[FairfieldLife] Re: For Barry, the French and compassion's claimants.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Emptybill, I have to ask... What, exactly, is the name of the Buddhist lineage you claim to have studied with? I'd like to know so I can avoid it. :-) I think this is the same Bill who claims to be an Orthodox Greek monk (I guess he must have been defrocked?), a TM teacher who still practices TM, a student of Younge Khachab Rinpoche ( http://www.rimeshedrubling.dreamhosters.com/site/ ) but seems to dabble in a number of lamas who happen upon the center in Kansas City. IOW it sounds like Bill doesn't know what his lineage is. He's what we'd call a dabbler. I think this is the same guy who also claimed to be a disciple of Hitler in a previous life. One things for certain, he really should repeat the ngondro (if he has ever performed it at all). Based on his roughshod presentation here I would seriously doubt he's Dzogchen material.
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Barry, the French and compassion's claimants.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Emptybill, I have to ask... What, exactly, is the name of the Buddhist lineage you claim to have studied with? I'd like to know so I can avoid it. :-) I think this is the same Bill who claims to be an Orthodox Greek monk (I guess he must have been defrocked?), a TM teacher who still practices TM, a student of Younge Khachab Rinpoche ( http://www.rimeshedrubling.dreamhosters.com/site/ ) but seems to dabble in a number of lamas who happen upon the center in Kansas City. IOW it sounds like Bill doesn't know what his lineage is. He's what we'd call a dabbler. I think this is the same guy who also claimed to be a disciple of Hitler in a previous life. One things for certain, he really should repeat the ngondro (if he has ever performed it at all). Based on his roughshod presentation here I would seriously doubt he's Dzogchen material. ah, another westerner like Vaj with a funny name, fresh out of the clown factory...let's see, your lineage is upper middle class, disaffected, rebelling against mommy and daddy, college educated (advanced degree probably), never lived outside the US, and thinks themselves fully steeped in some Eastern tradition of which they know nothing, except intellectually. how'm i doing? Geez, not even close! You suck, keep your day job, etc. I bet you get called clueless a lot! I'm from the Nath lineage, which is from India (a different country) and I am authorized as a lineholder in that tradition.
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Barry, the French and compassion's claimants.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: oh well, just trying to guess where your arrogance and nastiness come from...you suck too, for that matter. you feel pretty special with your nath path, huh? Pretty funny coming from someone who's sole role on this list is to be a malicious troll and instigator. I was actually responding to Empty Bill's almost continuously arrogant and trollish posts. If you don't get that, I suspect the reason is you are just another angry and biased TM person. This list seems to attract them. Thanks for adding nothing to the conversation Dawn. Gosh you're good at that! Should I feel special Dawn?
[FairfieldLife] Women and the Path to Enlightenment
If you have read the incredible work Cave in the Snow: Tenzin Palmo's Quest for Enlightenment, you will really appreciate this announcement. Thanks to Vaj for turning me on to this wisdom Dakini. Check out her web site (especially the picture of the yogis who are sharing their Knowledge on this whole trip). Not only are these women sharing our western, beyond gender slant on Enlightenment, they are going beyond the limitations of the east and incorporating these change *in the east*. And they are sharing the wisdom of the male yogis as they do so. It's what I always dreamed of. Maybe some of the women enslaved in cults like the TM org (mother divine) can now gain the courage to tread an honest path...and those who want to support a path for those women truly interested in a path to real enlightenment, will be enpowered to do so. So mote it be! Kala* A small step for Tenzin Palmo, a Greap Leap for Womankind in Spirituality: Jetsunbma Tenzin Palmo enthronement announcement From: joan stanley-baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] This Tibetan Buddhist tradition used to have women priestesses up till the fourteenth century, I believe when their authority was slowly removed shred by shred till they are not even given literacy in the recent centuries but used only to serve tea I am happy to bring this triumph to the list. It has been a very long struggle, for this English Buddhist nun who sat for 12 years in a cave high up in the Himalayas... to arrive at the honoured place given her here... What she seeks is women's rights in spiritual practice and attainment, and slowly, step by tiny step she is getting there. Check her website http://www.gatsal.org/ Here just to share a soft hurrahhh... An email contact is dongyu gatsal [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joan Joan Stanley-Baker MLitt DPhil Oxon Emeritus Professor, Tainan National University of the Arts #15, Lane 6 DaHeng Road,Yangmingshan, Shilin, Taipei 11191 ROC
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angela Tells It to The FF Enlightened
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: I bet we can drum up some more folks to join or at least lurkers who haven't ever posted who don't like these rules to *outnumber* the so-called consensus are return this group to open discussion. Lurk: I will make you a bet. How long would Lawson English last on any forum posting 30-40 messages a day? Or Judith in consort radiating her lesbionic pro-TM vibe endlessly. It's like one of those movies where you just can't kill the robot. It is these two who wholeheartedly hijacked this very group for months (years?). One is still just chomping at the bit waiting till she can vent her vitriolic Jihad here come Saturday. (or at least vent her swollen spleen on Barry). If both of these trolls had been ousted long, long ago by a savvy moderator, none of us would be STILL left suffering in their wake. It just goes to show what impotent and unrealistic wimps vegetarians can become. We just lucked out that Lawson headed for the hills when his obsessive knee-jerk was curtailed via digital decision.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced technique
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, biosoundbill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that the advanced techniques in TM where additional syllables are added to the mantra are not as powerful as the basic TM technique. The reason I say this is because in the basic TM technique one is meditating twice daily with the purest, most intense form of a mantra. I would disagree. The full dharani, the chain of mantra and it's bija is the most profound expression of mantra. One is the seed and one is the tree. It is only then that we can differentiate and experience the different levels of the mantra (vyapini, unmana, samana, etc.) consciously and under will. Failing that we never completely transcend the mind but instead simply arrive at what appears like a thought-free state. But vrittis are still present at this rudimentary state. This thought-free state can be quite addictive and people tend to get stuck there because of this. It's also important that the initate has the dhyana-vidhi of the devata as that potentializes the ability to actualize the mantra-shakti and communicate with that energy as all-pervasive outside of meditation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, biosoundbill smithybill@ wrote: I think that the advanced techniques in TM where additional syllables are added to the mantra are not as powerful as the basic TM technique. The reason I say this is because in the basic TM technique one is meditating twice daily with the purest, most intense form of a mantra. I would disagree. The full dharani, the chain of mantra and it's bija is the most profound expression of mantra. One is the seed and one is the tree. It is only then that we can differentiate and experience the different levels of the mantra (vyapini, unmana, samana, etc.) consciously and under will. Failing that we never completely transcend the mind but instead simply arrive at what appears like a thought-free state. But vrittis are still present at this rudimentary state. This thought-free state can be quite addictive and people tend to get stuck there because of this. It's also important that the initate has the dhyana-vidhi of the devata as that potentializes the ability to actualize the mantra-shakti and communicate with that energy as all-pervasive outside of meditation. Well, yes and no, that may be intellectually true but *experientially* unless the meditator is advanced it can have a slowing down of transcending per my experience! It's not an intellectual fact, it IS an experiential one. But you'd have to have a means of comparison and since this is not the type of mantra that is given in TM, you would need to experience a different practice. Mostly you see streamlined teachings being given out by the mass-market meditation vendors. TM epitomizes that approach. You do not always get what you pay for; personal instruction will always be the superior vehicle (but at one time TM might have been a good starter practice). The way TM was instructed years ago will only serve to plumb the grosser levels of mind but the technique is definitely not an unmana technique, i.e. one that goes truly beyond the mind. If that was the case (that TM took you beyond the mind, etc.) you would see people going into very deep absorptions for long periods of time. As far as I am aware, that is not the case. If it was I'm sure they'd advertise it!!! :-) Kala Devi
[FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, biosoundbill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Namaskaram Kala Devi, I'll use a non TM mantra as an example! Let's say the bija is `Shreem' for the basic TM technique. Let's say `Om Shreem Namaha' for an advanced technique. Finally let's say `Om Shreem Maha Lakshmiyei Swaha' for a more advanced technique. From your experience, am I correct in saying that `Om Shreem Maha Lakshmiyei Swaha' would be the most powerful of all 3 meditation mantras? Not necessarily, as mantras depend on the disposition of the student, most especially the students mind. There are some techniques utilizing merely a bija mantra which truly go beyond the mind (but there are specific techniques in addition to the mantra in order to do so). Now if, for example, the Lakshmi mantra IS appropriate for a certain student and they know the appropriate techniques to use that mantra fully, it could render full results. But merely giving out mantras for mental repetition, comparitively there could be little or no difference. However if paying wads of money made one think they had something more special or important, the change in attitude could affect the students experience of that mantra, as silly as that sounds, because the resolve and intent has changed. In addition to the mental use of mantra there are hosts of other techniques which can be applied in addition to or with the mantra. Often as the experience of subtlety of mantra refines, techniques will refine to take the mind deeper, beyond where the mantra *appears* to end and to allow the meditator to go much further, deeper and longer (sounds like porn! :-) ). Adhikara mantras, mantras which are chosen based on the student, are always favorable to mantras merely given by puja. With an indiscrimantly given mantra, there is always the potential for something to go wrong. Kala Devi
[FairfieldLife] The Congressional Medal for the Dalai Lama
Beautiful! Now Bush needs to follow this advice. http://snipurl.com/1sccv
[FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A longer mantra cultures the mind at deeper levels. The short bij mantra bobs up and down. It is not like a rock but more like a basketball being dribbled. But the longer mantra keeps you at a deep level for longer periods of time. Unfortunately on the airplane trip home after TTC where MMY gave out the advanced techniques about 2/3's of those who got advanced techniques couldn't remember what they were given. I had two versions in my mind: the correct one and one shorter but didn't know which was right. I went on for years switching between one and the other with different results. I didn't care much for that uncertainty and even wrote two mantra check letters to MMY but never got anything back. Rather than making an absolute statement that would clearly appeal to TMers, wouldn't it be fairer to say 'in some simple forms of meditation using mental repetition of mantra a longer mantra can culture the mind at deeper levels. A short bija mantra can sometimes bob up and down.' Otherwise you are ignoring the fact that some yogis will use a bija and trace it's component parts to beyond the mind and to the deepest absorptions (something never witnessed in TM meditators). Likewise other lay people may just use a long mantra in a more discursive fashion (consider 'Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God..etc.' as an English example or Om Mani Padme Hum superstitiously repeated by thousands of TIbetans). Your statement is not absolutely true, only conditionally true.
[FairfieldLife] Angela Tells It to The FF Enlightened
from the Wednesday Night Satsang List: Hi y'all, Rick gets private letters asking him to boot Bronte, and Bronte gets private letters in support of her stance. Well, now, doesn't that say it all? Why can't everyone be up front about this? I never said that I thought current Ff thought was as bad as German fascism, but I do think the two are compatible modes of thought. One is more extreme than the other. The Ff scene wants to project genteel peace at the moment, rather than holy warrior, and I find genteel peace insufferably phony---and not only phony, but, at bottom, icy cold and judgmental. And so I certainly agree with Bronte that the Wednesday Night group has a tendency to be condescending. That's why I've not been attending, though I do enjoy reading some of the posts. By no means all, however. In the posts, too, there is stuff that's too patronizing for me. And a patronizing attitude is somehow even harder to take when it comes from a female. That said, I'm going to be insufferably condescending myself. The Wednesday night group is pretty much where my head was at thirty five years ago. I was waking up then, and a group would have been nice. There wasn't one. And I was insufferably arrogant because I was awake and nobody else I knew was, though I found kindred spirits in literature. I ran rings around my profs in grad school, and that was not a good thing for a woman to do. Back then, I thought I would just get more and more incredible experience that would set me more and more apart from the stupid waking-staters of the world. Instead, I've become more and more ordinary over the years. At this point, I'm more comfortable with people who pretend to no spiritual attainment whatsoever than I am with folks who do. Yes, I've also got groovy experiences, but so f---ing what. a
[FairfieldLife] Bronte bids adieu to the FF enlightened
First, her open letter: Rick wrote: The Wednesday Night Chat group (WNC) is like a select group of people who have been invited ... Bronte: Select -- your word choice. This is a group of elite. Rick: to a cordial discussion in someone's living room. Bronte: Except when someone dares to disagree with elite opinion. Rick: In fact, it's almost literally an extension of Tom's living room. Bronte: Except when some of you were thinking of moving the group to a public building. Don't blame the elitist attitude on Tom's living room. Rick: Certain behavior appropriate in FFL is inappropriate in WNC. Bronte: You're prescribing behavior now, Archer. How elitist is that? You want to control not only how WNC members think but how they behave as well? There is a more appropriate word for that: fascist. Rick: Some people in WNC also belong to FFL and enjoy both, each for different reasons. Bronte: WNC will never become FFL because it's made up of different people. Let people be people. Let them be who they are. Quit prescribing and demanding certain behaviors. I've received half a dozen emails from WNC members thanking me for what I'm saying about the unspoken problem in the group, and for the interesting posts. Anyone who doesn't like what anyone else writes doesn't have to read it. To silence another's freedom of speech because you don't like what they said is fascist. Ugly word, absolutely appropriate. Quit white-washing elitism, folks. Archer, you are supporting and enforcing it. I am profoundly disappointed to see this in you. Rick: Others in WNC intentionally avoid FFL because they don't like the rough and tumble atmosphere there. Out of respect to those people and the unique purpose of WNC, I think I reflect the majority in requesting that we don't bring the behavior of FFL into WNC. Bronte: Bring the behavior of FFL into WNC? You mean because I call a spade a spade when I see it? What kind of people is this majority you speak for that they want to silence others or curtail their expression simply for having points of view that disagree with theirs? I have done nothing inappropriate. Did you write a preachy letter like this to Nate, Mr. Archer, for his vitriolic obscenity-strewn tirade in this forum? Not that I objected, it came from his honesty. Sometimes honesty and strong sincere feelings make people have to speak like that. But I ask, did he get a preachy little letter, too, telling him to behave properly or risk being silenced? Of course not. Not because his behavior was not objectionable to your delicate tastes, but because he wasn't rocking the idea boat. Only people who do that are not welcome here. Well, I'm going to make you do it, Archer. You are going to have to choose between being the lackey for people who want to silence and control others, or you can choose to get off this soapbox. Rick: When you joined FFL Bronte, you found much of the language and behavior offensive. At your request, I attempted to clean it up. Bronte: And we made it better through those efforts. There was no rule imposed from on high. Improving the civility was a group effort, a consensus. Rick: I am getting emails on the side asking me to unsubscribe you from the group. Bronte: Well, Rick, go figure. Rick: I don't want to do that, just as I've never (but once) banned anyone from FFL. Bronte: If you want to be the henchmen of those who would control the thoughts and actions of others, then do your dirty work, Rick Archer. Rick: So I'm asking you politely to consider these points. Bronte: Politely being the sugar-coat that's supposed to disguise your fascist-like ultimatum as acceptable. Rick: Let `er rip in FFL but please attune yourself to the very different atmosphere of WNC if you're going to post here. Bronte: I shall not be different people when I write to different chat groups just to please the controlling intentions of the very people whose agenda I have exposed. I shall write as I am and from who I am. If you want to silence me, those of you who hide behind Rick Archer, let that be your karma. You would have done well in Nazi Germany or in France around the fire in the witch burnings. How are you being any different? Only the scale of seriousness is changed. Angela has been writing FFL that she believes the New Age movement has brought to bear a philosophy that supports fascist thinking, that in the end will make people capable of everything the Nazis were capable of in their day. I found that a little extreme. But in the past few days, fascist is an adjective that sadly has entered my vocabulary. I'm now seriously wondering if Angela is right. Has it really come to this? Have my friends from the days of early TM really changed in 20 years from kind-hearted idealists working to try and create world peace, to become today cloak-and-dagger
[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)
Hi Bill: I'm not sure what to make of your infrequent posts here to FFL, so often filled with bile and now, misinformation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We get to hear claims here from time to time about lineages - along with various references to yogic insider knowledge. Most of it is nothing but mere claims, usually based upon a favored explanation given by some teacher who is rooted in a particular interpretation or philosophic view about yoga. Here, in this context, it appears quite funny - so we should all have a good laugh, pass the bottle of bourbon and salute our foolish imaginations. The PatanjalaYogaSutra is clocked around 150-200 CE. Both the Samkhya and Yoga darshanas were dealt with by Buddhist scholars, even as late as Paramatha in China (6th Cent. CE). That is pretty much it because neither of these darshanas survived the intervening centuries down to our era of time. Did not survive means no param-para, no sampradaya, no lineage, no diksha, no transmission of secret techniques, no transmission of hidden knowledge, and more importantly no person remaining to retain any kind of lengthy or abridged explanations. Of course this may be how it appears to someone who learned from a book. The reality however is quite different. For example I can tell you Vajranaths master in the yoga sutras come from a long oral lineage. The cave they were initated in records the oral tradition of that line for over 700 years! And thats just in this one place. Swami Hariharananda Aranya tried to revive this extinct lineage in the 19th Century, CE by creating a SankhyaYoga Matha but it did not survive either. Ah, more misinformation. First of all, Swami Hariharananda Aranya did not TRY to revive the lineage (from extant oral traditions), he did so. That was not in the 19th century but the 20th century. And not only DID that survive, it is now in its fourth generation and thriving. Wow, you got every point wrong Bill. Impressive! The Patanjali tradition is an ancient oral tradition which continues up to the present day, but it is very rare. Often it seems traditions have become extinct when in fact they submerge and reemerge, often beyond the eyes of the scholars and the masses. Vedanta survived - in various forms and sampradayas. Vedantic teachers read Patanjali and created their own interpretations of his intended meaning, although almost always defering to and starting from Vyasa's commentary. And Trinity you are quite correct. I posted Shankara's short vivarana about siddhis in Card's thread about YS. III.37(38). He sees siddhis as distractions but only for a yogin who wants to remain absorbed in the vision of purusha. Even then there is no problem for one detached in proper vairagya. But of course the initial point was cultivation of siddhis is opposite of vairagya so therefore the inital point remains, as the oral tradition tells us. Kala Devi
[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptybill@ wrote: Hi Trinity, Welcome back to krodha-dama. We get to hear claims here from time to time about lineages - along with various references to yogic insider knowledge. Most of it is nothing but mere claims, usually based upon a favored explanation given by some teacher who is rooted in a particular interpretation or philosophic view about yoga. Here, in this context, it appears quite funny - so we should all have a good laugh, pass the bottle of bourbon and salute our foolish imaginations. The PatanjalaYogaSutra is clocked around 150-200 CE. Both the Samkhya and Yoga darshanas were dealt with by Buddhist scholars, even as late as Paramatha in China (6th Cent. CE). That is pretty much it because neither of these darshanas survived the intervening centuries down to our era of time. Did not survive means no param-para, no sampradaya, no lineage, no diksha, no transmission of secret techniques, no transmission of hidden knowledge, and more importantly no person remaining to retain any kind of lengthy or abridged explanations. Swami Hariharananda Aranya tried to revive this extinct lineage in the 19th Century, CE by creating a SankhyaYoga Matha but it did not survive either. Vedanta survived - in various forms and sampradayas. Vedantic teachers read Patanjali and created their own interpretations of his intended meaning, although almost always defering to and starting from Vyasa's commentary. And Trinity you are quite correct. I posted Shankara's short vivarana about siddhis in Card's thread about YS. III.37(38). He sees siddhis as distractions but only for a yogin who wants to remain absorbed in the vision of purusha. Even then there is no problem for one detached in proper vairagya. empty How about siddhis being a touchstone of the depth(?) of samaadhi? dharma-megha-samaadhi is possible to reach only if one is 'akusiida' even in 'prasaMkhyaana', prasaMkhyaane 'py akusiidasya sarvathaa viveka-khyaater dharma-meghaH samaadhiH (IV 29) Perhaps 'prasaMkhyaana' means, amongst other things, that one is capable of performing siddhis, if one so wishes (is 'kusiida', *not* 'a-kusiida'??). Prasankhyana is the dicrimination between purusha and prakriti, it is also a source of the name of the Sankhya system (a prerequisite for the yoga-sutra).
[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Actually the way it's taught by lineal Patanjali masters is that siddhis are not to be cultivated via samyama but instead are spontaneous side-effects of samadhi. Swami Brahmananda Saraswati emphasized this as well. Hey there. While in India, I bought a book which was recommended here to me, the Bhagavad Gita with commentary by Madhusudana Saraswati, who was in the 16th century, a contemporary of Akbhar and a renovator of the Dasanami Order. It is because of him that Non-Brahmins are accepted into most Dasanami Orders. he was also a great Bhakta who synthezised the bhakti philosophies with Shankara Advaita. Here in verse 21 he calls samyama strongest of all disciplines This is what he says in his Invocation to the Gita. 20 Through the power of knowledge of reality (tattva-jnana) the results of actions (done in past lives) that have not commenced bearing fruit (anarabdha or sancita) get wholly destroyed, to be sure, and the results of actions (done in the present life after the dawn of knowledge) that are to bear fruit in the furure (agamini) do not accrue. 21 But because of disturbances created by the results of actions that have started bearing fruit (prarabdha), vasana (past impressions) does not get destroyed. That is eliminated through samyama, the strongest of all (the disciplines). 22. The five disciplines, viz yama (restraint) etc. (P.Y.Su 2.29) practised before become conducive to that samyama which is a triad consisting of dharana, dhyan and samadhi (see ibid. 3.1.4) I asked Vajranatha about this as he is over his posting limit. Samyama is not a bad practice by itself. It is when it is used to manifest siddhis that it causes obscuration of the natural state. In the context quoted it refers to the triad of yogic absorptions and not to cultivating of siddhis. Different context, different meaning. Other more specific references refer to the Gita and explain that samyama used for siddhis will lead to emotional and mental obscurations. Please be careful of your context as it is not a good idea to be encouraging people to use samyama to manifest siddhis!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Unfortunately cultivation of siddhis, esp, via samyama is the opposite of that, according to the Shankaracharya tradition and numerous others. But not necessarily according to Patanjali. And certainly not according to Madhusudana Saraswati, reformator of Shankaras order in the 16th century. He in his Gita Bashaya describes Samyama as the most effective means. And AFAIK S. is only described in PYS III pertaining to siddhis. So this whole stance against samyama being against the Shankara tradition is only hot air from someone who doesn't know. If that is the case then someone who doesn't know would be Shankaracharya Vidyaranya and the many others he quotes! Once again you are confusing the triad of yogic absorptions with using this triad to cultivate siddhis. There is a huge difference! How do you think samyama is actually used in non-magical traditions? You don't seem to be aware what that method is based on your remarks!!!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Unfortunately cultivation of siddhis, esp, via samyama is the opposite of that, according to the Shankaracharya tradition and numerous others. But not necessarily according to Patanjali. And certainly not according to Madhusudana Saraswati, reformator of Shankaras order in the 16th century. He in his Gita Bashaya describes Samyama as the most effective means. And AFAIK S. is only described in PYS III pertaining to siddhis. So this whole stance against samyama being against the Shankara tradition is only hot air from someone who doesn't know. If that is the case then someone who doesn't know would be Shankaracharya Vidyaranya and the many others he quotes! Once again you are confusing the triad of yogic absorptions with using this triad to cultivate siddhis. There is a huge difference! How do you think samyama is actually used in non-magical traditions? You don't seem to be aware what that method is based on your remarks!!! If thats the case then make us aware rather than being purposefully vague here. In the quotes above Madhusudana is particularely making references to the YS, hradly a magical tradition. AFAIK the word occures only in the context of the 3rd Chapter which is about Siddhis. There has to be a distinction to be made regarding attachment to Siddhis and their practise. You are ignoring this. Otherwise give your sources. You would do better to find an authentic teacher who can explain such things to you as you seem very confused. I cannot initiate you on a message board, what a crazy thing to ask. Madhusadana is referring to the triad of absorptions not performing those absorptions on the siddhi formulae (which *are* used in yogic magical traditions). They are not used in the advaita tradition of Shankara. If this is what your teacher is recommending, I'd be very concerned about that teachers worthiness to teach. IIRC the Advaitasiddhi by the same author is also against cultivation of siddhis!!! (I will try to find a quote if I can). Your comments do me show the danger of naive people reading texts without guidance, only an agenda. The truth should be your first priority, not your agenda to protect dangerous practices you are attached to.
[FairfieldLife] Madhusudana S. on Samyama (Re: Interesting translation of III 38)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Actually the way it's taught by lineal Patanjali masters is that siddhis are not to be cultivated via samyama but instead are spontaneous side-effects of samadhi. Swami Brahmananda Saraswati emphasized this as well. Hey there. While in India, I bought a book which was recommended here to me, the Bhagavad Gita with commentary by Madhusudana Saraswati, who was in the 16th century, a contemporary of Akbhar and a renovator of the Dasanami Order. It is because of him that Non-Brahmins are accepted into most Dasanami Orders. he was also a great Bhakta who synthezised the bhakti philosophies with Shankara Advaita. Here in verse 21 he calls samyama strongest of all disciplines This is what he says in his Invocation to the Gita. 20 Through the power of knowledge of reality (tattva-jnana) the results of actions (done in past lives) that have not commenced bearing fruit (anarabdha or sancita) get wholly destroyed, to be sure, and the results of actions (done in the present life after the dawn of knowledge) that are to bear fruit in the furure (agamini) do not accrue. 21 But because of disturbances created by the results of actions that have started bearing fruit (prarabdha), vasana (past impressions) does not get destroyed. That is eliminated through samyama, the strongest of all (the disciplines). 22. The five disciplines, viz yama (restraint) etc. (P.Y.Su 2.29) practised before become conducive to that samyama which is a triad consisting of dharana, dhyan and samadhi (see ibid. 3.1.4) I asked Vajranatha about this as he is over his posting limit. Samyama is not a bad practice by itself. It is when it is used to manifest siddhis that it causes obscuration of the natural state. In the context quoted it refers to the triad of yogic absorptions and not to cultivating of siddhis. Different context, different meaning. Other more specific references refer to the Gita and explain that samyama used for siddhis will lead to emotional and mental obscurations. Please be careful of your context as it is not a good idea to be encouraging people to use samyama to manifest siddhis! Please see the reference in verse 22: PYS 3.1.4 This is the Chapter followed by the explanation how siddhis are developed through Samyama. It is Vaj ignoring the context here. I'll have to ask him later as I only have one post left for the day. IIRC the initiated interpretation is in the order the text is meant to be read. In that order samyama is described and ALL THE MAGICAL FORMULA ARE TO BE SKIPPED. The text picks up where they end with the description of mastering yogic discrimination. People who just read the text as if it were to be read in a sequence will miss this. So it seems to me you don't understand they way it is read for the initiated. Your quote refers to a verse and there is no mention of the siddhis (unless you forgot to post that?). It does not refer to samyama on the siddhis at all. This is why you have missed the context. Your naivete is showing. Dangerously so.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting translation of III 38
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Unfortunately cultivation of siddhis, esp, via samyama is the opposite of that, according to the Shankaracharya tradition and numerous others. But not necessarily according to Patanjali. And certainly not according to Madhusudana Saraswati, reformator of Shankaras order in the 16th century. He in his Gita Bashaya describes Samyama as the most effective means. And AFAIK S. is only described in PYS III pertaining to siddhis. So this whole stance against samyama being against the Shankara tradition is only hot air from someone who doesn't know. If that is the case then someone who doesn't know would be Shankaracharya Vidyaranya and the many others he quotes! Once again you are confusing the triad of yogic absorptions with using this triad to cultivate siddhis. There is a huge difference! How do you think samyama is actually used in non-magical traditions? You don't seem to be aware what that method is based on your remarks!!! If thats the case then make us aware rather than being purposefully vague here. In the quotes above Madhusudana is particularely making references to the YS, hradly a magical tradition. AFAIK the word occures only in the context of the 3rd Chapter which is about Siddhis. There has to be a distinction to be made regarding attachment to Siddhis and their practise. You are ignoring this. Otherwise give your sources. You would do better to find an authentic teacher who can explain such things to you as you seem very confused. I cannot initiate you on a message board, what a crazy thing to ask. I certainly didn't ask you for anything. If its all 'secret knowledge' stop discussing! Stop fussing around and being personal. Madhusadana is referring to the triad of absorptions not performing those absorptions on the siddhi formulae (which *are* used in yogic magical traditions). They are not used in the advaita tradition of Shankara. You are just repeating yourself, without giving the required reference, nor do you address the occurence of the reference given i.e PYS III You are just getting personal and threatening. Madhusudanas Bhashya is a commonly available scholastic work, so one should be able to discuss it relatively emotionless on a public forum. If you (or Vaj) don't like this, refrain from discussing here and keep your secrets to yourselves. If this is what your teacher is recommending, I'd be very concerned about that teachers worthiness to teach. See, I am not discussing my teacher, or any teacher, and I wouldn't listen to your judgments, as your tone suggests you are an arrogant 'I know it all and better than everyone' Make clear and rational arguments and we can talk. IIRC the Advaitasiddhi by the same author is also against cultivation of siddhis!!! (I will try to find a quote if I can). Good, try. Your comments do me show the danger of naive people reading texts without guidance, only an agenda. Talking about agendas, what do you think you have? The truth should be your first priority, not your agenda to protect dangerous practices you are attached to. The whole tone of your post is one of superiority, personal attack, and threatening. Your opinion of 'truth' smacks of fundamentalism. Maybe you are just not so sure about everything, why use personalattack otherwise? I'm not attacking you t3inity, it just is rather obvious to me what your quote is referring to: the triad of absorptions (a very valuable practice indeed) but it does not refer to their use for siddhis. If I am missing something or you have a quote from Madhusadana which *does* mention using samyama on the siddhi formulae and practices, then please post it. Your confusing the plain practice of samyama, the triad of the three yogic absorptions, with the practice of samyama ON siddhi formulae (and associated practices). There is a difference, but it's for me to apologize for your ignorance of this fact? No, it's for me to point out this fact, not as any sort of fundamentalist, certainly, but from what my knowledge of what the teachings are. Samyama in the yoga sutra refers to a particular practice: dharana, dhyana and samadhi. That term of and by itself does not specify what object that samyama is being performed on. Since the prohibition on samyama
[FairfieldLife] Lawson English now harrassing Buddhist groups
Some people just can't stop in their obsessions with TM and TM's (so called) research. Lawson English, previously one of the primary tormentors on this fine list, has now taken his annoying TM research game to Buddhist lists where he proselytizes for TM constantly, day in and day out. Despite numerous requests to stop or leave this guy won't leave. What's his problem? Is this common is the TM org? Why would anyone consider such behaviour to be a beneficial example? Honestly, I've never seen anything quite like this. Very strange!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Lawson English now harrassing Buddhist groups
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: Lawson English, previously one of the primary tormentors on this fine list, has now taken his annoying TM research game to Buddhist lists where he proselytizes for TM constantly, day in and day out. Despite numerous requests to stop or leave this guy won't leave. Pray tell, what site/group is this. Honestly, I am not the praying type, but occasionaly I find myself thanking God that Lawson is no longer posting here. You and over a thousand other members of this once fine list. He's currently terrorizing ALL of the buddhist usenet groups.
[FairfieldLife] Fwd: Re: [TMTrue] My first post: Please help me, I'm so confused
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mathatbrahman mathatbrahman@ wrote: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Yes John-boy, I read the website and yes indeedee, it is all true. :-) The only truth that's been hidden is the truth about TM, the TMSP and the TMO in general. And this has caused suffering to countless human beings. And please remember, if you're near a TMO Peace Palace or facility and you see a pundit, give them a nice hug and tell them that you support Universal Tolerance. If you eat meat, make sure you tell them that *last*. ;-) On Jan 11, 2007, at 10:37 PM, John M. Knapp wrote: Hi, I just joined this list this week. I learned TM in 1972, and although I meditate regularly I haven't had much contact with the TM Movement in years. That's one of the reasons I signed up for this list after I started hearing about David Lynch. I wanted to see learn what's new with the Movement. But I received a very disturbing e-mail this morning from a friend. He stumbled on a blog, http://tmfree.blogspot.com. It's filled with very weird and upsetting stories about TM and Maharishi. Is any of this stuff true? --- End forwarded message --- What is this incoherent mess trying to say? More crap from the faux- Buddhist little Vajee? Buddha spits in his face. What a flaming asshole you are! If you do half the heart felt humanitarian work this man has done, then you can complain. Holy hell, last I talked to him he'd spent his last three vacations (including all of last Christmas) at children's orphanages. And I bet you and wife no. 2 only have visitation rights for your kids. If only you were half the man, then you might be a real man.
[FairfieldLife] The mechanics of True Believerism?
From the TM Free blog: Why TM is Dangerous and Blocks the Path to Liberation Meditate on any mantra long enough and you will awaken kundalini. Add some breathing exercises and some asanas and it makes it even more likely. If that doesn't work, one can use an occult yogic technique like samyama. Such an awakening however is both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing if one has been gifted with a true Master, one who can guide you through all the possible errors and handle all the different types of students. One who knows the techniques for a balanced awakening and how to correct imbalances when they occur. It's a curse if one is left alone to fend for oneself when something goes awry. Kundalini naturally has several routes it can take. Most people have only heard of one, the sushumna nadi. But actually sushumna nadi is not the easiest path for kundalini to take. There are other routes which offer a path of least resistance and all of these paths have one thing in common: they never complete themselves. They are dead ends. They never resolve into the bindu which is the source of the experience of Unity, the One. Once one opens an incomplete kundalini path, without expert guidance and assistance, it's virtually impossible to get out of this stuck position. It is highly unlikely such a person will achieve liberation in this lifetime. In fact, one will take that particular deflected awakening into their next existence since kundalini awakening follows the student from life to life. Being in such a position of suspension has it's advantages for the false master as it virtually assures compliance, dependence and someone who's almost guaranteed to hang around for the next best thing. This is really nothing new, tantric masters of the vama marga, the left hand path, have known of such control techniques for centuries. Many have heard the oft-repeated yogic maxim avoid the siddhis, they are nothing but trouble. Few understand the reason. Certain meditational methods aimed at such siddhis will force the kundalini up an errant path were it can activate the brain centers which in turn activate the siddhis (often the vajra-nadi). Once one has, they are trapped. And sometimes that is just the right formula for the master. Then he can utilize any powers the student achieves, however minor, for his own ends. If he can get groups of students to do so, all the better for his agenda. Kundalini shakti which takes it's proper path, the sushumna nadi and it's sequentially finer paths, citrini nadi and brahma nadi, is capable of delivering true spiritual experience in a relatively short time. It does not take decades. What are the signs of an incorrect rising? They are many and they vary depending on the specific path kundalini takes. But a few would include obsessive or personality disorders which go away when one stops meditating but return when one continues, depression, fascination with channelling or other occult powers, feelings of heaviness or lethargy, strange food allergies, moodiness or sensitivity to others, the need to isolate oneself from others, a sense of being stuck, the inability to separate from the group or function in the outer world, physical pain, feeling compelled to wait for the next thing the master says or does rather than gain a sense of balanced independence, spiritual experiences which come and then go, phobias, hypochondria, etc. It's a very workable formula for a manipulative guru intent on something other than your best interests. Sound familiar anyone? Saturday, January 27, 2007 6:33:00 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: WHAT WILL FAIRFIELD IOWA LOOK LIKE BY THE END OF 2007?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 24, 2007, at 2:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was told it was by invitation only from an Ammachi devotee. If it is not then I would like to attend. Sai Baba is already in jail because he is in a physical body. It is a bitch to let go of all emotional attachments to get into the 7th dimension. Sai Baba is in the upper 6th dimension and will digress due to his behavior. Channeled information says he has not touched anyone under the age of 14. Uh, you might want to change the channel or check their antenna if that's what they said. Check out Conny Larsson's (sp?) website for starters, this poor guy seems to have a karmic knack for finding false teachers. I see what you mean. The closer you look, the worse it gets: http://www.saibabaexpose.com/fecris.htm Maharishi just wanted to change the world by telling it to relax, because in fact he wanted everyone to become TM meditators, regardless of whom and what they were. He made people feel so welcome but his ultimate aim, which I only began to understand after 1975 when I left the organisation, was to create a world government and, until today there is a parallel world government run by Ministers, Maharajas and Kings with plastic crowns and mantles as in the Middle Ages. The fact is that they believe this and they are not just anyone, but well educated people, psychiatrists, doctors, ministers, psychologists, all those people that today appear on the famous TV show run by Oprah Winfrey. Her sponsoring of the movement brings them much success through trumped up support from famous doctors and publications. You can all connect to the Maharishi Satellite Network: there is a very important 24h a day Channel and there it is very easy to see what is going on. Why did I leave this organisation? I began to wake up when he declared that Mother Teresa was the worst kind of human being on earth. She later won the Nobel Prize. His main problem with her was that he wanted the Nobel Prize for himself. I was told to manipulate those responsible for choosing the people to be nominated. We tried to do this and succeeded, as he had much influence at that time, to get him nominated but this was blocked by King Olaf of Norway. He then started saying that all his teachers, I was one of them, were soon going to levitate. We were going to fly and we would visit all kinds of planets about which the psychiatrists and other spiritual teachers were always telling us. I realised that this could not be true as I taught these courses. They called it the TM-Sidhi Programme. At these flying courses people would be sitting cross-legs on their backsides on their mattresses and they jumped whilst sitting like this. After a while one could become very skilful and could jump up as high as a metre or so only to fall back again. I heard Maharishi tell a French photographer with a slow camera just to cut the fall back part and put the photos together when they were up which gave a flying image. So he put them together and this was broadcast all over the world.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Inside Pundit Info
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote: You just seem angry to me. -Rather petulant and childish to me.,___ Surprisingly so. It's unlike Jim to be this angry. He must have had a twist in his panties yesterday. The other remark I have about my challenges to you and Vaj yesterday was that here you sit day after day after day, challenging much of what TM is and who Maharishi is, and all who respond do so in the context of evaluating TM and Maharishi. So yesterday, understanding that I apply merciless rigor to TM and Maharishi and the TMO with regard to my acceptance or not of them, I decided why should Turq and Vaj be getting a free ride out of all of this? Why not apply the same rigor and scrutiny to their practices as I do to my own? And the results were very eye opening, you True Believers you!...Lol! :-) Please produce anything in either my posts of Vaj's that sounded True Believer like to you. My entire exchange with you yesterday was to help you realize how much of a solipsist you are -- you just make pronouncements, as if the fact that you have come to believe something makes it an actual fact. You have your opinions and I have mine. I thought we had cleared that up yesterday. I will continue to think of both you and Vaj as True Believers, which I define as those willing to be less critical of their own beliefs than they are those of others. Tibetan Buddhism ain't all its cracked up to be. *IMO*. If you think Vaj is a TB, I guess you never really talked to him or heard his talk on Spiritual Anarchy and how genuine spirituality is anarchistic by nature...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Inside Pundit Info
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: If you think Vaj is a TB, I guess you never really talked to him or heard his talk on Spiritual Anarchy and how genuine spirituality is anarchistic by nature... Kind of funny to say someone that calls himself Vajranatha is a spiritual anarchist, don't you think? That name sounds very much aligned with organized religion, probably Tibetan Buddhism. Oh well, one person's spiritual anarchist is another's religous shill, eh? Don't know much about the Naths do ya Jim?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Inside Pundit Info
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: If you think Vaj is a TB, I guess you never really talked to him or heard his talk on Spiritual Anarchy and how genuine spirituality is anarchistic by nature... Kind of funny to say someone that calls himself Vajranatha is a spiritual anarchist, don't you think? That name sounds very much aligned with organized religion, probably Tibetan Buddhism. Oh well, one person's spiritual anarchist is another's religous shill, eh? Don't know much about the Naths do ya Jim? Please explain. Thanks, that did answer my question. BTW, do you have some strange foot fetish or do you just enjoy sticking your foot in your mouth? To answer your question there is probably no other group of yogins that would be considered less of an organized religion than the Nathas. They do epitomize freedom and sahaja.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nisargadatta quote
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 8, 2006, at 6:41 PM, yhvhworld wrote: ---Vaj, but this is the initial stage, ...even from the POV of your Guru, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, complete, continuous realization requires at least, time and abundant practice. Perhaps Norbu is missing an important point regarding bodily purification; and...I contend, MMY's fund of knowledge on the topic of Realization is superior to Norbu's. This is not a case of my Guru is superior to yours. Just look at the facts. You mean like one of Mahesh's beautiful and primary students recently going insane? Thanks for reminding me. I'm sure Vaj might agree, he's mentioned it before here: Dzogchen begins where Unity ends. At least that's the gist of Shearer's official comments, right Vaj? Thanks for having the courage to speak the truth.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield = dilapidated little utopia?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: http://guruphiliac.blogspot.com/2006/11/maharishi-effect.html http://tinyurl.com/y3v3qo At 12/01/2006 3:32 PM, Iowa Corn said... Yeah if you think Fairfield is dilapidated, you should check out the new construction like Prince Alex's (brother of Tom Stanley, the TM-Raja of Denver) cross between a big Taco Bell and a mid-priced southwestern US theme hotel; it's on the outskirts of town. If tacky = dilapidated, this place would have been condemned on completion. But really it's a typical trust fund baby creation. And the TMO is filled with such trust-fund babies with nothing better to do than build faux Sthapatya Veda residences and live off Fairfield's the Sedona of Iowa ambiance. And of course throw money at the latest fauxvatar passing through town. Alex Stanley has posted the pictures and links on the Fairfield-Life newsgroup for those interested, posted in his name. It's worth the smile! But is Alex really an underwater model? Just when you think it can't get any weirder...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj is a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vaj is a fraud. He has no knowledge whatsoever about what he is writing. No knowledge of TM, the TM-Sidhis or the mechanics of structuring higher states of consciousness with Transcendental Meditation. Unfortunally for him, he is just a silly Budhist fundamentalist. His motivation is to demonalize TM and Maharishi whatever the costs to his evolution. Having practiced under numerous yogis I find Vajs comments on real yoga spot on and informed. But this is beyond what most TM people would be able to comprehend, especially TB's like you find here on this site. Maharishi OTOH has to outsource TM-Sidhi people from India there are so few people who even consider it worthwhile anymore, so draw your own conclusions. The truth of the matter is we were simply not taught any of the detailed aspects of yoga in TM or in the TMSP.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj is a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 nablusos108@ wrote: Vaj is a fraud. He has no knowledge whatsoever about what he is writing. No knowledge of TM, the TM-Sidhis or the mechanics of structuring higher states of consciousness with Transcendental Meditation. Unfortunally for him, he is just a silly Budhist fundamentalist. His motivation is to demonalize TM and Maharishi whatever the costs to his evolution. Having practiced under numerous yogis I find Vajs comments on real yoga spot on and informed. But this is beyond what most TM people would be able to comprehend, especially TB's like you find here on this site. Maharishi OTOH has to outsource TM-Sidhi people from India there are so few people who even consider it worthwhile anymore, so draw your own conclusions. The truth of the matter is we were simply not taught any of the detailed aspects of yoga in TM or in the TMSP. It is one thing to dive into spiritual knowledge deeply, learning all of the component parts and their relationship to one another. However it is misleading in my opinion to then trot out one's knowledge of same as to make another's path appear incomplete. So you believe the Yoga sutras are different than TM and the TMSP??? That's a good one! Did you also think that Vaj practiced Patanjali's yoga? His posts seem to say that's not what he practices, so I don't think think you are listening very closely or very clearly to what he's been saying.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj is a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote: I don't think he says TM is a fraud, just that some aspects of the teaching are very limited and limiting. He says it's a fraud because it claims *not* to be limited and limiting. However, he obviously doesn't understand the teaching. It would be one thing if he were able to state it clearly and accurately, then explain how it's limited and limiting; but what he presents as MMY's teaching is one misconception after another. Plus which, his approach to discussion is intellectually dishonest in the extreme, this current exchange with Lawson being a particularly egregious example. Just for one thing, in discussions with knowledgeable TMers, when asked to explain why such-and-such in the Buddhist or Yogic tradition is superior to or contradicts MMY's teaching, he either comes out with a string of impenetrable jargon and obscure references or claims the TMers couldn't possibly understand his point. If he himself actually understands what he's talking about, he ought to be able to explain it in plain language. Instead, he becomes evasive. Funny, I find his comments insightful and clear. He just doesn't take any BS or is sick of it to death (like many of us, no doubt!). There are many TM TBers here. If you think otherwise, you're either blind, stupid or insane.
[FairfieldLife] Vaj is not a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 29, 2006, at 12:30 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote: I don't think he says TM is a fraud, just that some aspects of the teaching are very limited and limiting. I agree with Llundrub here. I think that's exactly what Vaj is suggesting. Not that it would be *difficult* to suggest that TM is a fraud. It pretends to be unique and it's not, it pretends to be better than other techniques of meditation and it isn't, and it pretends to be worth the insane amount of money the TMO charges for it and it isn't. Pretty much a fraud on all counts. Actually I've NEVER said TM was a fraud--quite the opposite. Although I'd now recommend people who really wanted to learn this style of meditation to learn SSRS's technique as it is a superior evolution of TM IMO. A better org too. Just don't make the mistake of it being the 'be all and end all' like the fundies. Personally I find the similarities and common ground of various tantras, whether Natha, Hindu, Buddhist, Bon or Jain all incredibly beautiful. If I follow what you've been saying over the years, you are simply saying both the Hindu tantric meditation systems and the Buddhist ones both share techniques to perfect the fourth pranayama--a subtle pranayama important for deep meditation and deep samadhi. And therefore it doesn't matter if it's one or the other, but you should be able to practice it if you know what you are talking about. And most TM people have no clue about these higher practices which seems so key to that (deep) type of practice. Knowing that, you'd have to be surprised when you see their research and that this deeper meditation is not occurring even after many years of repetition, rounding, etc. It really seems painfully obvious.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj is a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote: I don't think he says TM is a fraud, just that some aspects of the teaching are very limited and limiting. He says it's a fraud because it claims *not* to be limited and limiting. However, he obviously doesn't understand the teaching. It would be one thing if he were able to state it clearly and accurately, then explain how it's limited and limiting; but what he presents as MMY's teaching is one misconception after another. Plus which, his approach to discussion is intellectually dishonest in the extreme, this current exchange with Lawson being a particularly egregious example. Just for one thing, in discussions with knowledgeable TMers, when asked to explain why such-and-such in the Buddhist or Yogic tradition is superior to or contradicts MMY's teaching, he either comes out with a string of impenetrable jargon and obscure references or claims the TMers couldn't possibly understand his point. If he himself actually understands what he's talking about, he ought to be able to explain it in plain language. Instead, he becomes evasive. Funny, I find his comments insightful and clear. He just doesn't take any BS or is sick of it to death (like many of us, no doubt!). Alright. So you're saying that Vaj, who can't furnish any direct reference to the studies he claims exists, is being more clear than moi, who does furnish references to such studies. Actually he has talked about them, I gather he's sick of constantly repeating himself, even morso since clearly like many yogis he prefers direct experience rather than materialistic ephemera. You prefer the way it's been done for less than 50 years, he prefers the one that's been done experientially for thousand and thousands of years. One is tried and true and has produced innumerable enlightned beings, another is groping in the dark for tentative answers. Just posting links of studies of questionable veracity is of little interest to most yogis. I'd guess Vaj is no exception to that. This yogini would certainly question anything the TM PR machine printed out. But overall, I'm unimpressed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj is a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: There are many TM TBers here. If you think otherwise, you're either blind, stupid or insane. Or, you are so much one yourself that you cannot see the phenomenon you are an integral part of. If you honestly, truly believe that TM is the best or the most effective technique of meditation on the planet, and you have never practiced another one except out of a book, you are a TB. If you honestly, truly believe that TM is unique, and you have never practiced another technique except out of a book, you are a TB. The amazing thing is to see the TBs *deny* that they *are* True Believers, while holding to positions like, TM is better and more effective than any other technique of meditation on the planet, when they have *never really studied any others*. *Anyone* except a TB can see that and identify it as True Believerism. *Only* a TB could say such a thing and deny that they are one. I mean, it's equivalent to saying, I don't *need* to practice any other technique to know the facts about it, and that TM is superior. *What I have been told* about it by Maharishi is all that I need to know to make that assessment. Yeah, right. Nicely said. With the definition of a TB, what've seen is a group of people who deperately want to move away from that label and have done so by changing the definition. It's no longer merely a TB in TM or the TMSP. If they profess skepticism about the TMO, they think this makes them immune from the label. Not so: if you believe TM is the best (or some similar variation on that), you're a TB. In other words, you can still be a TB and find the TMO offensive. A good example would be Bob Brigante: hates TMO (or appears to) but is a diehard TM believer. In some people this includes an almost carte blanche acceptance of anything that issues from the mouth or pen of Maharishi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj is a fraud
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote: I don't think he says TM is a fraud, just that some aspects of the teaching are very limited and limiting. He says it's a fraud because it claims *not* to be limited and limiting. However, he obviously doesn't understand the teaching. It would be one thing if he were able to state it clearly and accurately, then explain how it's limited and limiting; but what he presents as MMY's teaching is one misconception after another. Plus which, his approach to discussion is intellectually dishonest in the extreme, this current exchange with Lawson being a particularly egregious example. Just for one thing, in discussions with knowledgeable TMers, when asked to explain why such-and-such in the Buddhist or Yogic tradition is superior to or contradicts MMY's teaching, he either comes out with a string of impenetrable jargon and obscure references or claims the TMers couldn't possibly understand his point. If he himself actually understands what he's talking about, he ought to be able to explain it in plain language. Instead, he becomes evasive. Funny, I find his comments insightful and clear. He just doesn't take any BS or is sick of it to death (like many of us, no doubt!). Alright. So you're saying that Vaj, who can't furnish any direct reference to the studies he claims exists, is being more clear than moi, who does furnish references to such studies. We talked about the Mindfulness study. It's actually pretty cool (probably also why you see the technique ubiquitously across America in hospitals, gratis). Basically what you're seeing in the EEG is someone in continuous samyama on the web of compassionate relationship. The reason it's so effortless to do this level of contiunuous samadhi is because fueling of compassion into the dakini-net of reality is something nature totally and completely supports. Don't ya just love it! Meanwhile other less supported meditations are dying on the vine, paying Indian meditation outsourcers. And they try to use research as their favorite crutch still. Ho hum. I'm not impressed by a bunch of citations selling your product, neither are all but a few others...even if a rich weirdo is footing the bill...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Top Posters for October
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Give the bitch a 'time out' of several months and then let her come back and at that point see if she's learned anything and proceed accordingly. --Barry Wright Words of wisdom if ever I heard them. Of course she won't. 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 * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Upcoming CIC Schedule, Costs
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coldbluiceman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dick Mays wrote: Alexandria DeVasier Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:42:09 -0500 To: Recipient List Suppressed:; Subject: Information about the upcoming CIC's. Could you broadcast asap Sure lest see..4 times each spaced 15 seconds apart.. samyama(just like you think the mantra) on each Friendliness Happiness Compassion Strength of an elephant Bronchial tubes sun moon pole star transcendence finest..hearing..taste..touch..sight..smell transcendence intuition Relationship body and akasha..lightness of cotton fiber. There I just saved everyone a boat load of cash.. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coldbluiceman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dick Mays wrote: Alexandria DeVasier Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:42:09 -0500 To: Recipient List Suppressed:; Subject: Information about the upcoming CIC's. Could you broadcast asap Sure lest see..4 times each spaced 15 seconds apart.. samyama(just like you think the mantra) on each Friendliness Happiness Compassion Strength of an elephant Bronchial tubes sun moon pole star transcendence finest..hearing..taste..touch..sight..smell transcendence intuition Relationship body and akasha..lightness of cotton fiber. There I just saved everyone a boat load of cash.. I recommend the Gov/Purusha version on the hearing, etc: Purusha...Divine Hearing (...) Purusha...Divine Smell They just seem to give clearer experiences. Also nice are the special sutras: Soma, soma, soma after flying in shivasana and/or after the A of E technique. My other fav. sutras are Word...Object Implied...the Idea Thereof Overlapping. and Moment and it's Sequence. If you want to blow your friend's minds try the The appearance of the body sutra, apparently disconned. Have a Transcendental time! 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 * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Upcoming CIC Schedule, Costs
Om as in AUM? 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 * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: the moon nakshatra and naming
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: since it has come up twice recently, if anyone wants to find out about this all details can be found in William R Levacy's Beneath a Vedic Sky a good book about jyotish. He was an initiator. Most Jyotish programs will calculate this for you. Someone once told me where this comes from but I forget. 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 * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Unity and sidhis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip It's baiting the Awakened Ones on the forum. Most of them are unwilling to take the bait, apparently... Perhaps it's the wrong bait? Perhaps its the fact that it is bait? Perhaps its the intent to fish? Perhaps nobody's awake? I opt for all of the above. Zzzz. So all the Awake are asleep? One may be asleep, one may be awake ... what difference to Sparaig does either make? :-) More importantly, what difference to either does Sparaig make? IOW, why would an Awakened ONe bother reading/posting on this forum? 5 or more of these? http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis1/p21-pe07.html 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 * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting website
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rory: Excellent question; I would have to say No... more a case of witnessing and unraveling the bodymind's samskaras/habit- patterns --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As in, releasing stress? Yes, with the proviso that it is (at some points) not at all automatic, nor will simple TM and normal activity necessarily do the trick. Sometimes we have to consciously face our pain, using all of our inner resources -- not simply meditate away from it :- ) Perhaps this will allow things to happen faster, but how do you know it (the TM plus activity thang) won't work at all? Oh, I don't; anything is possible; I am only speaking from personal experience. If it comes to that, *anything* can work; divine grace is *that* good. As Judy says, even bus-fumes can free us. It was my experience that at a certain point, adherence to a path was obstructing the realization of the perfection of what IS. Belief in the automatic progress of TM-plus-activity had to go in favor of bringing all my resources to bear on taking care of the pain in front of me Now. Good story Rory. Please, tell us another one. You have a lot of them! I love stories about hey look at me in my mirror, see how enlightened I am; theyre so rare around here. 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 * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
