http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu7uPHtTJ4oNR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu7uPHtTJ4ofeature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmV6_oc2lwMfeature=related
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amy Winehouse
English blues??? Ha! Amy is overrated. Good singer but Hanna Montana-ed I am not into this kind of blues, but this girl has got ithas had it and will continue and does not need auto-tune. : ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRbN85LPOXYfeature=related Real Southern music continues, recorded without the bells and whistles: http://www.youtube.com/user/Pointbarney007#p/u/46/Zsr21ms2E_I From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 15 July, 2010 10:43:14 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amy Winehouse and Vaj's denial Like Amy, Vaj is no, no, no. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_1hasiYdgcfeature=channel David Letterman meets, for once, a real artist and makes a fool of himself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlRF43-xaYcfeature=related Will you love me tomorrow: Amy Winehouse http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygxQu08g2mgfeature=related I die a hundred times: Amy Winehouse http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1evzhSast8
Re: [FairfieldLife] Spiritual teachers having sex with their students as IDEA
Heh. I am sorry, but this description, rock-hard dhoti dolphin is very funny. From: TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 16 July, 2010 7:07:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Spiritual teachers having sex with their students as IDEA Let's step back from the emotions that Judith Bourque's book have brought up, and the feelings one way or another that we have about Maharishi. Just to see if anyone can do it, I propose a thread in which we keep the situation completely hypothetical, and try to discuss it as if we were not emotionally attached to the situation. Can you do it? We'll see. The hypothetical situation involves an unidentified spir- itual teacher, within an unidentified spiritual tradition. This teacher is regarded with some reverence by his students, some of whom regard him as holy -- so holy that according to the dogma of that spiritual tradition, he can do no wrong. In this tradition, the spiritual teacher in question has absolute power. He can decide on a whim to excommunicate someone from the organization, and has in fact done this, as all of his remaining students know full well. OK, given the above, this hypothetical spiritual teacher springs a big, rock-hard dhoti dolphin for one of his female students. He thinks she's got a marvelous pair of...uh...chakras and would like to caress them. He'd like to ask her to have sex with him. Should he do it? Are there moral and ethical factors that exist in this situation that would not exist if we were talking about some average man and woman on the street? Are there *power differential* issues inherent in asking someone to have sex with you if you have the power not only to fire her and kick her out of your organization but have the power to excommunicate her from what she considers her religion or spiritual path in life? Are there *abuse of trust* issues inherent in the person she came to in innocence and whom she regards as her trusted spiritual teacher suddenly asking her to get naked and have sex with him? I'm throwing this situation out as IDEA, to see if there is anyone here who can discuss it *as* idea, and without conflating the idea with a particular person. I for one think that it would be fun to discuss it that way. I welcome responses from anyone willing to discuss this IDEA *as* idea, and will probably join in the dis- cussion (warning in advance that at this point I only have three more posts I can make until Saturday morning). I will ignore any attempts to turn this idea into a Shoot the messenger or Make it all about Maharishi and defend him or bash him flame-fest. We've got enough of those threads on Fairfield Life already. Can we have one thread that's a discussion between adults, as adults?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A question about post limits
Stein is correct. I did not nor did she ever communicate with me on private. Please do not mind their interpretations of my question. I apologize to Stein if this was awkward. I was just making a point. I like Stein's responses on this FFL and I wouldn't negatively challenge Stein with a 10 foot pole, because Stein would eat me alive. It was funny to see how quickly some could think a conspiracy was going on based on a question. That is all I was doing. Peace. From: authfriend jst...@panix.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 16 July, 2010 8:28:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A question about post limits --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: [ditzyklanmail wrote:] You mean I cannot forward an email to a post count under my user name? I don’t understand the question. The language is not at all clear, but it sounds like ditzy wants to forward to FFL a privately emailed reply from Judy. Or publicly reply to Judy's private email on FFL. This was all ditzy's idea. I've never emailed her about anything. Looks like she just wanted to be helpful.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Judith Bourque expose
Even if you are partly correct, how annoying to put Amy Whine house as a rebuttle. Geez. From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 15 July, 2010 11:15:04 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Judith Bourque expose --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: Oops! Hit a nerve? Vaj sees nothing wrong with lying or promoting lies about Maharishi, but when someone like emptybill, who has no dog in the fight, presents information that questions Judith's motivation and truthfulness, rather than acknowledge there's room for doubt, he resorts to invectives. I'm not surprised. It's not possible to expect any better of him. Nor of The Turq. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmV6_oc2lwMNR=1
[FairfieldLife] Re: My take on Judith's book
Excerpts from posts I made in April: - You're leaving one aspect of it out, that he allegedly had these affairs with female followers. That really isn't OK, because of the power differential; it's exploitative at best, predatory at worst, even if it was nominally consensual. And the age difference was substantial, by all accounts. I don't have any problem in the abstract with him getting his rocks off, but this was a rotten way to go about it. He didn't have a lot of options given the way he had things set up; he didn't have access to mature women who weren't his followers. But if he had sexual needs, he ought to have figured out some way to manage them that didn't involve dewy-eyed devotees. Or just accept that it was something he was going to have to deny himself. - If you put yourself in a box, as he did, and then find you can't live in it comfortably, you need to chuck the box, or build a bigger one, instead of inflicting your discomfort on others, no matter how apparently eager they may be to share it. I don't know how reliable the various stories are, but in some cases a lot of pain for the women was said to be the result. They may not have just fallen off the turnip truck, but it takes a *huge* amount of sophistication to get sexually involved with your guru and keep it from becoming an awful mess, especially when the guru himself is unsophisticated in the area of such relationships. - There was lots more from me along these same lines in this thread. And here's what Barry said about me yesterday: I mean, we've got Judy and Raunchy, avowed feminists, going out of their way to try to come up with some way to describe Maharishi's actions as minor or inconsequential. So far, all of their concern has been for *Maharishi* and his rep. Not one word of concern that I've noticed for the women. Some feminists. I'd be a little more impressed if either of them could step up to the plate and take a swing at the power differential issues and the abuse of trust issues going down in Maharishi's actions. But seemingly they can't. The atmosphere of reverence that Curtis speaks of is still in effect, preventing any concern except for the person to whom they've been taught that reverence is due. Go figure. I mean, go figure. (Note that I used the very phrase Barry specifies above, power differential.) Barry went on: And I'm fuckin' tired of being the focus for [Edg's] own self-hatred in not being able to see that *he* and the way *he* thinks is the real object of that hatred. Funny how outraged Barry gets--after having told us over and over that he doesn't care what people think of him--when he feels someone has accused him unfairly, yet he hasn't the slightest compunction about slandering people *he* doesn't like, as he did in the quote above. Is it possible that I'm the focus of Barry's self- hatred? Just askin'...
[FairfieldLife] Re: My take on Judith's book
Is it possible that I'm the focus of Barry's self- hatred? Just askin'... Apparently Barry isn't reading the posts you made to FFL about Judith, or mine about Conny, and he has not read Judith's book. So, I figure he's just guessing at what he thinks you might have said - projecting. authfriend: Excerpts from posts I made in April: - You're leaving one aspect of it out, that he allegedly had these affairs with female followers. That really isn't OK, because of the power differential; it's exploitative at best, predatory at worst, even if it was nominally consensual. And the age difference was substantial, by all accounts. I don't have any problem in the abstract with him getting his rocks off, but this was a rotten way to go about it. He didn't have a lot of options given the way he had things set up; he didn't have access to mature women who weren't his followers. But if he had sexual needs, he ought to have figured out some way to manage them that didn't involve dewy-eyed devotees. Or just accept that it was something he was going to have to deny himself. - If you put yourself in a box, as he did, and then find you can't live in it comfortably, you need to chuck the box, or build a bigger one, instead of inflicting your discomfort on others, no matter how apparently eager they may be to share it. I don't know how reliable the various stories are, but in some cases a lot of pain for the women was said to be the result. They may not have just fallen off the turnip truck, but it takes a *huge* amount of sophistication to get sexually involved with your guru and keep it from becoming an awful mess, especially when the guru himself is unsophisticated in the area of such relationships. - There was lots more from me along these same lines in this thread. And here's what Barry said about me yesterday: I mean, we've got Judy and Raunchy, avowed feminists, going out of their way to try to come up with some way to describe Maharishi's actions as minor or inconsequential. So far, all of their concern has been for *Maharishi* and his rep. Not one word of concern that I've noticed for the women. Some feminists. I'd be a little more impressed if either of them could step up to the plate and take a swing at the power differential issues and the abuse of trust issues going down in Maharishi's actions. But seemingly they can't. The atmosphere of reverence that Curtis speaks of is still in effect, preventing any concern except for the person to whom they've been taught that reverence is due. Go figure. I mean, go figure. (Note that I used the very phrase Barry specifies above, power differential.) Barry went on: And I'm fuckin' tired of being the focus for [Edg's] own self-hatred in not being able to see that *he* and the way *he* thinks is the real object of that hatred. Funny how outraged Barry gets--after having told us over and over that he doesn't care what people think of him--when he feels someone has accused him unfairly, yet he hasn't the slightest compunction about slandering people *he* doesn't like, as he did in the quote above. Is it possible that I'm the focus of Barry's self- hatred? Just askin'...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, randyanand ra...@... wrote: I love the fact that when Michael attacks Vaj as a narcissist, Vaj's response is that he was just told by a psychiatrist that he is one of the healthiest people he knows. A classic narcissistic response. (I'm special because I'm not just ordinary healthy, I'm one of the elite of the healthiest people! and this has been verified by a psychiatrist no less, an expert!) Vaj you show your true colors very well. In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? I was first exposed to the concept of applying these criteria to gurus like Rajaneesh and Maharishi when I first left the movement and it really helped me understand them better. Far from being just a way to personally insult them, it gave me some peace to know that some people are wired differently. They aren't just bad men who choose to become exploitative. They lack the same empathy the rest of us have to keep us in check. These descriptions are not sent from God and may change in time as we further our understanding of people who rise up from the societal norms. People who approach their personal agendas with the kind of ruthless ease that make me stand back and go wow! It would serve me well to have a bit of what they have! But of course it comes at a price and it is a price I would never willingly pay. So I don't know if Maharishi was clinically Narcissistic and am not in a position to even be certain I understand how to apply the terms. But it helps me to know that everyone is not playing by the same internal social contract and that they may not be able to help themselves. All I can do is keep my eyes open to someone else rolling their agenda over my best interest. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:29 PM, feste37 wrote: If you are such a mentally healthy person, why are you so roundly disliked on this forum? Why is no one springing to your defense following Micheal's negative characterization of you? Not a single person has offered a single word in your defense. Can you offer any explanation for this odd but undeniable fact? Have you ever stopped to think about how you come across in your posts? Feste I suspect most saw Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's post as so whacky and weird that it's simply not something worth responding to... despite the fact that many have supported me in the past. When someone totally sidesteps the issue: Mahesh's behavior and it's odd parallel in narcissism, and then tries to attack the deliverer of that message; (I can't speak for others) but it's likely perceived as Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's issue rather than mine. Rather embarrassing situation for him, I'm afraid. In fact he never responded to any of Mahesh's issues at all. Very odd. It seems the latest revelation on M's lack of spiritual and personal integrity pushed a few people over the edge. It was just more than they could bear. So instead of addressing the issue at hand, filled with undigested anger and rage, they transfer all that pent up disappointment upon others. Like I said Dr. Michael Dean Goodman's behavior is well known in FF, where they had to seriously readjust a spiritual gathering's rule system because he would literally 'take over' the proceedings as if he were the sole person there! Knowing that, you tend to take Mike's expression of disappointment with the Maharishi in a different light.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A question about post limits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ditzyklanmail carc...@... wrote: Stein is correct. I did not nor did she ever communicate with me on private. Please do not mind their interpretations of my question. I apologize to Stein if this was awkward. No prob. You aren't the one who needs to apologize. I was just making a point. I like Stein's responses on this FFL and I wouldn't negatively challenge Stein with a 10 foot pole, because Stein would eat me alive. I suspect I'd find that more difficult than you think... It was funny to see how quickly some could think a conspiracy was going on based on a question. That is all I was doing. I should add, Alex's conjecture was perfectly reasonable, just not correct. (Although he and others might have remembered that Shemp and I tried this back when the posting limit was first imposed, in an attempt elicit a ruling. The ruling was definitively prohibitive, so it would have been pretty foolish for me to try it again with you. Especially since if I had, it would have revealed that I had lied about going away until today.) Peace. Dittoes, ditz! I appreciate the thought, in any case. From: authfriend jst...@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 16 July, 2010 8:28:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A question about post limits --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: [ditzyklanmail wrote:] You mean I cannot forward an email to a post count under my user name? I donââ¬â¢t understand the question. The language is not at all clear, but it sounds like ditzy wants to forward to FFL a privately emailed reply from Judy. Or publicly reply to Judy's private email on FFL. This was all ditzy's idea. I've never emailed her about anything. Looks like she just wanted to be helpful.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My take on Judith's book
What set Barry off on faux feminists ...again...was that I said he avoids making a distinction between the behavior of a pedophile, [Roman Polanski] a misogynistic/racist [Mel Gibson] and a guy who has illicit affairs [Maharishi]. #251928 He challenged me to comment on the *power differential* of Maharishi's alleged affairs which IMO is obvious and I refused to play. Then he escalated, saying Maharishi's behavior was worse than Polanski's or Gibson's. Ridiculous. Plus, he asked to be called an asshole and I obliged. Now he's sputtering nonsense and has me confused with you. Go figure. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Excerpts from posts I made in April: - You're leaving one aspect of it out, that he allegedly had these affairs with female followers. That really isn't OK, because of the power differential; it's exploitative at best, predatory at worst, even if it was nominally consensual. And the age difference was substantial, by all accounts. I don't have any problem in the abstract with him getting his rocks off, but this was a rotten way to go about it. He didn't have a lot of options given the way he had things set up; he didn't have access to mature women who weren't his followers. But if he had sexual needs, he ought to have figured out some way to manage them that didn't involve dewy-eyed devotees. Or just accept that it was something he was going to have to deny himself. - If you put yourself in a box, as he did, and then find you can't live in it comfortably, you need to chuck the box, or build a bigger one, instead of inflicting your discomfort on others, no matter how apparently eager they may be to share it. I don't know how reliable the various stories are, but in some cases a lot of pain for the women was said to be the result. They may not have just fallen off the turnip truck, but it takes a *huge* amount of sophistication to get sexually involved with your guru and keep it from becoming an awful mess, especially when the guru himself is unsophisticated in the area of such relationships. - There was lots more from me along these same lines in this thread. And here's what Barry said about me yesterday: I mean, we've got Judy and Raunchy, avowed feminists, going out of their way to try to come up with some way to describe Maharishi's actions as minor or inconsequential. So far, all of their concern has been for *Maharishi* and his rep. Not one word of concern that I've noticed for the women. Some feminists. I'd be a little more impressed if either of them could step up to the plate and take a swing at the power differential issues and the abuse of trust issues going down in Maharishi's actions. But seemingly they can't. The atmosphere of reverence that Curtis speaks of is still in effect, preventing any concern except for the person to whom they've been taught that reverence is due. Go figure. I mean, go figure. (Note that I used the very phrase Barry specifies above, power differential.) Barry went on: And I'm fuckin' tired of being the focus for [Edg's] own self-hatred in not being able to see that *he* and the way *he* thinks is the real object of that hatred. Funny how outraged Barry gets--after having told us over and over that he doesn't care what people think of him--when he feels someone has accused him unfairly, yet he hasn't the slightest compunction about slandering people *he* doesn't like, as he did in the quote above. Is it possible that I'm the focus of Barry's self- hatred? Just askin'...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, randyanand ra...@... wrote: I love the fact that when Michael attacks Vaj as a narcissist, Vaj's response is that he was just told by a psychiatrist that he is one of the healthiest people he knows. A classic narcissistic response. (I'm special because I'm not just ordinary healthy, I'm one of the elite of the healthiest people! and this has been verified by a psychiatrist no less, an expert!) Vaj you show your true colors very well. BINGO !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, randyanand ra108@ wrote: I love the fact that when Michael attacks Vaj as a narcissist, Vaj's response is that he was just told by a psychiatrist that he is one of the healthiest people he knows. A classic narcissistic response. (I'm special because I'm not just ordinary healthy, I'm one of the elite of the healthiest people! and this has been verified by a psychiatrist no less, an expert!) Vaj you show your true colors very well. In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? You might want to go back and look at Michael's post, Curtis. The first thing he does after his introduction is to quote a post from Vaj in which Vaj claimed that professionals he knew who had followed *my* posts had diagnosed *me* as personality-disordered. (Deranged was the term Vaj used in his own description.) I believe Michael pointed out the appropriateness of saucing both goose and gander as the basis for his analysis of Vaj. At least Michael's diagnosis is firsthand, and he shows his work.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, randyanand ra108@ wrote: I love the fact that when Michael attacks Vaj as a narcissist, Vaj's response is that he was just told by a psychiatrist that he is one of the healthiest people he knows. A classic narcissistic response. (I'm special because I'm not just ordinary healthy, I'm one of the elite of the healthiest people! and this has been verified by a psychiatrist no less, an expert!) Vaj you show your true colors very well. In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? You might want to go back and look at Michael's post, Curtis. The first thing he does after his introduction is to quote a post from Vaj in which Vaj claimed that professionals he knew who had followed *my* posts had diagnosed *me* as personality-disordered. (Deranged was the term Vaj used in his own description.) I believe Michael pointed out the appropriateness of saucing both goose and gander as the basis for his analysis of Vaj. At least Michael's diagnosis is firsthand, and he shows his work. I see. I myself have been guilty of this kind of personal dickishness here. IMO Michael crossed another line as a mental health professional. The rest of us are kids throwing sand and we all know it ahead of time. I guess he couldn't resist getting into the sandbox himself. I am trying to stay focused on the Judith story and appreciated your comments. Before even reading the book I think you expressed some of the issues at play very well. This is a profound human story, epic tragedy in some ways. We are all going to come away with a richer idea of what it means to be human from discussing it. I suspect that if you choose to read the book your feedback and insights would not only be interesting here, but would provide some welcome understanding for Judith herself. She has really put herself out there in vulnerability and the arrows are flying. That said Maharishi the person is not of interest to everyone who enjoys his programs and I can also understand that.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
On Jul 16, 2010, at 9:31 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? That's it, Curtis~~what I was trying to convey, that you said so much better. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
On Jul 16, 2010, at 12:07 PM, cardemaister wrote: Yeah, like the absurd misrepresentation of Patanjali's suutras, claiming that PJ warned against practicing the saMyama's mentioned in the vibhuuti-paada of YS! I'm absolutely certain Vaj and his Patanjali guru-s can't explain why Vyaasa uses the expression 'te praatibhaadayaH' and Bhoja 'te praakprati- paaditaaH', unless they (Vyaasa and Bhoja) refer only to the suutra preceding 'te samaadhaav upasargaa, vyutthaane siddhayaH'. If you're so absolutely certain then why do you keep bringing it up as if to reassure yourself? I'd recommend you read the jivan-mukti-viveka Card, which not only details a path to liberation, but does so using the YS of Patanjali in the context of the Holy Shankaracharya Order, the order Mahesh claimed lineage from. One of the nice things about reading this description of awakening is how clearly it excludes the siddhis from Patanjali's presentation. And not only does it warn against the siddhis, it singles out a special warning against yogic flying.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
Hi Curtis, I thought that I would glob onto your one-week-all-you-can-eat FFL pass to explore some thoughts fired up from some current posts. Not aimed at you -- a general rhetorical thought -- but when did we start kicking people who are ill? You with broken leg, with flu, with high cholesterol -- you wretched piece of humanity -- you dredge of the earth! Mental illness is such a non-starter term -- visions of raving psychotics. We need a better term without the baggage. There was a great show on Charlie Rose recently, with a round table of high level mental health professionals -- along the lines of Department Head of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School types -- leaders in their fields -- and while smart, graceous, reflective, empathetic -- exhibiting most human virtues -- a number of them were quite, self-acknowledged, mentally ill. Very acute psychotics and manic depressives, etc. Yet they were quite functional, at the top of their fields etc. I think the majority of people, if not all of us, have some form of mental illness. Coming to that realization, I find, engenders compassion, empathy, understanding and perspective. On a personal level, I have recently pieced together that some branches of my family tree had autism (Aspergers), depression, probably manic depression, etc. A characteristic of Aspergers is not able to read social queues, acute insensitivity, etc. A strong case several generations back -- but also apparently a lovely person -- its an Eureka moment to see streams of this tendency show up, at times -- in parents siblings, etc. It like the foreground-background illusions popular in intro psych classes - seeing the same thing, but seeing a totally different image. X is not a shithead because he did and does this or that, X is a wonderful person, suffering (unbeknown to themselves) from a weird inherited malady that flares up at times. Damn the malady, love the person. Casting aspersions on people via DSM labels -- meant as piercing insults -- and not helpful diagnosis and compassion -- itself reflects some serious malady IMO. And compassion flows to that poor knave with that affliction. (should be plural -- seems a lot of this flu is going around) more below --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, randyanand ra108@ wrote: I love the fact that when Michael attacks Vaj as a narcissist, Vaj's response is that he was just told by a psychiatrist that he is one of the healthiest people he knows. A classic narcissistic response. (I'm special because I'm not just ordinary healthy, I'm one of the elite of the healthiest people! and this has been verified by a psychiatrist no less, an expert!) Vaj you show your true colors very well. In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? I was first exposed to the concept of applying these criteria to gurus like Rajaneesh and Maharishi when I first left the movement and it really helped me understand them better. Far from being just a way to personally insult them, it gave me some peace to know that some people are wired differently. Yes. Its such an easy trap to assume people think and feel the way we do. They aren't just bad men who choose to become exploitative. They lack the same empathy the rest of us have to keep us in check. These descriptions are not sent from God and may change in time as we further our understanding of people who rise up from the societal norms. People who approach their personal agendas with the kind of ruthless ease that make me stand back and go wow! It would serve me well to have a bit of what they have! But of course it comes at a price and it is a price I would never willingly pay. So I don't know if Maharishi was clinically Narcissistic and am not in a position to even be certain I understand how to apply the terms. OTOH, I am unbounded, I am infinite, I am the universe, I am Oneness, I breath the cosmos, Life surges through my veins .. could sound narasistic as these true feelings are expressed in ones life -- -- but Whitman, Emerson and so many poets, artists and mystics have felt the same magnificence -- its part of human nature. But it helps me to know that everyone is not playing by the same internal social contract and that they may not be able to help themselves. Yes. All I can do is keep my eyes open to someone else rolling their agenda over my best interest. Yes. The recognition of strong, charasmatic, yet ultimately abusive traits in others, the realization that thats their trip, their malady -- I don't
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? You might want to go back and look at Michael's post, Curtis. The first thing he does after his introduction is to quote a post from Vaj in which Vaj claimed that professionals he knew who had followed *my* posts had diagnosed *me* as personality-disordered. (Deranged was the term Vaj used in his own description.) I believe Michael pointed out the appropriateness of saucing both goose and gander as the basis for his analysis of Vaj. At least Michael's diagnosis is firsthand, and he shows his work. I see. I myself have been guilty of this kind of personal dickishness here. IMO Michael crossed another line as a mental health professional. The rest of us are kids throwing sand and we all know it ahead of time. I guess he couldn't resist getting into the sandbox himself. Not sure how much of a difference there is between a mental health professional making a diagnosis, and a non-mental health professional claiming to have professional friends who had made a diagnosis. I think I'd rather hear the diagnosis from the horse's mouth rather than second-hand from a layperson. (And that's aside from issues of the layperson's credibility with regard to the unverifiable existence of the alleged friends and their purported diagnosis.) I am trying to stay focused on the Judith story and appreciated your comments. Before even reading the book I think you expressed some of the issues at play very well. This is a profound human story, epic tragedy in some ways. We are all going to come away with a richer idea of what it means to be human from discussing it. I suspect that if you choose to read the book your feedback and insights would not only be interesting here, but would provide some welcome understanding for Judith herself. She has really put herself out there in vulnerability and the arrows are flying. Not sure how much I'd be able to add that would be helfpul, but I do plan to read the book; it's just not in the budget this month. What I find distressing is that some here are using Judith's story as fodder to further their own personal squabbles and power struggles. Many of the flying arrows are not really aimed at her or her sisters but at other FFLers. I hope Judith and any others in her situation who are reading the discussion here realize that and manage not to take it too personally. Our infighting should not be at their expense, or add weight to the cross they have to bear.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_re...@... wrote: I think you are overstating the case on how many people are above or below the norm on psychological problems scales. All the DSM traits are abnormal balances of natural personality traits. The first authors of the DSM wrote a fascinating book on how we can map our own proportion of the personality traits that when exaggerated become pathologies. They show how carefulness becomes obsessive compulsion if it gets out of hand. It helped me feel more compassion for people with a different mix than I have and led to better relationship choices. Some personality traits make my life hell even though that are just fine for that person. As an example, although I don't rate as over the top dramatic (one of the traits), it is a strong trait for me. If I am with a person who scores too low on this trait and I start effusing about beauty of Christmas for example, and all I get in return is a hairy eyeball and a squelching Christmas is for children, I'm not gunna try a second date. (Nor would she I suspect. Her loss because dramatic people give fantastic Christmas presents!) Casting aspersions on people via DSM labels -- meant as piercing insults -- and not helpful diagnosis and compassion I agree. So for me the use of personality traits to understand how we can get a Maharishi personality (since I have long ago abandoned the idea that he was sent to earth as its savior) helped me understand him better and consequently feel a bit more compassion. The fact that he was an unusual human from any standpoint holds true from almost any way of analyzing him. But the nature of the Narcissism disorder is lack of empathy and no matter what that comes from, it comes out shitty for people around them. Understanding why a person is a prick to other people doesn't make me want to stop going, hey how about taking a chill pill Mcgill when I see it in action. Is the person who actually has a narcissistic personality disorder or some version of socio-pathology as little in control of their effects on others than say a more sympathetic depressive personality? I think this is part of the good points you raise. It is natural for me to offer sympathy and support for a depressive but I would never devote my life to saving one. I have learned that you need to pick the people you are close to very carefully even while being sympathetic. So we all find a balance between understanding and excusing behavior in our day to day lives. For analyzing a guy as complex as Mararishi I need to temper criticism with understanding that he probably couldn't help himself. I included that with my analysis that came form a fascinating book on the brain about how our brain's communication changes if we are put into an environment where we are never opposed. Most of us have lots of push back from others in the environment to keep us in check and not acting out our every emotional impulse. Rock stars and gurus lack this feedback and I believe it fundamentally changes them in some cases in a highly unpleasant way. If Al Gore's accuser is credible then he exhibited some of these unpleasant traits in that hotel room. I found an understanding of Aspergers to be enlightening. My sister who is a teacher uses the term a touch of Aspergers to describe some students. Not a clinical diagnosis, but a tool for compassion. Damn the malady, love the person. Brilliant. I very often fall short. It is all easier in the abstract isn't it? When your life is being affected by a person who has no empathy for you and is bulldozing over your best interests, the why becomes less important. And even in remembering a person who treated your life as a disposable means to their own end, scars of resentment can remain. The thing about Gurus is that most of us who have interacted with them personally use their really different manor and supernatural confidence to be evidence of their implied claims that they have all the answers. Looking into the eyes of a Narcissist or a psychopath for that matter affects you in a visceral way. We are not used to seeing a person giving off this level of complete self assurance without a trace of self conscious doubt. So now armed with a little more knowledge I am not so impressed by people's non verbal confidence projection. I know that they can be charismatically and congruently wrong. As usual, thanks for sparking an interesting discussion Tart! Hi Curtis, I thought that I would glob onto your one-week-all-you-can-eat FFL pass to explore some thoughts fired up from some current posts. Not aimed at you -- a general rhetorical thought -- but when did we start kicking people who are ill? You with broken leg, with flu, with high cholesterol -- you wretched piece of humanity -- you dredge of the earth! Mental illness is such a non-starter term -- visions of raving
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip In fairness to Vaj, I'm not sure what the appropriate response is to a guy trying to use his credentials as a mental health professional to use the concepts meant for understanding and helping other people as a malicious personal insult against someone he only knows through the Internet. Kind of a double bind don't you think? You might want to go back and look at Michael's post, Curtis. The first thing he does after his introduction is to quote a post from Vaj in which Vaj claimed that professionals he knew who had followed *my* posts had diagnosed *me* as personality-disordered. (Deranged was the term Vaj used in his own description.) I believe Michael pointed out the appropriateness of saucing both goose and gander as the basis for his analysis of Vaj. At least Michael's diagnosis is firsthand, and he shows his work. I see. I myself have been guilty of this kind of personal dickishness here. IMO Michael crossed another line as a mental health professional. The rest of us are kids throwing sand and we all know it ahead of time. I guess he couldn't resist getting into the sandbox himself. Not sure how much of a difference there is between a mental health professional making a diagnosis, and a non-mental health professional claiming to have professional friends who had made a diagnosis. I think the latter comes with a lot less credibility for one. It is just an amped-up personal insult. I would expect people in the field to have a bit more restraint knowing the enhanced credibility their words can have. I think I'd rather hear the diagnosis from the horse's mouth rather than second-hand from a layperson. (And that's aside from issues of the layperson's credibility with regard to the unverifiable existence of the alleged friends and their purported diagnosis.) Of course you would and so would I. The whole framework of using the concepts to hurt sucks. And again I cop to taking the low path on this myself sometimes. I am trying to stay focused on the Judith story and appreciated your comments. Before even reading the book I think you expressed some of the issues at play very well. This is a profound human story, epic tragedy in some ways. We are all going to come away with a richer idea of what it means to be human from discussing it. I suspect that if you choose to read the book your feedback and insights would not only be interesting here, but would provide some welcome understanding for Judith herself. She has really put herself out there in vulnerability and the arrows are flying. Not sure how much I'd be able to add that would be helfpul, but I do plan to read the book; it's just not in the budget this month. I'd send you mine but it is borrowed from a friend with compassion for a busker's budget! What I find distressing is that some here are using Judith's story as fodder to further their own personal squabbles and power struggles. Many of the flying arrows are not really aimed at her or her sisters but at other FFLers. I hope Judith and any others in her situation who are reading the discussion here realize that and manage not to take it too personally. Our infighting should not be at their expense, or add weight to the cross they have to bear. Agreed and well put. I don't know Judith or have any communication with her. I don't even know if she lurks here or reads anything other than posts Joe sends her. But I'm sure your compassionate intention would be appreciated.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My take on Judith's book
Hi Judy, I stole a copy of Curtis's one-week, FFL pass, so I am here working through some issues in my head and heart. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Excerpts from posts I made in April: I vaguely recall this as a response to a post of mine. Hopefully my comments do not egregiously repeat themselves. (Taking a new look at things is always great -- even if one comes out on the other side of the street.) - You're leaving one aspect of it out, that he allegedly had these affairs with female followers. That really isn't OK, because of the power differential; it's exploitative at best, predatory at worst, even if it was nominally consensual. And the age difference was substantial, by all accounts. My sense is that in many if not most cases we need to give these women credit for being smart, independent, somewhat worldly women. They were women coming of age in the late 60's. And its not black and white, one can be a modern women coming of age in the late 60's, and all which that comprises -- and be devoted, open, vulnerable, conflicted, etc. Many, not all, of the women that I am thinking of that were around Maharishi in those days, the ones that were actively working with him -- not the doe eyed, feeling infinitely devoted with flower in their hand, yet never really working with, interacting with him -- went to college in the late 60's, were involved with music or politics, anti-war or woodstock nation type things before -- and still after to some degree after starting TM -- had well thought through and life-tested opinions. and while they still might have been sweet, open, naive in some ways -- that is few had been fully around the spiritual and guru block in those days -- they were hardly stupid. Few argue the contention that TTC and ATR courses were quite orgiastic -- particularly at the beginning and ends. Where do you think the women of Mahrishi's Court were -- off in a convent -- having bypassed all that? Maharishis entourage was generally drawn from the best and brightest or at least, generally, most scheming, clever, witty, smart, picturesque and flamboyant from TTCs and ATRs. They were not drawn form a convent or simpltons off the farm. I can't imagine there was no calculation in the back of their minds. The Court of Maharishi, his larger (100 or so) entourage, was proximity heirarchtical -- that is, the more face-time, the more choice assignments, the more attention Maharishi gave you, the higher your status in the Court. I can't imagine many of the women I saw around him not thinking about the upside -- while being aware of downsides also. Upsides, i) high status in the Court, ii) maybe some special knowledge with proximity, iii) getting to know the real man, iv) answering the oddest but most intriguing of question I wonder what he is like -- energy of the cosmos surging thru him and all, v) plum assignments in the field when its over. vi) its all so complicated and weird, but I do vastly love him, vii) if I don't, Susie Q will -- that slut -- and she will be princess of the court -- and treat me like shit. Negatives: i) people get dumped, lose access quickly, faster they rise, faster they fall, ii) what would mom and dad think (that could be a positive also - shock value), iii) some would see this as very weird if not sick -- if word got out, iv) i may have done a few kinky things in college, but hey is this going a bit to much over the edge? So, I can't imagine no perception of risk and reward. If things really worked out -- and it may have for some -- then it would have been a positive thing. If things didn't work out, as occurred for some, well, it was clear there was risk involved -- some upside some downside potential. I don't have any problem in the abstract with him getting his rocks off, but this was a rotten way to go about it. He didn't have a lot of options given the way he had things set up; he didn't have access to mature women who weren't his followers. But if he had sexual needs, he ought to have figured out some way to manage them that didn't involve dewy-eyed devotees. There were those in the flower lines -- but those interacting with him daily, had assignments, in my perhaps far afield view, were not exclusively doe-eyed. They were devoted, but their brains were full-firing, quick witted, funny. And the doe-eyed image -- implies a harsh, do this or else type of cad abusing these poor, naive, innocent, just out of the nunnary waifs. Thats not what saw and knew. He was subtle, suggestive, nuanced -- I don't think there was any threat used in his MO. It was a college elective, not a required course. It was Wanna rock on the spiritual wild side? not Do me or you will rot in hell, I am your master, you MUST obey. If a girls said no, so be it. On to the next fish in the sea. 50 yr olds with 20 yr olds -- its quite common. Raises an eyebrow here
[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: ...for me the use of personality traits to understand how we can get a Maharishi personality (since I have long ago abandoned the idea that he was sent to earth as its savior) helped me understand him better and consequently feel a bit more compassion. And, to be honest, Curtis, you've helped me to feel if not more compassion for him, more distance from him. And that itself is kinda neat. The fact that he was an unusual human from any standpoint holds true from almost any way of analyzing him. On that point we must agree to disagree. I honestly never felt much of a vibe from him, other than that which my youthful naivete and his suggestions caused me to project onto him. I got to be in close proximity to him many times, and unlike many here, it was NOT by any stretch of the imagination a knock yer socks off darshan or shakti experience. Meeting other teachers later whose vibe *was* more of a knock yer socks off experience only helped to reinforce this. For this reason, and the fact that I last saw the dude 34 years ago, leave me with very little residual awe of or feeling for him. He was just a teacher I worked with for some time in my youth, and not a particularly good, intelligent, or impressive teacher. When I read quotes from him here, my first reaction is, WTF could I have been *thinking* to stick around for so long? But since you and Vaj have brought the usefulness of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder traits up as a learning device, I am finding them useful in answering that question, and thank you for that insight. There IS something compelling about dealing with a total Narcissist. As you said, the very rarity of a person with these traits is fascinating. For a while. But the nature of the Narcissism disorder is lack of empathy and no matter what that comes from, it comes out shitty for people around them. Absolutely. If it's possible for you to imagine, Curtis, the Rama guy's Narcissism *and* lack of empathy put Maharishi's in the shade. As did the shittiness that lack of empathy created for many who mistook it for enlightenment. Understanding why a person is a prick to other people doesn't make me want to stop going, hey how about taking a chill pill Mcgill when I see it in action. Me, either. And unlike many here who are clinging to some feelgood memories from the past and unwilling to let go of them, I've (obviously) got no obstacles to expressing what I really think of the guy, 34 years later. If he were here in the room, I would have no problem saying the same things I write on this forum to his face. Same with Rama - Fred Lenz. That is one way in which I think both of us differ from many here. I sense in many other posters, even those who have moved on from the TMO, the same reluct- ance to talk about Maharishi as if he were a normal, everyday guy that they would have felt back in the day, sitting in one of those heavily-intimidating rooms with him sitting up on a raised platform above everyone else, and the only way *to* speak to him being making your way to a microphone and asking a question, knowing that he already had one of those answers we have already prepared ready for you, and wasn't really going to listen to what you said anyway. I honestly don't think I'd feel that if he were alive and in the room with me today. I know I would feel none of it if the Rama guy were alive and in the room with me today. I would be able to regard both of them as just the normal, ordinary human beings they are. In other words, the Narcissitic Personality Disorder fascination or glammer has worn off. Is the person who actually has a narcissistic personality disorder or some version of socio-pathology as little in control of their effects on others than say a more sympathetic depressive personality? I suspect that those with more empathy are more in control. Because they can actually *imagine* and empathically *feel* the effects their actions have on others. The Narcissist cannot. Therefore they have no *reason* to control those actions. I think this is part of the good points you raise. It is natural for me to offer sympathy and support for a depressive but I would never devote my life to saving one. I have learned that you need to pick the people you are close to very carefully even while being sympathetic. Funny you should mention this. I have been thinking about this today. I'm wondering whether there is anything left for me to explore on Fairfield Life. As I said above, it's really not as if I have any extraordinary lingering fondness for or awe of MMY. I see him as a pretty ordinary, run-of-the-mill pop guru with a repetitious, spiritual-kindergarten-level rap. Not evil. I don't think of him as the worst of the pop gurus, in some sort of flip-flop from having once considering him the best. To me he's Just Another Pop Guru in a
[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
some meanderings. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: ...for me the use of personality traits to understand how we can get a Maharishi personality (since I have long ago abandoned the idea that he was sent to earth as its savior) helped me understand him better and consequently feel a bit more compassion. And, to be honest, Curtis, you've helped me to feel if not more compassion for him, more distance from him. And that itself is kinda neat. The fact that he was an unusual human from any standpoint holds true from almost any way of analyzing him. On that point we must agree to disagree. I honestly never felt much of a vibe from him, other than that which my youthful naivete and his suggestions caused me to project onto him. I got to be in close proximity to him many times, and unlike many here, it was NOT by any stretch of the imagination a knock yer socks off darshan or shakti experience. Meeting other teachers later whose vibe *was* more of a knock yer socks off experience only helped to reinforce this. Whatever we felt, it was about us, not him. (and actually, now that I think about it, he was very clear on that.) IMO, whether we had a good time, bad time, good reaction, indifferent or bad reaction, it was a stimulus for understanding, change, growth, jettonsing somethings, globbing on to others. This is bullshit or this is a mixed-bag deep and valuable life lessons. Its a part of growing op. Of letting the intellect season and mature. Giving it good data to work on -- life lessons. For this reason, and the fact that I last saw the dude 34 years ago, leave me with very little residual awe of or feeling for him. He was just a teacher I worked with for some time in my youth, and not a particularly good, intelligent, or impressive teacher. When I read quotes from him here, my first reaction is, WTF could I have been *thinking* to stick around for so long? Some of the SCI tapes made me wince even then. You spent two years and 100 people and 5 million edits and revisions to produce THIS! What is wrong with this picture!!! But while SCI had little value for me, it was useful for many. Good soil is always full of shit -- its what grows out of that, the flowers and tomatoes that is of value. Not the shit itself. But since you and Vaj have brought the usefulness of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder traits up as a learning device, I am finding them useful in answering that question, and thank you for that insight. There IS something compelling about dealing with a total Narcissist. As you said, the very rarity of a person with these traits is fascinating. For a while. But the nature of the Narcissism disorder is lack of empathy and no matter what that comes from, it comes out shitty for people around them. Absolutely. If it's possible for you to imagine, Curtis, the Rama guy's Narcissism *and* lack of empathy put Maharishi's in the shade. As did the shittiness that lack of empathy created for many who mistook it for enlightenment. Understanding why a person is a prick to other people doesn't make me want to stop going, hey how about taking a chill pill Mcgill when I see it in action. Me, either. And unlike many here who are clinging to some feelgood memories from the past and unwilling to let go of them, Reflecting on your words, I don't recall a lot of feel good moments. It was a place of paradoxes, imbalances, topsy turvy landscape, lack of footing, new vistas, dissatisfaction in that full answers were not obtained -- some tasty insights -- some great sublimity -- but not that big end-all satisfying banquet. And maybe that was by design, maybe coincidence, but it set me up on a path of resolution, of balance, of finding feel good -- that I probably would have missed if I had not taken that left hand turn to Maharishiville. Its not what I learned there, its how I later adapted, healed, grew, transcended the shit I learned, experienced, saw, was perplexed with there. I've (obviously) got no obstacles to expressing what I really think of the guy, 34 years later. If he were here in the room, I would have no problem saying the same things I write on this forum to his face. Same with Rama - Fred Lenz. That is one way in which I think both of us differ from many here. I sense in many other posters, even those who have moved on from the TMO, the same reluct- ance to talk about Maharishi as if he were a normal, everyday guy I do see him as unusual. Not your every day guy. He took a vastly different trip than most, and spent his life unwinding, resolving, restructuring, fitting pieces together from that early experience. So yeah, I think he was a wild man, way out there, on the fringe, large talents here, large deficiencies there, a pioneer, an
[FairfieldLife] Maharishis expansion in South-East Asia
The Dolly lama does not approve. When the monks learn TM that actually works, the Lama becomes upset and send in the fools we know from FFL, the Vaj and the Turq, fellows that are active on numberless sites/blogs under different names.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishis expansion in South-East Asia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: The Dolly lama does not approve. When the monks learn TM that actually works, the Lama becomes upset and send in the fools we know from FFL, the Vaj and the Turq, fellows that are active on numberless sites/blogs under different names. :-) [[political-pictures-dalai-lama-crouching.jpg]]
[FairfieldLife] The Gospel of Mel Gibson -- the moral universe of the modern narcissist
David Books apparently lurks on FFL and from which he gains inspiration for his columns. The Gospel of Mel Gibson By DAVID BROOKS Published: July 15, 2010t Let us enter, you and I, into the moral universe of the modern narcissist. David Brooks Go to Columnist Page » The Conversation The narcissistic person is marked by a grandiose self-image, a constant need for admiration, and a general lack of empathy for others. He is the keeper of a sacred flame, which is the flame he holds to celebrate himself. There used to be theories that deep down narcissists feel unworthy, but recent research doesn't support this. Instead, it seems, the narcissist's self-directed passion is deep and sincere. His self-love is his most precious possession. It is the holy center of all that is sacred and right. He is hypersensitive about anybody who might splatter or disregard his greatness. *** If someone treats him slightingly, he perceives that as a deliberate and heinous attack. If someone threatens his reputation, he regards this as an act of blasphemy. He feels justified in punishing the attacker for this moral outrage. *** And because he plays by different rules, and because so much is at stake, he can be uninhibited in response. Everyone gets angry when they feel their self-worth is threatened, but for the narcissist, revenge is a holy cause and a moral obligation, demanding overwhelming force. Mel Gibson seems to fit the narcissist model to an eerie degree. The recordings that purport to show him unloading on his ex-lover, Oksana Grigorieva, make for painful listening, and are only worthy of attention because these days it pays to be a student of excessive self-esteem, if only to understand the world around. The story line seems to be pretty simple. Gibson was the great Hollywood celebrity who left his wife to link with the beautiful young acolyte. Her beauty would not only reflect well on his virility, but he would also work to mold her, Pygmalion-like, into a pop star. After a time, she apparently grew tired of being a supporting actor in the drama of his self-magnification and tried to go her own way. This act of separation was perceived as an assault on his status and thus a venal betrayal of the true faith. It is fruitless to analyze her end of the phone conversations because she knows she is taping them. But the voice on the other end is primal and searing. That man is like a boxer unleashing one verbal barrage after another. His breathing is heavy. His vocal muscles are clenched. His guttural sounds burst out like hammer blows. He pummels her honor, her intelligence, her womanhood, her maternal skills and everything else. Imagine every crude and derogatory word you've ever heard. They come out in waves. He's not really arguing with her, just trying to pulverize her into nothingness, like some corruption that has intertwined itself into his being and now must be expunged. It is striking how morally righteous he is, without ever bothering to explain what exactly she has done wrong. It is striking how quickly he reverts to the vocabulary of purity and disgust. It is striking how much he believes he deserves. It is striking how much he seems to derive satisfaction from his own righteous indignation. Rage was the original subject of Western literature. It was the opening theme of Homer's Iliad. Back then, anger was perceived as a source of pleasure. Sweeter wrath is by far than the honeycomb dripping with sweetener, Homer declared. And the man on the other end of Grigorieva's phone seems to derive some vengeful satisfaction from asserting his power and from purging his frustration from the sheer act of domination. And the sad fact is that Gibson is not alone. There can't be many people at once who live in a celebrity environment so perfectly designed to inflate self-love. Even so, a surprising number of people share the trait. A study conducted at the National Institutes of Health suggested that 6.2 percent of Americans had suffered from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, along with 9.4 percent of people in their 20s. In their book, The Narcissism Epidemic, Jean M. Twenge and W. Keith Campbell cite data to suggest that at least since the 1970s, we have suffered from national self-esteem inflation. They cite my favorite piece of sociological data: In 1950, thousands of teenagers were asked if they considered themselves an important person. Twelve percent said yes. In the late 1980s, another few thousand were asked. This time, 80 percent of girls and 77 percent of boys said yes. That doesn't make them narcissists in the Gibson mold, but it does suggest that we've entered an era where self-branding is on the ascent and the culture of self-effacement is on the decline. Every week brings a new assignment in our study of self-love. And at the top of the heap, the Valentino of all self-lovers, there is the former Braveheart. If he really were that
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Jul 10 00:00:00 2010 End Date (UTC): Sat Jul 17 00:00:00 2010 604 messages as of (UTC) Fri Jul 16 23:27:33 2010 55 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 51 Joe geezerfr...@yahoo.com 50 authfriend jst...@panix.com 50 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com 49 TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com 44 WillyTex willy...@yahoo.com 33 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net 31 ditzyklanmail carc...@yahoo.co.in 28 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net 20 John jr_...@yahoo.com 17 curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com 16 do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com 15 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com 15 Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com 12 yifuxero yifux...@yahoo.com 10 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com 8 Yifu Xero yifux...@yahoo.com 7 mahavid3h no_re...@yahoogroups.com 7 emptybill emptyb...@yahoo.com 6 seventhray1 steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net 6 randyanand ra...@rocketmail.com 6 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 5 tartbrain no_re...@yahoogroups.com 5 merudanda no_re...@yahoogroups.com 5 Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@lisco.com 5 It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@gmail.com 4 sgrayatlarge no_re...@yahoogroups.com 4 jpgillam jpgil...@yahoo.com 4 Robert babajii...@yahoo.com 4 Dick Mays dickm...@lisco.com 3 seekliberation seekliberat...@yahoo.com 3 parsleysage meowthirt...@yahoo.com 3 merlin vedamer...@yahoo.de 2 shukra69 shukr...@yahoo.ca 2 pranamoocher bh...@hotmail.com 2 mainstream20016 mainstream20...@yahoo.com 2 feste37 fest...@yahoo.com 2 confmkeinst no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 Paul at_man_and_brah...@sbcglobal.net 2 MinP min.p...@yahoo.com 2 Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 Dr. Michael Dean Goodman tan...@cheerful.com 1 wgm4u wg...@yahoo.com 1 johnlasher20002000 johnltheob...@mchsi.com 1 andrasayer sandraa...@hotmail.com 1 wle...@aol.com 1 Hugo fintlewoodle...@mail.com Posters: 47 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] 55 ?
Nonsense !
[FairfieldLife] 55 ?
Not possible :-)
RE: [FairfieldLife] 55 ?
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 7:28 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] 55 ? Nonsense ! I guess you haven't been counting. See you next week.
[FairfieldLife] 58 ?
How can that be, I'm watching Save Meg Ryan !!
[FairfieldLife] Another woman comes forward
Anonymously: Dear Rick Of course please keep my name and position private. I have been reading, almost obsessively-compulsively, the sequential discussions re: Judith's book on FFL. At first it was with a sigh of relief, that one lady had opened up, and was so well received. Now the dirt is rolling in--people doing their best to cast doubt on her experiences, to besmirch her integrity, to ridicule what she has to say just so they will feel better. And people wonder why the other ladies don't come forward. I remember Judith from Squaw Valley days. She had been put in charge of cleaning M's rooms and silks. She had the most beautiful saris. I asked her where she bought them and she explained that M had given them to her. Immediately my radar went up; she had done something personal with him that pleased him, I surmised, and he gave her something beautiful in exchange. Having been propositioned by M myself but turning him down, I had not received anything for that one night. Even way back then with Judith, I thought, maybe if I had said yes..my life would have turned out better. I would be allowed to be closer. Now it's easy to see that isn't always the case. It helps to know that. Judith probably has done more for the other ladies who went through similar experiences than any one else. Remember also that she left the Movement and went off on her own path. She has had the freedom to speak the truth. My psychology is better now for what she has written. Truth, sweet truth helps. And Judith sees the good that M has done for the world. It is the technique of meditation that counts. Does THAT work? That is what he marketed to the world and hopefully today the world is a better place--not perfect, just a little better. No one likes everything about something or someone; that is the nature of the relative--it's not perfect. I guess we forget that in our quest for absolute anything. But shouldn't we focus on what does work, what is good? That's what Scriptures keep telling us to do and there must be a reason. That instruction is not guru-based; it is evolutionary based. What FFLfers are now doing is not helping us heal. Rather the fear is returning, the sense of persecution is coming back to life. If these people ever find out..runs through my mind constantly. This probably will be the closest I will ever come to going really public. This tiny missive that hardly says anything. I guess I am asking FFlfers to please, please, please, give us ladies a chance to heal. It may be lies to you, it may be fantasy to you, but it's not to those of us who went through it. Keep that in mind. If anything, have compassion in your hearts and give us the space we so desperately need to heal. thank you Yours Truly
Re: [FairfieldLife] Post Count
On Jul 16, 2010, at 7:15 PM, FFL PostCount wrote: Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Jul 10 00:00:00 2010 End Date (UTC): Sat Jul 17 00:00:00 2010 604 messages as of (UTC) Fri Jul 16 23:27:33 2010 55 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com It's just too good to be true... Sal
[FairfieldLife] Could the Shankaracharya be MMY's son? Dana Sawyer's comments
I'm a bit behind on all this, so give me some reference points. Does he mean the new Shankaracarya to be Vasudevananda? If so, I don't think he could be MMY's son. On the other side of the dispute, Swaroopananda may have stepped down by now and his successor, who can't be more than thirty-five does look like MMY but again it seems unlikely that he would be MMY's son. So give me names and I'll touch base with my contacts. A bit of info that may help. Vasudevananda was an attorney before he became a monk and he worked to defend MMY's group's claim to the acaryaship, though it was Swaroopananda's group that prevailed. I'll be in India in December and I'll follow up on all this.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Anonymously: Dear Rick Of course please keep my name and position private. I have been reading, almost obsessively-compulsively, the sequential discussions re: Judith's book on FFL. At first it was with a sigh of relief, that one lady had opened up, and was so well received. Now the dirt is rolling in--people doing their best to cast doubt on her experiences, to besmirch her integrity, to ridicule what she has to say just so they will feel better. And people wonder why the other ladies don't come forward. I remember Judith from Squaw Valley days. She had been put in charge of cleaning M's rooms and silks. She had the most beautiful saris. I asked her where she bought them and she explained that M had given them to her. Judith was on TTC prior to or during 1968? I assumed that she was on one of the four post Squaw Valley India courses (prior to Estes Park). I thought there was a picture of her with people on those courses. Or did her relationship begin prior to India, such as in Squaw Valley? Immediately my radar went up; she had done something personal with him that pleased him, I surmised, and he gave her something beautiful in exchange. Having been propositioned by M myself but turning him down, I had not received anything for that one night. Even way back then with Judith, I thought, maybe if I had said yes..my life would have turned out better. I would be allowed to be closer. Now it's easy to see that isn't always the case. It helps to know that. Judith probably has done more for the other ladies who went through similar experiences than any one else. Remember also that she left the Movement and went off on her own path. She has had the freedom to speak the truth. My psychology is better now for what she has written. Truth, sweet truth helps. And Judith sees the good that M has done for the world. It is the technique of meditation that counts. Does THAT work? That is what he marketed to the world and hopefully today the world is a better place--not perfect, just a little better. No one likes everything about something or someone; that is the nature of the relative--it's not perfect. I guess we forget that in our quest for absolute anything. But shouldn't we focus on what does work, what is good? That's what Scriptures keep telling us to do and there must be a reason. That instruction is not guru-based; it is evolutionary based. What FFLfers are now doing is not helping us heal. Rather the fear is returning, the sense of persecution is coming back to life. If these people ever find out..runs through my mind constantly. This probably will be the closest I will ever come to going really public. This tiny missive that hardly says anything. I guess I am asking FFlfers to please, please, please, give us ladies a chance to heal. It may be lies to you, it may be fantasy to you, but it's not to those of us who went through it. Keep that in mind. If anything, have compassion in your hearts and give us the space we so desperately need to heal. thank you Yours Truly
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
Then Jesus said to her, Receive your sight; your faith has made you well.Luke 18:42 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Anonymously: Dear Rick Of course please keep my name and position private. I have been reading, almost obsessively-compulsively, the sequential discussions re: Judith's book on FFL. At first it was with a sigh of relief, that one lady had opened up, and was so well received. Now the dirt is rolling in--people doing their best to cast doubt on her experiences, to besmirch her integrity, to ridicule what she has to say just so they will feel better. And people wonder why the other ladies don't come forward. I remember Judith from Squaw Valley days. She had been put in charge of cleaning M's rooms and silks. She had the most beautiful saris. I asked her where she bought them and she explained that M had given them to her. Immediately my radar went up; she had done something personal with him that pleased him, I surmised, and he gave her something beautiful in exchange. Having been propositioned by M myself but turning him down, I had not received anything for that one night. Even way back then with Judith, I thought, maybe if I had said yes..my life would have turned out better. I would be allowed to be closer. Now it's easy to see that isn't always the case. It helps to know that. Judith probably has done more for the other ladies who went through similar experiences than any one else. Remember also that she left the Movement and went off on her own path. She has had the freedom to speak the truth. My psychology is better now for what she has written. Truth, sweet truth helps. And Judith sees the good that M has done for the world. It is the technique of meditation that counts. Does THAT work? That is what he marketed to the world and hopefully today the world is a better place--not perfect, just a little better. No one likes everything about something or someone; that is the nature of the relative--it's not perfect. I guess we forget that in our quest for absolute anything. But shouldn't we focus on what does work, what is good? That's what Scriptures keep telling us to do and there must be a reason. That instruction is not guru-based; it is evolutionary based. What FFLfers are now doing is not helping us heal. Rather the fear is returning, the sense of persecution is coming back to life. If these people ever find out..runs through my mind constantly. This probably will be the closest I will ever come to going really public. This tiny missive that hardly says anything. I guess I am asking FFlfers to please, please, please, give us ladies a chance to heal. It may be lies to you, it may be fantasy to you, but it's not to those of us who went through it. Keep that in mind. If anything, have compassion in your hearts and give us the space we so desperately need to heal. thank you Yours Truly
[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE UNFRUITFUL WORKS OF DARKNESS BUT RATHER EXPOSE THEM...EPH 5:11 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: ...for me the use of personality traits to understand how we can get a Maharishi personality (since I have long ago abandoned the idea that he was sent to earth as its savior) helped me understand him better and consequently feel a bit more compassion. And, to be honest, Curtis, you've helped me to feel if not more compassion for him, more distance from him. And that itself is kinda neat. The fact that he was an unusual human from any standpoint holds true from almost any way of analyzing him. On that point we must agree to disagree. I honestly never felt much of a vibe from him, other than that which my youthful naivete and his suggestions caused me to project onto him. I got to be in close proximity to him many times, and unlike many here, it was NOT by any stretch of the imagination a knock yer socks off darshan or shakti experience. Meeting other teachers later whose vibe *was* more of a knock yer socks off experience only helped to reinforce this. For this reason, and the fact that I last saw the dude 34 years ago, leave me with very little residual awe of or feeling for him. He was just a teacher I worked with for some time in my youth, and not a particularly good, intelligent, or impressive teacher. When I read quotes from him here, my first reaction is, WTF could I have been *thinking* to stick around for so long? But since you and Vaj have brought the usefulness of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder traits up as a learning device, I am finding them useful in answering that question, and thank you for that insight. There IS something compelling about dealing with a total Narcissist. As you said, the very rarity of a person with these traits is fascinating. For a while. But the nature of the Narcissism disorder is lack of empathy and no matter what that comes from, it comes out shitty for people around them. Absolutely. If it's possible for you to imagine, Curtis, the Rama guy's Narcissism *and* lack of empathy put Maharishi's in the shade. As did the shittiness that lack of empathy created for many who mistook it for enlightenment. Understanding why a person is a prick to other people doesn't make me want to stop going, hey how about taking a chill pill Mcgill when I see it in action. Me, either. And unlike many here who are clinging to some feelgood memories from the past and unwilling to let go of them, I've (obviously) got no obstacles to expressing what I really think of the guy, 34 years later. If he were here in the room, I would have no problem saying the same things I write on this forum to his face. Same with Rama - Fred Lenz. That is one way in which I think both of us differ from many here. I sense in many other posters, even those who have moved on from the TMO, the same reluct- ance to talk about Maharishi as if he were a normal, everyday guy that they would have felt back in the day, sitting in one of those heavily-intimidating rooms with him sitting up on a raised platform above everyone else, and the only way *to* speak to him being making your way to a microphone and asking a question, knowing that he already had one of those answers we have already prepared ready for you, and wasn't really going to listen to what you said anyway. I honestly don't think I'd feel that if he were alive and in the room with me today. I know I would feel none of it if the Rama guy were alive and in the room with me today. I would be able to regard both of them as just the normal, ordinary human beings they are. In other words, the Narcissitic Personality Disorder fascination or glammer has worn off. Is the person who actually has a narcissistic personality disorder or some version of socio-pathology as little in control of their effects on others than say a more sympathetic depressive personality? I suspect that those with more empathy are more in control. Because they can actually *imagine* and empathically *feel* the effects their actions have on others. The Narcissist cannot. Therefore they have no *reason* to control those actions. I think this is part of the good points you raise. It is natural for me to offer sympathy and support for a depressive but I would never devote my life to saving one. I have learned that you need to pick the people you are close to very carefully even while being sympathetic. Funny you should mention this. I have been thinking about this today. I'm wondering whether there is anything left for me to explore on Fairfield Life. As I said above, it's really not as if I have any extraordinary lingering fondness for or awe of MMY. I see him
[FairfieldLife] Inception
Inception stills, and Valhalla Rising. Just saw the latter, looks fascinating. http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/movie-stills/gallery/2444/inception-stills#photo0
[FairfieldLife] Re: Jerry addresses IA, one of the Nazis gets canned
Can you translate this into something more readable please? I can't quite figure out what you are saying here. Thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: Pardon his gushing. He is on the longest running propaganda campaign in history. This from IA: If you read this its a update on the IA course and the Dome There is happiness and delight as the true enlightened leader graced our presence in the Dome,Jerry Jarvis after 30 years.When asked about it,Well i did build it.Jeff Cohen is taking a break after loosing his head with an International from New Zealand after saying that he wished all internationals would Fuck off and go back to where they came from. I assume Jeff was talking about Dr. BM and our KING.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
Wow. There is so much heartfelt feeling in her letter...it's truly heartbreaking. Those who have been so quick to condemn Judiththink about it. Think about it carefully and honestly. Despite all the attempts at mud slinging, all that anyone has been able to come up with is: 1. Judith and Conny Larson knew each other. Yes, correct, Conny was one of MMY's personal assistants at the time her affair with MMY started and on through through the Seelisberg beginnings. 2. Judith has continued on with the spiritual path of her choosing. (Shame on those who condemn her for this. Think about it. You, who call butt bouncing flying condemn her for being off your program. 3. Judith and Conny reconnected 30 years (or so) later. Makes sense to me and this is covered in her book. They both live in Sweden and they both teach meditation. They would hear about each other. When Judith came to read of Conny's abuse at the hands of Sai Baba, she realized they had something in common in addition to the shared time with MMY. Whoever wrote this new message, has clearly been moved by Judith's story. Please, let's honor this person's courage and honesty in coming forward. The TMO is not an organization that is , shall we say, friendly with those who have even the slightest degree of criticism. For her to come forward, even in this way, took a lot of courage. You know that age old expression: the truth shall set you free. Let's give the truth a chance to enlighten people to certain realities of the man we all followed. No one is saying MMY did not have value. No one is saying he didn't bring a wonderful thing to the world. But I believe it is important to understand that he was a man,a flawed man like all men. I would assume that most here would like to know the truth. Please allow these people the respect they deserve to allow them to come forward if they wish and say what they want to say.it will help their own healing and it will help a TMO much in need of its own healing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Anonymously: Dear Rick Of course please keep my name and position private. I have been reading, almost obsessively-compulsively, the sequential discussions re: Judith's book on FFL. At first it was with a sigh of relief, that one lady had opened up, and was so well received. Now the dirt is rolling in--people doing their best to cast doubt on her experiences, to besmirch her integrity, to ridicule what she has to say just so they will feel better. And people wonder why the other ladies don't come forward. I remember Judith from Squaw Valley days. She had been put in charge of cleaning M's rooms and silks. She had the most beautiful saris. I asked her where she bought them and she explained that M had given them to her. Immediately my radar went up; she had done something personal with him that pleased him, I surmised, and he gave her something beautiful in exchange. Having been propositioned by M myself but turning him down, I had not received anything for that one night. Even way back then with Judith, I thought, maybe if I had said yes..my life would have turned out better. I would be allowed to be closer. Now it's easy to see that isn't always the case. It helps to know that. Judith probably has done more for the other ladies who went through similar experiences than any one else. Remember also that she left the Movement and went off on her own path. She has had the freedom to speak the truth. My psychology is better now for what she has written. Truth, sweet truth helps. And Judith sees the good that M has done for the world. It is the technique of meditation that counts. Does THAT work? That is what he marketed to the world and hopefully today the world is a better place--not perfect, just a little better. No one likes everything about something or someone; that is the nature of the relative--it's not perfect. I guess we forget that in our quest for absolute anything. But shouldn't we focus on what does work, what is good? That's what Scriptures keep telling us to do and there must be a reason. That instruction is not guru-based; it is evolutionary based. What FFLfers are now doing is not helping us heal. Rather the fear is returning, the sense of persecution is coming back to life. If these people ever find out..runs through my mind constantly. This probably will be the closest I will ever come to going really public. This tiny missive that hardly says anything. I guess I am asking FFlfers to please, please, please, give us ladies a chance to heal. It may be lies to you, it may be fantasy to you, but it's not to those of us who went through it. Keep that in mind. If anything, have compassion in your hearts and give us the space we so
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
Thank you, Joegeezerfreak, another woman and all those loved ones in FF and elsewhere, Holding secrets of betrayal and violation for so long is stifling to the soul. Why did these women, both Judith and the other anonymous feel so afraid to speak of their experience for decades? Because they feared retribution, isolation, and rejection from loved ones. Such fear and repression of free speech and open dialogue are common manifestations within a destructive cult. Mediation has benefits, no doubt. However, there is no need for high costs, secret ceremonies, guilt trips about absence from group programs, neglect of children, in the name of spirituality. In my opinion, MMY was a skilled charming and brilliant manipulative PIed Piper. Many folks, my family included, willingly followed his tune of perfect peace and harmony. Dancing together for a deemed divine mission felt great for awhile. To my loved ones still in TM mindset, and those out : there is no Santa Claus. There is no perfect guru. There is no perfect path, nor one answer to achieve world peace, perfect health, enlightenment and business success. darn it! May others feel increasingly safe to come forth with their multidimensional stories. May those who were injured - sexually, through psychosis, loss of a loved one to suicide, bankruptcies, untreated cancers, broken families, be loving received by the community which so many love. Blame-the-victim for speaking their unpleasant stories is typical behavior of a destructive cult. From the very beginning, MMY taught us to keep the mantra secret for your own benefit - thus began mind control and normalization of secrets for mystical protection. My loved ones in FF and the TM Movement: you are better than such behavior! You are capable of compassion, you are intelligent and caring. For that reason, I continue to love my dear community of old. The truth shall set you free - even though it may initially bring some discomfort. Thanks Rick for keeping this forum open. I rarely visit here, but was encouraged in relation to Judith and the other woman Jai to free speech, open and supportive dialogue, and recovery to all, Gina Catena --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfr...@... wrote: Wow. There is so much heartfelt feeling in her letter...it's truly heartbreaking. Those who have been so quick to condemn Judiththink about it. Think about it carefully and honestly. Despite all the attempts at mud slinging, all that anyone has been able to come up with is: 1. Judith and Conny Larson knew each other. Yes, correct, Conny was one of MMY's personal assistants at the time her affair with MMY started and on through through the Seelisberg beginnings. 2. Judith has continued on with the spiritual path of her choosing. (Shame on those who condemn her for this. Think about it. You, who call butt bouncing flying condemn her for being off your program. 3. Judith and Conny reconnected 30 years (or so) later. Makes sense to me and this is covered in her book. They both live in Sweden and they both teach meditation. They would hear about each other. When Judith came to read of Conny's abuse at the hands of Sai Baba, she realized they had something in common in addition to the shared time with MMY. Whoever wrote this new message, has clearly been moved by Judith's story. Please, let's honor this person's courage and honesty in coming forward. The TMO is not an organization that is , shall we say, friendly with those who have even the slightest degree of criticism. For her to come forward, even in this way, took a lot of courage. You know that age old expression: the truth shall set you free. Let's give the truth a chance to enlighten people to certain realities of the man we all followed. No one is saying MMY did not have value. No one is saying he didn't bring a wonderful thing to the world. But I believe it is important to understand that he was a man,a flawed man like all men. I would assume that most here would like to know the truth. Please allow these people the respect they deserve to allow them to come forward if they wish and say what they want to say.it will help their own healing and it will help a TMO much in need of its own healing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Anonymously: Dear Rick Of course please keep my name and position private. I have been reading, almost obsessively-compulsively, the sequential discussions re: Judith's book on FFL. At first it was with a sigh of relief, that one lady had opened up, and was so well received. Now the dirt is rolling in--people doing their best to cast doubt on her experiences, to besmirch her integrity, to ridicule what she has to say just so they will feel better. And people wonder why the other ladies don't come forward.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
FFL's history is one of being a healing oasis for many. Many, if not most, were bent and twisted in the TMO. Sometimes to great and good effect - the springback effect that I alluded to in a previous post. others with bumps, scrapes,dents and some quite twisted frames. I venture that a lot of people on FFL over the years have vented, gained perspective, articulated new views and frameworks, and generally healed. However, FFL, in its present state may be a tough love, against the wind, stand-strong amid the good, bad, ugly and white noise BS. Good for some people's healing, not so much for others. Perhaps a moderated forum -- where rudeness, crudeness and the idiocy of some banter in FFL is diverted for a bit. A place where women approached can tell their stories -- of declining, of accepting, of the paradoxes, and consequences. And while comments and questions would be welcome, a moderator keeps them radiating a healing vibe. Not a bliss ninny retreat, but thoughtful, at times piercing, but polite and respectful comments and questions welcomed. A place to test the waters, to come forward a bit, open up some, breath deeply, and let healing more fully unfold. Later, perhaps a venturing into the rough and tumble of FFL. Perhaps a forum already exists. Perhaps its forming ad hoc as women contact Judith, unfold their stories, empathize and support each other. But perhaps fuller healing, over time, comes from being comfortable in a more public, yet politely moderated forum. and then, if over time, women open up on FFL, feel comfortable with the rough and tumble, clearly fuller healing and strength has unfolded. But for women who are conflicted by the experience, feeling some pain, a kinder, gentler forum may be an oasis of healing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gimari03 no_re...@... wrote: Thank you, Joegeezerfreak, another woman and all those loved ones in FF and elsewhere, Holding secrets of betrayal and violation for so long is stifling to the soul. Why did these women, both Judith and the other anonymous feel so afraid to speak of their experience for decades? Because they feared retribution, isolation, and rejection from loved ones. Such fear and repression of free speech and open dialogue are common manifestations within a destructive cult. Mediation has benefits, no doubt. However, there is no need for high costs, secret ceremonies, guilt trips about absence from group programs, neglect of children, in the name of spirituality. In my opinion, MMY was a skilled charming and brilliant manipulative PIed Piper. Many folks, my family included, willingly followed his tune of perfect peace and harmony. Dancing together for a deemed divine mission felt great for awhile. To my loved ones still in TM mindset, and those out : there is no Santa Claus. There is no perfect guru. There is no perfect path, nor one answer to achieve world peace, perfect health, enlightenment and business success. darn it! May others feel increasingly safe to come forth with their multidimensional stories. May those who were injured - sexually, through psychosis, loss of a loved one to suicide, bankruptcies, untreated cancers, broken families, be loving received by the community which so many love. Blame-the-victim for speaking their unpleasant stories is typical behavior of a destructive cult. From the very beginning, MMY taught us to keep the mantra secret for your own benefit - thus began mind control and normalization of secrets for mystical protection. My loved ones in FF and the TM Movement: you are better than such behavior! You are capable of compassion, you are intelligent and caring. For that reason, I continue to love my dear community of old. The truth shall set you free - even though it may initially bring some discomfort. Thanks Rick for keeping this forum open. I rarely visit here, but was encouraged in relation to Judith and the other woman Jai to free speech, open and supportive dialogue, and recovery to all, Gina Catena --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfreak@ wrote: Wow. There is so much heartfelt feeling in her letter...it's truly heartbreaking. Those who have been so quick to condemn Judiththink about it. Think about it carefully and honestly. Despite all the attempts at mud slinging, all that anyone has been able to come up with is: 1. Judith and Conny Larson knew each other. Yes, correct, Conny was one of MMY's personal assistants at the time her affair with MMY started and on through through the Seelisberg beginnings. 2. Judith has continued on with the spiritual path of her choosing. (Shame on those who condemn her for this. Think about it. You, who call butt bouncing flying condemn her for being off your program. 3. Judith and Conny reconnected 30 years (or so) later. Makes sense to me and
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
Yes. Wise thoughts Tartbrain. This isn't a time for all of the throwing of spaghetti against the wall. I fully admit that I know some of these women and I know these things to be true. Please peoplehave some respect for the truth. And have some compassion for the damage done, for the courage that is being shown, and for the real possibility of healing Thank you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_re...@... wrote: FFL's history is one of being a healing oasis for many. Many, if not most, were bent and twisted in the TMO. Sometimes to great and good effect - the springback effect that I alluded to in a previous post. others with bumps, scrapes,dents and some quite twisted frames. I venture that a lot of people on FFL over the years have vented, gained perspective, articulated new views and frameworks, and generally healed. However, FFL, in its present state may be a tough love, against the wind, stand-strong amid the good, bad, ugly and white noise BS. Good for some people's healing, not so much for others. Perhaps a moderated forum -- where rudeness, crudeness and the idiocy of some banter in FFL is diverted for a bit. A place where women approached can tell their stories -- of declining, of accepting, of the paradoxes, and consequences. And while comments and questions would be welcome, a moderator keeps them radiating a healing vibe. Not a bliss ninny retreat, but thoughtful, at times piercing, but polite and respectful comments and questions welcomed. A place to test the waters, to come forward a bit, open up some, breath deeply, and let healing more fully unfold. Later, perhaps a venturing into the rough and tumble of FFL. Perhaps a forum already exists. Perhaps its forming ad hoc as women contact Judith, unfold their stories, empathize and support each other. But perhaps fuller healing, over time, comes from being comfortable in a more public, yet politely moderated forum. and then, if over time, women open up on FFL, feel comfortable with the rough and tumble, clearly fuller healing and strength has unfolded. But for women who are conflicted by the experience, feeling some pain, a kinder, gentler forum may be an oasis of healing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gimari03 no_reply@ wrote: Thank you, Joegeezerfreak, another woman and all those loved ones in FF and elsewhere, Holding secrets of betrayal and violation for so long is stifling to the soul. Why did these women, both Judith and the other anonymous feel so afraid to speak of their experience for decades? Because they feared retribution, isolation, and rejection from loved ones. Such fear and repression of free speech and open dialogue are common manifestations within a destructive cult. Mediation has benefits, no doubt. However, there is no need for high costs, secret ceremonies, guilt trips about absence from group programs, neglect of children, in the name of spirituality. In my opinion, MMY was a skilled charming and brilliant manipulative PIed Piper. Many folks, my family included, willingly followed his tune of perfect peace and harmony. Dancing together for a deemed divine mission felt great for awhile. To my loved ones still in TM mindset, and those out : there is no Santa Claus. There is no perfect guru. There is no perfect path, nor one answer to achieve world peace, perfect health, enlightenment and business success. darn it! May others feel increasingly safe to come forth with their multidimensional stories. May those who were injured - sexually, through psychosis, loss of a loved one to suicide, bankruptcies, untreated cancers, broken families, be loving received by the community which so many love. Blame-the-victim for speaking their unpleasant stories is typical behavior of a destructive cult. From the very beginning, MMY taught us to keep the mantra secret for your own benefit - thus began mind control and normalization of secrets for mystical protection. My loved ones in FF and the TM Movement: you are better than such behavior! You are capable of compassion, you are intelligent and caring. For that reason, I continue to love my dear community of old. The truth shall set you free - even though it may initially bring some discomfort. Thanks Rick for keeping this forum open. I rarely visit here, but was encouraged in relation to Judith and the other woman Jai to free speech, open and supportive dialogue, and recovery to all, Gina Catena --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfreak@ wrote: Wow. There is so much heartfelt feeling in her letter...it's truly heartbreaking. Those who have been so quick to condemn Judiththink about it. Think about it carefully and honestly. Despite all the attempts at mud slinging, all that
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another woman comes forward
Yes, I too know far too many ugly stories. My own included, and those of many others. Some driven to drugs and mental illness as they wrestled with their abuse, seeking healing through over-meditating/dissociative denial. Not good. Let the truth flow. Let true healing begin. Appropriate therapy, if necessary. Find who are the true loved ones. They may not be who you think they are. It is painful to wake up. But eventually the wholeness of self integration brings much greater joy. And may the dead rest in peace, regardless of how they lived and passed away. We can move on. We can be whole. We can support one another, and we are adults (not children), we are victors, not victims. But all must first look the Pied Piper and followers squarely for what the tune is or was. Then acknowledge the mud that surrounds us. Only then can one step out of the mud, wash it off by looking at it, not by dissociating it away to mystically unstress. Sorry for being so blunt. I'll return to my real life now, away from FFL. Great appreciation and admiration for those who've spoken up, who've questioned, and sought outside resources, This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man. William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act I, sc. iii Gina :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfr...@... wrote: Yes. Wise thoughts Tartbrain. This isn't a time for all of the throwing of spaghetti against the wall. I fully admit that I know some of these women and I know these things to be true. Please peoplehave some respect for the truth. And have some compassion for the damage done, for the courage that is being shown, and for the real possibility of healing Thank you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dr. Michael Dean Goodman - Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Pseudo-Guru variety)?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Jul 16, 2010, at 12:07 PM, cardemaister wrote: Yeah, like the absurd misrepresentation of Patanjali's suutras, claiming that PJ warned against practicing the saMyama's mentioned in the vibhuuti-paada of YS! I'm absolutely certain Vaj and his Patanjali guru-s can't explain why Vyaasa uses the expression 'te praatibhaadayaH' and Bhoja 'te praakprati- paaditaaH', unless they (Vyaasa and Bhoja) refer only to the suutra preceding 'te samaadhaav upasargaa, vyutthaane siddhayaH'. If you're so absolutely certain then why do you keep bringing it up as if to reassure yourself? I'd recommend you read the jivan-mukti-viveka Card, which not only details a path to liberation, but does so using the YS of Patanjali in the context of the Holy Shankaracharya Order, the order Mahesh claimed lineage from. One of the nice things about reading this description of awakening is how clearly it excludes the siddhis from Patanjali's presentation. And not only does it warn against the siddhis, it singles out a special warning against yogic flying. Just found it: http://www.robgoodd.com/r_goodding.pdf (page 200, pdf: 219) Exactly the same problem: what is the actual antecedent of the pronoun 'te' (they) in te samaadhaav upasargaa vyutthaane siddhayaH? Because Vyaasa in YSB uses the expression 'te praatibhaadayaH', (praatibha, etc.) IMO it must refer to these six things: praatibha-shraavaNa-vedana+aadarsha+aasvaada (and)-vaartaa that is, the refined senses (III 37), or whatever which are the result of puruSa-jñaanam (III 36). YMMV...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Jerry addresses IA, one of the Nazis gets canned
It was not posted for the developmentally impaired. On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Joe geezerfr...@yahoo.com wrote: Can you translate this into something more readable please? I can't quite figure out what you are saying here. Thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: Pardon his gushing. He is on the longest running propaganda campaign in history. This from IA: If you read this its a update on the IA course and the Dome There is happiness and delight as the true enlightened leader graced our presence in the Dome,Jerry Jarvis after 30 years.When asked about it,Well i did build it.Jeff Cohen is taking a break after loosing his head with an International from New Zealand after saying that he wished all internationals would Fuck off and go back to where they came from. I assume Jeff was talking about Dr. BM and our KING. To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links -- Morality is doing what is right despite what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told despite if it's wrong.
