[FairfieldLife] Re: Sour grapes (was cognitive dissonance)
Hey Bob, thanks for this beautiful question. I can't speak for Nabby but NO, I can't truthfully say all the wankers on FFL, but I can definitely say truthfully that Bob and Barry are too un-evolved to have realized experiences and employ CD denial techniques to rationalize their ignorance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote: I hope this will be my last post about cognitive dissonance (CD). I figure if I can get some answers to this question I'll have both hemispheres firing and I can move on to the FFL script we're working on or better yet my first Zombie in My Gas Tank interview. Preamble If  Leon Festinger (major cognitive dissonance thinker) were to say to me: you and Fitzgerald are full of crap. The theory does not include some people being better at sustaining the discomfort caused by holding two conflicting ideas in the mind at one time. The theory states that people (as in all) have a motivational drive to reduce the dissonance (discomfort) and employ techniques (primarily denial) to reduce the discomfort. Question: If Leon said this to me and Ravi and Nabby over heard him, could they truthfully say: Exactly, which means all the wankers on FFL that question #1 experiences are actually just too un-evolved to have realized experiences and employ CD denial techniques to -not unlike the fox with sour grapes in Aesops fable, rationalize their ignorance. Please see the third paragraph at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
What BS? Barry - you are the classic example of CD on this list here, bullying and screaming loud about people's exeriences and complaining/cautioning newcomers about certain posters, trying to bully people sharing their experiences and then when you get an earful back you back off with your drama queen excuses of blaming posters who give it back to you as posters you don't read, posters that are not worth your time or occult energy sucking posters. Get a clue, you have an UNUSUALLY HIGH level of discomfort with conflicting ideas. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: There is nothing inherent in the experience of cognitive dissonance that causes discomfort. It's how you react to it. I see cognitive dissonance as a kind of energy field. I am comfortable with that energy field; it's more interesting to me than the energy field of knowing or claiming to know things. I like the dynamic of the swirling energy of contradictory ideas being juggled. As usual with me :-), there is a Bruce Cockburn lyric that captures my feelings about this. It's as close as I can get to explaining it: You see the extremes Of what humans can be? In that distance some tension's born Energy surging like a storm You plunge your hand in And draw it back scorched Beneath it's shining like Gold but better Rumours of glory
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sleep and TM (are youstill there RC?)
Thanks Jim, I loved the description of the East in reference to Bhakti. You were one of the few lone heart centered lotuses I encountered in the muddy intellectual ponds of FFL Batgap, and I can clearly see the impact of your childhood in the East. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: I like reading your stuff Ravi - Bhakti Yoga. In SE Asia I grew up on it. It was always in the air. Literally. What I remember was the air always smelled like life, kind of fruity, with rot and diesel and tobacco and dust mixed in. It HAD a smell. Life seems closer, less abstract there. Fruit bats filling the evening sky between the corrugated roofs, near the Presidential Palace in Bogor, Indonesia, on Java. The beating sun searing above the horizon at seven, then during the monsoon season, watching walls of rain sweeping down the street. In the tropics, Nature envelops you. Seed of Bhakti Yoga. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote: Bill - Thank you. If I understand you correctly, it seems as if you had too much energy. And later you crashed. I would characterize it as a rise and coast. It's only an apparent crash, not crash landing or crashing down to earth. Using the analogy of an airplane the crash from rise to coast is only apparent or temporary, we have already gained elevation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, William Parkinson ameradian2@ wrote: Thank you so much Ravi!! You have a very interesting story. And I can now see your inability to sleep for those periods is something quite different than what might happen in TM. If I understand you correctly, it seems as if you had too much energy. And later you crashed. It has some associative points of contact with manic-depressive states. I am just knowledgeable enough to know that kundalini-style yoga seems to emphasize moving energy around the various chakras. The problem in TM seems to be that the recognition within oneself of this silent innerlayer never leaves even during sleep. Your state was high energy, the TM state during sleep might be compared to a dimly lit candle-- but one nevertheless never goes out even during sleep. I am go thankful that you nshard this with me. I have a great awareness now of what happened to you and maybe it is also a cautionary tale against using this type of yoga in some cases. Cheers Bill Â
Fw: [FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com
snip
Fitzgerald's statement 'the true test of a first rate mind is the ability to
hold two contradictory ideas at the same time' really only works at the value
of unity;
Not sure Fitzgerald studied much Vedanta, my guess is that Zelda was the source
of his inspiration. Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com
snip
if you are operating on the level of logic, you can think of two ideas at the
same time, but it is impossible to believe they are both true, unless you
mindfuck yourself into submission by twisting the meaning of one of the
ideas. You have to modify your belief system to reduce discomfort: it is a way
of going unconscious, of suppressing the perceived discrepancy. If you go
unconscious, you may not notice the discrepancy. You see this a lot in the TMO,
in politics, and religion.
Denial (common dissonance reduction technique ) does not require the individual
to modify their belief system. Addictive personality disorders are an obvious
example of a group that uses denial to manage dissonance. Clinton's feelings of
victimization is another example. He didn't change his beliefs he just denied
his behaviour. Of course, having Hillary and his supporters as enablers didn't
hurt either. Another example might be Maharishi's annual action plan
announcements('72, Year of World Plan, '74 Year of Achievement of The World
Plan, '75 Year of The Dawn of The Age of Enlightenment). In the face of
obvious failures these exceptional individuals declared success.
In the case of Clinton and Maharishi were they in denial or did they have the
predilection Turq described
that encouraged the dissonance in the first place and caused them to thrive in
it rather then feel discomfort?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned. Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at least if it aims at a saint. No transparency please ! So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in stories of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, etc. The difference is ofcourse that I'm here to answer any kind of question about my posts you might have. Contrary to your friends who are free to pass on any rumor under the motto The wilder the better if it goes against a saint.
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: Turqoiseb said something really interesting: 'On the other hand, I thrive on cognitive dissonance; it defines for me some of the highest, most profound moments of my life. I actually seek it, as much as I seek anything.' I wonder if he might expand on this idea. Surely he thrives in trying to create the experience of cognitive dissonance for others, at which he is quite good, but what would be his reason for seeking it out? It is normally not natural to seek out discomfort. There is nothing inherent in the experience of cognitive dissonance that causes discomfort. It's how you react to it. I see cognitive dissonance as a kind of energy field. I am comfortable with that energy field; it's more interesting to me than the energy field of knowing or claiming to know things. I like the dynamic of the swirling energy of contradictory ideas being juggled. As usual with me :-), there is a Bruce Cockburn lyric that captures my feelings about this. It's as close as I can get to explaining it: You see the extremes Of what humans can be? In that distance some tension's born Energy surging like a storm You plunge your hand in And draw it back scorched Beneath it's shining like Gold but better Rumours of glory Because this subject interests me, I'll try a little harder to explain my approach to it. Unlike many here, including I think Xeno and some others, my approach to cognitive dissonance is not in the least intellectual. I don't perceive cognitive dissonance to be an intel- lectual phenomenon; it's an energy phenomenon. A lot of my approach admittedly comes from the time I spent with Rama - Frederick Lenz. Whatever else he may have been, he was a great connoisseur of energies, in the same way that others are connoisseurs of fine wines. He'd take us out to the desert, or to other places of power, and we'd meditate there and listen to him rap, and dig the energies. He'd occasionally try to explain the different energies, and help us try to take advantage of the energy of a particular place of power and draw upon it to make huge leaps in our spiritual progress. It seemed to work; in my experience I'd come back from those desert trips blown out of my socks and blown out of my body. For several days there would be not only no self, but *nothing* one could hold onto as what only 24 hours ago we'd laughingly called reality. Instead there was a subjective feeling of being totally in flux, a self-identity as energy, moving, not as self, fixed. I really dug it. I still do, and still make Road Trips to places of power to immerse myself in the more dynamic energies there and draw upon them to help me make changes in my life. But not everyone did. Some Rama students would be on the same hikes I was and we'd get to one particular place and they'd double up as if they'd been punched in the stomach. Rama would explain that there was a particularly strong energy field there and although they were perceiving it as negative or some kind of attack, it was just energy. Then he'd advise them to eat a candy bar, because in his opinion sugar helped to cut the effect of strong energies like this. It always worked. Go figure. So in my case I don't think of cognitive dissonance as being an intellectual thang at all; it's just a particular intense, swirling band of energy. And I'm pretty comfortable with that energy. I'm so bent that I *get off* on that energy; it gets me high. Others, maybe not so much. For them there may be an immediate reaction to the energy that makes them want to make it GO AWAY. And they accomplish this via denial, via rationalization, via diving for the most comforting answer we've already prepared dogma in their spiritual quiver that explains it, or via any number of other means. I rarely go there because to me the energy is comfortable. There is no dis-ease or discomfort caused by juggling seemingly contra- dictory concepts or ideas. They ARE contradictory, on one level of reality. On another, they aren't. For me the answer to the koan of contradictory ideas is found in transcending the plane of ideas and the intellect, and dealing with the CD situation on the level of energy. This approach has helped me over the years in trying to resolve the energy nexus that was Rama himself. The guy was *simultaneously* able to meditate better than anyone I've ever met, able to broadcast higher states of attention to others, able to manifest many of the siddhis, and *at the same time* he was arguably a real dick, lacking in integrity, self-indulgent, a control freak, paranoid, and a bit of a charlatan. What could be more of a CD situation than that? There is no answer to be found on any intellectual plane for all of that. These things really were to some extent contradictory. Yet they coexisted. I never
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
I do appreciate the stories you have shared on Swami Rama and the ones from an earlier post challenging seekers with opposing views. However I don't know if anyone suggested CD as being an intellectual thang, discomfort implies energy, emotion. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: Because this subject interests me, I'll try a little harder to explain my approach to it. Unlike many here, including I think Xeno and some others, my approach to cognitive dissonance is not in the least intellectual. I don't perceive cognitive dissonance to be an intel- lectual phenomenon; it's an energy phenomenon. A lot of my approach admittedly comes from the time I spent with Rama - Frederick Lenz. Whatever else he may have been, he was a great connoisseur of energies, in the same way that others are connoisseurs of fine wines. He'd take us out to the desert, or to other places of power, and we'd meditate there and listen to him rap, and dig the energies. He'd occasionally try to explain the different energies, and help us try to take advantage of the energy of a particular place of power and draw upon it to make huge leaps in our spiritual progress. It seemed to work; in my experience I'd come back from those desert trips blown out of my socks and blown out of my body. For several days there would be not only no self, but *nothing* one could hold onto as what only 24 hours ago we'd laughingly called reality. Instead there was a subjective feeling of being totally in flux, a self-identity as energy, moving, not as self, fixed. I really dug it. I still do, and still make Road Trips to places of power to immerse myself in the more dynamic energies there and draw upon them to help me make changes in my life. But not everyone did. Some Rama students would be on the same hikes I was and we'd get to one particular place and they'd double up as if they'd been punched in the stomach. Rama would explain that there was a particularly strong energy field there and although they were perceiving it as negative or some kind of attack, it was just energy. Then he'd advise them to eat a candy bar, because in his opinion sugar helped to cut the effect of strong energies like this. It always worked. Go figure. So in my case I don't think of cognitive dissonance as being an intellectual thang at all; it's just a particular intense, swirling band of energy. And I'm pretty comfortable with that energy. I'm so bent that I *get off* on that energy; it gets me high. Others, maybe not so much. For them there may be an immediate reaction to the energy that makes them want to make it GO AWAY. And they accomplish this via denial, via rationalization, via diving for the most comforting answer we've already prepared dogma in their spiritual quiver that explains it, or via any number of other means. I rarely go there because to me the energy is comfortable. There is no dis-ease or discomfort caused by juggling seemingly contra- dictory concepts or ideas. They ARE contradictory, on one level of reality. On another, they aren't. For me the answer to the koan of contradictory ideas is found in transcending the plane of ideas and the intellect, and dealing with the CD situation on the level of energy. This approach has helped me over the years in trying to resolve the energy nexus that was Rama himself. The guy was *simultaneously* able to meditate better than anyone I've ever met, able to broadcast higher states of attention to others, able to manifest many of the siddhis, and *at the same time* he was arguably a real dick, lacking in integrity, self-indulgent, a control freak, paranoid, and a bit of a charlatan. What could be more of a CD situation than that? There is no answer to be found on any intellectual plane for all of that. These things really were to some extent contradictory. Yet they coexisted. I never try to deny the contradictions, or even to try to explain them intellectually; they just were, as part of the reality I experienced when around him. *At the time*, what prevented these contradictions from getting in the way of having fun and having clear, shiny meds was in a sense being able to transcend the one level of reality in which these things appeared to be contra- dictory and move to another level of reality in which they weren't. It was very much the study of alternate realities, close to what was described by Castaneda. Carlos Castaneda, although more than a little a char- latan himself, was valuable in that he invented a language with which to describe these phenomena and experiences. Just as Maharishi invented a made-up language to attempt to describe the indescribable, one that we still use on this forum because we share it, Carlos invented terms that described the study of occult energetics. If you have read him, I would suggest that the resistance to feelings of CD is something associated with the
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
I'm glad someone finally brought up our obsession with sport icons and memorabilia. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@... wrote: Would you feel the same way about Hope Solo's soccer shoes, or how about Abby Wamback's sports bra? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: I may be the odd one out here, but the idea of buying someone's ratty, sweaty, old footwear kinda grosses me out. I would no more want MMY's old sandals than Mario Batali's old orange Crocs.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain)
Yeah, what's up with this liberal fascination of elite, so now even the shift and Light of Consciousness cannot really start and has to wait until the elite is taken care of first, can't even see this funny contradiction :-). Funny the conservatives also talk about liberal elite. Why do they need to recognize emptiness or arrogance or why does anyone else need to recognize it? What is this arrogance, does it even exist - I'm sure if you ask and talk to the so-called rich you will come back feeling sorry for them :-). In fact I say emptiness or arrogance always exists in oneself and is just an illusion outside of you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: no sweat. They will recognize their emptiness soon enough. In the meantime, make a decent life for yourself Robert. No need to put your attention on the mirage of the rich. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: More and more will the 'Light of Consciousness' shine on the arrogance of the corporate elites, so that they pay their fair share...there is a shift coming...soon, stand by..
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev.
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
Fitzgerald's statement 'the true test of a first rate mind is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time' really only works at the value of unity; if you are operating on the level of logic, you can think of two ideas at the same time, but it is impossible to believe they are both true, unless you mindfuck yourself into submission by twisting the meaning of one of the ideas - Xeno This is exactly what I was thinking, sure you can consider 2 ideas at the same time but ultimately mind will choose one since mind is under the payroll of ego. The mind always works with polarities, only when the mind upon unity is reigned in and is now under the payroll of the Self that you can then dwell and enjoy the play of the polarities. But first-rate mind is an oxymoron, mind is always third rate. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: Cognitive Dissonance: The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, esp. as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change. It is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously: mental confusion and emotional tension caused by holding incompatible values.The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions. Some have said cognitive dissonance is 'a psychological disorder whereby people believe stupid things.' At any rate it can lead to this, reducing the discomfort resulting in adopting some very peculiar ideas. Probably the major potential for cognitive dissonance in the TMO is holding the idea that the philosophy and technology of Vedic Science has nothing to do with religion. Fitzgerald's statement 'the true test of a first rate mind is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time' really only works at the value of unity; if you are operating on the level of logic, you can think of two ideas at the same time, but it is impossible to believe they are both true, unless you mindfuck yourself into submission by twisting the meaning of one of the ideas. You have to modify your belief system to reduce discomfort: it is a way of going unconscious, of suppressing the perceived discrepancy. If you go unconscious, you may not notice the discrepancy. You see this a lot in the TMO, in politics, and religion. Turqoiseb said something really interesting: 'On the other hand, I thrive on cognitive dissonance; it defines for me some of the highest, most profound moments of my life. I actually seek it, as much as I seek anything.' I wonder if he might expand on this idea. Surely he thrives in trying to create the experience of cognitive dissonance for others, at which he is quite good, but what would be his reason for seeking it out? It is normally not natural to seek out discomfort. The only reason I can think of is it is a tool for highlighting faulty perceptions in one's own understanding of the world and experiencing through those discomforts, rather than attempting to suppress them. If one is successful in this, one feels freer afterward and is not bothered by those discomforts again. This is not to say one is truly more free, it just feels this way; the sense of individual self - ego - is diminished when successfully and consciously working through difficult experiences. Even so, the unity of existence is still stuck in its own process, which paradoxically results in experiencing free will and determinism as the same thing. Another method of using cognitive dissonance is the Zen koan, where a question that has no rational answer is used to break down the overlay of a person's conceptual formulation of experience projected onto experience with the raw experience. Perhaps there are methods in other traditions that work the same way that I am not familiar with. TM works like this in a less dramatic way by taking one out of the experience of conceptual thought, but in the TMO, the conceptual overlay that one faces when coming back to normal thinking tends to work against the process of becoming free of one's conceptions. As for reincarnation, if there is just one being, no individuals reincarnate, their individual being rises and falls like a wave on the ocean, but they do not repeat, even though there are similar waves. Only the one, if you want to call it that, takes various forms, this is not a process of time but of perception, it occurs only now, we have memories of change and this makes it seem as if we have a past and creates the idea we might have a future as well, that we might endure somehow as individuals. But that individuality is an illusion caused by looking at individual waves on the ocean, having excluded the ocean from our vision.
[FairfieldLife] Real cost of Android?
http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/07/13/the-real-cost-of-android-potentially-60-per-device-in-patent-fees/ The real cost of Android? Potentially $60+ per device in patent fees
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
I just saw Casino Jack with Kevin Spacey, and he was brilliant in The Usual Suspects too. Of the two actors you mentioned, my impression of you is more in the direction of Kevin Spacey, vs. Robin Williams. RW strikes me as ZANY and frenetic, and you don't come across that way on FFL. Here on Fair Field Life, the series, I'll go with a combo shake of Kevin Bacon and Bob Denver's iconic Gilligan for my character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: I'm a fan of television. I think some of the best work in the motion picture arts is being done on TV. The genre of a TV series or mini-series, in the wrong hands, can turn high art into low schlock, as lamentably happened with the American remake of Life On Mars. Or, in the right hands, a TV series or mini-series can become the counterpart of a great novel. I've watched or rewatched a few TV series lately, from start to finish, in a kind of exercise in trying (a la Manhunter) to recapture the mindset of good storytelling. So I've been thinking about what makes a good story into a great story. One of the things I've come up with is character arc. Do the characters stay pretty much the same through an entire 6-to-12 episode mini-series (or season of an ongoing series), or do they keep changing on you? I've found that I prefer stories filled with characters who change on me a lot, who have long and complicated character arcs. For example, two performances in the last couple of years strike me as standouts in terms of character arc. The first was in, of all things, Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Early on we are introduced to -- and by intro- duced to I mean we get to see literally everything there is to see about her, nude -- to a character named Ilithyia. She is played by an Australian actress, Viva Bianca. When we first meet her, she seems a bit of a beautiful but shallow dingbat. But over the course of 12 episodes she turns into one of the most evil villains I've ever seen onscreen. Ilithyia is right up there with Hannibal Lechter. She did things in this series that completely surprised me and made me think, Whoa! Reassessment time. This woman is not who I thought she was. I love that. Another actress who got to play a character with *tremendous* arc just got ignored in the Emmy nominations, which I think is a cryin' shame. Emilia Clarke gave a knockout performance as Daenerys Targaryen in Game Of Thrones. Again, we are introduced to her naked, leading us as viewers to think we've seen all of her. When we first see her, she's a beautiful but naive virgin, and a bit of a spoiled princess. Technically she's not a princess; she's the rightful queen of the whole land. But she's still 15 or so and unformed. To watch the change in her as she is married off to a barbarian warrior lord, becomes the queen of his tribe, and gives birth not only to his son but a few more magical creatures as well is jaw-dropping. It's almost the definition of high character arc. So this got me thinkin' about the arc of some of the characters on the TV series of Fairfield Life. Do we have a high arc, or a low arc? Do people tend to change over the years, or stay the same? And IF they change, do other people let them, or is there a concerted attempt to draw them back into character and replay the same scenes they played years ago, in exactly the same way? No answers here, only questions. Now to the fun part: What if Fairfield Life WAS a TV series? Would it be on during prime time, or as a daytime soap? Would it be on FOX or AMC or HBO or the Oprah Channel? How would TV Guide classify it -- would it be considered more like John From Cinncinnati or more like Jersey Shore? Which actor or actress would you want to play you in the series? Has the series jumped the shark, or is it just getting into its classic Lucy episodes period? This post, based on my watching of the series so far, has the potential to turn either into a fun thread or a contentious one. Or a mix of both. I'm curious to see what'll happen. I'm gonna go for the fun part. I'm thinkin' that I'd like to see my character played by Kevin Spacey, doing a kind of combination of Verbal Kint and Lester Burnham. Either that or Robin Williams.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
weird, I posted this last Sunday... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: I just saw Casino Jack with Kevin Spacey, and he was brilliant in The Usual Suspects too. Of the two actors you mentioned, my impression of you is more in the direction of Kevin Spacey, vs. Robin Williams. RW strikes me as ZANY and frenetic, and you don't come across that way on FFL. Here on Fair Field Life, the series, I'll go with a combo shake of Kevin Bacon and Bob Denver's iconic Gilligan for my character. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: I'm a fan of television. I think some of the best work in the motion picture arts is being done on TV. The genre of a TV series or mini-series, in the wrong hands, can turn high art into low schlock, as lamentably happened with the American remake of Life On Mars. Or, in the right hands, a TV series or mini-series can become the counterpart of a great novel. I've watched or rewatched a few TV series lately, from start to finish, in a kind of exercise in trying (a la Manhunter) to recapture the mindset of good storytelling. So I've been thinking about what makes a good story into a great story. One of the things I've come up with is character arc. Do the characters stay pretty much the same through an entire 6-to-12 episode mini-series (or season of an ongoing series), or do they keep changing on you? I've found that I prefer stories filled with characters who change on me a lot, who have long and complicated character arcs. For example, two performances in the last couple of years strike me as standouts in terms of character arc. The first was in, of all things, Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Early on we are introduced to -- and by intro- duced to I mean we get to see literally everything there is to see about her, nude -- to a character named Ilithyia. She is played by an Australian actress, Viva Bianca. When we first meet her, she seems a bit of a beautiful but shallow dingbat. But over the course of 12 episodes she turns into one of the most evil villains I've ever seen onscreen. Ilithyia is right up there with Hannibal Lechter. She did things in this series that completely surprised me and made me think, Whoa! Reassessment time. This woman is not who I thought she was. I love that. Another actress who got to play a character with *tremendous* arc just got ignored in the Emmy nominations, which I think is a cryin' shame. Emilia Clarke gave a knockout performance as Daenerys Targaryen in Game Of Thrones. Again, we are introduced to her naked, leading us as viewers to think we've seen all of her. When we first see her, she's a beautiful but naive virgin, and a bit of a spoiled princess. Technically she's not a princess; she's the rightful queen of the whole land. But she's still 15 or so and unformed. To watch the change in her as she is married off to a barbarian warrior lord, becomes the queen of his tribe, and gives birth not only to his son but a few more magical creatures as well is jaw-dropping. It's almost the definition of high character arc. So this got me thinkin' about the arc of some of the characters on the TV series of Fairfield Life. Do we have a high arc, or a low arc? Do people tend to change over the years, or stay the same? And IF they change, do other people let them, or is there a concerted attempt to draw them back into character and replay the same scenes they played years ago, in exactly the same way? No answers here, only questions. Now to the fun part: What if Fairfield Life WAS a TV series? Would it be on during prime time, or as a daytime soap? Would it be on FOX or AMC or HBO or the Oprah Channel? How would TV Guide classify it -- would it be considered more like John From Cinncinnati or more like Jersey Shore? Which actor or actress would you want to play you in the series? Has the series jumped the shark, or is it just getting into its classic Lucy episodes period? This post, based on my watching of the series so far, has the potential to turn either into a fun thread or a contentious one. Or a mix of both. I'm curious to see what'll happen. I'm gonna go for the fun part. I'm thinkin' that I'd like to see my character played by Kevin Spacey, doing a kind of combination of Verbal Kint and Lester Burnham. Either that or Robin Williams.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sleep and TM (are youstill there RC?)
Thanks Ravi. I was very fortunate to have had that experience. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@... wrote: Thanks Jim, I loved the description of the East in reference to Bhakti. You were one of the few lone heart centered lotuses I encountered in the muddy intellectual ponds of FFL Batgap, and I can clearly see the impact of your childhood in the East. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I like reading your stuff Ravi - Bhakti Yoga. In SE Asia I grew up on it. It was always in the air. Literally. What I remember was the air always smelled like life, kind of fruity, with rot and diesel and tobacco and dust mixed in. It HAD a smell. Life seems closer, less abstract there. Fruit bats filling the evening sky between the corrugated roofs, near the Presidential Palace in Bogor, Indonesia, on Java. The beating sun searing above the horizon at seven, then during the monsoon season, watching walls of rain sweeping down the street. In the tropics, Nature envelops you. Seed of Bhakti Yoga. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote: Bill - Thank you. If I understand you correctly, it seems as if you had too much energy. And later you crashed. I would characterize it as a rise and coast. It's only an apparent crash, not crash landing or crashing down to earth. Using the analogy of an airplane the crash from rise to coast is only apparent or temporary, we have already gained elevation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, William Parkinson ameradian2@ wrote: Thank you so much Ravi!! You have a very interesting story. And I can now see your inability to sleep for those periods is something quite different than what might happen in TM. If I understand you correctly, it seems as if you had too much energy. And later you crashed. It has some associative points of contact with manic-depressive states. I am just knowledgeable enough to know that kundalini-style yoga seems to emphasize moving energy around the various chakras. The problem in TM seems to be that the recognition within oneself of this silent innerlayer never leaves even during sleep. Your state was high energy, the TM state during sleep might be compared to a dimly lit candle-- but one nevertheless never goes out even during sleep. I am go thankful that you nshard this with me. I have a great awareness now of what happened to you and maybe it is also a cautionary tale against using this type of yoga in some cases. Cheers Bill Â
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: Turqoiseb said something really interesting: 'On the other hand, I thrive on cognitive dissonance; it defines for me some of the highest, most profound moments of my life. I actually seek it, as much as I seek anything.' I wonder if he might expand on this idea. Surely he thrives in trying to create the experience of cognitive dissonance for others, at which he is quite good, but what would be his reason for seeking it out? It is normally not natural to seek out discomfort. There is nothing inherent in the experience of cognitive dissonance that causes discomfort. It's how you react to it. snip Cognitive dissonance disappears with self realization. or put another way, we are so deeply immersed in what we used to think of as cognitive dissonance that it becomes the norm. We have reached the point where we know absolutely nothing. Cognitive dissonance is the experience of the small ego, of experiencing the world as it is, vs. as the ego thinks and feels it should be. This creates a feeling of being boundless and rootless and may provide a taste within the small ego's context of living transcendence. Once the ego merges into its universal nature, there is no more comparison between 'is' and 'should be', so cognitive dissonance as an experience isn't possible. Everything is accepted and dealt with as it is. Not to say that leads to a flattening of experience. Just the opposite. Everything is a surprise, and yet not outside the familiarity of one's universal self.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: I just saw Casino Jack with Kevin Spacey, and he was brilliant in The Usual Suspects too. Of the two actors you mentioned, my impression of you is more in the direction of Kevin Spacey, vs. Robin Williams. RW strikes me as ZANY and frenetic, and you don't come across that way on FFL. I know that this is a Yahoo repost and that you probably wrote it some time ago, but I'll reply anyway, because I love Kevin Spacey. Lately I've been toying with taking the train to London so that I can see him perform Shakespeare's Richard III onstage there. That said, I'll agree with at least one other poster here by saying that I was totally underwhelmed by Casino Jack. The story didn't compel me, and neither did Spacey's portrayal. Sometimes the magic works, and sometimes it doesn't. As for Robin Williams, the man has *range*. He can be zany, but he can also be the finest of dramatic actors, as in his performances in One Hour Photo and Insomnia and Good Will Hunting and above all, The Final Cut. Here on Fair Field Life, the series, I'll go with a combo shake of Kevin Bacon and Bob Denver's iconic Gilligan for my character. Both seem appropriate to me. Isn't it a pity that more people didn't follow up on the fun aspect of FFL as a TV series? Wouldn't you have loved to see who other posting personas here would have chosen to play their roles in the series? I sure would have. In particular I would have loved to see who Curtis chose to play him. And Rick, and many others. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: I'm a fan of television. I think some of the best work in the motion picture arts is being done on TV. The genre of a TV series or mini-series, in the wrong hands, can turn high art into low schlock, as lamentably happened with the American remake of Life On Mars. Or, in the right hands, a TV series or mini-series can become the counterpart of a great novel. I've watched or rewatched a few TV series lately, from start to finish, in a kind of exercise in trying (a la Manhunter) to recapture the mindset of good storytelling. So I've been thinking about what makes a good story into a great story. One of the things I've come up with is character arc. Do the characters stay pretty much the same through an entire 6-to-12 episode mini-series (or season of an ongoing series), or do they keep changing on you? I've found that I prefer stories filled with characters who change on me a lot, who have long and complicated character arcs. For example, two performances in the last couple of years strike me as standouts in terms of character arc. The first was in, of all things, Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Early on we are introduced to -- and by intro- duced to I mean we get to see literally everything there is to see about her, nude -- to a character named Ilithyia. She is played by an Australian actress, Viva Bianca. When we first meet her, she seems a bit of a beautiful but shallow dingbat. But over the course of 12 episodes she turns into one of the most evil villains I've ever seen onscreen. Ilithyia is right up there with Hannibal Lechter. She did things in this series that completely surprised me and made me think, Whoa! Reassessment time. This woman is not who I thought she was. I love that. Another actress who got to play a character with *tremendous* arc just got ignored in the Emmy nominations, which I think is a cryin' shame. Emilia Clarke gave a knockout performance as Daenerys Targaryen in Game Of Thrones. Again, we are introduced to her naked, leading us as viewers to think we've seen all of her. When we first see her, she's a beautiful but naive virgin, and a bit of a spoiled princess. Technically she's not a princess; she's the rightful queen of the whole land. But she's still 15 or so and unformed. To watch the change in her as she is married off to a barbarian warrior lord, becomes the queen of his tribe, and gives birth not only to his son but a few more magical creatures as well is jaw-dropping. It's almost the definition of high character arc. So this got me thinkin' about the arc of some of the characters on the TV series of Fairfield Life. Do we have a high arc, or a low arc? Do people tend to change over the years, or stay the same? And IF they change, do other people let them, or is there a concerted attempt to draw them back into character and replay the same scenes they played years ago, in exactly the same way? No answers here, only questions. Now to the fun part: What if Fairfield Life WAS a TV series? Would it be on during prime time, or as a daytime soap? Would it be on FOX or AMC or HBO or the Oprah Channel? How would TV Guide classify it -- would it be considered more like John From
[FairfieldLife] Romantic Love and its relationship to Spirituality
Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Fitzgerald's statement 'the true test of a first rate mind is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time' really only works at the value of unity; And Bob Price replied: Not sure Fitzgerald studied much Vedanta, my guess is that Zelda was the source of his inspiration. My short answer to Bob's reply would be, What about finding his inspiration in another human being, in this case Zelda, is not Unity? My longer answer is the train of thought that Bob's comment triggered in me -- How do different spiritual traditions view Romantic Love? Is it considered an obstacle along the pathway to enlightenment, or is it considered a valuable tool for Self-realization? I ask because on another forum a number of folks are recapitulating their experience in a spiritual trip that was decidedly anti-relationship. Romantic Love was viewed as overshadowing, and thus something that would sap your personal power, power that you could have used pursuing enlightenment. I have seen similar sentiments expressed on this forum. I'm not down with this. I *am* a victim of it, and spent far too many years of my life pushing Romantic Love and relationships away. That is, in a very real sense, my only regret from the time I spent on the formal spiritual path. By being one-pointed, and feeling that the pursuit of Unity according to my teachers was more important than the pursuit of love, to some extent I closed myself to many opportunities to experience love, and thus to experience Unity. What else IS deep Romantic Love but Unity? You gaze into another sentient being's eyes and all that you see there is Self. In my spiritual travels I've seen whole mountains dissolve into pinpoints of light and become nothing but Self, dancing. But that was nothing compared to seeing the same thing happen when gazing into the eyes of someone I loved. I've written before here that I don't quite swing behind the idea that the one-pointed pursuit of enlightenment is the highest goal in life. Similarly, I don't swing behind the notion that this relentless pursuit trumps the often far more effective spiritual technique of simply falling in love.
[FairfieldLife] Taimni: Breathing alternately through the two nostrils...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21497898/I-K-Taimni-The-Science-of-Yoga-Yoga-Sutras-of-Patanjali P. 233 Most of the time am unable to do that, because of allergic rhinitis, or stuff. That reeeaaally sucks! :/ It would be very important to clean(?) the shrota-s or naaDi-s, or whatever, now wouldn't it?
[FairfieldLife] Phone Hacking interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_cnYHW82pwfeature=player_embedded Surely this spreads to other industries, not only tabloid. Note the Medical records being mentioned in this interview.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Coop Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 3:04 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev. I think he went through several deerskins over the years. They tend to wear out.
[FairfieldLife] Yahoo being flaky (was: Re: Fairfield Life as TV series)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: weird, I posted this last Sunday... For the last few days, in my FFL gmail email feed, there's been a small trickle of posts coming in that have taken three days to show up. If I see that it may cause problems for higher volume FFL posters, I will manually run the Post Count during the day as needed. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: [snip]
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How to pronounce the mantras
On Jul 17, 2011, at 2:42 AM, Bob Price wrote: Sal, we always miss you when you are away! Aw, thanks Bob! I say we take up a collection for anyone willing to pull off something like that. Sal
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 1:54 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned. Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at least if it aims at a saint. No transparency please ! So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in stories of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, etc. The difference is ofcourse that I'm here to answer any kind of question about my posts you might have. That's true. Contrary to your friends who are free to pass on any rumor under the motto The wilder the better if it goes against a saint. The one I just posted wasn't wild, nor was it against MMY. Just some info about how the movement might feel about selling his stuff. Don't get me wrong. I believe in the idea of saints, if by saints you mean people with an extraordinarily highly developed consciousness. By that definition, MMY was one in my book. But where it gets interesting, or confusing, is when there's substantial, credible evidence that these saints have done things you wouldn't expect a saint to do, if you expect saintliness to include high moral development. I say interesting or confusing because MMY taught that consciousness and morality were correlated, and the common definition of saint includes moral purity. But then morality is largely a cultural norm, and who's to say it rests on universal principles? Anyway, I respect your choice to avoid taking an honest look at this evidence, in order to maintain your innocent view of these matters. To me, it seems like you have blinders on, but hey, so did I, for decades, so why shouldn't you, as long as you want or need to? If you ever decide to take them off, you may find that a broader view of the world makes life more interesting, even if it raises questions to which there are no easy answers. That helps to cultivate an appreciation for mystery, and what the Zen folks call don't know mind.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@ wrote: If you are needing to survive, eat, then you are justified. I am sure Mark was just waiting to get your stamp of approval. Mite generous of you to do so. Thank you for pointing out the mistake, the one line you cut and pasted from the rest. I appreciate it. Only wishing to help Mark feel better about himself and if it takes sharing feelings, then that was the intent. Rephrase: If one is needing to survive, eat, then one is justified. Unknown Author
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Curtis, In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Hey Rick, I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting is much more important than their privacy. Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can include that demand in your new rules? And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as that homeless guy who hit the lottery. It is offensive to dwelling impaired Americans. Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador) Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned. Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at least if it aims at a saint. No transparency please ! So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in stories of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, etc.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@... wrote: Curtis, In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect. How is it incorrect? That is EXACTLY what you are asking for, and have been asking since you descended upon this forum. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). IMHO, Curtis didn't mischaracterize your intent in any way. You made your intent very clear. You want to know the names of people who post on this forum. So far, you have only wanted to know the names of the people whose ideas you disagree with. I leave it up to the conspiracy theorists here to determine the why of this. When you first appeared here, I took you to task for this 'tude, and do so again. When you first went all drama queen on having your Holy Opinion questioned, you pitched a hissy fit and demanded that I stop referencing you on this forum. I did so. I neither mentioned you nor referred to you in any post since February. And then, out of the blue, you come barging in and run the same number all over again, upbraiding me for speaking your name in vain. Get The Fuck Over Yourself. Neither you nor your opinions of How Fairfield Life Should Be Run are terribly of interest to me. I suspect I'm not alone in this, and that most on this forum -- judging from their lack of piling on to your adolescent demands -- probably agree with me. What makes this forum special, and of value to those who appreciate it, is exactly the thing that you seem to find most threatening. People can come onto this forum and speak their minds. They can do so using their legal names or using an alias. If one of them isn't a member and chooses to send something to Rick to repost anonymously, they have the right to do so, and he respects that right. YOU want to out them. Don't you think that's more than a little sick, and straying over the line into spiritual fascism? I do. And now I'll go back to what I was successfully doing before YOU dragged me back into this -- ignoring your silly ass. I suggest you do the same thing with me, and with other perfectly legitimate opinions expressed here, whether you agree with them or not. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Hey Rick, I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting is much more important than their privacy. Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can include that demand in your new rules? And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as that homeless guy who hit the lottery. It is offensive to dwelling impaired Americans. Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador) Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned. Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at least if it aims at a saint. No transparency please ! So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in stories of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, etc.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
danfriedman: In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect... You do know that Rick and Curtis and a few others were leaders in the TM cult movement - I don't know the exact hierarchy these folks claim, but at one time it was apparently very influential, to hear them talk about it. You need to be aware of the fact that for the most part, we are dealing with TM Teachers on this forum, Dan, and it is by their training to be very secretive about all their activities that are TM-related. One of the moderators' brother is a TM Raja, but he won't talk much about it or answer any questions about what happened to all the money. Can you believe that? There are only a few rank-and-file TMers on this list. But, apparently there are over a dozen or more simple lurkers. Go figure. In fact, you could characterize this forum as a site for TMO informants, who are supposed to be doing the informing, with news about the comings-and-goings of MMY, but he's dead, so in reality, most of the dialog is just mostly speculation about what's going on with the TM Movement, or what houses are for sale up in Vedic City. It's been my experience that only insiders know what's going on in the TMO - and none are respondents on this forum. You're not going to get very much discussion about the 'mechanics of consciousness' here, Dan, except for maybe Lawson or Judy. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting is much more important than their privacy. Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can include that demand in your new rules? And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as that homeless guy who hit the lottery. It is offensive to dwelling impaired Americans. Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador) Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Bill Coop: The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev... Maybe so, especially considering that the skin was probably used as a 'bed' for MMY and Judith. From what I've read, MMY never went anywhere without the skin and someone to carry it for him. So, I would assume that MMY had Judith carry the skin up to patio on the roof of his house that night. I could be mistaken about this. Maybe they did it on the bare concrete floor. Apparently MMY didn't own a real bed or mattress in India. As for the GD skin, I've been told that the GD skin, as well as GD's sandals, are kept on the altar at the ashram owned by GD down in Allahabad. There have been some problems in the past with ritual items being stolen from the Jyotirmath by that other Swami, Svarupanand, so I guess security is not that great in the Upper Kashi. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@... wrote: Curtis, In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect. You pressed Rick to reveal names of people who don't want their names used. He responded that he was not going to do it. If that isn't what you meant it also isn't what you said. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). It might be hard to describe what I was doing there since you seen unfamiliar with the basic underlying concept in play. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Hey Rick, I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting is much more important than their privacy. Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can include that demand in your new rules? And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as that homeless guy who hit the lottery. It is offensive to dwelling impaired Americans. Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador) Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned. Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at least if it aims at a saint. No transparency please ! So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in stories of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, etc.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
On Jul 20, 2011, at 1:10 AM, Ravi Yogi wrote: What BS? Barry - you are the classic example of CD on this list here, bullying and screaming loud about people's exeriences and complaining/cautioning newcomers about certain posters, trying to bully people sharing their experiences and then when you get an earful back you back off with your drama queen excuses of blaming posters who give it back to you as posters you don't read, posters that are not worth your time or occult energy sucking posters. LOL~~I gotta admit, this is damn good writing, Rav. No matter who it's about. Concise and funny. Thanks. Oh, and get a checking. :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rupert Murdoch gets pied
Robert: Just the mere fact that Murdoch and Co. had to defend themselves at 10 Downing St. is symbolic to me that the 'Light of Consciousness' is beginning to shine a bit brighter on the darknesses of this Media giant... Correct me if I'm wrong, but has the 'Murdoch and Co.' and/or Rebekkah Brooks, ever been to 10 Downing Street?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 07/17/2011 03:48 AM, turquoiseb wrote: I'm a fan of television. I think some of the best work in the motion picture arts is being done on TV. The genre of a TV series or mini-series, in the wrong hands, can turn high art into low schlock, as lamentably happened with the American remake of Life On Mars. Or, in the right hands, a TV series or mini-series can become the counterpart of a great novel. I've watched or rewatched a few TV series lately, from start to finish, in a kind of exercise in trying (a la Manhunter) to recapture the mindset of good storytelling. So I've been thinking about what makes a good story into a great story. One of the things I've come up with is character arc. Do the characters stay pretty much the same through an entire 6-to-12 episode mini-series (or season of an ongoing series), or do they keep changing on you? I've found that I prefer stories filled with characters who change on me a lot, who have long and complicated character arcs. For example, two performances in the last couple of years strike me as standouts in terms of character arc. The first was in, of all things, Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Early on we are introduced to -- and by intro- duced to I mean we get to see literally everything there is to see about her, nude -- to a character named Ilithyia. She is played by an Australian actress, Viva Bianca. When we first meet her, she seems a bit of a beautiful but shallow dingbat. But over the course of 12 episodes she turns into one of the most evil villains I've ever seen onscreen. Ilithyia is right up there with Hannibal Lechter. She did things in this series that completely surprised me and made me think, Whoa! Reassessment time. This woman is not who I thought she was. I love that. Another actress who got to play a character with *tremendous* arc just got ignored in the Emmy nominations, which I think is a cryin' shame. Emilia Clarke gave a knockout performance as Daenerys Targaryen in Game Of Thrones. Again, we are introduced to her naked, leading us as viewers to think we've seen all of her. When we first see her, she's a beautiful but naive virgin, and a bit of a spoiled princess. Technically she's not a princess; she's the rightful queen of the whole land. But she's still 15 or so and unformed. To watch the change in her as she is married off to a barbarian warrior lord, becomes the queen of his tribe, and gives birth not only to his son but a few more magical creatures as well is jaw-dropping. It's almost the definition of high character arc. So this got me thinkin' about the arc of some of the characters on the TV series of Fairfield Life. Do we have a high arc, or a low arc? Do people tend to change over the years, or stay the same? And IF they change, do other people let them, or is there a concerted attempt to draw them back into character and replay the same scenes they played years ago, in exactly the same way? No answers here, only questions. Now to the fun part: What if Fairfield Life WAS a TV series? Would it be on during prime time, or as a daytime soap? Would it be on FOX or AMC or HBO or the Oprah Channel? How would TV Guide classify it -- would it be considered more like John From Cinncinnati or more like Jersey Shore? Which actor or actress would you want to play you in the series? Has the series jumped the shark, or is it just getting into its classic Lucy episodes period? This post, based on my watching of the series so far, has the potential to turn either into a fun thread or a contentious one. Or a mix of both. I'm curious to see what'll happen. I'm gonna go for the fun part. I'm thinkin' that I'd like to see my character played by Kevin Spacey, doing a kind of combination of Verbal Kint and Lester Burnham. Either that or Robin Williams. Maybe the closest you'll get to FFL being a TV series: http://www.hbo.com/#/enlightened That is if they ever schedule it. How about Children of the Corn? Children watching their parents slowly die in a small inspiring town from disease brought upon by being surrounded by fields of GM Corn, no one budging because enlightenment must be attained now, there...then a plan to care only for the young and raise them by what their parents mis-perceived, because the plan could work, without the presence of the mixed up minds of the parents who meant well, but were scarred from years of indoctrination of churches past? Add on: A seemingly mysterious man who says he is one of them, but always allures the folks with crop circles of glory ooow's and ahhh's. Played by Bruce Greenwood.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
On Jul 17, 2011, at 7:18 AM, whynotnow7 wrote: just saw Casino Jack with Kevin Spacey, and he was brilliant in The Usual Suspects too. Of the two actors you mentioned, my impression of you is more in the direction of Kevin Spacey, vs. Robin Williams. RW strikes me as ZANY and frenetic, I'm pretty sure he was on various drugs during many of the MM episodes, as was Dick Van Dyke and many other great TV comedians. You just can't keep putting it out like that week after week otherwise. Hence the frenetic energy. Still all great actors though. and you don't come across that way on FFL. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
On Jul 20, 2011, at 6:15 AM, turquoiseb wrote: know that this is a Yahoo repost and that you probably wrote it some time ago, but I'll reply anyway, because I love Kevin Spacey. Lately I've been toying with taking the train to London so that I can see him perform Shakespeare's Richard III onstage there. I would. He's gotten fantastic reviews. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
The idea you are floating here, that the loyal devotees became wealthy and those who criticized ended up poor, is plain daft. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rupert Murdoch gets pied
I wonder if Obama, MediaMatters, Jon Stewart, indeed the rest of the media at large, will accept personal responsibility for creating a 'culture of hate' that led to this attack the way they demanded Palin do after the Giffords incident? Bhairitu: Apples and oranges. So, the 'culture of hate' is different when the liberal media does it? In this climate of disproportionate wealth the rich should be made to feel as uncomfortable as possible. Don't you just hate those 'rich' people? And a more aggressive populace would make sure they are relieved of their burden. Where do you think you think you're going to get a more aggressive populace that will vote for communism? You refuse to even take part in a Tea Party Rally to support reducing the size of government! Go figure. http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/124634/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain)
But why insist on higher taxes in the middle of weakest economic recovery in the post-World War II era? Denise Evans: Because it isn't the American people don't want higher taxesthe question is do the american people want a proportionately fair tax system on the money made from the corporations and wealth aristocrats (that is not coming back to us via the trickle down theory or will it ever) on the backs of us working class. This is another Republican myth that they are spreading to instill fear. You sound really scared. So, how much would reforming the corporate tax code bring down the federal deficit of $13 trillion? This idea is not in Obama's recent federal budget. Why not? http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
Cocaine is God's way of telling you you have too much money - Robin Williams. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@... wrote: On Jul 17, 2011, at 7:18 AM, whynotnow7 wrote: just saw Casino Jack with Kevin Spacey, and he was brilliant in The Usual Suspects too. Of the two actors you mentioned, my impression of you is more in the direction of Kevin Spacey, vs. Robin Williams. RW strikes me as ZANY and frenetic, I'm pretty sure he was on various drugs during many of the MM episodes, as was Dick Van Dyke and many other great TV comedians. You just can't keep putting it out like that week after week otherwise. Hence the frenetic energy. Still all great actors though. and you don't come across that way on FFL. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: The idea you are floating here, that the loyal devotees became wealthy and those who criticized ended up poor, is plain daft. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
No, it came from a deer I am pretty sure. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coop williamgcoop@... wrote: The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Life as TV series
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: On 07/17/2011 03:48 AM, turquoiseb wrote: I'm a fan of television. I think some of the best work in the motion picture arts is being done on TV. The genre of a TV series or mini-series, in the wrong hands, can turn high art into low schlock, as lamentably happened with the American remake of Life On Mars. Or, in the right hands, a TV series or mini-series can become the counterpart of a great novel. I've watched or rewatched a few TV series lately, from start to finish, in a kind of exercise in trying (a la Manhunter) to recapture the mindset of good storytelling. So I've been thinking about what makes a good story into a great story. One of the things I've come up with is character arc. Do the characters stay pretty much the same through an entire 6-to-12 episode mini-series (or season of an ongoing series), or do they keep changing on you? I've found that I prefer stories filled with characters who change on me a lot, who have long and complicated character arcs. For example, two performances in the last couple of years strike me as standouts in terms of character arc. The first was in, of all things, Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Early on we are introduced to -- and by intro- duced to I mean we get to see literally everything there is to see about her, nude -- to a character named Ilithyia. She is played by an Australian actress, Viva Bianca. When we first meet her, she seems a bit of a beautiful but shallow dingbat. But over the course of 12 episodes she turns into one of the most evil villains I've ever seen onscreen. Ilithyia is right up there with Hannibal Lechter. She did things in this series that completely surprised me and made me think, Whoa! Reassessment time. This woman is not who I thought she was. I love that. Another actress who got to play a character with *tremendous* arc just got ignored in the Emmy nominations, which I think is a cryin' shame. Emilia Clarke gave a knockout performance as Daenerys Targaryen in Game Of Thrones. Again, we are introduced to her naked, leading us as viewers to think we've seen all of her. When we first see her, she's a beautiful but naive virgin, and a bit of a spoiled princess. Technically she's not a princess; she's the rightful queen of the whole land. But she's still 15 or so and unformed. To watch the change in her as she is married off to a barbarian warrior lord, becomes the queen of his tribe, and gives birth not only to his son but a few more magical creatures as well is jaw-dropping. It's almost the definition of high character arc. So this got me thinkin' about the arc of some of the characters on the TV series of Fairfield Life. Do we have a high arc, or a low arc? Do people tend to change over the years, or stay the same? And IF they change, do other people let them, or is there a concerted attempt to draw them back into character and replay the same scenes they played years ago, in exactly the same way? No answers here, only questions. Now to the fun part: What if Fairfield Life WAS a TV series? Would it be on during prime time, or as a daytime soap? Would it be on FOX or AMC or HBO or the Oprah Channel? How would TV Guide classify it -- would it be considered more like John From Cinncinnati or more like Jersey Shore? Which actor or actress would you want to play you in the series? Has the series jumped the shark, or is it just getting into its classic Lucy episodes period? This post, based on my watching of the series so far, has the potential to turn either into a fun thread or a contentious one. Or a mix of both. I'm curious to see what'll happen. I'm gonna go for the fun part. I'm thinkin' that I'd like to see my character played by Kevin Spacey, doing a kind of combination of Verbal Kint and Lester Burnham. Either that or Robin Williams. Maybe the closest you'll get to FFL being a TV series: http://www.hbo.com/#/enlightened That is if they ever schedule it. How about Children of the Corn? Children watching their parents slowly die in a small inspiring town from disease brought upon by being surrounded by fields of GM Corn, no one budging because enlightenment must be attained now, there...then a plan to care only for the young and raise them by what their parents mis-perceived, because the plan could work, without the presence of the mixed up minds of the parents who meant well, but were scarred from years of indoctrination of churches past? Add on: A seemingly mysterious man who says he is one of them, but always allures the folks with crop circles of glory ooow's and ahhh's. Played by Bruce Greenwood.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
What a doofus. I'll give him ten bucks for the sandals, free shipping. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: The idea you are floating here, that the loyal devotees became wealthy and those who criticized ended up poor, is plain daft. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Coop Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 3:04 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev. I think he went through several deerskins over the years. They tend to wear out. Some years ago, I bought Petra a deerskin when I was out in Colorado for a Waking Down retreat. The thing shed hair like crazy, and she soon grew tired of cleaning up after it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
On Jul 20, 2011, at 8:53 AM, whynotnow7 wrote: What a doofus. I'll give him ten bucks for the sandals, free shipping. LOL...I admit I'm not too surprised to hear about this. (Would love to see the film but NF hasn't gotten it yet and doesn't seem to know when it will.) Trash-talking someone (publicly no less) but then attempting to make $$ off of your devotion to him? Mark, meet Cognitive Dissonance. I'm sure you two will have a long and happy relationship. :) (And I still stand by what I said originally, that he'd be lucky to get $1000 or anything close.) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tedadams108 Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 8:47 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film. What did he say, for those of us who didn't see the film? I've never heard Mark speak ill of Maharishi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: No, it came from a deer I am pretty sure. Funny surreal connection Jim! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coop williamgcoop@ wrote: The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Compassion. As expressed by -- and exemplified by -- a long- term practitioner of the Transcendental Meditation(TM) technique (one assumes), self-proclaimed as the highest, most effective means of spiritual development on the planet. Interesting dharma talk. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
whynotnow: No, it came from a deer I am pretty sure. Probably from Corbett Park. http://www.corbettpark.com/ From what I've read, Guru Dev did not sit on a 'deerskin'; he meditated on an antelope skin. The skin, which was given to Guru Dev by his guru Swami Krishnanada Saraswati, which the great Guru Dev meditated on, was inherited by his successor, in direct desciplic succession. Not only the skin, but the gold gilt high chair and the Raja Umbrella, the sandals, the japa beads, the water pot and the staff of Guru Dev. Also, the Jyotirmath Ashram, the buildings and all the Ashram property, both at Jypotirmath and at the Shankar Math at Allahabad, were inherited by Guru Dev's successor. Guru Dev's successor was H.H. Swami Shantanand Saraswati, as reported in the Indian Press. All the above listed items are now in the possession of Swami Vasudevananda Saraswati, the current representative of the line of Brahmanada Saraswati. Read more: Subject: The Shankaracharyas Today Author: Willytex Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: July 1, 2003 http://tinyurl.com/3ugc62k Sources: 'The Times of India' http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ The Whole Thing, the Real Thing The Official Biography of Guru Dev A Tradition of Teachers: Shankara and the Jagadgurus Today By William Cenkner, Ph.D. The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Rick, The entire film was posted on youtube. It has since been removed. It is in german, but the interview with Mark Landau is in english. The following are the people interviewed in the film: Judith Bourque, Earl Kaplan, John Knapp, and Mark Landau. As you can assume the producer did not choose these people to glorify Maharishi, rather to make the points he wanted to make in the film. I would be paraphrasing since I cannot go back and listen since the videos were removed, but in each of the interviews, including the one with Mark, the viewer comes away with a very negative impression of Maharishi. There is a reason Mark was put in the film and it was not to say nice things about Maharishi. I do remember a couple things that were said but rather than paraphrase it would be best to see the film or to ask your initiate directly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tedadams108 Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 8:47 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film. What did he say, for those of us who didn't see the film? I've never heard Mark speak ill of Maharishi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
What a doofus. I'll give him ten bucks for the sandals, free shipping. Sal Sunshine: ...I still stand by what I said originally, that he'd be lucky to get $1000 or anything close. Maybe so, but how much could you get for a pair of your own worn-out sandals, a few cents? LoL!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Curtis, In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect. How is it incorrect? That is EXACTLY what you are asking for, and have been asking since you descended upon this forum. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). IMHO, Curtis didn't mischaracterize your intent in any way. You made your intent very clear. You want to know the names of people who post on this forum. A little clarification here, since of course we can't expect Barry to do anything but attempt to confuse the issue: Dan has been very clear that what he doesn't like is Rick's posting of anonymous emails from nonmembers. I don't recall Dan complaining about members using handles. As Nabby just pointed out, the difference is that members who use handles tend to have an ongoing presence on the forum and to respond to comments and questions; and they therefore have some ostensible accountability for what they post, unlike the anonymous writers of the emails Rick posts. So far, you have only wanted to know the names of the people whose ideas you disagree with. I leave it up to the conspiracy theorists here to determine the why of this. No conspiracy theory required. The vast majority of emails from nonmembers that Rick posts anonymously involve ideas Dan disagrees with. I can't remember the last anonymous email posted by Rick that was positive about TM/MMY/the TMO. So this remark from Barry is disingenuous as well. When you first appeared here, I took you to task for this 'tude, and do so again. When you first went all drama queen on having your Holy Opinion questioned, you pitched a hissy fit and demanded that I stop referencing you on this forum. I did so. I neither mentioned you nor referred to you in any post since February. And then, out of the blue, you come barging in and run the same number all over again, upbraiding me for speaking your name in vain. This is false, and Barry knows it. Dan had been having conversations with others here since June 23 that had nothing to do with Barry; he did not just come barging in out of the blue and demand that Barry stop using his name. And by the time Dan did address Barry on this issue, Barry *had* been referring to Dan, using his name. What happened was that on July 11, Dan made an offhand reference to the unpleasant episode involving Barry from January, without mentioning Barry's name. Curtis wanted to know who the perp was, and I posted message numbers from the archives for the January episode. Curtis read the posts and then accused Dan of having misrepresented the episode. Then *Barry* barged in and piled on to Curtis's accusation, using Dan's name, and himself misrepresented the episode. That's the point at which Dan upbraided Barry for using his name after promising not to do so. (To be fair to Barry, he could hardly participate in the discussion about the January episode in which he had been involved without mentioning Dan's name. On the other hand, Dan had not used Barry's name, as noted, when he mentioned the episode and was not participating in the discussion about it, which was primarily between Curtis and me until Barry got involved.) For the record, I don't have any objection to Rick posting the anonymous emails, although I understand Dan's gripe about them and think he had a perfect right to bring it up and make his point. I also think, however, that Dan's point has been more than made, and if I were Dan, I'd back off. Rick isn't going to change his policy based on Dan's complaint, and that's *Rick's* right. But I don't feel the need to demonize Dan about this as Barry does. And I think if Barry finds the temptation to demonize him irresistible, he at least ought to refrain from *misrepresenting* what Dan has done and said, as he has in this post and several others. This is my 50th for the week. See you in a few days. Get The Fuck Over Yourself. Neither you nor your opinions of How Fairfield Life Should Be Run are terribly of interest to me. I suspect I'm not alone in this, and that most on this forum -- judging from their lack of piling on to your adolescent demands -- probably agree with me. What makes this forum special, and of value to those who appreciate it, is exactly the thing that you seem to find most threatening. People can come onto this forum and speak their minds. They can do so using their legal names or using an alias. If one of them isn't a member and chooses to send something to Rick to repost anonymously, they have the right to do so, and he respects that right.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: There is a reason Mark was put in the film and it was not to say nice things about Maharishi. I do remember a couple things that were said but rather than paraphrase it would be best to see the film or to ask your initiate directly. Whoa! More TM Compassion. Now it's Rick's fault if one of his initiates is deemed Off The Program by someone with a stick up their butt. K-Y dude. It's not just for sex. Just sayin'.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
On Jul 19, 2011, at 5:31 PM, emptybill wrote: According to my informant (a former student of MMY, a former MIU professor, a close teacher of SSRS who now is a professor and a Sankhya-Yoga scholar) SSRS was always devoted to MMY and had only love for him until the final endlessness. According to this scholar, SSRS said, quite often, that MMY had nothing but Deva Ma's will to fulfill, i.e. that this was his sole purpose in life and that Her Divine Will was all that concerned him in this earthly life. So your confession is that this Deva Ma is behind the molestation of the young women, the poisoning and the hundreds who went insane or died under Mahesh. It sounds like it's time to contact Homeland Security. Obviously another enemy combatant. Perhaps Hindu Al Qaeda.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
On Jul 20, 2011, at 4:04 AM, Bill Coop wrote: The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev. LOL!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
I do have compassion for Mark or anyone in financial difficulties. I have been observing the comments on Fairfield Life for many years but until today was not inspired to post one of my own. For some reason it was hard for me to resist pointing out the hypocrisy since I had just seen the film. Perhaps I was a little colorful with my words, but they pale in comparison to the words used in the interview. Obviously there are people on here that fit either into the pro-TM camp or the anti-TM camp. I apparently hit a nerve. I'm not taking sides here, just pointing out the facts and people can spin them the way they want. Interestingly, those who have an issue with my post are not addressing it's main point, rather my mention of being compassionate or acknowledging that many have enjoyed financial success and have attributed it to their TM practice. The main point is not debatable. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: There is a reason Mark was put in the film and it was not to say nice things about Maharishi. I do remember a couple things that were said but rather than paraphrase it would be best to see the film or to ask your initiate directly. Whoa! More TM Compassion. Now it's Rick's fault if one of his initiates is deemed Off The Program by someone with a stick up their butt. K-Y dude. It's not just for sex. Just sayin'.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
On Jul 20, 2011, at 7:48 AM, Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Coop Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 3:04 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals The real prize would be the deerskin. I think I heard that it was inherited from Guru Dev. I think he went through several deerskins over the years. They tend to wear out. Guru Dev must have taken out several with his Vedic Deer rifle. I wonder who got the Guru Dev moosehead?
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
Yes, in music dissonance drives forward. If you look at the history of Western music, it starts with chant, vocal, music primarily driven by the power of the meaning of words. Even as such music became polyphonic and dissonance appeared, the music was rather like a very even tapestry, a kind of bland concoction of musical lines. While harmony was the result, composers thought in terms of combining individual musical lines rather than the 'vertical' structure of harmony. About 1600 composers began to experiment more with purely instrumental compositions, and without the words they discovered that to hold listeners' attention they had to find devices by which to extend musical vocabulary and expanding the vocabulary of dissonance and harmony was one of the solutions. These new musical devices of course are now added back in to vocal music as well. Western Classical music contains far more driving dissonance than popular music. The most well known example is the opening of last movement of Beethoven's 9th Symphony, which is a real scrunch, demanding a significant resolution. The driven effect depends on the consonance of harmony, in music that is highly dissonant throughout, certain forms of jazz, or 20th century atonal compositions, the effect of resolution is less apparent, thus the greatest effect is produced when dissonance and consonance are at their extremes. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 07/16/2011 08:39 AM, Bob Price wrote: I'm curious what everyone thinks is the difference between cognitive dissonance (people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance) and what F. Scott Fitzgerald said: the true test of a first rate mind is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time. If the theory of cognitive dissonance and Fitzgerald are both right would that mean the natural tendency of the mind is to become less intelligent? The most common use of dissonance is in music. If I play a dissonant chord the ear wants it resolved. Therefore it creates motion in music. Elsewhere on the Internet including YouTube I use a handle of Captain Bebops which is cognitively dissonant because you have Captain, a military rank, paired with Bebops, a jazz term or two things you wouldn't ordinarily put together. A handle like that sticks out a little more than something like frank123xy or bsmith2020. Bhairtu, however, is a homonym. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: Guru Dev must have taken out several with his Vedic Deer rifle. I wonder who got the Guru Dev moosehead? Wait a minute... ya mean that story about how animals go up to the great masters and drop dead to offer their skins isn't true?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: I do have compassion for Mark or anyone in financial difficulties. I have been observing the comments on Fairfield Life for many years but until today was not inspired to post one of my own. For some reason it was hard for me to resist pointing out the hypocrisy since I had just seen the film. Perhaps I was a little colorful with my words, but they pale in comparison to the words used in the interview. Obviously there are people on here that fit either into the pro-TM camp or the anti-TM camp. I apparently hit a nerve. I'm not taking sides here, just pointing out the facts and people can spin them the way they want. Interestingly, those who have an issue with my post are not addressing it's main point, rather my mention of being compassionate or acknowledging that many have enjoyed financial success and have attributed it to their TM practice. The main point is not debatable. The main point, as you put it, is completely debatable. You are trying to make the case that a person who has mixed feelings about Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is somehow off, and should be looked down upon. You made that very clear with your sandals as firewood comment in your first post. It is NOT a given that anyone who has conflicting feelings about Maharishi is a Bad Guy, despite what you are trying diligently to infer. One would IMO have to be categorically insane to NOT have conflicting feelings about Maharishi, if they'd spent any time around him. Now that you've delurked, let's see whether you have anything positive to say about the man you're defend- ing, or only negative things to say about those who honestly deal with their conflicting feelings about him. The latter is easy. Many of the posters on this forum provide a testament to this. But the former? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: There is a reason Mark was put in the film and it was not to say nice things about Maharishi. I do remember a couple things that were said but rather than paraphrase it would be best to see the film or to ask your initiate directly. Whoa! More TM Compassion. Now it's Rick's fault if one of his initiates is deemed Off The Program by someone with a stick up their butt. K-Y dude. It's not just for sex. Just sayin'.
[FairfieldLife] TV Heads up: Breaking Bad returns tonight
If you are a fan of one of the best shows on television, one that breaks the mold that Hollywood is afraid to break, it returns on AMC tonight. Wonder if the producers strategically delayed the show until after the Emmy nominations were released so that Mad Men might actually get a chance. http://www.amctv.com/shows/breaking-bad Been having some fun today looking up films shot with DSLR cameras. Guess I'm going to have to get one now. Up until a couple years ago microbudget filmmaking was done with prosumer camcorders costing above the $5000 mark. But there are films shot these days on inexpensive DSLR cameras because you can use different lenses and the look is much like 35mm motion picture photography. There are some films that have been shot with a Canon EOS T2i ($799 MSRP) though many on the list belong have been shot with the list below have been shot with a Canon 7D ($1500) and some with the Canon 5dmkii ($2400). http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?198927-DSLR-Feature-Film-List Check out some of the trailers. There have been a few like Rubber that I have recommended here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How to pronounce the mantras
Raunch Don't look any further! You might have to shoulder the burden of knowing Sal's mantra if you read the reply. So don't do it! You'll become the lap dog of demons. . --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptybill@ wrote: That what it says in the checking notes of D.J. Wahl Ghoul. Apparently he can't keep his sources separate. Still got a doubt that he never learned any of it? Not moi. That's been clear for some time. All his various smoking-gun missteps along these lines are just the kinds of things someone on the outside looking in would be likely to assume about how the technique is taught and practiced. It makes perfect sense for such a person to figure that something called checking in the TM context would of course involve having one's mantra checked, either as part of the routine or upon request. He may even be remembering point 23E from having read the checking notes and erroneously thinking that's what it refers to. Checking doesn't mean checking the mantra. The purpose of checking is to give the right *experience* of meditation, which is effortless meditation. Other than point 23E, the only time an initiator explicitly checks the pronunciation of a mantra is individually with new meditators after the third night of checking. The wording in Maharishi's checking notes is brilliant and in this instance very delicate so as not to make a big deal out of it or risk disturbing the innocence and naturalness of meditation: And you remember your mantra? [Assumes everything is AOK, but whether yes or no, it doesn't matter.] Whisper softly what you feel it is. [This is so cool. You engage his quiet feeling not his noisy intellect by saying, What do you *think* it is?] If the mantra was wrong, you just reassure him it is all right now. Anything that creates doubt and confusion about meditation or pronunciation of the mantra is the antithesis of the checking procedure and effortless meditation. No wonder he won't give out the basic names of his initiator and his course(s). But I am impressed. Apparently Namkhai Norbu's webinars now give modified instructions in TM. It's just no longer the same old vajra-japa you seen in the Buddhist Tantras. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: snip One POV worth considering is that since TM does not generally oppose the mantra changing in sound or quality or speed, etc., ones mantra could change and they would not remember the original sound they were given, but the morphed version. I know mine morphed so that I had to be re-told it on checking several times... As much as anythign else I suspect that that was a nod to your anxiety, rather than an essential part of checking... He seems to think that it's a routine part of checking for the meditator to tell the checker his/her mantra, whereupon the checker corrects it if necessary. Not the case. Any TMer who's ever been checked would know this; any TM teacher (or anyone who has taken checker training) would know this. Even if the meditator *asks* to have the mantra checked, it's extremely unlikely the checker would nod to his anxiety. The checking procedure is formulated so as to *disallow* checking of the mantra (see point 23E of the checking notes). The checking procedure is designed to make the meditator comfortable with using whatever s/he remembers, morphed or otherwise. It's not impossible that if the meditator made a huge fuss, his/her initiator might be brought in to check his/her mantra, but the checker would stand on his/her head to avoid it by simply going through the regular checking procedure loops as many times as necessary in the hope that the meditator says the hell with it. The whole idea is to discourage any anxiety the meditator may have about correct pronunciation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sleep and TM (are youstill there RC?)
The TM mantras appear repeatedly in numerous different tantras... cardemaister: Gotta admit that might be true, actually! Think 'twas prolly Mahaa-nirvaaNa-tantra or somesuch that has my mantra... White 'Tara' in Vajrayana Buddhism is 'Sarasvati' in Hindu Sri Vidya. According to Blofield, White Tara counteracts illness and thereby helps to bring about a long life. The Tara sadhana was revealed to the Nath Siddha Tilopa in 995 C.E., who is the human father of the Karma Kagyu sect of Tibet. Read more: 'The Tantric Mysticism of Tibet' A Practical Guide to the Theory, Purpose, and Techniques of Tantric Meditation by John Blofeld Penguin, 1992 'The Cult of Tara' Magic and Ritual in Tibet by Stephen Beyer University of California Press 1992
[FairfieldLife] Re: cognitive dissonance
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@... wrote: I do appreciate the stories you have shared on Swami Rama and the ones from an earlier post challenging seekers with opposing views. However I don't know if anyone suggested CD as being an intellectual thang, discomfort implies energy, emotion. I found Turq's response useful. I do not think of cognitive dissonance as energy myself, or think about energy fields (except for physics) perhaps because I have a tendency to avoid terminology from woo-woo land. I did read Castaneda's books long ago, where he described the 'lines of the world', energies as something one could see. Castaneda's friends are said to have regarded him as a big liar. How much he just made up in his writings is an unknown. However, cognitive dissonance, in common parlance at least starts with the intellect because you have two ideas that share a discrepancy, and you have an emotional attachment to one or both of those ideas. It is that deeper level of emotional attachment that results in a problem for people. Without the emotional connexion, there is no problem. Most of my life, different places all feel kind of like the same place to me, and now I have a better idea of why that is, so relating to the idea of places of power does not resonate with me. So either I am a dull boy, or others have an imagination far more active than mine. I find it gratifying that Turq revealed something of his experiences here, although he would not give a damn that I feel that. His posts have brought up some interesting material from others on the forum this time. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: Because this subject interests me, I'll try a little harder to explain my approach to it. Unlike many here, including I think Xeno and some others, my approach to cognitive dissonance is not in the least intellectual. I don't perceive cognitive dissonance to be an intel- lectual phenomenon; it's an energy phenomenon. A lot of my approach admittedly comes from the time I spent with Rama - Frederick Lenz. Whatever else he may have been, he was a great connoisseur of energies, in the same way that others are connoisseurs of fine wines. He'd take us out to the desert, or to other places of power, and we'd meditate there and listen to him rap, and dig the energies. He'd occasionally try to explain the different energies, and help us try to take advantage of the energy of a particular place of power and draw upon it to make huge leaps in our spiritual progress. It seemed to work; in my experience I'd come back from those desert trips blown out of my socks and blown out of my body. For several days there would be not only no self, but *nothing* one could hold onto as what only 24 hours ago we'd laughingly called reality. Instead there was a subjective feeling of being totally in flux, a self-identity as energy, moving, not as self, fixed. I really dug it. I still do, and still make Road Trips to places of power to immerse myself in the more dynamic energies there and draw upon them to help me make changes in my life. But not everyone did. Some Rama students would be on the same hikes I was and we'd get to one particular place and they'd double up as if they'd been punched in the stomach. Rama would explain that there was a particularly strong energy field there and although they were perceiving it as negative or some kind of attack, it was just energy. Then he'd advise them to eat a candy bar, because in his opinion sugar helped to cut the effect of strong energies like this. It always worked. Go figure. So in my case I don't think of cognitive dissonance as being an intellectual thang at all; it's just a particular intense, swirling band of energy. And I'm pretty comfortable with that energy. I'm so bent that I *get off* on that energy; it gets me high. Others, maybe not so much. For them there may be an immediate reaction to the energy that makes them want to make it GO AWAY. And they accomplish this via denial, via rationalization, via diving for the most comforting answer we've already prepared dogma in their spiritual quiver that explains it, or via any number of other means. I rarely go there because to me the energy is comfortable. There is no dis-ease or discomfort caused by juggling seemingly contra- dictory concepts or ideas. They ARE contradictory, on one level of reality. On another, they aren't. For me the answer to the koan of contradictory ideas is found in transcending the plane of ideas and the intellect, and dealing with the CD situation on the level of energy. This approach has helped me over the years in trying to resolve the energy nexus that was Rama himself. The guy was *simultaneously* able to meditate better than anyone I've ever met, able to broadcast higher states of attention to
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
I think in your very articulate way you are missing my point. My point is more specific and was not meant (despite my colorful words)to comment on Mark's devotion to Maharishi or his TM practice. It's been well documented on here of Mark's disillusionment. Like you said, people can have doubts or question aspects of the Movement, and I am not questioning Mark's doing so. He has a right to feel the way he wants to. Again, the main point is After seeing the film David Wants to Fly, the interview with Mark is not flattering of Maharishi...to say the least. As such, the following quote from Mark's post couldn't conflict more with the man he described in the interview. In my experience, they still carry a lot of his energy, as if the atoms and molecules have been entrained in it. And, of course, in India, they would be holy objects to be revered. I have kept them very well protected and have handled them very little over the decades. I guess it's possible to speak ill of someone one minute and speak so highly of his sandals the next. My guess is that what Mark said in the film expresses his true feelings, but he can't express them here because it may compromise the value of what he is trying to sell. Maybe Mark can post the interview he had in the film on here, the questions and answers. If read my main point becomes obvious to anyone who chooses to be objective and not already biased. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: I do have compassion for Mark or anyone in financial difficulties. I have been observing the comments on Fairfield Life for many years but until today was not inspired to post one of my own. For some reason it was hard for me to resist pointing out the hypocrisy since I had just seen the film. Perhaps I was a little colorful with my words, but they pale in comparison to the words used in the interview. Obviously there are people on here that fit either into the pro-TM camp or the anti-TM camp. I apparently hit a nerve. I'm not taking sides here, just pointing out the facts and people can spin them the way they want. Interestingly, those who have an issue with my post are not addressing it's main point, rather my mention of being compassionate or acknowledging that many have enjoyed financial success and have attributed it to their TM practice. The main point is not debatable. The main point, as you put it, is completely debatable. You are trying to make the case that a person who has mixed feelings about Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is somehow off, and should be looked down upon. You made that very clear with your sandals as firewood comment in your first post. It is NOT a given that anyone who has conflicting feelings about Maharishi is a Bad Guy, despite what you are trying diligently to infer. One would IMO have to be categorically insane to NOT have conflicting feelings about Maharishi, if they'd spent any time around him. Now that you've delurked, let's see whether you have anything positive to say about the man you're defend- ing, or only negative things to say about those who honestly deal with their conflicting feelings about him. The latter is easy. Many of the posters on this forum provide a testament to this. But the former? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: There is a reason Mark was put in the film and it was not to say nice things about Maharishi. I do remember a couple things that were said but rather than paraphrase it would be best to see the film or to ask your initiate directly. Whoa! More TM Compassion. Now it's Rick's fault if one of his initiates is deemed Off The Program by someone with a stick up their butt. K-Y dude. It's not just for sex. Just sayin'.
[FairfieldLife] Re: States of Consciousness
Can't find where he mentions shamatha by name. He mentions someone else's proposed categorization of meditation into 2 main groups and proposes that TM belongs in a 3rd category... L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: Wow, does he mischaracterize shamatha mediation. Not a very honest presentation. But sadly, not surprising. On Jul 14, 2011, at 12:17 PM, sparaig wrote: New book: http://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/07/01/consciousness- states-cosic-2011/consciousness-states-cosic-2011.pdf chapter 10 is about enlightenment, TM-style by Fred Travis
[FairfieldLife] Zombie in My Gas Tank
Ravi, I was quite pleased to see you accepted the peace offering in my cognitive dissonance post. Thank you for your thoughtful response. I feel, our relationship is deepening with each exchange. I have to admit, my desire to bury the spitballs was a little self-serving, as I'm hoping you will consider doing me a very big favor. As you know, I've been working diligently on launching a new pod-cast with the working title Zombie in My Gas Tank. The mission of Zombie will be to explore, go where no one has gone before, any and all questions concerning Emotional Intelligence (EI). I'm hoping for a thoughtful investigation into something, I feel is almost as important as enlightenment. And because, I'm such a huge believer in all things related to TM. I believe, I've come up with a concept that could be described as doing less and accomplishing more. Instead of using Skype or expensive recording equipment- not to mention that deer in the headlights look- some guests get when asked a question they didn't expect, I've decided to post a series of EI questions, that the guest can take as long as they like to answer and then post so everyone can join in with something constructive. I've pondered long and hard about what the questions could be asked of my guests, and it became obvious to me that the Proust Questionnaire was made for this purpose. For anyone unfamiliar with the Proust Questionnaire it is series of personality (EI) questions made famous by Marcel Proust and more recently by VANITY FAIR (as I'm sure many know the last page of every issue includes a celebrity answering the questions). You can get more at the following links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proust_Questionnaire http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/06/proust-albert-brooks-201106 http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/05/proust-tina-fey-201105 http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2010/12/proust-harrison-ford-201012 http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2010/10/proust-rafael-nadal-201010 http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2007/10/proust_simon200710 There are 50+ questions in the first two questionnaires that Proust originally completed. I plan to submit around 20 of those questions to each Zombie guest. So Ravi, would you consider being my first quest? I would be honored.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Romantic Love and its relationship to Spirituality
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Fitzgerald's statement 'the true test of a first rate mind is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time' really only works at the value of unity; And Bob Price replied: Not sure Fitzgerald studied much Vedanta, my guess is that Zelda was the source of his inspiration. My short answer to Bob's reply would be, What about finding his inspiration in another human being, in this case Zelda, is not Unity? My longer answer is the train of thought that Bob's comment triggered in me -- How do different spiritual traditions view Romantic Love? Is it considered an obstacle along the pathway to enlightenment, or is it considered a valuable tool for Self-realization? I ask because on another forum a number of folks are recapitulating their experience in a spiritual trip that was decidedly anti-relationship. Romantic Love was viewed as overshadowing, and thus something that would sap your personal power, power that you could have used pursuing enlightenment. I have seen similar sentiments expressed on this forum. I'm not down with this. I *am* a victim of it, and spent far too many years of my life pushing Romantic Love and relationships away. That is, in a very real sense, my only regret from the time I spent on the formal spiritual path. By being one-pointed, and feeling that the pursuit of Unity according to my teachers was more important than the pursuit of love, to some extent I closed myself to many opportunities to experience love, and thus to experience Unity. What else IS deep Romantic Love but Unity? You gaze into another sentient being's eyes and all that you see there is Self. In my spiritual travels I've seen whole mountains dissolve into pinpoints of light and become nothing but Self, dancing. But that was nothing compared to seeing the same thing happen when gazing into the eyes of someone I loved. I've written before here that I don't quite swing behind the idea that the one-pointed pursuit of enlightenment is the highest goal in life. Similarly, I don't swing behind the notion that this relentless pursuit trumps the often far more effective spiritual technique of simply falling in love. About 95 percent of the human population gets romantically involved one way or another, and the remainder are the monkish, nunish types. It is these latter that seem to gravitate most strongly into spiritual organizations, perhaps because they are total klutzes when it comes to relating to people biologically. Yet it is this same group that thus ends up dominating the life of many spiritual communities. We can conclude that this ultimately results in philosophies developing in these communities that are basically contrary to the impulses of the general population and thus, from a spiritual point of view, have a tendency to misdirect the path of the average guy and gal.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Real cost of Android?
On 07/20/2011 01:43 AM, cardemaister wrote: http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/07/13/the-real-cost-of-android-potentially-60-per-device-in-patent-fees/ The real cost of Android? Potentially $60+ per device in patent fees All this is losers in the game trying to make up for their lack of innovation and their closed platforms. Most of the patents probably should never have been granted. There are too many software patents that are just the way a computer or Turing engine would work. Those should not be patentable. I can't walk into an electronics store and buy an HD DVR for $200 or less. The hardware technology we have available that should be possible. Nope, it's the patents that Tivo owns that keeps them off the shelves. And at least one of those patents if butt silly: the ability to read a file you have open for writing. Android is winning because it is open source. The 18th century thinking of so many corporations hates the open source concept because it means it can't be owned. It is a form of collectivism which is good for the people.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: States of Consciousness
On Jul 14, 2011, at 4:02 PM, sparaig wrote: Can't find where he mentions shamatha by name. He mentions someone else's proposed categorization of meditation into 2 main groups and proposes that TM belongs in a 3rd category... In the neurological division of different types of meditation there are two: FA and OM IIRC. FA is shamatha, i.e. TM, shamatha, etc. The TM researchers, without providing parallel research, tried to invent a faux category I believe they called automatic transcending or some similar diversion. Due to the lack of similar, parallel evidence, I don't believe anyone but the radical TMers believed it. It's just part of their underlying belief that they must maintain some sort of unique brand-name recognition.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rupert Murdoch gets pied
On 07/20/2011 06:37 AM, richardjwilliamstexas wrote: I wonder if Obama, MediaMatters, Jon Stewart, indeed the rest of the media at large, will accept personal responsibility for creating a 'culture of hate' that led to this attack the way they demanded Palin do after the Giffords incident? Bhairitu: Apples and oranges. So, the 'culture of hate' is different when the liberal media does it? Gifford was just a congresswoman not a billionaire. Murdoch has been messing with society with his right wing megaphone. These monetarily obese people need to be put on a diet. In this climate of disproportionate wealth the rich should be made to feel as uncomfortable as possible. Don't you just hate those 'rich' people? Not all rich people, just the monetarily obese. Who needs more than a $12 million estate anyway? Money addicts apparently. And a more aggressive populace would make sure they are relieved of their burden. Where do you think you think you're going to get a more aggressive populace that will vote for communism? When they are broke, living in the streets and hungry. How do you think that FDR got his New Deal programs passed? The capitalists feared that the populace might rise up and overthrow them in a Bolshevik style revolution. By the government providing such programs it curbed the tide that might have resulted in such a revolution. In other countries like Germany and Italy the capitalists used other methods to stem such a revolution. BTW, as someone pointed out the other on another forum, there has never been a communist country. Just totalitarian countries claiming to be communist. What you fear is not communism but authoritarianism. You refuse to even take part in a Tea Party Rally to support reducing the size of government! Why would I join the Tea Party? To overthrow it and make it a liberal one? I'm sorry but capitalism has soiled it's bed with the extreme inequality it produces. Either it is doomed or civilization is. Go figure. Not with your math.
[FairfieldLife] Re: States of Consciousness
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: On Jul 14, 2011, at 4:02 PM, sparaig wrote: Can't find where he mentions shamatha by name. He mentions someone else's proposed categorization of meditation into 2 main groups and proposes that TM belongs in a 3rd category... In the neurological division of different types of meditation there are two: FA and OM IIRC. FA is shamatha, i.e. TM, shamatha, etc. The TM researchers, without providing parallel research, tried to invent a faux category I believe they called automatic transcending or some similar diversion. Due to the lack of similar, parallel evidence, I don't believe anyone but the radical TMers believed it. It's just part of their underlying belief that they must maintain some sort of unique brand-name recognition. You've seen their evidence for why they propose this 3rd category of meditation and you can't even recall what they call the category? H Lawson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain)
Probably because we have never had a situation where people could accumulate absurd amounts of wealth. And many of these people like Murdoch were influencing society in negative ways. Try to run a competitive business against these crooks and you'll have good reason to hate the rich. Run into one who thinks they are superior to you and you'll have reason to hate them. They are monetarily obese. I'm fine with people who might have a wealth of a few million dollars. But billions? That to me mean they are mentally ill. Let's have a world for the people and not just the few overprivileged! On 07/20/2011 12:55 AM, Ravi Yogi wrote: Yeah, what's up with this liberal fascination of elite, so now even the shift and Light of Consciousness cannot really start and has to wait until the elite is taken care of first, can't even see this funny contradiction :-). Funny the conservatives also talk about liberal elite. Why do they need to recognize emptiness or arrogance or why does anyone else need to recognize it? What is this arrogance, does it even exist - I'm sure if you ask and talk to the so-called rich you will come back feeling sorry for them :-). In fact I say emptiness or arrogance always exists in oneself and is just an illusion outside of you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7whynotnow7@... wrote: no sweat. They will recognize their emptiness soon enough. In the meantime, make a decent life for yourself Robert. No need to put your attention on the mirage of the rich. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: More and more will the 'Light of Consciousness' shine on the arrogance of the corporate elites, so that they pay their fair share...there is a shift coming...soon, stand by..
Re: [FairfieldLife] Real cost of Android?
On Jul 20, 2011, at 4:43 AM, cardemaister wrote: http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/07/13/the-real-cost-of-android- potentially-60-per-device-in-patent-fees/ The real cost of Android? Potentially $60+ per device in patent fees The full Mac OS, to be released today, is only 30 USD.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Obviously no one needed to poison you Vag. Like a little slithering naga, you carry yours internally. You then spit it at others. Nice trick. When where were you initiated in TM and TM-Sidhis? Who are your gurus? What is your sampradaya? Aren't you are just another make-believe bullshitter? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: On Jul 19, 2011, at 5:31 PM, emptybill wrote: According to my informant (a former student of MMY, a former MIU professor, a close teacher of SSRS who now is a professor and a Sankhya-Yoga scholar) SSRS was always devoted to MMY and had only love for him until the final endlessness. According to this scholar, SSRS said, quite often, that MMY had nothing but Deva Ma's will to fulfill, i.e. that this was his sole purpose in life and that Her Divine Will was all that concerned him in this earthly life. So your confession is that this Deva Ma is behind the molestation of the young women, the poisoning and the hundreds who went insane or died under Mahesh. It sounds like it's time to contact Homeland Security. Obviously another enemy combatant. Perhaps Hindu Al Qaeda.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Real cost of Android?
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:43 AM, cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/07/13/the-real-cost-of-android-potentially-60-per-device-in-patent-fees/ The real cost of Android? Potentially $60+ per device in patent fees The real cost of Android and other smart phones is your innocence, your soul, your privacy and if you get pulled over by the police and they take your phone away to dump it, you freedom and virgin *ss.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: I think in your very articulate way you are missing my point. My point is more specific and was not meant (despite my colorful words)to comment on Mark's devotion to Maharishi or his TM practice. It's been well documented on here of Mark's disillusionment. It has not. I'd never heard his name before this latest tempest in a pisspot, and I've been here for years. A search of the archives seems to indicate that there was only one such mention of him with regard to this film, back in a post in February. Before that, any mentions of him were from 2007 or earlier. Are you sure you haven't caught Judy Sensitivity Disease? :-) Like you said, people can have doubts or question aspects of the Movement, and I am not questioning Mark's doing so. He has a right to feel the way he wants to. Again, the main point is After seeing the film David Wants to Fly, the interview with Mark is not flattering of Maharishi...to say the least. Why should it be? As such, the following quote from Mark's post couldn't conflict more with the man he described in the interview. In my experience, they still carry a lot of his energy, as if the atoms and molecules have been entrained in it. And, of course, in India, they would be holy objects to be revered. I have kept them very well protected and have handled them very little over the decades. I see no dichotomy in his either saying this or believing it, *whatever* else he may think of Maharishi. I guess it's possible to speak ill of someone one minute and speak so highly of his sandals the next. I don't see why not. His sandals, after all, never banged groupies while claiming to be celibate. Caveat: If they did, any you know intimate details, please don't post them. TMI. :-) My guess is that what Mark said in the film expresses his true feelings, but he can't express them here because it may compromise the value of what he is trying to sell. Your guess is yours, and you are welcome to it. I have no idea what his true feelings are, and my bet is that despite your best guess, neither do you. Maybe Mark can post the interview he had in the film on here, the questions and answers. Gawd, it's another Dan. Would you like him to post his school records, including any detention halls he had to sit through, too? If read my main point becomes obvious to anyone who chooses to be objective and not already biased. I completely disagree, which is why I spoke up. From my point of view, it's YOU who is biased. Furthermore, you are trying your best to push your bias into other people's minds and keep him from being able to sell something that many would consider valuable to the people who might be in the market for it. From my point of view the main point of your post was to tarnish his image so that potential buyers would become afraid to buy from him for fear of catching his OTP cooties. I cannot help but notice that in none of your delurking posts have you said anything positive about Maharishi so far. You've only dissed those whose opinions of him you don't seem to agree with. Do you honestly consider that positivity? Just sayin'. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: I do have compassion for Mark or anyone in financial difficulties. I have been observing the comments on Fairfield Life for many years but until today was not inspired to post one of my own. For some reason it was hard for me to resist pointing out the hypocrisy since I had just seen the film. Perhaps I was a little colorful with my words, but they pale in comparison to the words used in the interview. Obviously there are people on here that fit either into the pro-TM camp or the anti-TM camp. I apparently hit a nerve. I'm not taking sides here, just pointing out the facts and people can spin them the way they want. Interestingly, those who have an issue with my post are not addressing it's main point, rather my mention of being compassionate or acknowledging that many have enjoyed financial success and have attributed it to their TM practice. The main point is not debatable. The main point, as you put it, is completely debatable. You are trying to make the case that a person who has mixed feelings about Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is somehow off, and should be looked down upon. You made that very clear with your sandals as firewood comment in your first post. It is NOT a given that anyone who has conflicting feelings about Maharishi is a Bad Guy, despite what you are trying diligently to infer. One would IMO have to be categorically insane to NOT have conflicting feelings about Maharishi, if they'd spent any time around him. Now that you've delurked, let's see whether you have anything positive to say
[FairfieldLife] Re: Not Satire eliminate the old and disabled Judy
It's the same exact evil. It's just that the Fascists have become more subtle about how they do it. Many right wing Republicans are still linked to the Nazis of WW2. Prescott Bush was almost charged with treason for dealing with Hitler during the war, but his connections quashed it. The eugenics program is alive and well and just like Hitler they want to eliminate the non producers from society. Greed and lust for power has always been at the root of it.No they aren't rounding them up in the street, too visible. They're just feeding them poison and cutting off health care to eliminate millions. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnt johnlasher20002000@ wrote: What I'm saying, and I fully understand what satire and irony are, is that this is too serious a situation to deal with subtly or through sarcasm. The point I was trying to make is not a matter of you doing my homework asking you (Judy) to write a satire on the holocaust, but to demonstrate that with such a serious threat to millions neither you nor most people would be willing to approach the holocaust in that manner. You're quite right, I wouldn't. But there's a significant difference between allowing people to die for lack of health care, and deliberately rounding them up and gassing them to death. They're still just as dead, but the *malice* involved is vastly greater with the Holocaust. You can't really satirize that degree of malice the way you can ignorance, greed, and lack of empathy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Nobody is making light of or trivializing the issue in question. That's not what satire does--quite the opposite. Maybe this will help: satire is like mockery. Everett is *mocking* those who think it's a good idea to cut Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security, pointing out that they're stupid and cruel and insensitive and greedy. He's being sarcastic when he praises the idea. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnt johnlasher20002000@ wrote: I'm not stupid you arrogant * It's just that making light or trivializing a potential genocide is what I object to. Don't bother responding if you're to stupid to get my point. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnt johnlasher20002000@ wrote: Judy, Perhaps you could write an example of a satire about the holocaust so I can have more of an idea of how you think this literary form is being used, not being an English scholar myself. No, I'm not going to do your homework for you. There's no need to be an English scholar to understand what satire is. Did you read the Wikipedia entry I linked to on A Modest Proposal? You might also read Wikipedia's entry on satire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire Take a look at both of these, then if you still have questions, get back to me, OK? The number of deaths of the most helpless in society due to this movement by some Republicans could easily result in many more than 6 million deaths. Right. That's what the writer was pointing out. He thinks that's a terrible idea. If you understand that he's NOT in favor of cutting Medicaid and Medicare and read his piece with that in mind, I think you'll quickly recognize what satire is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnt johnlasher20002000@ wrote: The fact is, that elements in the Republican party and indeed Obama are talking about cutting Medicaid and Medicare. If they succeed this will have the actual effect of shorting the lives of the poor, elderly and disabled as quoted in the article, and will indeed lessen the expenses to the government without raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy. Regardless of the author's intent, which may have admittedly been to raise public ire, what he's said is actually happening. It would be similar to having a satire on the Holocaust which should still raise public indignation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnt johnlasher20002000@ wrote: Not only is the Wall Street Journal involved in a wiretapping scandal, but now they have writers suggesting the elimination of the elderly and disabled through cutting their medical insurance. This article was published by Market watch, which is owned by the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch. Unbelievable!!! This is NOT a satire
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Of course Mark can have it two ways, you need to read more of Turq's posts! He can also have it two ways without being able to thrive on CD. What if Mark used to hang with Charles Manson but didn't know what he was really like until after the murders (I understand Charlie charmed no less a charmer than Tim Leary)? And he happened to have an old pair of Charlie's jeans and there was a market for them. Of course he could condemn Charlie in film and then turn around and try and sell the jeans on eBay with no CD required. From: tedadams108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 6:46:47 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: The idea you are floating here, that the loyal devotees became wealthy and those who criticized ended up poor, is plain daft. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Of course Mark can have it two ways, you need to read more of Turq's posts! He can also have it two ways without being able to thrive on CD. What if Mark used to hang with Charles Manson but didn't know what he was really like until after the murders (I understand Charlie charmed no less a charmer than Tim Leary)? And he happened to have an old pair of Charlie's jeans and there was a market for them. Of course he could condemn Charlie in film and turn around and try and sell the jeans on eBay with no CD required. From: tedadams108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 6:46:47 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Ok, forget about the famous meditator references. My main point is the contradiction between representing Maharishi as bad in the film but glorifying the man in the sandals. Can't have it both ways. The sandals are more valuable when worn by someone of high regard. Mark did not speak well of Maharishi in the film. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@... wrote: The idea you are floating here, that the loyal devotees became wealthy and those who criticized ended up poor, is plain daft. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@ wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Wow, are we one dimensional? I believe it's the sign of a developed being that he or she can easily hold all the paradoxes. Not only can I have it both ways, but I must have it both ways and, beyond that, have it all ways that were, are or ever will be, if I am to do any justice to truth and reality. That's a lot of ways. I also believe that, ultimately, we must go beyond all the paradoxes and polarities, including the polarity of good and bad (and that, of course, doesn't mean that we rush out to do all the bad things we possibly can ASAP). The truth of the matter, if anyone cares, is that, like Judith Bourke, who I find to be a wonderful, honest person, I was in love with him (no, prurient ones, not that way, though there are things I could say about that, too) and the notion and seeming experience that TM could transform the world for the better. Why else would I work seven days a week for the movement for nearly five years and pay significantly to do so? Are we not all some blend of the three gunas? Aren't there glorious and dark things about all of us? M was no different. One of the most glorious things about him was his energy. I lived and basked in it pretty much straight for the seven months I was skin boy and for a lot of the five years I was with him. I went through withdrawal for two years when I lost it. That's my voice in the background of DWTF when David cut to the archival footage of M entering the hall with Jerry carrying the skin saying something like, It was like divine air came down from heaven and I got addicted to it. Is that so very negative? In one other sentence I said something like, Remember how I said he could get into you and help you sleep? He could also get into you and completely pulverize you. Is that both negative and positive? Of course, one-dimensional believers would say having M pulverize you would be the greatest blessing. It could only be all positive. But what if he did it because he was pissed, out of sorts or sexually frustrated? Yes, IME, he definitely got sexually frustrated. In my total reworking of his own words, the only man in all of recored history that anyone knew about who lived beyond the libido was Sukadeva. I also said in the movie, It took me a while to put the paradox together. How could he be wonderful and awful at the same time? Well, that's just how it was. He was wonderful and awful at the same time. David filmed me for over two hours and he used the several minutes that suited his purpose in segueing from the more positive part of the film to the more negative. So I feel no conflict or contradiction in saying In my experience, they still carry a lot of his energy, as if the atoms and molecules have been entrained in it. And, of course, in India, they would be holy objects to be revered. I have kept them very well protected and have handled them very little over the decades. and M abused women, devastated people right and left and was more concerned with money than with treating people decently. They're all simply true. And so were all the other totally glorious aspects of that intense, complex man. Was anyone else in the movie theater that night in Fiuggi, or wherever it was, when M's darshan got so strong that it made all the little, hanging crystals dance extravagantly and tinkle together as if there were a small tornado blowing through the hall? And probably only I saw this, but when M first got to Murren, the three mountain devas came to greet him. IME, which of course many of you would completely howl at, they had been waiting for someone for centuries and thought, because of his light, that it might be M. M went completely silent and looked up at them for several moments while they communed. He wasn't who they were waiting for, they left and the lecture went on. And you should have seen the angel stations that congregated in the intersections of the pathways between the puja tables in the halls where M made teachers. That's why he didn't like people walking around then. I had to bust right through one of them to get to him to tell him something urgent while he was giving out the mantras. The five or six angels in that one station took off in all directions like they had been stung. (There, three little stories...) For me, the truth holds a higher priority than rules about the truth or any rules that are more about control than the highest good. Perhaps I am wrong about that. Do my circumstances prove that, one way or another? I think not. In the actual words of the man himself, Karma is unfathomable. I do love some of his sound bites. Another one that would be appropriate here is There are no absolutes in the relative. You're only confused because you're thinking one-dimensionally. When you move beyond that, try watching my interview in the film again. You may, or may not, see it slightly differently. Thank you for eliciting
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
On Jul 20, 2011, at 11:25 AM, turquoiseb wrote: Gawd, it's another Dan. Would you like him to post his school records, including any detention halls he had to sit through, too? I would, dammit. Sal
[FairfieldLife] FDR Warning about Today's Republicans
FDR tells the truth about the leaders of the modern Republican party. Somehow, in 1936, he foresaw what would be happening NOW. Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUZGkNAUSvY
Re: [FairfieldLife] Real cost of Android?
On 07/20/2011 09:34 AM, Vaj wrote: On Jul 20, 2011, at 4:43 AM, cardemaister wrote: http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/07/13/the-real-cost-of-android-potentially-60-per-device-in-patent-fees/ The real cost of Android? Potentially $60+ per device in patent fees The full Mac OS, to be released today, is only 30 USD. But you need a Mac to run it. IOW, a regular PC with a tweaked BIOS, and an Apple logo on it, that would cost about 1/2 as much otherwise. For the record I found the Mac OS to be a bit constricted for a developer. They not only hand hold the users but the developers as well.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rupert Murdoch gets pied
Just dropped in to see what was going on at FFL after not looking in for months. I see Willy is equating a pie in the face to a gunshot to the brain. Living in that Texas cematary seems to have made Willy a bit 'tarded! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 07/19/2011 03:32 PM, richardjwilliamstexas wrote: Bhairitu: Or do they so fear the old grinch they're afraid to post it... I wonder if Obama, MediaMatters, Jon Stewart, indeed the rest of the media at large, will accept personal responsibility for creating a 'culture of hate' that led to this attack the way they demanded Palin do after the Giffords incident? http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/124634/ Apples and oranges. In this climate of disproportionate wealth the rich should be made to feel as uncomfortable as possible. And a more aggressive populace would make sure they are relieved of their burden.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Did anyone else notice that in this single post Mark said more positive things about Maharishi than tedadams and danfriedman have said in all of the posts they've made to Fairfield Life combined? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau m@... wrote: Wow, are we one dimensional? I believe it's the sign of a developed being that he or she can easily hold all the paradoxes. Not only can I have it both ways, but I must have it both ways and, beyond that, have it all ways that were, are or ever will be, if I am to do any justice to truth and reality. That's a lot of ways. I also believe that, ultimately, we must go beyond all the paradoxes and polarities, including the polarity of good and bad (and that, of course, doesn't mean that we rush out to do all the bad things we possibly can ASAP). The truth of the matter, if anyone cares, is that, like Judith Bourke, who I find to be a wonderful, honest person, I was in love with him (no, prurient ones, not that way, though there are things I could say about that, too) and the notion and seeming experience that TM could transform the world for the better. Why else would I work seven days a week for the movement for nearly five years and pay significantly to do so? Are we not all some blend of the three gunas? Aren't there glorious and dark things about all of us? M was no different. One of the most glorious things about him was his energy. I lived and basked in it pretty much straight for the seven months I was skin boy and for a lot of the five years I was with him. I went through withdrawal for two years when I lost it. That's my voice in the background of DWTF when David cut to the archival footage of M entering the hall with Jerry carrying the skin saying something like, It was like divine air came down from heaven and I got addicted to it. Is that so very negative? In one other sentence I said something like, Remember how I said he could get into you and help you sleep? He could also get into you and completely pulverize you. Is that both negative and positive? Of course, one-dimensional believers would say having M pulverize you would be the greatest blessing. It could only be all positive. But what if he did it because he was pissed, out of sorts or sexually frustrated? Yes, IME, he definitely got sexually frustrated. In my total reworking of his own words, the only man in all of recored history that anyone knew about who lived beyond the libido was Sukadeva. I also said in the movie, It took me a while to put the paradox together. How could he be wonderful and awful at the same time? Well, that's just how it was. He was wonderful and awful at the same time. David filmed me for over two hours and he used the several minutes that suited his purpose in segueing from the more positive part of the film to the more negative. So I feel no conflict or contradiction in saying In my experience, they still carry a lot of his energy, as if the atoms and molecules have been entrained in it. And, of course, in India, they would be holy objects to be revered. I have kept them very well protected and have handled them very little over the decades. and M abused women, devastated people right and left and was more concerned with money than with treating people decently. They're all simply true. And so were all the other totally glorious aspects of that intense, complex man. Was anyone else in the movie theater that night in Fiuggi, or wherever it was, when M's darshan got so strong that it made all the little, hanging crystals dance extravagantly and tinkle together as if there were a small tornado blowing through the hall? And probably only I saw this, but when M first got to Murren, the three mountain devas came to greet him. IME, which of course many of you would completely howl at, they had been waiting for someone for centuries and thought, because of his light, that it might be M. M went completely silent and looked up at them for several moments while they communed. He wasn't who they were waiting for, they left and the lecture went on. And you should have seen the angel stations that congregated in the intersections of the pathways between the puja tables in the halls where M made teachers. That's why he didn't like people walking around then. I had to bust right through one of them to get to him to tell him something urgent while he was giving out the mantras. The five or six angels in that one station took off in all directions like they had been stung. (There, three little stories...) For me, the truth holds a higher priority than rules about the truth or any rules that are more about control than the highest good. Perhaps I am wrong about that. Do my circumstances prove that, one way or another? I think not. In the actual words of the man himself, Karma is unfathomable. I do love some of his sound bites. Another one that would be appropriate here is There are no absolutes in the relative.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real cost of Android?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 07/20/2011 01:43 AM, cardemaister wrote: http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/07/13/the-real-cost-of-android-potentially-60-per-device-in-patent-fees/ The real cost of Android? Potentially $60+ per device in patent fees All this is losers in the game trying to make up for their lack of innovation and their closed platforms. Most of the patents probably should never have been granted. There are too many software patents that are just the way a computer or Turing engine would work. Those should not be patentable. I can't walk into an electronics store and buy an HD DVR for $200 or less. The hardware technology we have available that should be possible. Nope, it's the patents that Tivo owns that keeps them off the shelves. And at least one of those patents if butt silly: the ability to read a file you have open for writing. Android is winning because it is open source. That's probably true. Tomorrow might be devastating for us Nokia share holders. I have to admit I hate my Nokia N8. I like much more my ZTE Blade Android phone. But I downright love my iPad! But I was stoopid enough not to sell my NOK-s right after the distribution of dividend... http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/flashquotes.aspx?symbol=NOKselected=NOK
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
As if I would share my feelings for Maharishi with the likes of you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: Did anyone else notice that in this single post Mark said more positive things about Maharishi than tedadams and danfriedman have said in all of the posts they've made to Fairfield Life combined? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau m@... wrote: Wow, are we one dimensional? I believe it's the sign of a developed being that he or she can easily hold all the paradoxes. Not only can I have it both ways, but I must have it both ways and, beyond that, have it all ways that were, are or ever will be, if I am to do any justice to truth and reality. That's a lot of ways. I also believe that, ultimately, we must go beyond all the paradoxes and polarities, including the polarity of good and bad (and that, of course, doesn't mean that we rush out to do all the bad things we possibly can ASAP). The truth of the matter, if anyone cares, is that, like Judith Bourke, who I find to be a wonderful, honest person, I was in love with him (no, prurient ones, not that way, though there are things I could say about that, too) and the notion and seeming experience that TM could transform the world for the better. Why else would I work seven days a week for the movement for nearly five years and pay significantly to do so? Are we not all some blend of the three gunas? Aren't there glorious and dark things about all of us? M was no different. One of the most glorious things about him was his energy. I lived and basked in it pretty much straight for the seven months I was skin boy and for a lot of the five years I was with him. I went through withdrawal for two years when I lost it. That's my voice in the background of DWTF when David cut to the archival footage of M entering the hall with Jerry carrying the skin saying something like, It was like divine air came down from heaven and I got addicted to it. Is that so very negative? In one other sentence I said something like, Remember how I said he could get into you and help you sleep? He could also get into you and completely pulverize you. Is that both negative and positive? Of course, one-dimensional believers would say having M pulverize you would be the greatest blessing. It could only be all positive. But what if he did it because he was pissed, out of sorts or sexually frustrated? Yes, IME, he definitely got sexually frustrated. In my total reworking of his own words, the only man in all of recored history that anyone knew about who lived beyond the libido was Sukadeva. I also said in the movie, It took me a while to put the paradox together. How could he be wonderful and awful at the same time? Well, that's just how it was. He was wonderful and awful at the same time. David filmed me for over two hours and he used the several minutes that suited his purpose in segueing from the more positive part of the film to the more negative. So I feel no conflict or contradiction in saying In my experience, they still carry a lot of his energy, as if the atoms and molecules have been entrained in it. And, of course, in India, they would be holy objects to be revered. I have kept them very well protected and have handled them very little over the decades. and M abused women, devastated people right and left and was more concerned with money than with treating people decently. They're all simply true. And so were all the other totally glorious aspects of that intense, complex man. Was anyone else in the movie theater that night in Fiuggi, or wherever it was, when M's darshan got so strong that it made all the little, hanging crystals dance extravagantly and tinkle together as if there were a small tornado blowing through the hall? And probably only I saw this, but when M first got to Murren, the three mountain devas came to greet him. IME, which of course many of you would completely howl at, they had been waiting for someone for centuries and thought, because of his light, that it might be M. M went completely silent and looked up at them for several moments while they communed. He wasn't who they were waiting for, they left and the lecture went on. And you should have seen the angel stations that congregated in the intersections of the pathways between the puja tables in the halls where M made teachers. That's why he didn't like people walking around then. I had to bust right through one of them to get to him to tell him something urgent while he was giving out the mantras. The five or six angels in that one station took off in all directions like they had been stung. (There, three little stories...) For me, the truth holds a higher priority than rules about the truth or any rules that are more about control than the highest good. Perhaps I am wrong about that. Do my circumstances prove that,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
I expected your asshole remark. What was it you are saying? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Curtis, In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect. How is it incorrect? That is EXACTLY what you are asking for, and have been asking since you descended upon this forum. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). IMHO, Curtis didn't mischaracterize your intent in any way. You made your intent very clear. You want to know the names of people who post on this forum. So far, you have only wanted to know the names of the people whose ideas you disagree with. I leave it up to the conspiracy theorists here to determine the why of this. When you first appeared here, I took you to task for this 'tude, and do so again. When you first went all drama queen on having your Holy Opinion questioned, you pitched a hissy fit and demanded that I stop referencing you on this forum. I did so. I neither mentioned you nor referred to you in any post since February. And then, out of the blue, you come barging in and run the same number all over again, upbraiding me for speaking your name in vain. Get The Fuck Over Yourself. Neither you nor your opinions of How Fairfield Life Should Be Run are terribly of interest to me. I suspect I'm not alone in this, and that most on this forum -- judging from their lack of piling on to your adolescent demands -- probably agree with me. What makes this forum special, and of value to those who appreciate it, is exactly the thing that you seem to find most threatening. People can come onto this forum and speak their minds. They can do so using their legal names or using an alias. If one of them isn't a member and chooses to send something to Rick to repost anonymously, they have the right to do so, and he respects that right. YOU want to out them. Don't you think that's more than a little sick, and straying over the line into spiritual fascism? I do. And now I'll go back to what I was successfully doing before YOU dragged me back into this -- ignoring your silly ass. I suggest you do the same thing with me, and with other perfectly legitimate opinions expressed here, whether you agree with them or not. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Hey Rick, I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting is much more important than their privacy. Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can include that demand in your new rules? And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as that homeless guy who hit the lottery. It is offensive to dwelling impaired Americans. Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador) Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned. Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at least if it aims at a saint. No transparency please ! So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in stories of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, etc.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Real cost of Android?
On Jul 20, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Bhairitu wrote: The full Mac OS, to be released today, is only 30 USD. But you need a Mac to run it. IOW, a regular PC with a tweaked BIOS, and an Apple logo on it, that would cost about 1/2 as much otherwise. I don't find that much difference, feature for feature. In fact Macs are now less, simply because so many people are buying them. And you're getting technology not available elsewhere, they're always ahead of the curve. For the record I found the Mac OS to be a bit constricted for a developer. They not only hand hold the users but the developers as well. Not so sure I see a difference. Open Source apps are the same, regardless of the platform. Wait till the iLiver comes out. You'll just have to have one: you never gain weight.
[FairfieldLife] Forwarded email policy (was: Re: Maharishi's Sandals)
And this is your thoughtful response to a Member's suggestion? Your free speech defect is showing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Also, you obvious desire to eliminate any dissent on his Yahoo group, is obvious and misplaced. I have never expressed an intent to unsubscribe. I misinterpreted your words: Then I registered on Maharishi_Mahesh_Yogi, but recommend staying away from this Yahoo Group; as a matter of fact, I'm going to cancel my membership in it right now. I assumed this Yahoo Group was referring to the one you posted it on (FFL), as opposed to the other group, Maharishi_Mahesh_Yogi. It sounded to me like you were going to cancel your membership in FFL. My desire isn't so much to eliminate dissent but to eliminate needless, unproductive whining about meta issues. When the posting limits were proposed, there was support behind it from a lot of people, and the limits were put in place (BTW, I was not in favor of posting limits.) You, OTOH, are a single voice whining about how the group is run, with no one joining in to support you. And, my recollection is that this isn't the first time you've done this. Requesting a ban on forwarded emails is a major restriction on what is otherwise an extreme free speech zone. That rule would mean that the informational TMO emails that Dick Mays posts here would be against the rules. So, how do we allow people to post useful info in the form of forwarded emails while preventing people from posting forwarded emails that Dan Friedman, alone, doesn't think should be posted? Make FFL moderated, you a moderator, and have you approve every post? Not gonna happen. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Moderators, Can FairfieldLife adopt a Policy restricting non-member posting? This issue has come up before, and has led to many misunderstandings. Probably not gonna happen. It's basically a Law of Nature that if Rick receives something interesting in email, he's very likely to post it to FFL. This is his Yahoo group, and he's set it up the way he wants it set up. You clearly have major issues with how this group is run, so I suggest you follow through with your intent to unsubscribe because it's highly unlikely that Rick is going to change the group to accommodate your particular needs.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Rick, Since he's your informant, can you go back to clarify whether MMY said that people should be careful making personal gain from a holy man's belongings. This would validate one side of the debate on FFL, and invalidate the other. Why encourage speculation on FFL when the facts are available to you? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of danfriedman2002 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:03 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Rick, Here's the first instance where the facts need to be questioned because there was no attribution of the source. Can't you provide your Sources? Nope. This person has the right to remain anonymous. Without that right, he/she wouldn't have provided this information. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Mark Landau Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 12:47 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Thank you for this. Truth is always the best. So they are not as rare as I had thought, but, still, I believe, quite rare and, to many, quite precious. And, yes, the rules will probably get in the way for many, though I would be surprised if they actually came from M. So somewhere between 5 million and 0. Who knows what will come of this? I suppose if he could fly under the radar, some raja may say Damn the rules; I want the sandals. _ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3774 - Release Date: 07/19/11
[FairfieldLife] Forwarded email policy (was: Re: Maharishi's Sandals)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@... wrote: And this is your thoughtful response to a Member's suggestion? Your free speech defect is showing. You are free to whine, and I'm free to call you on it. No one is preventing you from expressing your opinion about how the group is run, although I'm not alone in wishing you'd put an end to that particular drama. In any event, Rick has addressed your suggestion, and as I predicted, he is not inclined to implement it. Case closed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
But Richard, you have been vehemently defending secretive posting, and defending the practice by stating that that Rick and Curtice are resiting secrets. What's up with that? What a tangle we weave with all these secrets. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, richardjwilliamstexas willytex@... wrote: danfriedman: In reply to your first paragraph: You are not seconding the motion, but rather introducing your own motion, as your charactarization of my suggestion as outing of people against their will is incorrect... You do know that Rick and Curtis and a few others were leaders in the TM cult movement - I don't know the exact hierarchy these folks claim, but at one time it was apparently very influential, to hear them talk about it. You need to be aware of the fact that for the most part, we are dealing with TM Teachers on this forum, Dan, and it is by their training to be very secretive about all their activities that are TM-related. One of the moderators' brother is a TM Raja, but he won't talk much about it or answer any questions about what happened to all the money. Can you believe that? There are only a few rank-and-file TMers on this list. But, apparently there are over a dozen or more simple lurkers. Go figure. In fact, you could characterize this forum as a site for TMO informants, who are supposed to be doing the informing, with news about the comings-and-goings of MMY, but he's dead, so in reality, most of the dialog is just mostly speculation about what's going on with the TM Movement, or what houses are for sale up in Vedic City. It's been my experience that only insiders know what's going on in the TMO - and none are respondents on this forum. You're not going to get very much discussion about the 'mechanics of consciousness' here, Dan, except for maybe Lawson or Judy. Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see above). I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting is much more important than their privacy. Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can include that demand in your new rules? And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as that homeless guy who hit the lottery. It is offensive to dwelling impaired Americans. Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador) Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain)
I've seen this and always thought it spoke volumes.illusion vs reality...in politics - Democratic or Republican - two sides of the same coin. Having said that, in concept and theory I fall on the Democratic side believing that they represent the lesser evil...but in the end, all politicians are corrupted by the money..it is the corporations that are pushing the agenda and it does not include the concept of public good. I think Obama is pushing the equity issue out to the public while buckling to the reality of trying to negotiate a budget in an environment of political extremism. Is the larger good a compromise or a fight to the death? He is compromising - there will be another fight...Obama has taken the corporate powers/financial industry on in many ways and irritated them to no end by raising the issues again and again. The equity issue is easy for us citizens to understand so it gets vetted. Having worked years in the corporate environment and coming from a family that confuses money with love.I have strong opinions on the importance of messaging the concept of sharing and accountability. Concentrated wealth breeds fear and bad behavior and lack of accountability in almost all caseswe, as shareholders, need to rethink the entire model of how we define value and profit. Again, they made their profits on our backs and we allowed them to concentrate wealth and power and the evils it has brought. The movie The Last Mountain brings this directly into perspective. No, asking corporate america and the billionaires to pay their fair share won't solve our budget woes, but it will send a message that we are all accountable and is the only thing they care about and the only place to hit them - in their pocketbook. Concentrating wealth privately at the expense of the masses is not the answer! Corporate america is fighting back, in part, by refusing to hire, etc. We bailed them out and we're being paid back for our generosity now - what is not clear about this message? When a system is all about the money period, there is no conscience at workwhich is why part of me wishes we allowed the institutions to fail and chaos to descendperhaps a more conscious and connected new world order would have emerged from the ashes to benefit the generations to come. Corporations (as a stereotypical category) are all about greater and greater monetary profits period - the system is flawed completely - we have sold our soul to a short-sighted and unsustainable model. The trickle down theory is a huge myth and has been tested time and time again. The only way to change behavior at this point is to force it - and fair and proportional taxation by the government for and by the people is one tiny way we can send a message. If we give up on the concept of government and gut the powers we gave to our government to oblivion, we will pay with the loss of our society. Just a repetition of history...many civilizations have gone down before usthe future generations will have to start again. Mother nature will ultimately take care of herself - that seems to be evidently clear these days. --- On Tue, 7/19/11, raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com wrote: From: raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain) To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2011, 7:27 PM Our country has moved so far to the right that there's hardly any difference between a Republican who wants to cut Social Security and Medicare and a Democrat who wants to cut Social Security and Medicare but raise taxes slightly. Ronald Reagan raised taxes and IMO was more of a Democrat than Obama. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-budget-deals-of-reagan-bush-clinton-and-obama-in-one-chart/2011/07/06/gIQA98w11H_blog.html --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@... wrote: Because it isn't the American people don't want higher taxesthe question is do the american people want a proportionately fair tax system on the money made from the corporations and wealth aristocrats (that is not coming back to us via the trickle down theory or will it ever) on the backs of us working class. Â This is another Republican myth that they are spreading to instill fear. --- On Tue, 7/19/11, richardjwilliamstexas willytex@... wrote: From: richardjwilliamstexas willytex@... Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Economic Collapse -- why it won't be stopped (and The Last Mountain) To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2011, 3:26 PM Â In the context of our continued political system, it is easy to blame Obama while we whine and cry and call foul - where is the loyalty
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
Sounds like your open mind is made up for the future. Do you realize what you're saying? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of danfriedman2002 Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 3:58 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals Rick, There is no apology necessary, but I do suggest attributing the friend's name. Then there's a record of who said what to whom. Just like on a Public Forum. Sorry. On FFL people have the right to remain anonymous. That's the way it has always been and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From a friend (with apologies to Dan Friendman): Dear Rick MMY had several sets of sandals made for him over the years. Mark's were not the original set. Helen Lutes had a set of sandals that M left behind when new ones came as did a few others. Mark had the sandals M used during that time period. But they were not the first set. Five million? Should be careful making personal gain from a holy man's belongings. Bevan has some rules about that and if Mark connects to Rajas he may come across those rules. We had some items and ran into the rules. Nothing happened as a result. I think the rules come from MMY. Perhaps Mark should try Craig's list instead. _ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3774 - Release Date: 07/19/11
[FairfieldLife] Movie review: Unknown
Unknown with Liam Neeson made the rental shelves this week. It arrived yesterday from Netfix on Bluray. First off I had to fast forward through the trailers. Damn Warner Brothers anyway. Most of those trailers I had already seen. But you couldn't chapter click through them either and of course menu button was disabled too. I remember the days when DVDs were new and WB had the courtesy to even leave the FBI warning to the end so you could just get into the movie. Their rental discs come with no extras. They want you to buy the full featured disc. But I would say the movie isn't worth it. Though it had its moments many of the scenes were poorly executed. This is probably another case of the big studio giving a small director known for his film Orphan a chance. Most of these guys are used to working with small crews and small budgets. Maybe they should stick to that. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1401152/
[FairfieldLife] Forwarded email policy (was: Re: Maharishi's Sandals)
Alex, Characterizing my raising an objection as whining is really a conversation stopper. Ending your post with case closed doesn't further the conversation either. You can close your mind, but not open debate. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: And this is your thoughtful response to a Member's suggestion? Your free speech defect is showing. You are free to whine, and I'm free to call you on it. No one is preventing you from expressing your opinion about how the group is run, although I'm not alone in wishing you'd put an end to that particular drama. In any event, Rick has addressed your suggestion, and as I predicted, he is not inclined to implement it. Case closed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tedadams108 no_reply@... wrote: I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind words about Maharishi in the film David Wants To Fly.? When attempting to sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals. I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra, etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about the Master. I'm sure someone would appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood. That's interesting news, never heard this. Did Maharishi personally give him the sandals or did he simply put them in his suitcase ?
