[FairfieldLife] Re: How's business in your area?
Edg, Also in Madison - and shopping for a different dentist - - if you see fit to recommend your tooth dr and he\she is West of the Isthmus please let me know. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Have any of you a take on your local area? Snoop that I am, I often ask proprietors of local businesses, How's business since the market crashed? Here in Madison, WI, some tell me that business is down, but surprisingly many say business is doing as good or better. The local Dairy Queen says revenues are upbut in the same strip-mall 33% of the storefronts have recently emptied -- three of them in the last month. All the folks who work for an employer that I've queried are antsy about losing their jobs -- even 20 years-into-it seniority skilled folks. My babe's son who flies a 747 was laid off for two months, but then, surprisingly, called back yesterday. My dentist says he has not had a down turn yet (as he gleefully handed me a bill for as much money as it would take to buy a used car.) So, folks may not be all the pinched yet that they slow down their health efforts. Best Buy told me that sales are good -- a minion, not a manager telling me as I handed him a check for a major entertainment system upgrade, so I was doing my part. My local fine dining restaurant with $20+ entree pricing stop doing lunch service. It's going to be very strange if everything really goes to the dumpster -- a ghost town everywhere. Your area? Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis re Guitar
A few years ago (age 52) I decided to learn to play guitar and bought a China made Guild which looks like and cost about the same as the Nickle Creek - - I would venture to say that many of these guitars by name brands are made in the same plants with a similar quality as these Nickle Creeks and are simply packaged under different names. However, when I get a chance to play or hear a mighty fine instrument - like a higher end Martin, Collins or Martin, etc. - I can really tell the difference - I don't ever want to put it down. But my main point is that after playing a couple weeks and I then knew about 5 chords, and it was only taking me about 31 seconds to switch between chords - - a friend mentioned the best way to learn an instrument was to play with others, and that I should go to some local bluegrass jams. Now, I didn't know exactly what bluegrass was but I (somewhat timidly) went - and I was tempted to keep my guitar in the car but I walked in tried to keep up the best I could and I learned a whole bunch that first night, and I still go about every week. and at these BG jams lots of different types of music is played including country, blues and light rock - the last one I was at we got into a John Prine 'rant' and of course now that I can finally play guitar well enough to hop in at just about any speed and any tune even if I've never heard it before - - now I decide to learn a second instrument (mandolin) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Another note from my friend: i just took a look at the discussion. about all i'd have to add is i don't think there's a better bargain going anywhere than the silver creek guitar at musicians friend. it's no substitute for a gibson, but for what it is it's truly the most amazing value i've ever seen in a guitar. it reminds me of the time consumer reports had connoisseurs test a group of cheap and gourmet wines. the pros picked the $30 bottle and $20 bottle over the $100 bottle of dom perignon. i think a blindfold test playing of the silver creek guitars vs martin or taylor would get a similar result. bob
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yearbook Page at MUM LIbrary
what a trip (1975) I believe I'm on page 49 - lots of familiar faces, faces I think I still occasionally see in some netherworld. Thanks for the link. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yateendrajee mcint...@... wrote: PDF's of old yearbooks are available at the MUM website. Might be helpful for group participants to point themselves out, and/or refresh their memories about classmates. I've been having a misty-eyed time looking at those dear people! http://www.mum.edu/yearbooks.html Cameron McIntosh Student '77-79
[FairfieldLife] Re: If I wanted to see Fairfield and go into domes and ro
I did just that about a year ago (for a weekend) - - (at that time) and you allowed as much time in the domes as a reasonable person would need for rounding. time in the domes and--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 mainstream20...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: and round for a week. How hard would that be? Do they have week WPAs anymore? Don't know about WPA's, but IA is the current rounding program in the domes. For some time, housing on campus was limited - on campus housing, and meals are now widely available. See http://www.invincibleamerica.org/faq.html#options To Apply https://invincibleamerica.securesites.com/apply/index.html
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment? (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Let me jump into this attachment discussion. I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until you experience pure consciousness while the mind functions. Any attempt to become unattached through the mind is pure mood-making/manipulation which is worthless. Most people disengage/unattach from aspects of their relative existence out of neurotic fear, not out of a desire for realization. They want to free themselves from the discomfort of the mind's attachment so they disengage. But this is a mistake. Even in enlightenment the mind is still fully engaged when dealing with relative existence. What is unattached in enlightenment is pure conscious which has ALWAYS been unattached. But prior to realization pure consciousness identifies with something other than itself (primarily the mind, secondarily the body) and an ego is created. So pure awareness experiences itself as limited. So why would PC, which is eternally free and unbounded, the substratum of the gods, the Being of the universe, experience itself as limited? Exactly when did this delusion of Pure Consciousness begin? Ultimately, this is a question for the philosophers of the group - but experientially, this is what Maharishi referred to as the 'naturalness' of waking state, or the 'naturalness' of CC or the 'naturalness' of any state of consciousness - - it is accompanied by a sense of This is how I have always lived, or This is what it means to be a human being, etcCompletely natural means there is not a sense of: I used to be or experience such and such, but now I experience or am such and such. It is completely seamless. This is a delusion. This is why advaitins will say you already are enlightened. That might be true, but its not necessarily very helpful for popping you out of a delusion. It'd be like a character in a dream telling you that all of this is not real. It might get you out of the dream or you might just look at him and say, what? --- On Mon, 2/9/09, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ Subject: [FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment? (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs ) To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 11:42 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip It's not that type of identity I'm talking about. It's not vanity or preoccupation with the body. Identification occurs with human development. Identification isn't an overt craving of the body, but a seamless identification that identifies your body as separate from all other bodies. Curtis, this description of the nature of identification, as the term is used in enlightenment teaching, is an exceedingly rare instance of near-total agreement between Vaj and me. That alone should lead you to sit up and take notice! (I'm referring here just to the definition, not the meaning, which is a whole 'nother question.) It sounds like a positive aspect of our natural development and not anything that needs fixing to me. snip I don't view people that way. Most people seem to be more similar than different to me. They share the same cares and desires for their loved one's lives. Exactly, they share the same references you do. They attach to others and they probably enjoy attachments games like romance as part of those attachments. But from the yogic point of view--not necessarily the Hindu POV, these are just objects. Crucial point. I think Curtis has been misled by the term objects. In this context it means something much more general than in the standard usage, i.e., things as opposed to people or one's own body and thoughts. Referring to romance as an attachment game sounds like a product of dissociation to me. In fact this whole world view sounds like a result of cultivating dissociation. Here's where Vaj and I don't agree: And by being caught up unconsciously in and seamlessly in maintaining identification with these reference point, we allow awareness--we train awareness--to unconsciously run in a non-mindful rut. I don't think it has much of anything to do with mindfulness per se. Or at least that may be one way to diminish identification, but it's not the only way. I am down with the concept of mindfulness but I don't view it as having anything to do with attachment. Being able to completely immerse yourself in an experience without any part of you witnessing the experience is a fantastic option for experience
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment? (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Larry inmadison@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Let me jump into this attachment discussion. I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until you experience pure consciousness while the mind functions. Any attempt to become unattached through the mind is pure mood-making/manipulation which is worthless. Most people disengage/unattach from aspects of their relative existence out of neurotic fear, not out of a desire for realization. They want to free themselves from the discomfort of the mind's attachment so they disengage. But this is a mistake. Even in enlightenment the mind is still fully engaged when dealing with relative existence. What is unattached in enlightenment is pure conscious which has ALWAYS been unattached. But prior to realization pure consciousness identifies with something other than itself (primarily the mind, secondarily the body) and an ego is created. So pure awareness experiences itself as limited. So why would PC, which is eternally free and unbounded, the substratum of the gods, the Being of the universe, experience itself as limited? Exactly when did this delusion of Pure Consciousness begin? Ultimately, this is a question for the philosophers of the group - but experientially, this is what Maharishi referred to as the 'naturalness' of waking state, or the 'naturalness' of CC or the 'naturalness' of any state of consciousness - - it is accompanied by a sense of This is how I have always lived, or This is what it means to be a human being, etcCompletely natural means there is not a sense of: I used to be or experience such and such, but now I experience or am such and such. It is completely seamless. Thanks for your reply. I understand that some may say things such as pure consciousness identifies with something other than itself and pure awareness experiences itself as limited in a poetic sense, and/or as from the perspective of the (illusion of an) ego in order to paint a picture for an ego-driven waking state perspective. However to state, and to hold that literally, that Pure Consciousness morphs into a limited state, and gets confused and identifies with the mind or objects of the senses indicates that this type of Pure Consciousness is a very weak -- and unworthy, bound state of consciousness, IMO. The experience of this very weak sibling of ever constant unchanging actual Pure Consciousness -- even when this weak sibling gets strong and not so confused -- appears a trivial attainment. When the sun shines upon the earth, the sun is not effected by how it is reflected off mud or water or any surface, likewise PC is not effected by how it is reflected by various sentient beings. As far as the 'attainment' is concerned, think of the attainment as an increasingly clear discernment of Reality, Reality without the noise, grime and distortion of cloudy perception. The noise and distortion are attachments and obsessions - and these attachments are simply patterns of thinking and feeling that prevent us from seeing and touching Reality directly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Are There Prerequisites for Advaita?
Part of the answer to the question Are There Prerequisites for Advaita? lies in the question itself. The question implies that the topic belongs to, or has to be steeped in a particular culture or tradition. Au contrare - I've got a brother-in-law who has a heart attack, dragged half dead to the hospital, cut open from bow to stern . . . and he walked out of that hospital an advaita thru and thru. He's never heard of the concept, or come across any of its precepts. But he speaks of the meaninglessness of worldly pursuits, how his daily duties only left him only with fears and anxieties - he experienced a discontent that went right to his core. That dude has really lightened up. So the question Are There Prerequisites for Advaita? Hell, forget whether there's prerequisites or not - ask yourself - without the (near) extinguishing of 'that person in charge of my life', can advaita be practiced at all? The practice of advaita without the honest recognition that it will never work is doomed to create the same anxieties and fears that a 9-5 job will do. I recommend eating a bunch of deep fried cheese curds. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: From the excellent article by David Frawley Misconceptions about Advaita, First published in the Mountain Path of the Sri Ramanashram LINK Are There Prerequisites for Advaita? One of the main areas of difference of opinion is relative to who can practice Advaita and to what degree? What are the prerequisites for Self-inquiry? Some people believe that Advaita has no prerequisites, but can be taken up by anyone, under any circumstances, regardless of their background or life-style. After all, Advaita is just teaching us to rest in our true nature, which is always there for everyone. Why should that rest on any outer aids or requirements? This is a particularly appealing idea in the age of democracy, when all people are supposed to be equal. In much of neo-Advaita, the idea of prerequisites on the part of the student or the teacher is not discussed. Speaking to general audiences in the West, some neo-Advaitic teachers give the impression that one can practice Advaita along with an affluent life-style and little modification of one's personal behavior. This is part of the trend of modern yogic teachings in the West that avoid any reference to asceticism or tapas as part of practice, which are not popular ideas in this materialistic age. However, if we read traditional Advaitic texts, we get quite a different impression. The question of the aptitude or adhikara of the student is an important topic dealt with at the beginning of the teaching. The requirements can be quite stringent and daunting, if not downright discouraging. One should first renounce the world, practice brahmacharya, and gain proficiency in other yogas like Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga and Raja Yoga and so on (the sadhana-chatushtya). One can examine texts like the Vedanta Sara I.6-26 for a detailed description. While probably no one ever had all of these requirements before starting the practice of Self-inquiry, these at least do encourage humility, not only on the part of the student, but also on the part of the teacher who himself may not have all these requirements! Ramana keeps the requirement for Advaita simple yet clear a ripe mind, which is the essence of the whole thing, and encourages practice of the teaching without overestimating one's readiness for it. Yet a ripe mind is not as easy as it sounds either. Ramana defines this ripe mind as profound detachment and deep discrimination, above all a powerful aspiration for liberation from the body and the cycle of rebirth not a mere mental interest but an unshakeable conviction going to the very root of our thoughts and feelings (note Ramana Gita VII. 8-11). A ripe, pure or sattvic mind implies that rajas and tamas, the qualities of passion and ignorance, have been cleared not only from the mind but also from the body, to which the mind is connected in Vedic thought. Such a pure or ripe mind was rare even in classical India. In the modern world, in which our life-style and culture is dominated by rajas and tamas, it is indeed quite rare and certainly not to be expected. To arrive at it, a dharmic life-style is necessary. This is similar to the Yoga Sutra prescription of the yamas and niyamas as prerequisites for Yoga practice. In this regard, Ramana particularly emphasized a sattvic vegetarian diet as a great aid to practice. The problem is that many people take Ramana's idea of a ripe mind superficially. It is not a prescription that anyone can approach or practice Advaita in any manner they like. Advaita does require considerable inner purity and self-discipline, developing which is an important aim of practice which should not be
[FairfieldLife] Re: NOT AGAIN! .......Edg strikes......
I would have to study your post a lot longer then I would like to, to glean exactly what you're asking - but to cut to the chase, from what little I've seen of AI, it appears to be as much a popularity contest then a singing contest. So don't feel bad if your perceived talent does not go far. I did see and hear a singer near the end of this last episode that gave my listening organ a tickle - as does a fine curry tickle my mouth. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Yes, again. But this time, I'm asking for help getting clarity about singing talent. Intuit my issue yet? Yes, it's AMERICAN IDOL TIME AGAIN! Last year about this time I boldly suggested that Idol was worth a looksee, and the silence herein was from freakin' satoriville. So, yeah, I'll try again, but this time, I've got a challenge for ya. Here's my problem, and it's real, and maybe you can help me: at the beginning of each of Idol's seasons, they show dozens and dozens of decent singers banging out tunes with elan, nuance, creativity, etc. with wonderfully listenable voices that come from a vast spectrum that swings from Janice Joplan growers to operatic profundo types to the more commercially sought golden-larynx. I'm not some musical genius, so what do I know, but, hey, I'm no dummy, and I tells ya there's a ton-O-folks in these Idol prelims that can belt it out. So, here's my problem: at the end of the season, all that hope, all that a talent, is nowhere to be found in the final contestants. Oh, they can sing, but in the last few Idol prelim shows, I've seen talent that would, I believe, blow the past Idol winners out of the water. This year's talent seems a notch above the past, yet each year, I feel the same inspired and upbeat way about the new crop, and then I come away disappointed in the winnerin fact, usually the final 12 are just not delivering on the greatness I thought was certain to arise from the initial goin'-to-Hollywood-golden-ticket holders. My working theory is that the songs we see them singing in the prelims are songs they've really really practiced and have naturally developed a more nuanced touch for particular songs, but that when Idol starts hammering them with the challenges of singing songs that are out of the contemporary interests of the singers', then we see that their talent cannot come up with an idiosyncratic version of the songs that they have only a week to develop. And out comes clunky. But this just doesn't satisfy me. I'm thinking it's more the case that I don't know what's what when it comes to projecting how far a talent can be taken and what a singing artist really faces. Or: It may have to do with the Carol King effect. That's my term for the fact that every song she ever created sounded like a Carol King song. See? The Beatles did a new sound as good as any and came out with many voices to address the many genres they tackled, and they covered many hit songs of others with their own unique take, but most artists seem to be unable to sing out of the box within which they're first presented to us. And, yep, sooner or later, the product offered just doesn't speak to one anymore. The raspy voice of the country gal, the silken tones of some crooner, the lilt of another, no matter, it all fades. It might have more to do with toys. How so? I invented dozens and dozens of toys, was in the industry for years, so I know toys, and I'm here to tell ya that there will never be another Hula Hoop craze, never another flood of buyers for Rubic's Cube, never another mania for the Yo-yo. These toys still sell millions of units per year, but, even though every year a new crop of kids turn Hula Hoop age, those millions don't get turned on to the gizmo like the 180,000,000 buyers of hoops purchased in the first year of hoop-existence. Something in our culture just can't go home again. Today's kid sees hoops on TV etc. from birth on, and by the time they can wiggle their hips, the hoops are old news. When first they came out, it was NEW NEW NEW. See? Like that, I think most singers just get plain-old KNOWN, and the new kids coming into musical awareness have already been there done that with the hipsters of even a few years back. So, maybe that's it -- jaded bots R Us, and by the time I get to the final 12 of Idol, I'll have simply had too much of them to be wowed like I was when first they sang in the prelims. Opinions? Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Computer Upgrade? Question for the Geeks
I would agree with others who have offered ideas - your computer is amply powerful. What drew my attention right away is the HD - although you have 14Gb left, my experience is that drives get flaky when less than 10% space remains, regardless of their size. I would archive (lots) some files to DVD/CD. Then I would defrag the HD. I would make sure there's no spyware and etc on board . . . Adaware / Malwarebytes malware / Spybot / AVG and etc. Then I would download a free demo of Windows tuning software (ie http://www.tune-up.com/products/tuneup-utilities/) These utilities look at all apps that are being loaded when booting and etc. This may appear to be time consuming (cuz it is) - - but less time then to setup new machine. Good Luck --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: I'm thinking of upgrading my computer, as it is often way too slow for my liking. I need to work with a lot of different applications, and often have many open at once. This computer doesn't multi-task well. Apps often bog each other down, such that everything runs slowly. MS Outlook is one of the biggest culprits. It takes an unbelievably long time to check email, it's hard to use Outlook while it's being checked, and other applications are compromised during the process. If there's a background process happening, such as a backup or virus scan, the computer becomes very sluggish, so I schedule such things at night. It takes 20 minutes to fully boot this puppy. A consultant came over and turned some things off, which sped it up a little, but it's still too slow for my taste. I'm thinking of getting this: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9174289 http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9174289type=productid=12180 44029789 type=productid=1218044029789. . Do you think I'd notice a big improvement? . At this stage, does 64-bit processing make a big difference, considering that most apps aren't written for it yet? (A friend of mine has a 32-bit desktop machine running XP (I'm running Vista) on which Outlook also runs very slowly, and a 64-bit laptop running Vista on which Outlook runs fast.) . Does 512MB (dedicated) to video sound adequate, or would performance be inferior to having a separate video card? . Are big hardware improvements just around the corner, such that I should wait a while? . Can I get a better deal elsewhere? Thanks for your advice. Here's what I've got now. There are 2 250Gb drives in it. What would be a fair asking price if I were to sell it? More details about my computer Component Details Subscore Base score Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6300 @ 1.86GHz 4.9 3.4 Determined by lowest subscore Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB 5.4 Graphics Intel(R) G965 Express Chipset Family 3.6 Gaming graphics 358 MB Total available graphics memory 3.4 Primary hard disk 14GB Free (228GB Total) 5.4 Windows Vista (TM) Home Premium System _ Manufacturer GATEWA Model GT5268E Total amount of system memory 4.00 GB RAM System type 32-bit operating system Number of processor cores 2 64-bit capable Yes Storage _ Total size of hard disk(s) 466 GB Disk partition (C:) 14 GB Free (228 GB Total) Disk partition (D:) 2 GB Free (5 GB Total) Media drive (E:) CD/DVD Disk partition (J:) 81 GB Free (233 GB Total) Graphics _ Display adapter type Intel(R) G965 Express Chipset Family Total available graphics memory 358 MB Dedicated graphics memory 0 MB Dedicated system memory 64 MB Shared system memory 294 MB Display adapter driver version 7.14.10.1147 Primary monitor resolution 1280x960 DirectX version DirectX 9.0 or better Network _ Network Adapter Intel(R) 82562V 10/100 Network Connection Network Adapter Microsoft Tun Miniport Adapter
[FairfieldLife] Re: Call for Lucid Dreaming stories
I don't know if this qualifies as Lucid Dreaming or not - but about 1-2 times per month I will find myself in a frustrating dream. I attempt to salvage the dream by removing the frustration, but eventually just decide to end it and wake up. Example: Just last night I dreamt I was on a jet flight and was stuck with this super annoying passenger. He was bugging the crap out of me - and everyone else on the plane. At some point I got fed up with everything and I step in and decided to have the plane land far short of the runway on a city street just so I could get off the plane and away from this guy. I remember looking out the passenger window and 'flying' the plane down thru this city street, the wings get knocked off by the buildings. I remember the potholes and even a stretch of cobblestone. Beautiful landing. The plane comes to a stop - I get off and away from this guy, then it's back to dream mode - in other words, back to more frustration. Cuz this guy reappears and tells me he going to go to O'Hare with me but first he's got to take a leak . . . Anyways, sorry about the boring details, but the nuts and bolts are the following: 1) frustration in a dream 2) I 'step in', put the dream on hold, and attempt to remove the frustration 3) if I am successful, dream will continue 4) either way, eventually the 'frustration stack' will get to me and I decide to wake up and end it 5) my first thought upon waking is always regret - I should have given the dream one more chance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Consider this an Edg-like rap, in the tradition of determining whether anyone here on FFL is interested in the odd things I am, and wants to swap stories. It's also a rap addressing ED's complaint that nobody ever talks about their spiritual experiences. I recently posted a rap about Lucid Dreaming. It is pasted in at the bottom of this post. What I'm inter- ested in is whether anyone on FFL has had experiences of this sort, and wants to rap about them. No experts, no dogma, just rappin'...trying to figure things out. The Rama fellow I studied with for many years taught Lucid Dreaming. He taught it in the context of Tibetan Dream Yoga, but the techniques were the same as those I've later found in Native American shamanism and other disciplines. The Tibetan connection is that in that tradition Lucid Dreaming is seen as analogous to (or synonymous with) the Bardo state between death and rebirth, and thus developing a facility with waking up in the dream, and being able to manipulate the dream state is seen as valuable to a culture in which the teachings of The Tibetan Book Of The Dead are assumed as a given. If you can wake up in a normal dream, and use your intention there in the astral, then it is assumed that you might also be able to do the same thing in the Bardo, and thus have a shot at a cooler rebirth. Basically, the definition of Lucid Dreaming I am using for this rap, and calling for stories about, has to do with the *interactive* nature of Lucid Dreaming. It is *not* the same as witnessing dreams, because that phenomenon is usually described as passive. Depending on the spiritual culture, the witness in witnessing dreams may be considered to be the self, or the Self. For the purposes of this rap, that distinction doesn't matter. All that matters is when that self or Self decides to wake up and take an interactive, *intentional* role in the dream. For example, if you wake up in the dream and find yourself in a room that has purple wallpaper, and you don't like the color purple, you can change the color of it in an instant. Just *intend* the color blue, and zap!, you're in a blue-colored room. If you find yourself in a location that doesn't quite do it for you, you can switch locations equally quickly and easily. That sorta thing. In the Rama trip, he first taught all of his students the basics of Dream Yoga or Lucid Dreaming, and had us prac- tice on our own for some time. Then, after enough students reported gaining a facility with it, he started having dream seminars. They were fun. What he'd do is announce that on a certain night he was open for business as a spiritual teacher, but in the dream plane. He wouldn't tell us where, or how to get there. That was our challenge, or task. To accomplish it, you'd have to first wake up in the dream, and then focus on his vibe or energy, and see if you could find the group. If you did, there was often a talk going on, or a demonstration of some abilities or siddhis, or just a party. Interestingly, many times students would see other students that they recognized in the dream seminars, say something to them, and then ask them later in the waking state to repeat it back to them. They were often able to do so. Go figure. Anyway, I always thought that Lucid Dreaming was FUN, and so I continued practicing it after I left
[FairfieldLife] Re: Call for Lucid Dreaming stories
Hey Edg, I'll have to check again tonight, but when I floated thru your office the other night, I thot for sure one of those stautues was a bust. Speaking of busts, those old Playboys you've got stashed away are a hoot. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Turq, I find it strange that you are being somewhat pro lucid dreaming when I compare that to your POV about oogabooganess in general. I've but dabbled with lucid dreaming, so I can't go toe to toe with you, but I can ask questions of you that should clarify some things for me if you honestly answer. If you truly believe that you and others were meeting in the astral or were in the same dream . . . whatever, then there's easy and scientific experiments you could conduct that would prove if such an experience is real or merely imagination. So, here's an experiment: All you have to do is come out of a lucid dream and tell what you saw in another physical location and then check to see if that is true. I have four statues on my desk, so presumably an adept at lucid dreaming should be able to hover over my desk and wake up with information about the statues. I'm betting you'll say you personally cannot do this, but it seems you'll also say that IT CAN BE DONE. I'm saying that if someone cannot pony up the correct information about my statues (or meet other such testing challenges) then astral traveling remains unproved. But you seem to be a cheerleader for the validity of the concept, and that seems at odds with your other POVs. I'm shocked that you are being such a pushover about the reports about lucid dreaming, and I'm at the same time fascinated and wanting to know how that all works inside your logic systems. Your statement about actually doing lucid dreaming that is, to you, valid, and that you are saying that almost anyone can gain this skill, makes it astounding that science hasn't nailed this phenomenon down pat by now. In fact, I would challenge ANY lucid dreamer to pass The Great Randi's test and collect his cash reward -- surely, also, the NSA and other black-op governmental wogs would be all over this ability as a threat to national security -- some terrorist should be able to dream about, what?, passwords, account numbers, conversations the President is having with top militarists, spy on any operation, etc. The whole thing stinks of scam when real world concerns would have discovered and used the ability to astral travel for many many many reasons. Where's the beef? All that said, how's 'bout this: If someone can guide their dreams, then why not simply have the intention to be enlightened, or, say, meet Krishna, or, hey, my favorite, have the dream character meditate and see what happens, cuz, in the astral, why, you're right next door to ritam levels, and the siddhis surely must be far more intense and productive etc. when one can mindfully be at that lesser state of excitation that, by definition, the astral state must be. So??? Got beef? But these things are not commonly attempted by lucid dreamers, and in fact, a brief survey of lucid dreamers' accounts of their experiences will yield a vast profusion of the most ordinary kind of dreaming material -- there is almost no clamoring in the lucid dreaming community for having their best dreamers be tested as The Great Randi might suggest. I do agree that witnessing dreams is possible, but I think it's a skill that only the most adept yogi-types can be expected to have much skill in doing. I'm convinced that it is a case of what happens in meat, only happens in meat. Imagination is incredibly powerful, and the willingness to be fooled is commonplace. A good lucid dreamer should be able to completely convince any scientist in short order -- but it simply has not happened, right? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Consider this an Edg-like rap, in the tradition of determining whether anyone here on FFL is interested in the odd things I am, and wants to swap stories. It's also a rap addressing ED's complaint that nobody ever talks about their spiritual experiences. I recently posted a rap about Lucid Dreaming. It is pasted in at the bottom of this post. What I'm inter- ested in is whether anyone on FFL has had experiences of this sort, and wants to rap about them. No experts, no dogma, just rappin'...trying to figure things out. The Rama fellow I studied with for many years taught Lucid Dreaming. He taught it in the context of Tibetan Dream Yoga, but the techniques were the same as those I've later found in Native American shamanism and other disciplines. The Tibetan connection is that in that tradition Lucid Dreaming is seen as analogous to (or synonymous with) the Bardo state between death and rebirth, and thus developing a facility with waking up in the dream,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Call for Lucid Dreaming stories
On the long-shot that I was correct about the bust(s), then I could finally tell my Mom my one year at MIU paid off because it expanding my 'hunch power' If I was way off, I fall back on gentle ribbing. Since you caught me on both accounts, I apologize and won't do it again. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: No busts over here. Wanna try another guess? Playboys? Here? As if. Real sex is how I roll. What I do think you DO know is why you posted this. And, if you could expound on that, hey, we'd all be agog if it were done with clarity. I'm an easy target here for this kind of teasing, but far harder to see is the mechanics of how my presentation triggers responses in others. I don't mind the elbow in the ribs, but I do wonder about the motivation to have done so. Maybe I'm reading you wrongly, Larry, er, what was your intent with the post? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Larry inmadison@ wrote: Hey Edg, I'll have to check again tonight, but when I floated thru your office the other night, I thot for sure one of those stautues was a bust. Speaking of busts, those old Playboys you've got stashed away are a hoot. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Turq, I find it strange that you are being somewhat pro lucid dreaming when I compare that to your POV about oogabooganess in general. I've but dabbled with lucid dreaming, so I can't go toe to toe with you, but I can ask questions of you that should clarify some things for me if you honestly answer. If you truly believe that you and others were meeting in the astral or were in the same dream . . . whatever, then there's easy and scientific experiments you could conduct that would prove if such an experience is real or merely imagination. So, here's an experiment: All you have to do is come out of a lucid dream and tell what you saw in another physical location and then check to see if that is true. I have four statues on my desk, so presumably an adept at lucid dreaming should be able to hover over my desk and wake up with information about the statues. I'm betting you'll say you personally cannot do this, but it seems you'll also say that IT CAN BE DONE. I'm saying that if someone cannot pony up the correct information about my statues (or meet other such testing challenges) then astral traveling remains unproved. But you seem to be a cheerleader for the validity of the concept, and that seems at odds with your other POVs. I'm shocked that you are being such a pushover about the reports about lucid dreaming, and I'm at the same time fascinated and wanting to know how that all works inside your logic systems. Your statement about actually doing lucid dreaming that is, to you, valid, and that you are saying that almost anyone can gain this skill, makes it astounding that science hasn't nailed this phenomenon down pat by now. In fact, I would challenge ANY lucid dreamer to pass The Great Randi's test and collect his cash reward -- surely, also, the NSA and other black-op governmental wogs would be all over this ability as a threat to national security -- some terrorist should be able to dream about, what?, passwords, account numbers, conversations the President is having with top militarists, spy on any operation, etc. The whole thing stinks of scam when real world concerns would have discovered and used the ability to astral travel for many many many reasons. Where's the beef? All that said, how's 'bout this: If someone can guide their dreams, then why not simply have the intention to be enlightened, or, say, meet Krishna, or, hey, my favorite, have the dream character meditate and see what happens, cuz, in the astral, why, you're right next door to ritam levels, and the siddhis surely must be far more intense and productive etc. when one can mindfully be at that lesser state of excitation that, by definition, the astral state must be. So??? Got beef? But these things are not commonly attempted by lucid dreamers, and in fact, a brief survey of lucid dreamers' accounts of their experiences will yield a vast profusion of the most ordinary kind of dreaming material -- there is almost no clamoring in the lucid dreaming community for having their best dreamers be tested as The Great Randi might suggest. I do agree that witnessing dreams is possible, but I think it's a skill that only the most adept yogi-types can be expected to have much skill in doing. I'm convinced that it is a case of what happens in meat, only happens in meat. Imagination is incredibly powerful, and the willingness to be fooled is commonplace. A good lucid dreamer should be able to completely convince any scientist in short order
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY one of the biggest intellectual con artists of all time
The irony is of course he's comparing self-help books to theology - and by theology we have to assume the ubiquitous and most marketed self-help book of Civilization (The Bible) and the other irony - should his book be successful, he will have joined the gaggle of books he himself is railing against - - and if his book fails - then it's obvious he didn't understand the self-help books enough to even write about them. Either way he is doomed. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://media.www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/ 2008/08/27/University/ A.Better.You.Professor.Debunks.SelfHelp-3405616.shtml A better you: Professor debunks self-help By Dylan Miracle  Media Credit: Bryant Haertlein Paul Damien, a UT business professor, has written a new book, Help!, that exposes the motivations of authors of self-help literature. Paul Damien, a UT business professor, has some tips on how to write a best-selling self-help book. He suggests that you start by making an outlandish claim (path to immortality, secret of the universe, shoot lightning from your hand) then master the linguistic gibber of the guru: Searching for the selfless self and the egoless I will align your energy with the wave function of your chakra, and lightning will spring from your hands. Oh, and if it doesn't, you did something wrong. Damien's new book, Help!, is a blistering indictment of modern guruism. He dissects the arguments of several best-selling self-help authors, including Deepak Chopra, Rhonda Byrne and Fritjof Capra, accusing them of praying on people's fears for personal profit. Damien's tone is lighthearted and humorous as he dismantles the techniques used by these self-proclaimed gurus. The idea for Help! began when Damien read some self-help books to contrast them with theology. I read quite a few of them, and my initial disbelief turned to a burning desire to discredit and disprove these people, Damien said. I felt that debunking the self-help book is itself a form of self- help. This burning desire turned into a systematic study of the methods used to generate a successful, Oprah-quality best seller. And what sets the best sellers apart? Clever marketing, Damien said. As professor in the business school, I am telling you it is just clever marketing. These books are a dime a dozen, and very few of them make it to the top. The ones that do have a good marketing strategy. Damien explained how Chopra was already marketing guruism before he even wrote his first book. He was a follower of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who was one of the biggest intellectual con artists of all time, Damien said. Chopra was his salesman and he made his first couple of million dollars selling Yogi's products. He had copyrighted the word ayur-veda, and then he marketed all these products under the guise of healing and youthfulness. From there it was easy for him to get into the mainstream of self-help gurus. Then he appeared on Oprah and his book sold like 130 thousand copies in an hour. (...) Link
[FairfieldLife] Re: Perfection in what IS
This may have nothin to do with nothin but it is yesterday's story and may be worth telling - I ride about Madison on a bike with a sign a friend made for me - it simply states Non consumption Changes Everything and occasionally it spurs up a conversation. especially with fellow bikers or peds while waiting at a stop sign - but yesterday when I went to hop on my steed to go home, someone had taken the time to write a note and leave it for little ol' me. Essentially it told me I still consume and that I should change the sign to Non run-away consumption changes something and then after a few more dictations pointed my way, it had a smiley face at the bottom. and I got to thinkin' That's the problem with Madison, and perhaps the whole 'world-wide conversation' - - we would rather position ourselves one nuance off, then actually agree - well, too bad we are 2% off . . . for if we agreed to agree we might actually have to get to the uncomfortable business of doing something together. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis, Hey, we're getting along fabulously today! Gotta love it. Okay, I think we're down to our normal end-game of each of us doing a semantic shuffle. We've sorta got ourselves agreeing with the other, but, below, you finally called it, and noted that we don't know our definitions of inner and outer -- so, from whence springs an ego, eh? I've watched a lot of kids grow up before my eyes. Ego is there in infancy, cuz, well, I'm a good projector, but by about the age of four, most kids have a fully formed ego that anyone can see. This smacks of an ego being a construct of a processing history -- not a transfer student from another lifetime. Ergo: ego is environment. OTOH, as a father of four kids, I can tell ya that each one came out of the chute as different as can be. Who'da thunk it, but there it was: nurture was pwned by nature. To me, this is the basis for karma's unfathomability. When I rail about the world, I'm indicating that I think the matrix should prune its denizens, but when I talk about axioms of identity, I'm agog with the notion that a universal consciousness is running everything. If I change after reading your posts, and I have, is it because it was time for it anyway and consciousness is merely doing its thang, or is it because the words of your posts have some incantational power to transfer conceptuality? Anyone got a coin? What do you call, heads or hearts? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Edg, Our discourse is an example of change, big time. Much more productive and we both had to work at creating it. I'm not sure I am as far on the side of inner change driving outer. Of course it is huge, but I purposely put myself in situations that hit me with new stuff despite my natural resistance to not me. I think it is one of the only ways I can get some new perspectives into my thick skull. I believe that the outside can initiate change in me. But I may be running up against you philosophy about what is inner and what is outer. I am more Western than Vedic in my POV about that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Curtis, The POV washing machine here at FFL is merely another object that your ego projects upon. If your ego starts changing how it projects, no surprise since that's what we call learning, but miss not that one's mind is always as if a fire hose spraying red paint on everything, and then the ego says, Look! There's pink! I hosed everything with red, but right over here, it's kinda pinkish. The answer to DeNiro's You talkin' to me? is always: Nope, I'm talking about myself. Oh, I hear what you're saying, and, yeah, I've changed by being here and exposing myself, ahem, to this room full of pussies, but all this change starts inside me, and I'm merely finding in the outer what I'm experiencing in the inner. It may seem recursive, but to me not so much. Then again, I'm a six-planets in Leo, so I'm the be all of my universe. YMMV. My psychologist told me was about his friend and him in a grocery store both of them looking down the same aisle. The friend says, Will you look at that! Unbelievable. My psychologist said, Right on, bro, I can't stand it when a parent jerks their kid's arm and reads the riot act to them in public -- it deforms them. And the friend said, I was talking about that broken jar of pickles being a hazard that's not been cleaned up yet. We imbue our environment with our definitions, and to me, the game of enlightenment asks us to entirely quit the definition business. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I have shifted many of my POVs considerably
[FairfieldLife] Re: Beautiful, sweet, innocent -- but a creepy zombie nonetheless.
speaking of JB, once in a while I wonder off and watch http://youtube.com/watch?v=Wm4ppyF1D_A about half way thru he falls into Mystery Train --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis wrote: I fell in love with the sound of certain instruments and that kept me going in the beginning. Keith Richards never bought a Ricky Nelson album, only James Burton's LPs. From Presley to Parsons, James Burton played it all. James Burton is a god among guitar players. Check it out: 'Kick It Off' By Jim Caligiuri Austin Chronicle, April 4, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/23m2q8 'James Burton' Lonestar Rod Custom Round Up April 4, 2008 Austin, Texas 'Roy Orbison - Black White Night' BW, Dolby, DTS Surround Sound DVD http://tinyurl.com/2zy2lj Recorded live at the Cocoanut Grove in Los Angeles in 1987 with James Burton, Bruce Springsteen, Elvis Costello on guitars; Jackson Browne, T-Bone Burnett, J.D. Souther, Jennifer Warnes, K.D. Lang, Bonnie Raitt, and Tom Waits. A must-have DVD - possibly the best concert footage ever filmed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An answer to the question.
As I have heard, UC is recognition of Self in another object (person/place/thing) . . . as UC matures, recognition becomes more frequent and the 'scope' of the object expands . . . till entire universe can be appreciated as Self. However - in BC the fullness of 'inside' and 'outside' collide and that inside/outside or subject/object distinction becomes only a matter of practicality. Also, in BC the Self is gone because there is no sense of anything that is non Self, no inside/outside, no subject/object. Like CC, UC feels very natural and a normal way for a human being to live. However, in BC there is absolutely no doubt that something really big happened, things are really different . . for one thing, you are no longer a human being - and That does not feel natural. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I liked the explanation of the fish, knowing itself because it moves through water-- so very much like the individual ego. Regarding Unity or some such, I've heard it described like this: the usual experience we have is differentiation predominating, everything separate, but in Unity, the differences can still be experienced but unity is predominant. in such a state, the difference between internal and external is more degree than absolute, more wave than particle, or so I've heard... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: In what sense is the distinction between internal and external still valid in Unity or any state after? It should be merely a heuristic by that time in my estimation. --- matrixmonitor matrixmonitor@ wrote: --External Gods may still be worshipped after Brahman Realization (external as Brahman, nondifferent); since Ramakrishna was devoted to Kali before and after Realization, and Ramana Maharshi was devoted to Arunachala Shiva.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This is a big, BIG problem for Obama
every church has a freaky pastor - that's why I stay away from those places. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the facts in this article are true, not only will he not be elected president, he won't get the nomination REGARDLESS of how many delegates he has. - from: http://tinyurl.com/2xtfub OPINION Obama and the Minister By RONALD KESSLER March 14, 2008; Page A19 In a sermon delivered at Howard University, Barack Obama's longtime minister, friend and adviser blamed America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs and creating a racist society that would never elect a black candidate president. The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006. Trinity United Church of Christ/Religion News Service Sen. Barack Obama and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright We've got more black men in prison than there are in college, he began. Racism is alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run. No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body. Mr. Wright thundered on: America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers . . . We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. His voice rising, Mr. Wright said, We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic. . . . We care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means. . . . Concluding, Mr. Wright said: We started the AIDS virus . . . We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty. . . . Considering this view of America, it's not surprising that in December Mr. Wright's church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan for lifetime achievement. In the church magazine, Trumpet, Mr. Wright spoke glowingly of the Nation of Islam leader. His depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening, Mr. Wright said of Mr. Farrakhan. He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest. After Newsmax broke the story of the award to Farrakhan on Jan. 14, Mr. Obama issued a statement. However, Mr. Obama ignored the main point: that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Mr. Farrakhan, and that Mr. Wright's church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader. Instead, Mr. Obama said, I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex- offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree. Trumpet is owned and produced by Mr. Wright's church out of the church's offices, and Mr. Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland on Feb. 24, Mr. Obama described Mr. Wright as being like an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with. He rarely mentions the points of disagreement. Mr. Obama went on to explain Mr. Wright's anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state's support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his previous claim that his church gave the award to Mr. Farrakhan because of his work with ex-offenders, Mr. Obama appears to have made that up. Neither the presentation of the award nor the Trumpet article about the award mentions ex-offenders, and Mr. Wright's statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way. Mr. Obama nonetheless told the Jewish leaders that the award to Mr. Farrakhan showed a lack of sensitivity to the Jewish community. That is an understatement. As for Mr. Wright's repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what Mr. Wright calls its racist and violent policies, Mr. Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be provocative. Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have
[FairfieldLife] Re: Your replies to my inquiries about TM technique and experience
you're making this way too complicated, simplify, simplify, there's nothing to this --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 11, 2008, at 5:33 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote: Some yogis have noted TMers--esp. TM-Sidhi practitioners have blocks in their nervous system (actually their pranic bodies) that can prevent such full awakening. What exactly causes these alleged blocks? Imbalanced kundalini risings which take non-culminating routes. Several people with vajra-nadi risings that I've spoken to. They believe sidhi cultivation has a lot to do with it. See http://www.kundalinicare.com/aboutkundalini3.html These people--a swami from the Saraswati order and his American lineholder--have spent a lot of time helping old TMers, including some higher-ups who skidaddled the TMO years ago. They also come to Fairfield from what I see every now and again. One letter from one of MMY's old close students, Earl Kaplan, is in the FFL archives. He seems to feel it was deliberate, but who knows?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Story from Ben Collins
is this thread based on our interpretation of one fella's interpretation of another fella's look? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: About two BILLION people on Earth live on ONE dollar a day. If we could get those folks to TWO dollars a day, death of children dramatically subsides. Do any of us here think we can enter the mindset of living in such poverty? I can't throw a stone at any of them for almost any of their sins -- as un-human as some of the third world practices are -- hell, on a day when I've gotten a paper cut I can be over stressed and find myself growling and grumping and snarky. Imagine the daily horrors of their lives and the effects on personality. Everyone here is a vastly rich potentate comparatively. All the gripes about each other that are bandied here are, to a third worlder, like kings pissing and moaning about losing a sequin on their gold embroidered gowns. We simply have no stance upon which to judge these folks. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gandalfaragorn no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore steve.sundur@ wrote: there was this look on his face that was like Mahesh Yogi can get these westerners to do 40 years of meditation and how hard that is to accomplish here in India. Whatis the caloric intake of the average Indian? Apparently the caloric intake is enough to, among other things, to sustain, a) a tremendous interest in Astrology and provide a living for a host of practitioners of this subject, b) a vast motion picture industry, and c) shamefully I have to say, a massive predeliction on the part of married Indian men towards visiting houses of prostitution.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: One of my favorite quotes from last week is this from Sandy Ego: Now I will explain myself, and please see if you can discriminate between what I am saying, and what you think I am saying. If he creates his world with his thoughts and perceptions, and, moreover thinks this is what everyone else should also be doing or they're deluded, then, how, in heaven's name can I know what anyone saying? I can only know what I think they're saying. I'm pasting an interesting article below about a scientist who recorded her experience of having a stroke and then spoke about it on TED talks because it may shed an interesting light on higher states. I've had experiences of what's been described as Unity, I can switch into that experience at will, but, for the life of me, I can't see that it is a higher state than any other state I've experienced. They're just states, useful for some things, not so useful for others. And no matter how much my experience is that I am the author of my universe, my body still ages. I'm a very, very long way from the time I had a job in a key club, wearing stilettos and net stockings while delivering heavy trays of food and drinks from a dirty kitchen to dirty old men. Well, I don't know that there is really such a thing as Unity consciousness using the TM definition, but it is obvious that you are not and never have been in that state, by the TM definition. I'm not convinced that such a state exists in anyone currently, or, if it does, that MMY ever was in it, but, using the TM definition, which you have implicitly acknowledged, you are not and never have been, in said state. THAT said, I can see why you don't find the non-existence of the state in yourself to be of any value... Just an observation. Lawson Until proven otherwise, I claim there is a state of Unity Consciousness as defined by MMY (tho as you I can not speak to what the above experience is) My first UC (type) experience was on a rounding course - and had been having CC state for about a week (BTW, on that winter course there were snow drifts inside the hallways of Howard Dorm, and sorta warm water a few hours a week, anyone else there at that time?) and I took some advice from Walter Koch who once said that if one is 'feeling Being' do what you can to shake it and don't try to hold on to it. Anyways, I was at the cafeteria eating heavy foods like tons of peanut butter and yukking it up with the 'rebels' trying to shake Being, and someone I did not know very well walked into the room and I witnessed myself walking into the room - and what almost caused to upload my mouthful of food was that the -- I am That, You are That -- is not a metaphor, it is not some warm fuzzy poetic leap, but is is a crisp undeniable recognition - - and over the next few days the frequency of such recognitions increased
[FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
I know what you're getting at - and add the element that it almost seems like BeinginCoitus, there is a tad of guilt associated - or a little yuck, I am That and you are Gross :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, exactly. I am that...etc. That is my experience. I like the experience, but it's not convenient when interacting with others to actually experience them in that way. So I don't go there when I'm talking to the guy at Walmart to ask him where the stuff is that I want. On the other hand, I like getting together with a good friend who can also experience that state, though there is never much to say to each other. Still, the companionship is deep and lovely. So, yeah, I can go there and it's great. But I think of it as just another outfit to wear, not better than any other. a --- Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: One of my favorite quotes from last week is this from Sandy Ego: Now I will explain myself, and please see if you can discriminate between what I am saying, and what you think I am saying. If he creates his world with his thoughts and perceptions, and, moreover thinks this is what everyone else should also be doing or they're deluded, then, how, in heaven's name can I know what anyone saying? I can only know what I think they're saying. I'm pasting an interesting article below about a scientist who recorded her experience of having a stroke and then spoke about it on TED talks because it may shed an interesting light on higher states. I've had experiences of what's been described as Unity, I can switch into that experience at will, but, for the life of me, I can't see that it is a higher state than any other state I've experienced. They're just states, useful for some things, not so useful for others. And no matter how much my experience is that I am the author of my universe, my body still ages. I'm a very, very long way from the time I had a job in a key club, wearing stilettos and net stockings while delivering heavy trays of food and drinks from a dirty kitchen to dirty old men. Well, I don't know that there is really such a thing as Unity consciousness using the TM definition, but it is obvious that you are not and never have been in that state, by the TM definition. I'm not convinced that such a state exists in anyone currently, or, if it does, that MMY ever was in it, but, using the TM definition, which you have implicitly acknowledged, you are not and never have been, in said state. THAT said, I can see why you don't find the non-existence of the state in yourself to be of any value... Just an observation. Lawson Until proven otherwise, I claim there is a state of Unity Consciousness as defined by MMY (tho as you I can not speak to what the above experience is) My first UC (type) experience was on a rounding course - and had been having CC state for about a week (BTW, on that winter course there were snow drifts inside the hallways of Howard Dorm, and sorta warm water a few hours a week, anyone else there at that time?) and I took some advice from Walter Koch who once said that if one is 'feeling Being' do what you can to shake it and don't try to hold on to it. Anyways, I was at the cafeteria eating heavy foods like tons of peanut butter and yukking it up with the 'rebels' trying to shake Being, and someone I did not know very well walked into the room and I witnessed myself walking into the room - and what almost caused to upload my mouthful of food was that the -- I am That, You are That -- is not a metaphor, it is not some warm fuzzy poetic leap, but is is a crisp undeniable recognition - - and over the next few days the frequency of such recognitions increased Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Witnessing, was: Steve Martin of Wilmington
Let's take the question: Who are you and what do you really do? The domain in which the question is asked, is the same domain in which it is answered. That domain does not go away, it is not diminished, that domain does not become dishonest. Only in the context of an ever-expanding self does that domain shrink - in WS, that domain is all we've got, in CC that domain appears as though it's painted on (something?), in BC that domain exists only in the boundaries, it allows one to distinguish this from that, to point out Tom, Dick and Harry. Again, let's take the question: Who are you and what do you really do? Intellectually we know that the answer lies tenuously in our memory, what we've experienced, what we've been told and how we've been programmed to think, and, etc. I was born here, grew up here, went to this school, met this person, had some kids, moved here . . . and so on In WS our identity is bound this narrative and instinctively we know how shaky this narrative is and so we spend a disproportionate amount of time propping it up, we embellish it, feed it and rehash it, rehash it, rehash it over and over because if we lose it, it's back to square one. In CC, if we lose our memory, we also lose that narrative - but we don't lose our identity, our Self - - - and so, if the prospect of losing that narrative leaves a wicked transcendental smile on your face - that's CC
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yogic Sleep (15)
a seamless thread of continuity - imagine being inside a hollow sphere, and everything is projected on the inside surface, everything = sleeping, dreaming and waking. Everything is the same distance from self. witnessing is the ego getting a taste of self and thinking it might just survive this enlightenment thing and live forever . . . that's why it's accompanied by some pretty happy thoughts . . . of course realizing that the ego barely even exists at all is when you finally jump ship. on the inside surface--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vaj, The below doesn't seem to have enough definitional clarity -- the meanings of words are kinda fuzzy. My quibbles below. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: From Yoga an Psychotherapy, The Evolution of Consciousness The Mandukya Upanishad says of this state which lies beyond waking consciousness and dreaming sleep: The third aspect of the Self is the Universal Person in dreamless sleep-prajna He experiences neither strife nor anxiety, he is said to be blissful Prajna is the Lord of All He knows all The sphere 0f prajna is deep sleep in whom all experiences become unified or undifferentiated, who is... a mass of consciousness... who is full of bliss... who is the path leading to the knowledge of the other states.27 But this universal state is split off. It is experienced separately. It is not remembered. The unconsciousness of the thoughtless-sleep state is the one thing that differentiates it from enlightened thoughtless-sleep. While awareness is always present, it should be noted that awareness is not conditioned with the quality of being recallable. An enlightened person doesn't remember awareness as a process of the past, but instead, since awareness is ALWAYS THERE, it is known to the enlightened to be the same no matter where in time or space it is symbolized, and even if a memory of awareness could be conceived, it would always have the same identical presentation, and no difference is no difference, so no memory is needed when it's right there in one's face! The waking consciousness-even the dreaming consciousness-are too limited to cope with it. It remains unknown, a four-hour mystery that takes place each night, hidden between our dreams leaving occasionally just a hint of other- worldliness. This hint must be counted as a wisp of the oncoming dream state or waking. Thoughtlessness is thoughtlessness. That said, Patanjali says that this state is one in which the thought nothingness is being considered. Though this way of understanding dreamless sleep seems very foreign to Western thinking, the Upanishads go even further. They describe a fourth state. It is still more advanced than the third. It is what results when the expanded consciousness is brought back from dreamless sleep into dreaming and waking consciousness. This is considered more evolved than the third state because it is the result of a massive reintegration. This is poetry -- very hard to resonate with it. Turiya is amness, not a processing of an evolution. The universality of deep sleep is carried over into the other levels of consciousness. One maintains the all-encompassing awareness, the serene and universal consciousness constantly. Nope, any one is impotent -- there can be no causal agent of amness. If all-encompassing awareness were something a doer could do, it would be of little worth since its eternal nature would be gainsaid by the imposition of the assertion that it needs to be maintained. He maintains (ahem) contact with the brilliant light of cosmic awareness while also remaining in touch with the usual levels of waking consciousness. This fourth state is called turiya. It is the perspective from which all can be observed, controlled and integrated. Turiya cannot be a perspective since it is, if anything, all perspectives in seed-form: OM. Nor is there any observing done by amness. Observing is a process contained within the potentiality of amness, but the gunas must get out of balance and manifest an ego-process for any observation to occur. It brings total awareness of all the compartments of the mind, all the lower levels of consciousness. Awareness is always whole, so it is illogical to think that it can ever be in a lesser state. Thus it is always total. Because an ego denies its true status, it contends that awareness is limited because the ego cannot see some things that are too subtle for the current refinement of the ego's ability to attend. Awareness is never limited -- only the ego can take on such a quality. In other words, God knows, the ego blows. For example, the dream state becomes totally accessible. A yogi who is approaching this highest state of development can maintain consciousness during the period that would
[FairfieldLife] Re: Yogic Sleep (15)
I had noticed that at the instant of falling asleep, that thoughts became less frequent, discontiguous and random - - - so I will occaisionally reproduce that to encourage sleep. For example . . . popcorn . . . scuba diving large firm breasts, crap, bad idea, start over tractor seat cozy horse . . . after a brief time, the random thoughts appear on their own, and it's off to slumber land. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 26, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: Really good description. When witnessing sleep, you can sometimes see the moment when the body drifts from waking into sleeping, and you can feel surprised at some distance from it all that there is hardly any difference. Yes! Nice. I love that.
[FairfieldLife] Interesting show on NPR right now (Wed afternoon)
Two guests declaring the world is becoming a more peaceful and prosperous place. http://wpr.org/HereOnEarth/archive_080226k.cfm
[FairfieldLife] Re: Steve Martin of Wilmington
Steve, Thanks for posting your experiences. I also have continued my practice in isolation - I spent 4 days last fall in FFld and domes, but other than that, I've done program alone since mid eighties. I also continue the siddhi program - I view the siddhis as a selection of possible appreciations of properties, appreciation of qualities from the transcendent - the particular abilities or perfections are not significant in themselves - but culturing the ability to appreciate an abstract quality (such as friendliness) - cultures the ability to appreciate any 'thing' from the Self . . . my siddhi practice extends to almost my every waking moment - everything is a flavor of Self - the TM-siddhi practice is with eyes closed - but samyama is for seeing, samyama is for living. If the person sitting next to me on the bus only knew - I see Self in their hands - feeling a tad guilty I look away - aluminum sizzles with Self - I honestly wonder, how did I get there - I look up and see Self get on the bus, how can that be? . . . maybe I should have scraped the mold off my bagel this morning :)Jai Guru Dev
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mostly lurking with a question
OMG, not another used-to-be TMer who gave it up because he / she couldn't handle a few obstacles. f those shastras. Most of the opinions given are just musings of the egoistic mind and have no basis in what is Truth. Do people seek siddhis for power? If so, this is a quality of Asuras, demons. They don't bring enlightenment according to Patanjali. Ravana was well versed and in total command of Veda. He was a great devotee of Shiva and gained boons from Him. Yet Ravana was a demon. Wanting only more and more. Especially of what he could not have. It was his downfall. Maharishi Kapila who was Vishnu incarnate, and the one who gave us Sankhya Knowledge, when asked by His mother Devahuti about gaining liberation from this samsara, said: No other way by which yogis may attain the Brahma is more easy and auspicious that the way of devotion to the Exalted Lord, the Soul in all that is. Only by that steadfastness of mind which is gained by concentrating it on Me through intense and sustained dvotion can men in this world achieve Moksha.Srimad Bhagavatam Chapter 25. In Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says the same thing...Only through devotion can one gain liberation. Adi Sankara, whose name is invoked as the TMO tradition of Holy Masters, says Bhaja Govindam Singing the names of the Lord (namasankirtana) is the fastest way and the easiest road. Devotion to Lord as Guru in Guru Ashtakam Many other works of His indicate devotion. In verse 12 of Sri Guru Gita, Lord Shiva continues to tell Parvati Devi about false gurus... If one doesn't know the qualilty of Guru, all the ritualistic practices, prayers, penances are useless In the absence of knowledge of the quaility of Guru all other knowledges lead but to ignorance, so they are called the agents of illusion. Shiva says that those who are fond of them are petty minded. When was any of this taught in the TMO? Kali yuga isn't the best climate for gaining liberation through meditation. Too much noise. Krita yuga...Meditation Treta yuga...Yagnas Dvapara yuga..Bhakti Kali yuga...Namsankirtana In the little I have read in this group, little is spoken of prayer. Little is heard of praising the Lord..Whatever name you wish to give. Much is said about what all of this is. Isn't most knowledge posted here referencing what was learned through TMO? The effects of TMO manifest as much confusion, little Truth. One thing those who spew the negative towards other can count on... Your Karmic debt is one of bad tastes. Moving to Fairfield was the best of my life to that time. Leaving Fairfield was so freeing of the illusions we had been fed. I am Grateful to have cleared the bowels of that waste. I pray that those sincere seekers find their way. There is a Light. Harih Om Tat Sat
[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
Thinking back now, I should have included a smily face, then it wouldn't have come off as such a wild ass axiom - but too late now. What I should have said was: If you have two or more observers, you can not have Truth. As each observer distinguishs self - what lies outside of that first distinction is everything else, which includes the other observers. So, for each observer, what lies 'outside' that first distinction is different because it includes the other observers. Let's ask a basic question . . . is the car red? Well, what makes the car red is exactly the same as what makes it not red. For example, we can pick out a candle because of its bundle of properties, including the space it occupies. We can make the distinction of 'the candle' because there is a 'not candle' to dintinguish it from. The dintinction between the candle and 'not candle' is the same distinction - it's the same boundary. Sort of like my grandfather who used to bug me with questions like: Does the mortar keep the bricks apart, or does keep them together? So getting back to the car . . two or more observers can not equally dintguish the car, because the 'not car' distinction includes the other observers . . so therefore, the distinction of the car will also be different between observers. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really? How do you figure? - Original Message From: Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:44:31 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor You can have a manifold relative world that works, or you have one with Truth, but you can't have both --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ ... wrote: Well, we've got at least two versions of the events. This does not tell us that either version corresponds to the facts, however. Medical records can be falsified--and I've seen this done on more than one occasion. So the medical records would not necessarily tell us the truth either. And if we can see how difficult it is to get at the truth in this scenario, then what makes us think the official version of history that we learn in school is true? - Original Message From: ruthsimplicity ruthsimplicity@ ... To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:20:47 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Dick Mays dickmays@ . wrote: Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian Governor responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000 pundits in India. He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi instructor and teacher of Advanced Techniques. Farrokh Ruffina Dear Friends: I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji' s personal physician at the time that Dr Deepak Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in England, as per his article entitled The Maharishi Years - the Untold Story. I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and inaccuracies. I was at Maharishiji' s side during the entire incident. Some of the details of the article that I know to be untrue are as follows: there was no blood transfusion from Dr Chopra; Maharishi was not on a ventilator and was not pronounced dead as claimed; he did not have kidney failure at all at that time; Dr Chopra's father attended Maharishi in India, but not in London; there was no helicopter involved; Dr Chopra did not carry Maharishiji in his arms into the hospital. Dr Chopra was handsomely paid for his services by the movement. These facts can be corroborated by Prakash and Kirti from the Indian TM movement and Maharishiji' s medical records would bear this out as well. There were two other Indian physicians involved, both of whom were instructed in TM by Farrokh. They can confirm the facts as well. Dr G. M. It is interesting to watch people writing history. The absence of facts will simply lead to even more speculation. Was there a poisoning or evidence of poisoning? Why London? If not kidney failure at that time when did he have kidney failure? What year? What kind of recovery? Etc. Can his silence be interpreted as assent that there was a heart attack
[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
You can have a manifold relative world that works, or you have one
with Truth, but you can't have both
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, we've got at least two versions of the events. This does not
tell us that either version corresponds to the facts, however.
Medical records can be falsified--and I've seen this done on more than
one occasion. So the medical records would not necessarily tell us
the truth either. And if we can see how difficult it is to get at the
truth in this scenario, then what makes us think the official
version of history that we learn in school is true?
- Original Message
From: ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:20:47 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Dick Mays
dickmays@ . wrote:
Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian Governor
responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000
pundits in India. He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi instructor and
teacher of Advanced Techniques.
Farrokh Ruffina
Dear Friends:
I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji' s personal physician at
the time that Dr Deepak Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in England,
as per his article entitled The Maharishi Years - the Untold Story.
I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and
inaccuracies. I was at Maharishiji' s side during the entire
incident. Some of the details of the article that I know to be
untrue are as follows:
there was no blood transfusion from Dr Chopra;
Maharishi was not on a ventilator and was not pronounced dead as
claimed;
he did not have kidney failure at all at that time;
Dr Chopra's father attended Maharishi in India, but not in London;
there was no helicopter involved;
Dr Chopra did not carry Maharishiji in his arms into the hospital.
Dr Chopra was handsomely paid for his services by the movement.
These facts can be corroborated by Prakash and Kirti from the Indian
TM movement and Maharishiji' s medical records would bear this out as
well. There were two other Indian physicians involved, both of whom
were instructed in TM by Farrokh. They can confirm the facts as
well.
Dr G. M.
It is interesting to watch people writing history. The absence of
facts will simply lead to even more speculation. Was there a
poisoning or evidence of poisoning? Why London? If not kidney failure
at that time when did he have kidney failure? What year? What kind
of recovery? Etc.
Can his silence be interpreted as assent that there was a heart attack
and pancreatitis and that this happened in late 1991?
He says MMY's medical records would bear this out. I would be glad to
take a look. :)
!--
#ygrp-mkp{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px
0px;padding:0px 14px;}
#ygrp-mkp hr{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
#ygrp-mkp #hd{
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0px;}
#ygrp-mkp #ads{
margin-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad{
padding:0 0;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad a{
color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}
--
!--
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
font-family:Arial;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
--
!--
#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica,
clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;margin:25px
0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:uppercase;}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
(Hopefully) One last blovial blast of hot air - - - When observers are gathered in His Name - aka gathered in TC, then they all have the same initial distinction of Self - and therefore identical distinctions of non self - then there is nothing but Truth, but they won't agree on it by force of habit As you may have heard, we (Madison WI) are expected to get 6-8 more inches of snow on Sunday - - that will put us over 2x the average for the whole season. A few years back I picked up a used snowblower, my plan is for it to have the heart attack before me. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthew 18:18-20 (King James Version) King James Version (KJV) 20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Larry, What we have here is a failure to communicate. Any egoic projection fits your views, below, but pure truth seemingly IS available whenever two or three are specifically gathered for the purpose of discovering it. Not that they will find it, mind you, the promise is that it is there -- presumably those with deep intent can REALIZE it H, let's see now, how many are gathered here today? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Larry inmadison@ wrote: Thinking back now, I should have included a smily face, then it wouldn't have come off as such a wild ass axiom - but too late now. What I should have said was: If you have two or more observers, you can not have Truth. As each observer distinguishs self - what lies outside of that first distinction is everything else, which includes the other observers. So, for each observer, what lies 'outside' that first distinction is different because it includes the other observers. Let's ask a basic question . . . is the car red? Well, what makes the car red is exactly the same as what makes it not red. For example, we can pick out a candle because of its bundle of properties, including the space it occupies. We can make the distinction of 'the candle' because there is a 'not candle' to dintinguish it from. The dintinction between the candle and 'not candle' is the same distinction - it's the same boundary. Sort of like my grandfather who used to bug me with questions like: Does the mortar keep the bricks apart, or does keep them together? So getting back to the car . . two or more observers can not equally dintguish the car, because the 'not car' distinction includes the other observers . . so therefore, the distinction of the car will also be different between observers. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Really? How do you figure?
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMO future - just speculation
I'm surprised Bevan didn't pick up on Maharishi's message from Heaven - Bevan was to leap from that window - to show the world Yogic Flying - what an image, a naked cherub with soapy eyes. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh yes, I am wise But it's wisdom born of pain Yes, I've paid the price But look how much I gained If I have to I can do anything I am strong (strong) I am invincible (invincible) I am Bevan
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak Chopra: The Maharishi Years - The Untold Story: Recollections of a Fo
this reads like a 21st century rig veda - imagine the commentaries on this piece written 5000 years in the future. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maharishi, after all, did the same thing. We have NO IDEA what the real story of Guru Dev was. All we have is Maharishi's view of who and what he was. And that view is often at odds with the view of other people who were students of Guru Dev's at the same time Mahesh was. The only reason that most of us have any kind of official view of who and what Guru Dev was is because MMY's was in many cases the *only* view we ever heard. Safe to say that if it wasn't for Maharishi then we would not have heard of Guru Dev as he would have just been another saint in the long Hindu list. I personally do not believe that Maharishi has outdone the Shankaracharyas. It's negotiable which is the more important victory for him, that is, to get the Shanks to think Westerners should be allowed to be Hindus, or that Hindus should be allowed to become Westerners. Because we aren't normally allowed within range of many yajnas at all. The effect Maharishi had was to unite the world at least a few more ways. I believe that the course participants now are experiencing some of the Vedic ability as based in the real traditional yajnas being held now. Especially in Varanasi. I had the benefit of working with Ben Collins puja group and a couple others last year and I can speak to the power of the attention of real Hindu (and Buddhist) priests. They have powerful concentration which alone with one as the focus, or whomever recipient can feel. As for whether I believe in the gods or the power alone of human attention it is great. Rituals may well be psychocognitive coherence makers due to synchronized attentions and intentions. I actually almost went totally crazy during that time. I think I had something like literally 15 yajnas lined up for last Akshaya Tritiya. Fucking intense. I was literally insomniac for five months. I mean totally. I burned the pujas out. I can't even do one now or it's too much for me. I had yajnas done to erase slavery, to create peace in the east, to make my gurus, many Buddhist, live longer, to enrich New Orleans and the Gulf South, and to attract merit to said same. Finally I did some Bhudevi yajnas for all beings. I met a lama and he told me to do all pujas for all beings. So I started doing that. man was it fucking intense. One Sunday morning I felt this peace so great. But then the swing to feeling like I was in hell. It was all really really intense. My point. I forget. Oh yeah. Oh Yeah, I also under the auspices of the Kanchi Shank and other Sri Vidya devotees was the only white guy out of a hundred Hindus to be in the first Saundaraya Lahiri Japa Yajna under Sri Harshanand, rising young guruji. But oh yeah. Shakti is in control, not Maharishi or his followers. I had a dream the other night where a middle aged black woman of average looks was bowed to by everybody including myself, and when she walked towards me I got a hardon. The next day I saw this picture of Mahakali riding Shiva. So I thought some funny things about Bevans proclaimation that Maharishi has turned Kali to Sat quite interesting. I had quite a few dreams during this last week, all with black people in them, all seeming to say that Shakti is the source of all power, not Maharishi. I had one dream where a small black boy was trying to get a woman to dance but she wasn't buying. She was staying out of frame and unseen. Not dancing. So I have to praise Mahakali as Buddha first and Mahakali as Herself second before Mahakali as Maharishi third or fourth or whatever. Guru dev was Mahakali, as Shodashi, as are all the great gurus of the Shanks. Yoni Goddess, circular source of endless perfection and power. Without Shakti Shiva is Shava. Jai Ma. Ma unformed, Ma with no basis, Ma - basis of freedom. Ma - yah! And freedom from Yah! to- Ma. This is what one calls transcending in speech. ;)
[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement
Maharishi's model of enlightenment has always puzzled me as well - right from the Intro lecture - really, why should a true Indian sage have any concern about World Peace when he should be talking about how the world is illusion . . . how the world is as it should be . . . shouldn't we be walking around pondering the I AM . . . Perhaps this is what made Maharishi so unique - perhaps why he was invited into heaven (should that be the case) - because he cared about the world - because he placed raising world consciousness even above the self-realization of his followers. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, abutilon108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thanks for your comments about what I wrote, very insightful. I especially dug when you talked about people projecting special power on to you. And you knew it! Good for you. I'm still working it all out. I don't have a model of enlightenment I do currently have a model of enlightenment and what's interesting is that it's a far cry from what Maharishi presented to us. It has more to do with the dropping away of the illusion of separation/doership. Of course one can find concepts in Maharishi's talks/books that would seem to be about that, but his focus on relative perfection makes me feel he wasn't really getting at what interests me. It's fascinating to find myself having lost my interest in his descriptions of the states of consciousness when once I was so enamored with that. It feels as if my path has taken me into a whole different universe. these days really so I am back to the physiological stuff when thinking about Maharishi. I believe he was functioning in a different way than I am but so is Donald Trump. I don't have to ascribe a pathology to recognize that he and I are cut from radically different cloth psychologically. Actually, I don't like ascribing pathology to anyone, so not sure how that came up except that idea -- of being able to act exactly as someone would want you to be -- had been mentioned in regard to Scott Peterson. And, much as I don't like to admit it, I'm not so sure I'm cut from a radically different cloth psychologically from Maharishi... I don't buy the simple con theory. I think he believed most of his rap. Yes The gap is where the weirdness of all of us got reflected back to him due to his role with us all. Just as you described in your teaching experience. But he also didn't end up a billionaire with an uncompleted Gita commentary by accident... Didn't follow this -- please explain! I just mean that he was money motivated at a Trumplike level. You don't get that rich by accident, it takes tremendous focus. Likewise, despite his claim to loving knowledge more than anything, he never finished most of his long term mental projects. If you spend day after day with him it is like chasing an ADD child, but leaving actual human lives in his wake. Interesting... Nice rap man, I'll keep an eye out for your posts. This is the first group I've participated in. Still getting the hang of it and am overwhelmed by the volume of posts (was even before MMY's death increased the activity). Wanted to reply here, though, because this line of conversation really interests me, and it's been helpful to think/feel some things out here. Thanks! And by the way, I'm not a man...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Claim and belief systems
Beliefs allow us to be one thing - and pretend to be another. and the best we can hope for is to replace the fraud we believe in, with a better fraud - or we can drop having beliefs all together. I remember when my kids were very small, they didn't believe in anything. Re the questions of 'channeling' - I know as fact there are no barriers (time, distance, etc) to knowledge. [Note: courtesy of TM-Siddhi's, specifically, the inner light sutra, often before I introduce the sutra I think now this time when barriers are removed, I will inquire about a specific someone or something , but I always 'forget' to inquire] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's worth thinking about how we go about defining what we believe and why we believe. If, as the conversation is flowing lately, we are asked by some inside the TMO to believe that some elite individuals are still in CONSCIOUS contact with MMY, then should we believe this? First question: is it possible? Maybe. It would be called chanelling in other New Age lingo, wouldn't it? If by death we assume the soul has exited this stage and is now on another, could we not set up a communication path between the two stages? Why not? People who have had refined psychic experiences have seen ghosts, the newly dead, the old dead, etc. People have claimed to be able to access the long ago dead. This is no new story. Second question: is it verifiable? Probably not in any meaningful way. I mean, how? A machine? A voice mail machine? I mean, no, there is no reliable way to verify the claim. The other person would have to have the same direct connection and they'd then be able to say, yes, it happened for me as well. Third question: how reliable is the contact? Hard to measure. How do we know that some other higher life form in some other realm is not acting as a conduit? Use your imagination. We can't tell. Fourth question: if it is not just a matter of faith on our part, then what is it? Are we not believing or are we? If people say that Jesus, Enoch, Malkizedek (fill in your own name here) has said something to someone what are we to do with this information? Shrug our shoulders and find a way to believe or shake our head and say, no, I don't believe that? This is just a partial list for discussion purposes. Regards, Fred
[FairfieldLife] Re: I'm ready for my close-up now, Mr. DeMille...
Nice writing - but I feel the need to point out that everyone I know has some similar wacky relations with something, ie people and their pets, people and nearly inanimate infants, .. and don't get me started on those dang bird watchers :) and if I could take a step back I could see my own anthropomorphisms - man, I'd hate to watch me eat (aka worship) a Snickers my point being there is no right or wrong way to deal with this relative world - just do no harm. do no harm BTW, I gotta go, there's a Snickers stuck in a machine and it wants me to slowly undress it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From Blaine Watson: Skipping ahead now to 1986 and another birthday, again in Delhi, or rather Noida across the Jamuna River. 1986 was the year of the Yogic Flying demonstrations. They were done in the form of competitions or 'olympics' though we couldn't use that registered name. I had won gold medals in Washington D.C. and then again a 'high jump' gold in Delhi in front of 12,000 people in the Indira Gandhi stadium, though Maharishi was not that impressed when he was told how high the jump was. hehehe the ego is always being worked on in many different ways. Hehehe. The how's and why's of cult members never ceases to amaze me. The single most significant cause of the failure of the TMO was the way that MMY and the TMO came out with yogic flying. Blaine, I am truly sad for you that you find it important to celebrate the embarrassment of the yogic flying demonstrations. We remained on in Delhi after that summer and the fall came with its clouds and romantic full moon skies. Maharishi was spending more and more time in his house as the weather got colder and colder. The visas were expiring and groups of people were going home. There were not many of us left, a few hundreds I think at most. My birthday came along as winter approached and I celebrated it in what had become my habitual way, quietly in my room without any fanfare. Those who remembered came by and wished but that was all. I fasted and meditated and was 'on the self' as we used to say. In the intervening years since the 1980 vedic science conference, i had been back and forth to India several times, Africa twice, Europe and America more often than i could count, had been with Maharishi countless times but each time my birthday approached he would send me off somewhere, probably whittling away at my oversized ego. This time, in 1986, I was hoping that he would celebrate. He had for some and not for others. It was a very karmic thing. How precious. A grown man wishing and hoping that another grown man will come prancing into his room with a birthday cake. I had developed a very deep attitude of not asking him for anything personal at any time always seeking to do for him to the best of my limited capacities rather than to take from him. I always thought his time amongst us is too precious to be wasted on my small personal wants and needs. Yes, but I imagine that somehow this story will progress to the point where you will, indeed, waste his precious time AND get your birthday cake, to boot. However this day something shifted and I very definitely wanted 3 specific desires fulfilled. This was one of the of reasons for staying in my room, i didn't want to risk celebrating and burning up any little karma i might have that could be used towards the fulfillment of these desires. Selfish i know and with possible repercussions which i will examine a bit later in this email. So far, you are sounding like an 8-year-old girl in a Hallmark after- school special who is wishing for a Barbi Doll for Christmas but is too lazy to do her chores to get her $1.25 a week allowance in order to save up and get it for herself. And that there's going to be a moral to this story, just as there would be for a Hallmark show. I wanted Maharishi to go for a walk with me. I wanted to see his feet. and I wanted him to touch me. I think I'm going to vomit. Peripherally to these i wanted to know if we were going to have to go home and if so, to ask him if we could stay here with him. Not small things eh? And very very individually selfish. I can't believe my boldness in even thinking of them. I can't believe you actually felt you had to share this information with anyone but a psychiatric professional... The day came and went. Maharishi had not come out at all. A friend who was also celebrating his birthday, came to my room that evening and said that everyone who was having
[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement
and don't forget about Abraham, he trudged up that mountain in waking state and slid down in CC, or perhaps he went up in CC and came down in UC . . . --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I salute your humor. Very good. There is an interesting section in the Torah just as God tells Moses to get back to Egypt on his mission. Moses in his extreme state of insecurity and humility, asks God how a simple person like him, heavy of tongue (had a speech impediment) would be believed by his people? God then shows him the things to do after which they will be stirred into belief. This whole process goes on for quite some time. Even as late as the total destruction of the Egyptian army at the splitting of the waters, the Torah speaks of the awe and fear and belief in Moses by the people. Seems like he impressed more as time went by and events unfolded as they did. Regards, Fred --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Matrix, I'm not so sure. Moses had two beams of light shooting out of his head -- like horns -- sounds pretty enlightened to me Michaelangelo carved Moses with those horns. New definitions are needed for the below: Me so horny (full of the divine light of the presumptuous assumption?) Toot your own horn. (Miles Davis on cloud nine?) Little Boy Blue, come blow your horn. (Toddler Krishna ref?) Big Horn Sheep (The ones that gathered around Baby Jesus?) Edg [snip]
[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement
Jimi Hendrix came back as your cat, very hip Great bear story! One morning I came out to a strange sound. My cat was pulling out a guitar string with his teeth and letting it ring! He did it many times and was obviously enjoying it. I started hanging my guitars on the wall!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you still practice TM but not believe in MMY?
I don't have anything to add to the discussion - I think of this post as merely a vote to your OP - in the interest of a tally in whatever column you feel fit. yes, I still do TM, but I never 'practiced' it as I was pretty damn good at it right from the get go :) but I have a couple of kids and at night I return to a house of chaos so it is rare that I meditate in the PM - but I do a full-fledged IA program in the AM Speaking of IA - I went to FFL in November for the first time since - well the last time I was there someone pointed out to me where the temporary trailers were going to go . . . ha ha so I goes to the dome for 4 days last fall and I had profound and clear programs and really got my batteries charged. I wouldn't give up my TM Sidhi program up for nothin' Now on to the MMY part, I am a Vedanta kinda guy, and I find MMY's discourse clear,concise and intellectually satisfying. However, when the topic migrated to ayurveda, architecture and etc, I lost interest pretty fast. Likewise, when discussions turn to the TMO, and money or rumors - I am not interested - to me, MMY understands the mind, transcendent . . . you know all that vedanta/sankhya stuff . . . and he can convey it like no other. I believe in MMY because I believe in Vedanta - because I believe in Self.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you still practice TM but not believe in MMY?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you hold a gun on me and forced me to recommend a spiritual program, I'd say that the only method for getting enlightened in today's world is to 1. read Ramana Maharishi's Talks five times, and 2. do self inquiry: meaning sincerely ask the question, Who am I? and then listen to the silence created by the mind's complete inability to come up with an hearable answer. And to 3. find some form of Bhakti to practice daily -- loving a child would do. 4. remember that a rope gets through a needle's eye easier than it is to stop the mind from grinding on and on about MONEYso try to get some sort of lifestyle that keeps the world at arm's length. One must have intellectual clarity about the goal, a technique, emotional involvement to keep one attached to the ultimate goal and psychic distance from Satan's addictions! 5. Shoveling 10+ inches of snow - the Upanishads say From this Fullness, leaving Fullness - - please say it is so!! Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sticheau sticheau@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity ruthsimplicity@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: The ridiculously named TM-Free blog is anything *but* TM-Free. It's all TM, all the time. Unhealthy-TM-Obsession Blog is a more accurate description. I checked the blog out. Seems no more unhealthy than this place--we have no idea the extent of anyone's obsession. I can understand the desire to put out the other side of the story as the TMO never sees anything wrong with itself. Both that blog and this group reflect how people deal with the paradox that Peter mentioned. And the original poster mentioned. I am coming to the very personal conclusions that: (1) MMY probably believed strongly in himself and his cause, but was manipulative, lacked empathy, was prone to exaggeration and I don't believe he was enlightened. He as the founder is ultimately responsible for the organizations that have evolved under his tenure. (2) Meditation 20 minutes twice a day probably does no harm and likely does a fair amount of people some good. A chance to step back, relax, let go. Maybe it has some physical benefits but they are not pronounced. The psychological benefits are harder to quantify. Spiritual benefits? The jury is out for me. I wouldn't pay the current price. The price is elitist. (3) I question whether the advanced techniques and the siddhis have any benefit whatsoever. The promised benefits have not been shown. The claims are exaggerated. The teachers say you need no faith to practice the techniques, but why would you practice the techniques unless you had faith that they worked? Super highway to enlightenment? I don't see it. If it is a superhighway, I know plenty of people who have been on that highway for more than 30 years, still going around in circles. I think that any benefits people perceive are in large part due to justification. You invested a lot of time and money; dissonance theory makes it likely that you will exaggerate the benefits and minimize the detriments and never know you did so. (4) Excessive meditation, like rounding, may be dangerous to some and is good for almost no one. (5) The TMO is a collection of various corporations and entities that are not financially transparent which leads to considerable speculation as to where the money goes. It is paternalistic and not democratic, inconsistent with many western values. Its leadership structure and asset ownership structure is obscure. It has blinders on as to the TM techniques and its affiliated scientists often refuses to cooperate with outside scientists and they ignore potential problems in some meditators. Its inside scientists do not behave as scientists, they behave like religious fanatics. Yet, as a religion it fails. The various religious type pronouncements are inconsistent (think Nader and heaven vs. the more mystical hindu view) and it has no real ethical or moral teachings. Trying to make it a religion without an underlying morality is dangerous. Yet many TBs seem to make it a religion. And, after all, the TMO says it is NOT a religion. (6) Given the exaggerated claims, the unproven benefits, why would anyone then buy into the siddhis, the food supplements, the natural law party, the vastu architecture, the pulse diagnosis, the yagyas, the consciousness based education, all the things that the movement wants to sell? A rational person would want damn good evidence. Or
[FairfieldLife] Re: Replay of Bevan's Wonderful Call Tomorrow Afternoon
Putting aside for a moment the content of Bevan's message, whoever told Bevan (and Hagelin) to speak in that pasty puffy toad faced limp-wristed fake tri-tone sissy style? They come off like they could benefit from being robbed at gun point - or getting the crap beat out of them. I never heard Maharishi speak like that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bevan made such a wonderful call to us in Fairfield Wednesday night! To me it was the best of his that I've ever heard. I've just learned it's going to be replayed tomorrow, Saturday afternoon in the Dome at 2:15. I'm checking to see if a current badge is also required.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Replay of Bevan's Wonderful Call Tomorrow Afternoon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Larry inmadison@ wrote: Putting aside for a moment the content of Bevan's message, whoever told Bevan (and Hagelin) to speak in that pasty puffy toad faced limp-wristed fake tri-tone sissy style? They come off like they could benefit from being robbed at gun point - or getting the crap beat out of them. I never heard Maharishi speak like that. Gee, that sounds strangely familiar... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/111818 that is spooky, I got goosebumps reading your prior post . . I should see what you posted the next day so I can see what I'll be thinking tomorrow.
[FairfieldLife] MMY and the art of living.
Maharishi was a Great Holy man who brought me and others meditation from a far away land - to find happiness within. Jai Guru Dev http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/05/AR2008020502752.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM has never been secular (this perfume is not secular)
Is this perfume non secular if you don't believe in it, or are unaware of its origin? http://www.virtueperfume.com/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is pretty funny! Are Richard and Nabby even TM teachers? I think Nabby was. Richard didn't need it,he just knows! And me, 18 year drop out that I am, in there swinging! A Monty Python moment. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: When someone claims to know more about TM than MMY, the conversation screeches to an immediate halt and one politely excuses oneself because they left something cooking on the stove, so sorry! We must chat later, yes, indeed. Ya gotta love the theater of the absurd performed by Nabby, Richard and me arguing about which one of us mad hatters understands MMY's teacher BETTER! What a moment of comedy on FFL! It is pretty funny! Are Richard and Nabby even TM teachers? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Curtis wrote: So Richard claims to know more about TM than MMY, but I claim to know more about his teaching than people who haven't gone through TTC. Maybe so, but you don't know more about TM than I do regardless of your TTC claims. The proof is here for anyone to read. I'm afraid that this ship sailed over 18 years ago Richard. You want the crown, TM expert, it is all yours. Have fun with it, I certainly did. When someone claims to know more about TM than MMY, the conversation screeches to an immediate halt and one politely excuses oneself because they left something cooking on the stove, so sorry! We must chat later, yes, indeed. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
[FairfieldLife] Re: The two models
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: this sounds like a fantasy on your part- an ego trip. And it still doesn't explain your insistence that people in your estimation aren't enlightened because they don't *act* enlightened... do you try to *act* enlightened? I don't have to. As always Turq, clear as a bell. I thought so. :-) I don't claim to be enlightened the way Jimbo does, so why would I try to act enlightened? You claim a different enlightenment than Jim Flanegin since you said we all are enlightened anyway. I see, tapas not necessary. Cheers ! ;-) I'm curious, does every thread on this forum tend to degrade like this? This forum is all about the people who belong to it ..:)
[FairfieldLife] Re: a computer question - is it allowed?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, claudiouk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead of buying a new laptop is it possible to just buy a faster desktop PC base unit (without monitor or keyboard) and then access this unit from anywhere in the house from my old laptop (which then becomes the wireless keyboard and monitor for the unit)?? I've got XP Home on my laptop. I know there are programs (eg XP Professional has it) where you can control a computer remotely and see the desktop, but does that take advantage of the faster computer capacity or is the process limited by the speed of the controlling computer anyway, in which case my idea is pointless..? I know this is a non-TM question but I noticed there are real PC experts in FFL... conceivably - your new bottleneck would be the refresh rate of the your old laptop screen and connection to the new PC, so anything with graphics would slow way down - and the other extreme, programs with big calcs and little graphics would be faster, like if you were doing runs in stat packages . . . but few people use this kind of software - but this advice is worth exactly what I charged you for it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The two models
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlist@ wrote: Barry writes snipped: And again, you are assuming the unenlightened model, which believes that progress *has* to be made towards enlightenment. If you shift to another equally accurate model and description of the process -- that everyone is always already enlightened and that the *only* thing that marks enlightenment is a realization of what has always already been going on -- then there is no progress possible. TomT: The reason it is called ignorance is that one actually is able to ignore that which they always have been and will always be. It is not called stupid or smart or arrogant or gratuitous or a lie it is called IGNORANCE. Name and form. For those who have had a realization experience, whether it be temporary or permanent, the always already enlightened model is just so much more *accurate*. It's *obvious* when it happens that there was never anywhere to go, nothing to become, no stress to get rid of, no moment at which you were ever unenlightened. Enlightenment is, has always been, and will always be; the only thing lacking up til now has been the realization of what should have been obvious. As Tom suggests, the being who has considered himself unenlightened has just been being IGNORANT of what's been right in his face since the day he was born. So I've always wondered WHY spiritual teachers went for that *other* model, the *inaccurate* one. You know the one -- the one that says that there are things you have to do to become enlight- ened, that there are obstacles like stress that can prevent enlightenment, that one can ever be unenlightened. Why not do what Ramana Maharshi and a few other teachers did and just TELL THE TRUTH from Day One: You're enlightened. Right here, right now. GET OVER all this 'unenlightened' stuff already. :-) As far as I can tell, the entire TM model for the enlightenment process is a LIE. Worse, it is a *known* lie, because Maharishi has at times written eloquently about the other model, the always already enlightened model. So he *chose* to tell people that they were unenlightened, and would remain unenlightened until certain undefined conditions were met. He chose to *reinforce* the ignorance rather than dispel it. WHY, one wonders? My readings of vedic texts implies that acquiring enlightenment is like becoming a doctor - - that is, after one has demonstrated sufficient proficiency with the material, then the title is bestowed upon you, (thru practice of yoga) one earns enlightenment the old fashioned way. This traditional 'model' takes a polite approach to enlightenment - as compared to the buccaneer approach where one can create opportunities of heightened eligibility (aka Grace) - - the thinking being that all that is required is a familiarity with the transcendent - - for example, if closing your eyes right now (or better yet with eyes open); if the notion of I Am or the Transcendent resonates - than you are eligible. So, create your own moments of Grace, and try on the idea of I AM That - - does it fit? Hey remember this, 50% of all doctors graduated in the bottom half of their class - likewise, the Self is not exact till you are there, so the point where you leap is up to you. Keep in mind the naturalness of consciousness (as compared to an experience) - we are not looking for something like Wow I've been enlightened for 2 hours and 22 minutes and it is really a trip .. if any impression is present, it be more like this is how I have always lived or this is how human beings live . . not unlike waking state . . so be a pirate AARGH
[FairfieldLife] Re: recipe for good health
snip snip What we're debating here is whether psychoactive substances such as alcohol and pot interfere with one's progress toward enlightenment. And again, you are assuming the unenlightened model, which believes that progress *has* to be made towards enlightenment. If you shift to another equally accurate model and description of the process -- that everyone is always already enlightened and that the *only* thing that marks enlightenment is a realization of what has always already been going on -- then there is no progress possible. Except progress toward realization of what has always already been going on. See, the reason it's a throwaway neo-Advaita one-liner is that the distinction is still there, only now it's called not realizing vs. realizing what has always already been going on instead of unenlightened vs. enlightened. In other words: unenlightened = not realizing what has always already been going on enlightened = realizing what has always already been going on It's the same distinction. So all I have to do is change my wording: What we're debating here is whether psychoactive substances such as alcohol and pot interfere with one's progress toward realizing what has always already been going on. The only difference is that my original wording uses fewer words; the meaning is identical. and because 'realizing' is the essential criteria and because 'not realizing' is devoid of meaning and what has always already been going on is not an object Libations: sometimes one has to stumble, to stumble onto something.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Request to change RIP Scott Girard thread title
There is wisdom in showing grace when given an opportunity, and wisdom in not filing a grievance with every real or alleged fault of another. The wisdom being that, in giving grace, you will be more 'eligible' when grace comes your way . . . anyways, this seems like good advice my grandma told me. Does anyone have any photos of Scott, or any tales? I wonder if I ever met him? L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Mr. Archer et al, I tried to post to this thread last night but cannot find it. I may have done something wrong. Rather than attempt to re-write my memories of my friend Scott Girard from high school and college, I would like to simply repeat my request that, as there appears to be no adult supervision on this discussion group, perhaps all of you might take your little arguments about exercise and your vicious threats against each other to a different subject line in order to stop the disrespect you are bringing to the name of a good and gentle man. This is precisely the kind of childishness that would have upset Scott the most. Were he to have learned that so many people have time to criticize each other behind anonymous pen-names, he would have been saddened indeed. I am certain he would ask all of you to rise above it, to seek to spend your limited time here on more significant matters. And, above all, he would ask you to stop with the childish name-calling and meaningless physical threats. So, please, start a thread called To exercise or not or something like that and let poor Scott and his memory actually begin to rest in peace. Tim Rowan Colorado Springs Dear Mr. Rowan, By suggesting that our silly yet insignificant bickering on this forum is preventing Mr. Girard's soul from finding peace, you imply that he spent the better part of 30 years on a program -- called The Thousand-Headed Purusha Progarm -- that wasn't very effective. After all, if all that rounding and deep meditation and countless hours spent at the feet of his Master, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, wasn't enough to create a barrier of invincibility to overcome our admittedly childish infighting then what exactly are YOU saying about the most important choice that Mr. Girard made during his lifetime? I would therefore humbly suggest, Mr. Rowan, that it YOU who is showing disrespect for the dearly departed by implying that he was both wasting his time and had bad judgement by choosing a spiritual path that didn't achieve the most basic results one would, at the very least, expect from more than three decades of devotion. Sincerely, The Reverend, Most Perfect Shemp McGurk Jesus, man. Cut Tim some slack. He's bothered that a thread about a great guy passing away devolved into a ridiculous series of posts about exercise without a thread name change. He's right. Obviously Tim knew Scott quite well and is simply asking for some respect for Scott. Why can't we take Tim's request to heart without the sarcastic nonsense and name calling? Please, nobody answer that question! It really irked me that he referred to Scott (someone I never heard of nor knew) as poor Scott. That really probably more insulting to his memory than anyone else. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ __ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
[FairfieldLife] Re: What must they think?
They might think it is too much like coming upon one of those multi car pile ups, you know, like in the fog that involve dozens of vehicles - and coming upon it just as it happening with all the walking wounded. Many folks already have enough drama and chaos in their lives and it's not worth sifting through all the over-emotionalism - they slow down, gawk, and move on. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FFL gets about 4-8 new members a week. I see the comments they're required to make when they sign up. Many are intrigued by the description on HYPERLINK http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ FairfieldLife/ and figure they've stumbled upon a pretty cool, open-minded group of spiritual seekers. For the most part, they have, but I also see many of them unsubscribe after a few days. They don't have to leave comments when they unsubscribe, but I suspect that many of them are turned off by the bickering and trash talk that sometimes prevails. This is an unfortunate loss IMO. Don't the spiritual traditions which we all respect advocate love, forgiveness, acceptance, etc? I don't understand how people can tolerate indulging in negative feelings and behavior for weeks, months, years. It's self-polluting. I should think spiritual seekers would be inclined to look within and locate the source of such impulses, and try to eradicate it. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.11/1244 - Release Date: 1/25/2008 7:44 PM
[FairfieldLife] Maharaja Nader Raam
I must confess that I have pretty much been out of touch with the TMO since the 80's - I have avoided ayerveda, jotysh, vostoo, etc. and couldn't give a 25 cent description of them. (Spelled them wrong on purpose, though I don't know how to spell them correctly.) and I am wondering about this fellow Maharaja Nader Raam, the heir to the throne. Who is he, where did he come from, anyone heard him speak or spent time with him? More importantly, does he have a firm grip on Being?
[FairfieldLife] Re: So just what is 'eternal damnation'?
eternal anything has one massive loophole - - being eternal, once you are there for even a mico-second, you've already appreciated the eternal property of the eternal anything - - and so, you are immediately eligible to move on to the next anything It's the non eternal anything you gotta watch out for . . . BTW, I am not joking. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eternal damnation is the fate of one who has decided to pursue the pleasures of the senses as an end in life; in short a materialist. Since the pleasures of the senses are insatiable the individual is doomed to Reincarnate over and over again until he realizes that sensual pleasures, in and of themselves, are a dead end. That is eternal damnation, damned to Reincarnate over and over again! Context defines purpose!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Actualization vs (Self) Enlightenment
Interesting question, At first thought, Self Actualization and Enlightenment (Eastern) appear to be at odds - - Self Actualization being about perpetuating and securing the identity and hierarchy of the (small) self and its role in the world . . . and Enlightenment as realization of the (small) self as illusion, or perhaps a function of memory. or to put it metaphorically; getting on that 'motorcycle' of self actualization or riding that 'train' of enlightenment motorcycle=being the one in control (intellect) train=a silent witness to reality (transcendent) Oh, to appreciate the difference between intellect and transcendence!!! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering how mnay of us got on the self-actualization train, and not the Enlightenment train.* In the mid to late 60's and early 70's, TM, as well as life's quest, was all about actualization (or Actualization) not Enlightnement. The latter was not a term used, AFAIR, and we were a bit shocked when MMY came out with the term Age of Enlightenment in the mid 70's. I have a funny skit in my head about two (imaginary) lectures. One on Actualization and the other on Enlightenment, given around 1967-9 at UCLA or Berkeley. The latter given by someone using a lot of Rory/Jim-speak (with perhaps some good rants on the REAL nature of consciousness by in Peter-speak). The former, enthusiastic, glowing, healthy, vibrant 20-30ishs lecturers, on campus, giving an articulate vision of possibilities about human potential. Which line would you have, did you, get in? --- Some definitiions, not necessarily definitive: Self-actualization is a term that has been used in various psychology theories, often in slightly different ways (e.g., Goldstein, Maslow, Rogers). The term was originally introduced by the organismic theorist Kurt Goldstein for the motive to realize all of one's potentialities. In his view, it was the master motive - indeed, the only real motive a person has, all others being merely manifestations of it. However, the concept was brought to prominence in Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory, as the final level of psychological development that can be achieved when all basic and meta needs are fulfilled and the `actualization' of the full personal potential takes place. According to Kurt Goldstein in his book The Organism: A Holistic Approach to Biology Derived from Pathological Data in Man self-actualization is the tendency to actualize, as much as possible, its [the organism's] individual capacities, in the world. The tendency for self-actualization is the only drive by which the life of an organism is determined. [1] Goldstein defined self-actualization as a driving life force that will ultimately lead to maximizing one's abilities and determine the path of one's life. The term was later used by Abraham Maslow in his article, A Theory of Human Motivation. Maslow explicitly defines self-actualization to be the desire for self-fulfillment, namely the tendency for him [the individual] to become actualized in what he is potentially. This tendency might be phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming. [2] ... A basic definition from a typical college text book defines self actualization according to Maslow simply as the full realization of one's potential without any mention of antiquated Goldstein. [4] A more explicit definition of self actualization according to Maslow is intrinsic growth of what is already in the organism, or more accurately of what is the organism itself self actualization is growth-motivated rather than deficiency-motivated. ... People that have reached self actualization are characterized by certain behaviors. Common traits amongst people that have reached self actualization are as follows: [6] * They embrace reality and facts rather than denying truth. * They are spontaneous. * They are interested in solving problems which may include personal problems or the emotional conflicts of others. * They are accepting of themselves and others and lack prejudice. For Goldstein it was a motive and for Maslow it was a level of development; for both, however, roughly the same kinds of qualities were expressed: independence, autonomy, a tendency to form few but deep friendships, a `philosophical' sense of humor, a tendency to resist outside pressures and a general transcendence of the environment rather than a simple `coping' with it. [7] ... The humanistic approach focuses on healthy, motivated people and tries to determine how they define the `self' while maximizing their potential. [9] People who are self actualized have had peak experiences. Peak experiences are situations that are so intense that the person loses all sense of self and they find themselves in the
[FairfieldLife] Re: Goodbye to the anti-science crowd her on FFL
If one is predisposed to conspiracy theories and the like, turning to peer review science would be a boon. If one is predisposed to useful stuff (including accumulated wisdom), turning to peer review science will turn you into an absent minded klutz.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Goodbye to the anti-science crowd here on FFL
When my Mom tells me to put on fresh clean underwear before going out for a drive - I am not supposed to take her as an authority on the subject - - wait till I tell her, she'll come and kick your ass.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Pseudo-Science vs Anti-Science
I am not anti-science - - I am suggesting that much of the intellectual findings of science don't impact me - - - for example, I know the earth is round, but for 99.9+% of my daily life activities, it makes no difference whether the world is flat or round. The issue of the flatness or roundness of the earth was historically of great importance to the pro and anti science peoples, and some lost their lives because of their positions - - but for the billions of average Joes like myself, the controversy doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Likewise, quantum mechanics may claim that the banana I had for breakfast is mostly empty space, but that fact has little bearing on the banana's comings and goings . . . I am not talking about the application of science in technology - but the intellectual discovery or resulting knowledge of the scientific process. It has little impact for most people, then there are a few who appreciate science for its entertainment value - then there are the very few scientists themselves who are actually engaged in the research. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity ruthsimplicity@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason jedi_spock@ wrote: How many people in this forum Pseudo-science.?? And how many are Anti-science.?? How do you define both.?? I recently moved to town and found this forum. I signed up mostly to discuss this question. :) The first question really is what is science. The Merriam Webster dictionary definition works for me: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/science 1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding 2 a: a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study the science of theology b: something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge have it down to a science 3 a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science 4: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws cooking is both a science and an art My favored and the most specific definition which pertains to how science is acquired is #3 3 a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method. Of key importance is that you acquire science through the scientific method of research. (Briefly, principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.} Pseudoscience is also defined as a system of theories, assumptions, and methods erroneously regarded as scientific. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pseudoscience If the scientific method is misused or conclusions misinterpreted, that could result in pseudoscience. For example, you develop a hypothesis, do an experience, and do not disprove your hypothesis. This does not mean that your hypothesis is now science. Maybe after many experiments it might become science, but relying on one experiment could very well result in pseudoscience. Also, problems with how you use the scientific method could also result in pseudoscience. Say the researcher had a strong bias or a financial interest. This could lead to erroneous conclusions and development of a pseudoscientific theory. Antiscience in my mind is the basic disbelief in the scientific method as the way to develop knowledge about the physical world. Hi Ruth, yes that is exactly what Curtis and TurquoiseB said in another thread. They tried to throw out the scientific method altogether in favor of their own opinion. The traits of Fox News the Neocons and the anti-science crowd: 1. Attack the person not the argument. 2. Attack the concept of science itself 3. Use science to back up their agenda when it suits them. 4. Shout until the argument is lost in non-related BS. These are typical traits of an anti-science fundamentalists such as Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell, Ted Haggard, George Bush, Osama Bin Laden, Billy Graham, Fox News, The Pope, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Rielly and... Curt, Turq, Lurk, Vaj, Sal, Larry, Shemp, Peter, Boo, Bhairitu, and others. PREDICTION: Their next move will be to try to proove their point with a peer-reviewed study, after insisting such things are not valid ! ...which I think I saw VAJ just trying to do ! ! ! ! ! LOL ! ! ! The 21st century will be about
[FairfieldLife] Re: Charlie Lutes encounters MMY
It is stunning to see how much folks project on Jerry Jarvis, Dick Mays, Bevan, etc . . . all the defects, short comings and neurosis heaped on . . . and we don't even consider the possibility that these perceived defects are the result of our own conditioning or faulty reasoning. Transform others by not judging them, and then having mastered 'not judging others' - stop judging yourself and see yourself as you really are. What you think can take lifetimes, can be done today. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor matrixmonitor@ wrote: ---Dialog: yes, in a manner of speakingI talked to him for 1/2 hr a while ago and regularly send him items of interest (such as forwarding info from this forum - which he declines to subscribe to). He sent me an information packet on the prison program (as reported in a previous post). My objective is to eventually wean him away from all TMO-based negative influences, of which there are many since most are pie in the sky pipe dreams. snip What's Jerry's view of the prison project now that that fellow has disassociated himself from the TMO? Does he understand the reasons why that was necessary? When I first heard a few yrs ago that Jerry was associated with it, I knew it was doomed - there's no way Bevan and his troupe would allow a project that had Jerry connected to it to succeed without their interference. I'm not surprised Jerry's interested in the prison project as that's the exactly the kind of thing the TMO should be doing but it's a little disappointing to hear that Jerry takes the Kansas project and people like Bevan seriously - I always thought he was more grounded and realistic than that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Brainwashing is predation
With any given object, or person or concept - we 'seduce ourselves' to construct a narrative and formula useful to complete thoughts . . such as French Silk Pie = whatever or TMO = whatever you want to plug in Whether these narratives and formulas come from the outside world, such as the media or gurus - - or whether these formulas come from our own inner thought processes - they are brainwashing. Don't think for a moment that if we come up with a formula, or adopt a formula that lines up with our inclinations and passes all our tests - don't think for a moment that formula is not brainwashing. It is still a formula and it taints our world. If a formula gets you where you want to go, great, if not, dump it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: YMMV, but I see a lot of the TMO in the below. Edg http://tinyurl.com/2yelvx 3 Tools To Brainwash and Influence People Through Media `'till at last the child's mind is these suggestions, and the sum of the suggestions is the child's mind. And not the child's mind only. The adult's mind too all his life long. The mind that judges and desires and decides made up of these suggestions. But all these suggestions are our suggestions! - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World The opinions and behaviors of people and societies are easily swayed. Every decade, every year, every week, those who control mass media change the climates of human thought. New pop stars, fashions, and fads are paraded center stage and then exit stage left followed by floods of expendable cash, leaving the path of sordid garbage known as popular culture in its wake. Now the power to rule the world and wag the cultural dog is at your fingertips. What follows are simple instructions, a manual, a playbook of sorts, some simple behavioral tools to influence and take advantage of the nervous systems of all your peers. The 23 Tools: 1. The key to truly effective brainwashing is to work at people's most fundamental awareness. Shape them at the neurological level so they develop the faculties to take your input and call it thinking for myself. Enable them to stop thinking. 2. Limit any and all faculties for self-awareness and self-sensing. Destroy instinct and intuition. Actively and endlessly encourage external awareness. Make people dependent on your external input for as many decisions as possible. 3. Speed up messages so that the pace and rhythm of information is disorienting and visually biased. 4. Condition people to being bombarded with hundreds of thousands of signals a day. Teach them to attend to this stream of information and to call it Reality. Never let them ask what reality is. 5. Framing is everything. Decide what you want people to believe and make sure that any choices you give them are within a framework which assures you of your result. This is called the Illusion of Choice. Do you want to sweep the floor before or after dinner? Repeat this formula for economic systems, politicians, news stories, competing product brands and entertainment. 6. Appeal to the lowest common denominator. Make sure that all shows model conflict resolution of people with an emotional and intellectual maturity no greater than that of a six year old. Make it funny so no one notices. 7. Keep people passive. Encourage the Couch Potato Alpha Wave Escape Plan as the healing elixir for all that ails. 8. Don't make people think. Their days are hard enough as is. Bypass the need for opinion making by giving people ready-made opinions. Do it as though you don't have a conscience they are probably too stupid to make their own decisions anyway. 9. Ensure that there are no ongoing storylines with meaning or purpose beyond immediate sensory stimulation. Avoid universal themes as much as possible. Make absolutely certain there is no cultural, societal or global story or mythology present that conflicts with the myths of comfort and consumption. 10. Never encourage responsibility, or so much as suggest that humans could be involved in co-creating their future and the realities in which they reside. 11. Encourage group-sanctioned individuality only. By making `individuality the new conformity you are generating a powerful illusion of free choice. 12. Sensationalize the superficial. 13. Keep information bytes infinitesimally small. Promote Attention Deficit Disorder. Several decades of television have already set this in motion. 14. Repetition is key. Repeat important messages as often as possible. 15. Repetition is key. 16. Repetition is key. 17. Bypass rationality by any means possible. People don't need logic to accept information. Belief is emotional. Always remember: WAR=PEACE. 18. Remember - two half-truths make up a whole truth. 19. Demonize self-knowledge technology of all kinds. Throw around words like cult and brainwashing. Marginalize anyone involved in
[FairfieldLife] Re: The truth about flying, CC in 5-8, etc.
Why don't you get the ultimate revenge and pop into CC today - just to spite the whole bunch - - - you have the power and sufficient familiarity right now. and as far as yogic flying is concerned, first get a 100+ mile per hour fast ball, it pays much better and requires less mastery over those (what you will know soon enough when in CC) pesky circling 3 gunas. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This guy got up to the mike, 1972 Majorca, and asked Maharishi if this five to eight years was something he'd said, and Maharishi said: NO, NO, NO, NO NOnot for you. For teachers of TM we should be thinking only two years. Not an exact quote, but I was there, and that's exactly what he MEANT. I sold TM to EVERYONE on the basis of that five to eight year claim. It took me FIFTEEN two-year-hunks before I gave up hope of getting to CC in this lifetime, and finally faced that I'd been sold a bill of goods and was just another cultish true believer. Talk about being in denial. To me, one of the most telling facts that EVERY TRUE BELIEVER KNOWS IS TRUE is that no one is hovering -- and that those who are most dedicated to TM, those on Purusha and Mother Divine, have not perfected this siddhi yet. Given how much TM has used flimsy quasi-scientific evidence to the hilt, there can be no doubt that the TMO would be running banner ads in every media if there was a TMer hovering -- it would easily get the TMO BILLIONS OF DOLLARS almost overnight. NO ONE IS HOVERING. The Purusha and Mother Divine folks were/are required to be much much more pure in their relative lives. If those fuckers can't fly, why would anyone in the householder lifestyle even begin to think they'll be lucky enough to perfect that siddhi? I feel so fucking stupid to have ever even tried to evolve when I see so many who have left Purusha, entered business life, and been just as assholish as me. I just don't see any superiority in them, moral or otherwise, nor did I sense anything much in the vibes of those who were still on the program. But I was plainly LIED to by true believers who came back from the first six-month courses and said the most outlandish assertions ever about it. This is it guys...you have to get to this course. Like that. And now the poor pundits are in a slave camp and freezing and low on food. The TMO took my ATR credits and never even bothered to tell me until I applied for the siddhi course -- IT'S ABOUT THE MONEY. It's snowing here in Wisconsin for the sixth time in a month. My arms and wrists are killing me after another two hours of shoveling my corner house's walk and drive; ibuprofen will mostly cure my physical woes, but my psychic arms and wrists still are sore from all the shit I shoveled for the TMO. To me THE LACK OF FLYING AFTER 30 YEARS OF FOLKS TRYING IS FUCKING PROOF THAT ANYONE WOULD BE A FOOL TO BELIEVE IN IT ENOUGH TO DEDICATE THEIR LIFE TO IT. I did more than that: I sold out my family, my career, and my precious integrity based on a bill of goods that never had any more value than a pig in a poke. 29 years, four hours a day. But, hey, I got off lite, cuz I didn't pay a million buckazoids for a crown and an empty title. If I ever see Bevan or John in person again, I'm going to spit out the above words with as much rage as I can muster. Neither would finish a meal in any restaurant I would find them in. They'd have to call the cops to drag my ass out of there. This is about predation. I was one of the suckers born every minute. Judy, do you think, in the next 20 years that anyone will fly? If not, then why bother? Be born in the family of yogis in your next lifetime and enjoy what you have left of this one. If Maharishi had handled the money correctly, I might still be in the fold -- so, bottom line, THANKS FOR ROBBING US ALL BLIND, MAHARISHI, it was one of the major components of my REALIZATION that I was duped to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost opportunities, and tens of thousands in actual out of pocket money -- and this loss was as if nothing compared to the burden that my past memories have on me even now. Mirrors are hard to have around. But thanks, TMO, thanks Maharishi, at least after such a divine screwing as I've received from this, I can avoid suchlike for the rest of my life and enjoy what I have now without the onus of making a spiritual case for its value. After such a religious rape, THANKS, I get it now. I can have a beer, a steak, and a fuck -- daily for the rest of my life -- without even one idea passing through my mind about sin, and if anyone, ANYONE, looks cross-eyed at me for it, they'll get my fullest energetic blast back at them if they emit the slightest judgmental peep about it. It's about the money, and here's the good news: MAHARISHI IS GOING TO DIE ANY DAY NOWand the shit is going to
[FairfieldLife] Re: mothers of men - TMO press release
I think the term mother of men is not mother of males, but contrasted with mother of gods - - I believe that Mary is given the same title and respect in the purest of Catholic Traditions. I must admit the 'mother is at home' beats 'mother is working out of the home to earn extra cash so I can have a Playstation 3'. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As resolved on the 22nd of November, the final day of the European Assembly of National Leaders, there will now be two wings of administration of the Global Country of World Peaceone for men, and one for the mothers of men. The administration of the mothers' wing of the Movement will be on the level of silence functioning within itself. Our administration will not be through human endeavour but through human surrenderfrom where silence operates. The mothers' wing will offer to every mother in the world the opportunity to swing in the value of Saraswatithe Divine Mother, Goddess of Knowledge. We will offer to every mother the opportunity to be mother at home, at home within her own transcendental bliss consciousness. There will be a global video connection from 28 December, 8:00-9:30 p.m. Central European Time, so all who are unable to attend can watch on the Maharishi Channel, the MOU channel, or via the internet at www.Maharishichannel.org.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Dad the Alcoholic
H... How's that explanation of Jewish belief in reincarnation coming? Jonah and the Whale is a spot-on description of reincarnation - not that there's anything wrong with that
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amma's Visit to FF
test How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates. __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] Palestinians terrorism
( with regard to nablus108 ).I'm sorry to saythat since the intafadah began I have uterly lost any respect for Palestinians as a nation. They choose terrible leaders and support terrible policies. They glorify terrible murderers who celebrate in killing Israeli women and children. I am sad to say to you Palistinians, I have no sympathy for you. Hardly anyone I know respects you- even my Muslim friends in Australia are embarressed by you. While you continue to support and glorify your murderous leaders, I don't think you will ever have the respect of the world. Please dump these terrible people like Mashaal and follow people who can lead you with dignity. Then maybe us neutral people will respect you. Remember people like Ghandi and Martin Luther King achieved their goals far quicker, using peaceful methods than you have been able to do with your suicide bombings, rockets and other terrorist activities. So until you do choose a new tactic and new positive leaders, expect the world not to blink an eye or shed a tear while you slowly follow your suicidal course. Us neutral people really don't respect you at all anymore. P.S. Remember - if you are going to shoot your rockets from in the midst of women and children, you have only yourself to blame if women and children get struck by missiles. Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Palestinians terrorism
bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Larry Potter larry.potter@... wrote: ( with regard to nablus108 ). I'm sorry to say that since the intafadah began I have uterly lost any respect for Palestinians as a nation. They choose terrible leaders and support terrible policies. They glorify terrible murderers who celebrate in killing Israeli women and children. I am sad to say to you Palistinians, I have no sympathy for you.http://tinyurl.com/qxtq8 Aggression Under False Pretenses The aggression comes from the Palestinians side, To remind you, or to tell you, since you conveniently left out, that Palestinians murdered of 18-year-old Eliyahu Asheri two and a half weeks ago. Includingthat Hamas terrorists firing rockets and mortar bombs for weeks. Some of the rockets fell near the Israel city of Ashkelon. Some 17 rockets were fired between Saturday and Sunday morning. A man at a school in the Israel town of Sderot was wounded, Israel officials said.Now, what would you think, USA will do (or any other country for that matter)if, let's sayMexico, will beconstantly shooting rockets on USA cities and civilians. I'm just curious to know, how USA will react in your opinion. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150885975162pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull so, there is more to it thanone soldier as Haniyeh is falsely trying to paint. snip Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Religion and spirituality Buddha shakyamuni Maharishi mahesh yogi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
