[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for Guru Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to set up hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start in 3 weeks or 2 months. This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had unstructured lives and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was applied to scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals accustomed to scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things with a few weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s conference was organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. The first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy. Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential participants, or to give the organizers something to do? There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized. And we MUST NOT EVER suggest or even *consider* a less-than-100 percent negative explanation for anything MMY or the TMO does that seems odd to us, EVEN if that explanation actually makes sense-- because that would mean we were gasp True Believers. The corollary: It is NEVER the negative interpretation that is off the wall, ONLY the positive one. In fact, the more negative it is, the saner it is, and vice- versa. Who said anything about a 'negative explaination'. I was talking about rationalizing an action that did not work according to plan. Plan fails - redifine it to fit the outcome - 'rationalize'. What was the conference for? For the mayors, no it was just COSMIC wheel spinning... We really didn't intend for it to suceed, ya that's the ticket. Again this shows how easyly any action can be rationalized. JohnY 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who said anything about a 'negative explaination'. I was talking about rationalizing an action that did not work according to plan. Plan fails - redifine it to fit the outcome - 'rationalize'. What was the conference for? For the mayors, no it was just COSMIC wheel spinning... We really didn't intend for it to suceed, ya that's the ticket. Again this shows how easyly any action can be rationalized. JohnY You make a good point, except when the intent of those around Maharishi is to gain enlightenment, vs. say, money. Maharishi states explicity in the Gita that following transcending, the type of action necessary to stabilize pure consciousness is not important (i.e. it could be anything). So for the TMO, whether or not a conference is a bust or not is really not as important as the activity carried out by them to stabilize pure consciousness. On the other hand, I personally did not enjoy working for the TMO. On the other hand, as a means to an end, it was fine. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
He did say this [become in tune with my thinking] explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all knowers of Reality. Eggzactly. Segue time again... The the Word What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. But what *is* it in them that feels attacked? I think that the answer lies in one word used by one poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, It's based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on Absolute Truth. The respondent insisted on redefining Rick's statement using her own definition: Or, that he has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics of consciousness. There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is in them that feels threatened and attacked when other people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of seeing things. Anyone get what it is? It's the word the. She specifies that Maharishi has a handle on the truth, not a truth. What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't even realize it when their own language gives them away, is the belief that there is only *one* truth. They cannot admit to the possibility of there being another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra- dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, There can only be one. And naturally, these people feel that they know what that single, solitary truth is. The TBs feel personally attacked when someone attacks an idea they believe in because they have been told for decades by Maharishi and his parrots that there *is* only one truth, and that they are privy to it because he was gracious enough to share it with TBs like themselves. And *only* the TBs. If someone doesn't believe that the TM truth is THE truth, well then at the very least (in the eyes of the TBs) the non-believers have misunder- stood what was being said. More likely these deluded souls (the critics) are motivated by jealousy of those who know THE truth. I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much experience with life could they possibly had to believe that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just fascism posing as spirituality. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He did say this [become in tune with my thinking] explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all knowers of Reality. Eggzactly. Segue time again... The the Word What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. But what *is* it in them that feels attacked? I think that the answer lies in one word used by one poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, It's based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on Absolute Truth. The respondent insisted on redefining Rick's statement using her own definition: Or, that he has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics of consciousness. There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is in them that feels threatened and attacked when other people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of seeing things. Anyone get what it is? It's the word the. She specifies that Maharishi has a handle on the truth, not a truth. What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't even realize it when their own language gives them away, is the belief that there is only *one* truth. They cannot admit to the possibility of there being another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra- dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, There can only be one. And naturally, these people feel that they know what that single, solitary truth is. The TBs feel personally attacked when someone attacks an idea they believe in because they have been told for decades by Maharishi and his parrots that there *is* only one truth, and that they are privy to it because he was gracious enough to share it with TBs like themselves. And *only* the TBs. If someone doesn't believe that the TM truth is THE truth, well then at the very least (in the eyes of the TBs) the non-believers have misunder- stood what was being said. More likely these deluded souls (the critics) are motivated by jealousy of those who know THE truth. I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much experience with life could they possibly had to believe that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just fascism posing as spirituality. You are right. Many of us ex-TB's had that experience that MMY was speaking The Truth - he was The One that did know The Ultimate Truth - and we had to accept it, because we did not have a consciousness that was able to know The Truth. And we saw everything MMY did - as a path to reach a Higher Consciousness - even when it gave a lot of Stress - but we called it unstressing. Today I can't believe that I did accept so much as I did - . Ingegerd 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- sparaig sparaig@ wrote: snip In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest to fragment personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any consistent physiological correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period. It's hard to believe until you start working with it clinically. Then you say, Oh! Some of the stuff I've read about different personalities needing different eyeglass prescriptions, reacting differently to medications, etc., is really mind-boggling. Sure makes you rethink what personality is. Why do most of us have only one?? Of course, a question arises: DO we only have one, or do we simply maintain an inner narrative thatis shared by multiple personalities? Recall the split-brain people and their situation... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. Glenn Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had said as So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.' On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here who haven't spoken up. Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh? So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh? You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's semen on it? Actually, it sounds like something that someone with undiagnosed ADD would say... ...I resemble that remark. Looks more like MPD at this point... In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest to fragment personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any consistent physiological correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period. Actually, I was referring facetiously to your I resemble that remark (i.e., the remark you had just made). I don't think Sal has MPD. I don't either. I was merely going off on a tangent, which, for some reason, I often do... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: snip Marklar: Young one, your Marklar is wise and true. Funny bit. Larry, Daryl, and Daryl taken to extremes. The episode was funny. Marklar (the leader) called out to the crowd and asked for Marklar to step forward. When some guy stepped out, he said, No, not YOU, Marklar, MARKLAR. The guy nodded, stepped back and someone else stepped out. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
More same old-same old demonizing of those perceived to be True Believers from Barry. Can anybody find anything in this current rant that Barry has not said here before multiple times? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He did say this [become in tune with my thinking] explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all knowers of Reality. Eggzactly. Segue time again... The the Word What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. This mantra one of Barry's many unexamined assumptions that he takes to be The Truth. And it may be in some cases, but by no means all. There's more than one mechanics involved, depending on the individual in question. But what *is* it in them that feels attacked? Barry obviously doesn't perceive the irony in asking such a question in a rant that itself personally attacks those he considers True Believers. I think that the answer lies in one word used by one poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, It's based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on Absolute Truth. The respondent Moi, of course. If Barry were to think about it for a moment, he'd have to acknowledge that I challenge anti-Semitism, homophobia, racism, and male chauvinism in precisely the same way and with the same forcefulness that I do unreasonable criticism of MMY/the TMO. The only one of the groups targeted by such bigotry to which I belong is the female sex, so it's pretty clear that with that one exception, in these cases I couldn't possibly feel personally attacked by the bigotry. It's the bigotry itself that offends me. It's in my nature to challenge unfair attacks of groups of people and was long before I ever started TM. On what basis would Barry claim that when I challenge unfair attacks on TM, in that single case I do so because I'm feeling *personally* attacked? insisted on redefining Suggested redefining, Barry means. Rick's statement using her own definition: Or, that he has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics of consciousness. There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is in them that feels threatened and attacked when other people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of seeing things. Anyone get what it is? It's the word the. She specifies that Maharishi has a handle on the truth, not a truth. Barry fails to notice that I was redefining Rick's statement *down*, from Maharishi has a handle on Absolute Truth to Maharishi has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics of consciousness. What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't even realize it when their own language gives them away, is the belief that there is only *one* truth. The problem with Barry's contention is that the notion that there is only one Ultimate Truth pervades teaching about enlightenment and is perhaps the single principle that the vast majority of enlightenment traditions hold in common. Whatever the specific metaphysics of the various traditions, the assumption is that all who reach enlightenment, no matter the tradition, will experience the same Ultimate Truth. They cannot admit to the possibility of there being another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra- dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, There can only be one. And naturally, these people feel that they know what that single, solitary truth is. snip I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much experience with life could they possibly had to believe that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just fascism posing as spirituality. Continuing the theme of Barry's inadvertent irony, Barry feels that he knows The Truth: that there *is* no single, solitary truth. From the way Barry compulsively demonizes anyone who expresses a different view, as he does in this post, it's clear that he feels personally attacked when The Truth he believes in--that there is no single truth--is challenged. He's completely oblivious to the fact that he's subject to precisely the same tendency for which he demonizes those he calls True Believers. He's just as much a True Believer as any of them. (One further irony is Barry's difficulty with metaphysical
[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip Hi, Way -- I'm just getting caught up since I looked in last. I noticed that Judy and Lawson monopolized the newsgroup for many messages. I don't read their drivel, but I was sort of wondering if their private mutual admiration set was a contest to see who could insert his/her nose the fartherest up the other's butt. They are getting to be more and more turd clones of each other. -- best watched from a distance, I suppose, like a train wreck or the TMO. Sal wrote: Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal gerbal wrote: Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be sent to some far off place to go and teach. Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her odd way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down; she just enjoys the thought that she can influence the thinking of others. She used to be sharper and could actually zero in on relatively useful false statements of conclusions or false reasoning. But these days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of hers was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or wasn't defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of his (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made any mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother with. I m sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does. Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like so many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state of need. I guess she has followers, Lawson seems to have his nose permanently affixed in one of her orifices, but I can't see she has an actual following. Keep up the good work Sal. We always need to be reminded that fancy words are not necessarily meaningful words and are not always likly to be coming from a good and well intentioned source. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for Guru Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to set up hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start in 3 weeks or 2 months. This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had unstructured lives and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was applied to scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals accustomed to scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things with a few weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s conference was organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. The first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy. Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential participants, or to give the organizers something to do? There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized. JohnY Or diverted back to TM-speak, something nice, safe, meaningless and sure to stop any further thought on the matter. *When doubt arises, stop thinking* would seem to be the fundamentlist lunatic's answer to whenever might go against whatever the current version of the supposed purity of the teaching might be. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 5:02 PM, gerbal88 wrote: Thanks to you and Sal and a few others, I think there might be hope for sorthing through the huge pile of crap Mahesh sold us and winnowing out the something of value. I think this is it--FF Life and the other places we've made friends, thanks to MMY and the TMO. I know without them I would have had a much less fulfilling life up until now. I feel I owe him a lot of thanks for that alone. Sal Yes, there are things for which we can be grateful. We made a lot of friends because of Mahesh and many of those friends are far more important now than anything Mahesh did or was trying to do. - A special debt of gratitude goes to Rick for this great site, and, I suppose, too, to Judy who reminds us just how degenerate things can get without those good and valuable friends. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip Hi, Way -- I'm just getting caught up since I looked in last. I noticed that Judy and Lawson monopolized the newsgroup for many messages. I don't read their drivel, but I was sort of wondering if their private mutual admiration set was a contest to see who could insert his/her nose the fartherest up the other's butt. They are getting to be more and more turd clones of each other. -- best watched from a distance, I suppose, like a train wreck or the TMO. Funny how gerbal knows Lawson and I are getting to be more and more turd clones of each other even without reading our posts, ain't it? (Actually, *not* reading our posts is the only way you could have this impression, since we disagree quite often--just did, in fact.) 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He did say this [become in tune with my thinking] explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all knowers of Reality. Eggzactly. Segue time again... The the Word What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. But what *is* it in them that feels attacked? I think that the answer lies in one word used by one poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, It's based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on Absolute Truth. The respondent insisted on redefining Rick's statement using her own definition: Or, that he has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics of consciousness. There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is in them that feels threatened and attacked when other people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of seeing things. Anyone get what it is? It's the word the. She specifies that Maharishi has a handle on the truth, not a truth. What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't even realize it when their own language gives them away, is the belief that there is only *one* truth. They cannot admit to the possibility of there being another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra- dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, There can only be one. And naturally, these people feel that they know what that single, solitary truth is. The TBs feel personally attacked when someone attacks an idea they believe in because they have been told for decades by Maharishi and his parrots that there *is* only one truth, and that they are privy to it because he was gracious enough to share it with TBs like themselves. And *only* the TBs. If someone doesn't believe that the TM truth is THE truth, well then at the very least (in the eyes of the TBs) the non-believers have misunder- stood what was being said. More likely these deluded souls (the critics) are motivated by jealousy of those who know THE truth. I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much experience with life could they possibly had to believe that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just fascism posing as spirituality. Hey, T -- 'Fascism posing as spirituality' is bang on. Truth is exactly what you experience. The only reality that is is the one you experience. If you don't experience it, then, it isn't. If your mind is obsessed with story after story about what the truth is/might be/ought to be/or what Mahesh says it is or might be or what you think he might have meant when he said or you thought he said ... you get my drift -- then there's no possibility of experiencing truth, only our stories are experienced and this becomes your truth and you turn that into your 'fascism posing as spirituality'. -- People defend their fascism like religious extremists defend their sacred symbols. You could kill a billion people and it would not be as bad, say, as even suggesting bombing the Ka'ba or St. Peter's in Rome! The FBI could ruin the lives of many innocent people but it wouldn't be as bad as burning the American flag. TM used to be a really good thing. Mahesh single handedly turned it into his private fascist enterprise to dominate and manipulate the lives and resources of as many people as possible. Take a good look at the TMO as you read through that disgusting book Mein Kampf. Mahesh had Devindra read it to him. This was in either the late 60's or very early 70's. Look what happened in the TMO at around this 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/ * 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: snip All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. The first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy. Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential participants, or to give the organizers something to do? There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized. JohnY Or diverted back to TM-speak, something nice, safe, meaningless and sure to stop any further thought on the matter. Was the conference meant for the potential participants, or to give the organizers something to do? is TM-speak?? And just how does it stop any further thought on the matter? Seems to me it's gerbal's comment that is the attempt to stop any further thought on the matter, by labeling Lawson's question TM-speak, even though it's obviously not. *When doubt arises, stop thinking* would seem to be the fundamentlist lunatic's answer to whenever might go against whatever the current version of the supposed purity of the teaching might be. Looks an awful lot like projection to me, purity in gerbal's case being unalloyed loathing for MMY and the TMO. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Hey, T -- 'Fascism posing as spirituality' is bang on. Truth is exactly what you experience. The only reality that is is the one you experience. Except, of course, for those whose experience is consonant with what MMY teaches. They are seriously deluded. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for Guru Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to set up hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start in 3 weeks or 2 months. This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had unstructured lives and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was applied to scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals accustomed to scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things with a few weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s conference was organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. The first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy. Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential participants, or to give the organizers something to do? There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized. JohnY Or diverted back to TM-speak, something nice, safe, meaningless and sure to stop any further thought on the matter. *When doubt arises, stop thinking* would seem to be the fundamentlist lunatic's answer to whenever might go against whatever the current version of the supposed purity of the teaching might be. So you think that it's a GOOD thing that all the people involved were doing busy work for no reason? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip Hi, Way -- I'm just getting caught up since I looked in last. I noticed that Judy and Lawson monopolized the newsgroup for many messages. I don't read their drivel, but I was sort of wondering if their private mutual admiration set was a contest to see who could insert his/her nose the fartherest up the other's butt. They are getting to be more and more turd clones of each other. -- best watched from a distance, I suppose, like a train wreck or the TMO. Funny how gerbal knows Lawson and I are getting to be more and more turd clones of each other even without reading our posts, ain't it? (Actually, *not* reading our posts is the only way you could have this impression, since we disagree quite often--just did, in fact.) But everyone knows we only did that to cover our tracks... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 no_reply@ wrote: snip Hey, T -- 'Fascism posing as spirituality' is bang on. Truth is exactly what you experience. The only reality that is is the one you experience. Except, of course, for those whose experience is consonant with what MMY teaches. They are seriously deluded. Something else we agree on... Guess I have to dump Sal now... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 8/26/06 2:04 PM, chaim_laib at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend jstein@ wrote: I *never* encountered any teaching in the TM context about blind devotion to one's teacher or becoming in tune with one's teacher's thinking as the quintessence of spiritual practice. Although Maharishi may not have ever said this explicitly-I want you, my followers, to become in tune with my thinking- he certainly requested this, no, demanded it in every way. He did say this explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) And this was the quintessence of spiritual practice? (Please note, in context I was *not* suggesting that he never said anything along these lines, merely that it wasn't what was taught, explicitly or implicitly, to rank-and-filers.) I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as that eventually you would all be in the same state of consciousness he was. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: OK, Barry does say these people are close followers. Perhaps he means TM teachers, who may have received the teaching he describes while the rank-and-filers did not? But who on this forum is a TM teacher and a TB? I can't think of anybody offhand. snip It's *Maharishi* who has the hangup about loyalty, and who views anyone who isn't completely faithful to him forever as weak and a failure, or an actual enemy. It's *Maharishi's* mindset we see in the words of the TBs, spoken by people who don't even know that the mindset they're expressing is not their own. And interestingly, I think the reason Maharishi feels this way is that he's doing the same thing the TBs on FFL and elsewhere in the TMO are doing, projecting his own internal dis-ease outwards. IMO Maharishi feels betrayed by those who don't do everything he says because *he* didn't do what Guru Dev told him to do. He was told to go off and meditate, and *not* to teach, and he did the opposite. I honestly think that inwardly he feels that he betrayed his teacher, and that these feelings come to the surface for him whenever someone betrays him by not doing exactly what *he* tells them to do. Just one other point: A hangup about loyalty is common in many, many groups, spiritual or otherwise. It's particularly common in politics (see the general condemnation of Joe Lieberman among Democrats, just for one example). So the hangup about loyalty mindset that the mysterious teacher-TBs on this forum manifest, according to Barry, need not have been acquired from MMY; they could have encountered and absorbed it in any group they had worked with. It's certainly rife among many of the other followers of Guru Dev; just think of the abuse that's been heaped on MMY for going his own way (including the story Barry cites of Guru Dev having told MMY not to teach). So if Barry's insight is sound, we'd have to assume *Guru Dev* fostered those loyalty hangups as well, and that Guru Dev did so because he felt guilty about betraying his own teacher. and avoiding those posters whom time has proven a waste of time. Like you Judy. Your high horse pontifications are truly obnoxious. Got any substantive comments on my analysis, or can you only resort to the old ad hominem? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did not experience him as this Blazing Brahman his surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago. I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then one day: POW! I've heard people on FFL say this often over the last year, and noticed that no one ever asks them the obvious question. That is, why do you think that it is *Maharishi's* presence or SSRS's presence that you're perceiving? It sounds more likely to me that what you and other folks like Jim are experiencing is your *own* energy on a good day, and mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as that eventually you would all be in the same state of consciousness he was. In my honest and long-considered opinion, all of Maharishi's students have *always* been in the same state of consciousness as he is -- normal old waking state. The problems arise when one or more of the students start to achieve what the teacher never has. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did not experience him as this Blazing Brahman his surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago. I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then one day: POW! I've heard people on FFL say this often over the last year, and noticed that no one ever asks them the obvious question. That is, why do you think that it is *Maharishi's* presence or SSRS's presence that you're perceiving? It sounds more likely to me that what you and other folks like Jim are experiencing is your *own* energy on a good day, and mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's. In other words, they shouldn't trust their own experience. Right, Barry? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as that eventually you would all be in the same state of consciousness he was. In my honest and long-considered opinion, all of Maharishi's students have *always* been in the same state of consciousness as he is -- normal old waking state. The problems arise when one or more of the students start to achieve what the teacher never has. snore 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as that eventually you would all be in the same state of consciousness he was. In my honest and long-considered opinion, all of Maharishi's students have *always* been in the same state of consciousness as he is -- normal old waking state. The problems arise when one or more of the students start to achieve what the teacher never has. snore P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. Could that be because the former gives him no opportunity to recycle his old MMY-is-a-fraud- and-you-stupid-TBs-believe-him mantras? 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Does that help any? 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. OK... The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. OK... The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. OK... The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. No, sorry, it's your interpretation of what I said that's insane. I have *no* idea how you could possibly have come up with what you just said on the basis of what I wrote. What I said was that a person may quote someone else without necessarily believing that what the other person said is true. It depends on the context. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Absolutely correct, and absolutely irrelevant. We're talking (or I'm talking; apparently you aren't) about quoting someone *else*, and whether person doing the quoting believes what they're quoting to be true. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant. Look, let's make it *real simple*. If I were to say, George Bush says God tells him what to do, would you automatically assume I believed God tells George Bush what to do? Or would you need some *context* to determine whether that's what I believed? It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote: Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant. Look, let's make it *real simple*. If I were to say, George Bush says God tells him what to do, would you automatically assume I believed God tells George Bush what to do? Or would you need some *context* to determine whether that's what I believed? Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to make a point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as *evidence* or backup that what they said is true. What you are saying is that people are offering MMY's quotes whether or not they believe them to be true, whether or not they back up their (the poster's) point. I'd say the context in which this happens on this board pretty much negates that, and it's nuts to think otherwise. You and other pro-TMers who use MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be true--or else are trying to deceive. So which is it? Sal 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. And it would have been just as insane as what Sal said. It's truly perplexing that *anybody* could get what I'm saying so completely, totally, off- the-wall wrong. It isn't even *controversial*. Let's take another example. Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a male chauvinist. And I respond, Well, he does say women should stay at home and raise the children. Would you assume I *believed* women should stay at home and raise the children? Or would you assume that I was pointing out that what he says indicates that he's a male chauvinist, contrary to what the first person said? The context of the exchange would suggest the latter, would it not? In context, there should be no impediment to honest communication in this exchange. I'm disagreeing with the first person about whether MMY is a male chauvinist, and I'm citing what MMY has said to support my disagreement. What would impede honest communication would be if somebody else started berating me for supporting MMY's male chauvinism. I didn't express an opinion either way about whether women should stay in the home and raise children, so there's no basis for making such an assumption. Barry makes similar assumptions all the time, that if a TMer quotes MMY about anything, it must mean the TMer believes what MMY says is true. But that isn't necessarily the case, as the above example shows. As it happens, I *don't* believe women should stay in the home and raise children. I don't support MMY's male chauvinism at all. I was quoting MMY to the first person not to support MMY's views but to point out that MMY is indeed a male chauvinist. Good grief, people, get a grip! 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote: Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant. Look, let's make it *real simple*. If I were to say, George Bush says God tells him what to do, would you automatically assume I believed God tells George Bush what to do? Or would you need some *context* to determine whether that's what I believed? Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to make a point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as *evidence* or backup that what they said is true. What you are saying is that people are offering MMY's quotes whether or not they believe them to be true, whether or not they back up their (the poster's) point. It depends entirely on what the poster's point *is*. We have frequent discussions here about what MMY thinks about something or other, and people quote him to back up their assertions as to what he thinks. In many cases the poster's point is that what MMY thinks is crazy, or wrong, or a lie. They don't quote him because they believe what he says is true, they quote him to back up their point about what he thinks. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. If Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it, and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes, would you assume Barry believes the world is about to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes? Or would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back up his point that MMY has lost it? I'd say the context in which this happens on this board pretty much negates that, and it's nuts to think otherwise. Pretty much negates what? I'm not following. Seems to me it's more often the case on this forum that people quote MMY when they *don't* agree with him than when they do. You and other pro-TMers who use MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be true--or else are trying to deceive. So which is it? False dichotomy. Nobody's trying to deceive. As to whether pro-TMers believe MMY's quotes to be true, it depends entirely on what we're using the quotes to back up. Please see the example I just gave Curtis re MMY as male chauvinist. In that case I would be using the quote to back up my view that MMY is a male chauvinist, not to back up a belief that women should stay in the home and raise children, because I don't believe that at all, and it wasn't the issue in any case. The issue was *what* he has said, not whether what he has said is *true*. Those are two separate issues. In other cases I might well use a MMY quote to back up something I believed--but you'd have to know the *context*. What point was I making? What was I responding to? If someone claims that TM requires effort, and I disagree, I might quote MMY to the effect that TM should be effortless. If my point is that TM is effortless, then you can assume I'm quoting MMY because I believe what he says is true. It all depends on the context, Sal. Go back to the beginning: It's the difference between what MMY has said, and whether what he has said is true. I'm making an incredibly simple point, one that isn't the slightest bit controversial, but you're so anxious to dump on me that you've gotten it all tangled up in a very elaborate misunderstanding. *That's* the kind of thing that impedes honest communication. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote: Let's take another example. Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a male chauvinist. And I respond, Well, he does say women should stay at home and raise the children. Would you assume I *believed* women should stay at home and raise the children? No. But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along is, Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist. See the difference? :) Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote: Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant. Look, let's make it *real simple*. If I were to say, George Bush says God tells him what to do, would you automatically assume I believed God tells George Bush what to do? Or would you need some *context* to determine whether that's what I believed? Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to make a point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as *evidence* or backup that what they said is true. What you are saying is that people are offering MMY's quotes whether or not they believe them to be true, whether or not they back up their (the poster's) point. Just to reiterate: No, I certainly never suggested that when a poster quotes MMY, it's not to back up the poster's point. It's *always* to back up the poster's point. The poster's point, however, may be that MMY is wrong or crazy or lying; or simply that he said B rather than A. The context in which they quote MMY should tell you that. And to add one final point: If you really can't tell from the context whether the poster believes what they've quoted MMY as saying is true, and it's actually relevant in context, then ASK, don't assume. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote: That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. If Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it, and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes, would you assume Barry believes the world is about to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes? Or would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back up his point that MMY has lost it? The latter, which is exactly *my* point. Barry quotes some goofy quote to show the goofiness. You guys (pro-TMers) quote some invariably goofy thing and then try to rationalize it, no matter how absurd it may be on its face. As you say, it's all in the context. Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages) on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic- ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they use it. Remember what I said in recent posts about those who have adopted the True Believer mentality being actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge is one way that they avoid having to do so. How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. If someone comes back in response to the dodge and claims that they are just parroting the TM party line (which, of course, they are by quoting it), they can say, Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/ whoever said that. The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When challenged, they always have the out of claiming, Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes you think that's what *I* believe? Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge is used here and challenged, and notice that the person who uses it almost *never* says what he or she really believes. They'll pretend to get all uptight about people mistakenly assuming that what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all the furor that they've stirred up, somehow forget to say what it is they really believe. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote: Let's take another example. Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a male chauvinist. And I respond, Well, he does say women should stay at home and raise the children. Would you assume I *believed* women should stay at home and raise the children? No. Good. That's the point I was trying to make. But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along is, Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist. See the difference? :) Well, it's not what I've said, Sal, to the contrary. And in any case, a pro-TMer who *did* say that would be making it quite clear they *did* believe what they were quoting. You would know what they believed from the context. So you're actually reinforcing my point. I think part of your problem is that you assume, perhaps unconsciously, that being pro-TM automatically means believing everything MMY says. It doesn't. Some pro-TMers do believe everything MMY says. Some believe some things he says and not others. Some believe some things he says, don't believe others, and haven't a clue about still others. I'm in the last category, FYI. So you need to know the *context* of my quoting MMY to know whether I agree, disagree, or don't have a view either way; or in some cases I may have a view, but it's not relevant to the context. Barry knows I'm in the last category too, but he simply ignores the context and makes the default assumption that I agree with anything I quote MMY as saying, because he can always use that as a putdown. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote: That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. If Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it, and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes, would you assume Barry believes the world is about to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes? Or would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back up his point that MMY has lost it? The latter, which is exactly *my* point. Barry quotes some goofy quote to show the goofiness. You guys (pro-TMers) quote some invariably goofy thing and then try to rationalize it, no matter how absurd it may be on its face. As you say, it's all in the context. Yeah, except that we don't always do that, Sal. Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying home and raising the children). Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw man, in other words. Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. I once got into an argument with him about a fine point of Christian theology concerning baptism. He was arguing the fundie view, naturally (that only adult baptism is biblical), and I was arguing the mainstream Protestant view, that infant baptism is also biblical. He knew I wasn't a believer, and he couldn't figure out for the *life* of him why I'd be defending infant baptism as having biblical support when baptism in general wasn't something I believed in. He simply couldn't grasp the notion of my playing devil's advocate against his extreme views. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying home and raising the children). Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw man, in other words. And those weren't the posts I was referring to. Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Yawn. Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote: That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. If Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it, and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes, would you assume Barry believes the world is about to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes? Or would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back up his point that MMY has lost it? The latter, which is exactly *my* point. Barry quotes some goofy quote to show the goofiness. You guys (pro-TMers) quote some invariably goofy thing and then try to rationalize it, no matter how absurd it may be on its face. As you say, it's all in the context. Yeah, except that we don't always do that, Sal. Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying home and raising the children). Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw man, in other words. Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. I once got into an argument with him about a fine point of Christian theology concerning baptism. He was arguing the fundie view, naturally (that only adult baptism is biblical), and I was arguing the mainstream Protestant view, that infant baptism is also biblical. He knew I wasn't a believer, and he couldn't figure out for the *life* of him why I'd be defending infant baptism as having biblical support when baptism in general wasn't something I believed in. He simply couldn't grasp the notion of my playing devil's advocate against his extreme views. There was excellent advice given in one of the early posts of this thread. It is: I am suggesting, in fact I am asking, that you consider NOT READING the posts of those who upset you, like Judy. The underlying theme of her posts is usually the same. You can't follow my superior logic. Let me try again to explain it to you, little feller. Her point is only to win and be as condescending as possible doing it. Ever hear her say hey, thanks. I was wrong? Ignore her pointless posts as I shall do from now on. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages) on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic- ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they use it. Except, of course, that it isn't a dodge. Remember what I said in recent posts about those who have adopted the True Believer mentality being actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge is one way that they avoid having to do so. How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. Um, it doesn't just happen to refute it, it's chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute it. (Actually the correct term here is rebut, not refute, unless we're talking about correcting a misquote. Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge.) Barry's just like the fundie Christian I described to Sal. He can't conceive of somebody making a devil's advocate-type argument. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. Often what they believe is irrelevant, depending on the context. If the context is *what* MMY says, whether they believe it is irrelevant. It's only relevant if they're arguing that what MMY says is *true* (or untrue, as the case may be). If someone comes back in response to the dodge Not a dodge. Or it's Barry's dodge to claim it's a dodge. and claims that they are just parroting the TM party line (which, of course, they are by quoting it), they can say, Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/ whoever said that. They sure can. MMY says women should stay home and raise the children. *I* certainly didn't say that. The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When challenged, they always have the out of claiming, Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes you think that's what *I* believe? Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge is used here and challenged, and notice that the person who uses it almost *never* says what he or she really believes. They'll pretend to get all uptight about people mistakenly assuming that what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all the furor that they've stirred up, somehow forget to say what it is they really believe. And if you see this happening, try this: *Ask* the person what they believe. If they tell you, then you'll know Barry was off base. I can't think of a time when I was asked what I believed that I didn't respond in detail, even if it wasn't relevant to the discussion in question. I can't remember a time when Lawson wasn't willing to say what he believed either in response to a question. I'd challenge Barry to cite an example of either, except that, as he claims, he's not trying to convince anybody of anything, so he doesn't feel the need to support or be accountable for anything he says. Oh, but wait a minute. He claims he's not trying to convince anybody of anything, yet above he insists that if readers watch for the dodge, they'll find it and realize he's not off base. Ah, well, as we all know, a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Barry's repeated inconsistencies and self-contradictions must mean he has a truly enormous mind, right? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying home and raising the children). Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw man, in other words. And those weren't the posts I was referring to. Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Yawn. Sal Absolutely correct, Sal. She has made herself utterly irrelevant on this forum. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did not experience him as this Blazing Brahman his surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago. I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then one day: POW! I've heard people on FFL say this often over the last year, and noticed that no one ever asks them the obvious question. That is, why do you think that it is *Maharishi's* presence or SSRS's presence that you're perceiving? It sounds more likely to me that what you and other folks like Jim are experiencing is your *own* energy on a good day, and mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's. Hi Barry, isn't your statement above like saying the sun really doesn't give off any heat- what we are experiencing on a cloudless day is our own increased metabolism? Unlike those you are addressing, there is nothing...absolutely nothing in it for me whether or not Maharishi or Brahmananda Saraswati are or were or will be enlightened. To use a crude phrase, I could give a rat's ass, either way. Nonetheless I also do not doubt my perception. Just like anything else, something is true for me if it continues to be true according to my direct perception. And as far as I can tell, both Brahmananda Saraswati and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi are supremely enlightened. SSRS too. It is not a difficult thing to assertain, and really needs no thought to confirm. It is simply energy signature matching, as all Self realized souls have a very distinct and unmistakeable energy signature. However if you continue your belief that Maharishi is not enlightened, I have absolutely no argument with that. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying home and raising the children). Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw man, in other words. And those weren't the posts I was referring to. Non sequitur. You've completely lost the thread. You were castigating me for quoting MMY when I didn't believe what he said was true, remember, calling me dishonest for making a distinction between MMY sez... and What MMY sez is true? I just gave you two--three, including the one right below--instances in which it would be perfectly legitimate to quote MMY without believing what he said was true. Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, Um, Sal, it's *your* point that has been very thoroughly demolished. start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Whereas your tactic is to find some way to avoid responding to the other person's arguments and just hope the poster goes away. Usually you do this by tying the argument up in knots until it no longer has anything to do with your original (now long since refuted) point. But I'm happy to continue the argument as long as you like. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. Exactly, and it's hardly just Judy and Lawson, I know others (not on this forum) that use this dodge as well. It's an effective way of basically putting forth something (oftentimes something really dumb or illogical) and then not having to take responsibility for it. Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip The underlying theme of her posts is usually the same. You can't follow my superior logic. Let me try again to explain it to you, little feller. Her point is only to win and be as condescending as possible doing it. Goodness knows, Barry is *never* condescending, and his logic is always flawless and his facts unassailable, right, geezerfreak? Ever hear her say hey, thanks. I was wrong? You never have?? You must not have been paying very close attention. But then, you claim you don't read my posts, so how could you have? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for Guru Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to set up hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start in 3 weeks or 2 months. This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had unstructured lives and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was applied to scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals accustomed to scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things with a few weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s conference was organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. The first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy. I suppose that saving the day was, for Mahesh, confirmation of his wonderfultivity. My personal time around Mahesh, which for nearly 18 months was all- day-every-day, confirms, for me, at least, that Mahesh lives in the bubble of his own private world. He opines upon what should be done about the world he thinks exists outside his bubble and expects the flunkies to accomplish this: do nothing, accomplish everything. I saw/knew an egomaniacal megalomaniac whose mantra was *see, I'm right.* 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: snip Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. And yet another tactic you invariably fall back on is snipping context, in this case *why* you reminded me of this particular fundie Christian. That way you can make it seem as if I just likened you to a fundie Christian without any basis, purely as an insult. That was quite reprehensibly dishonest, Sal. And you do that kind of thing *a lot*. And one more thing: As a point of fact, I virtually *never* insult someone unless I've first shown their argument to be nonsense. It's not something I fall back on, it's something I *add* after reasoned analysis. Yawn. Sal Absolutely correct, Sal. She has made herself utterly irrelevant on this forum. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. Exactly, and it's hardly just Judy and Lawson, I know others (not on this forum) that use this dodge as well. It's an effective way of basically putting forth something (oftentimes something really dumb or illogical) and then not having to take responsibility for it. No, Sal, it's not a dodge, at least not with Lawson and me. I'm perfectly happy to say whether I believe something or not, even when it isn't relevant to whatever is being discussed. And so is Lawson. And just for the record, if there is *anybody* on this forum who is not willing to take responsibility for what they say, it's Barry. If you think I'm off base, ask him to cite an instance where Lawson or I refused to say what we believe. For that matter, *you* cite such an instance. If you decline, I think I'm justified in saying you refuse to take responsibility for what *you* say. *All* of this is just more True Believer demonizing. Why are the True Non-Believers so threatened by pro-TMers? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for complimenting you on something you said that was totally wrong. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages) on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic- ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they use it. Remember what I said in recent posts about those who have adopted the True Believer mentality being actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge is one way that they avoid having to do so. How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. If someone comes back in response to the dodge and claims that they are just parroting the TM party line (which, of course, they are by quoting it), they can say, Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/ whoever said that. The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When challenged, they always have the out of claiming, Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes you think that's what *I* believe? Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge is used here and challenged, and notice that the person who uses it almost *never* says what he or she really believes. They'll pretend to get all uptight about people mistakenly assuming that what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all the furor that they've stirred up, somehow forget to say what it is they really believe. I have a suggestion; pack up and get back to alt.med where you belong. FFL was way more interesting before you started flooding this place. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 8/26/06 2:04 PM, chaim_laib at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend jstein@ wrote: I *never* encountered any teaching in the TM context about blind devotion to one's teacher or becoming in tune with one's teacher's thinking as the quintessence of spiritual practice. Although Maharishi may not have ever said this explicitly-I want you, my followers, to become in tune with my thinking-he certainly requested this, no, demanded it in every way. He did say this explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all knowers of Reality. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnlasher20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 8/26/06 2:04 PM, chaim_laib at chaim_laib@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend jstein@ wrote: I *never* encountered any teaching in the TM context about blind devotion to one's teacher or becoming in tune with one's teacher's thinking as the quintessence of spiritual practice. Although Maharishi may not have ever said this explicitly-I want you, my followers, to become in tune with my thinking-he certainly requested this, no, demanded it in every way. He did say this explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of people in the audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.) Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all knowers of Reality. Eggzactly. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as that eventually you would all be in the same state of consciousness he was. In my honest and long-considered opinion, all of Maharishi's students have *always* been in the same state of consciousness as he is -- normal old waking state. The problems arise when one or more of the students start to achieve what the teacher never has. The normal old waking state of the sociopathic type is somewhat different from the normal old waking state of most folks. When Mahesh sensed competition or that someone could see through his pretend importance, he got rid of them. Remember what he said about Lillian Rosen: when people give advanced techniques they can be seen as gurus; I know that with Lillian I am taking no chances. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did not experience him as this Blazing Brahman his surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago. I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then one day: POW! I've heard people on FFL say this often over the last year, and noticed that no one ever asks them the obvious question. That is, why do you think that it is *Maharishi's* presence or SSRS's presence that you're perceiving? It sounds more likely to me that what you and other folks like Jim are experiencing is your *own* energy on a good day, and mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's. To be sure, we are aware of our own energies and often project them onto what we feel we like or dislike. I got to spend a lot of time around Mahesh. Later, after TM, I worked with a few people who were certified sociopathic individuals. It was like being around Mahesh. The energy of the sociopathic type invades your space, ignores your boundaries (much like Judy is so often want to do in an effort to squelch critical thought about the realities of Mahesh and his delusional thinking that she'd rather not have to face), pushes our buttons, pulls your strings and just generally plays with your head. Mahesh, like many another sociopathic type enjoyed manipulating others. Mahesh enjoyed it on a grand scale because he could. No one called his bluff and was still there the next day to do it again. Anyone who seemed to clever, too intelligent, too insightful was sent on some mission of no return. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip The energy of the sociopathic type invades your space, ignores your boundaries (much like Judy is so often want to do in an effort to squelch critical thought about the realities of Mahesh and his delusional thinking that she'd rather not have to face), LOL!! 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. OK... The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be sent to some far off place to go and teach. Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her odd way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down; she just enjoys the thought that she can influence the thinking of others. She used to be sharper and could actually zero in on relatively useful false statements of conclusions or false reasoning. But these days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of hers was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or wasn't defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of his (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made any mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother with. I m sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does. Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like so many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state of need. I guess she has followers, Lawson seems to have his nose permanently affixed in one of her orifices, but I can't see she has an actual following. Keep up the good work Sal. We always need to be reminded that fancy words are not necessarily meaningful words and are not always likly to be coming from a good and well intentioned source. 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:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages) on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic- ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they use it. Remember what I said in recent posts about those who have adopted the True Believer mentality being actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge is one way that they avoid having to do so. How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. If someone comes back in response to the dodge and claims that they are just parroting the TM party line (which, of course, they are by quoting it), they can say, Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/ whoever said that. The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When challenged, they always have the out of claiming, Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes you think that's what *I* believe? Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge is used here and challenged, and notice that the person who uses it almost *never* says what he or she really believes. They'll pretend to get all uptight about people mistakenly assuming that what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all the furor that they've stirred up, somehow forget to say what it is they really believe. Thanks, Turquoise B, for your posts. I don't think I totally agree with every word you say, but I like the way you say it and it gives me pause to consider. I was about to give up on FFL, but someone sent me a note saying you had returned from holiday and had a lot to say. Thanks to you and Sal and a few others, I think there might be hope for sorthing through the huge pile of crap Mahesh sold us and winnowing out the something of value. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip Sal wrote: Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal gerbal wrote: Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be sent to some far off place to go and teach. Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her odd way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down; she just enjoys the thought that she can influence the thinking of others. She used to be sharper and could actually zero in on relatively useful false statements of conclusions or false reasoning. But these days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of hers was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or wasn't defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of his (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made any mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother with. I m sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does. Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like so many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state of need. I guess she has followers, Lawson seems to have his nose permanently affixed in one of her orifices, but I can't see she has an actual following. Keep up the good work Sal. We always need to be reminded that fancy words are not necessarily meaningful words and are not always likly to be coming from a good and well intentioned source. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
On Aug 27, 2006, at 5:02 PM, gerbal88 wrote: Thanks to you and Sal and a few others, I think there might be hope for sorthing through the huge pile of crap Mahesh sold us and winnowing out the something of value. I think this is it--FF Life and the other places we've made friends, thanks to MMY and the TMO. I know without them I would have had a much less fulfilling life up until now. I feel I owe him a lot of thanks for that alone. Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. OK... The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be sent to some far off place to go and teach. Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her odd way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down No, actually Sal got what I said completely, pathetically, miserably, embarrassingly wrong, and I was attempting to restate my very simple, obvious, and utterly uncontroversial point so she'd understand it. Clearly you missed the point as well. snip days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of hers was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or wasn't defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of his (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made any mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother with. Right, you can't even reconstruct what I said, but you know it was off the wall. I'm sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does. In this case I suspect you forgot the rest so as not to give me any clue as to what post you were referring to; that way you could be sure I wouldn't be able to dig it out and demonstrate how you had failed to understand it. Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like so many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state of need. I guess she has followers,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip mutual admiration society, now nice for them 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did not experience him as this Blazing Brahman his surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago. I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then one day: POW! I've heard people on FFL say this often over the last year, and noticed that no one ever asks them the obvious question. That is, why do you think that it is *Maharishi's* presence or SSRS's presence that you're perceiving? It sounds more likely to me that what you and other folks like Jim are experiencing is your *own* energy on a good day, and mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's. To be sure, we are aware of our own energies and often project them onto what we feel we like or dislike. I got to spend a lot of time around Mahesh. Later, after TM, I worked with a few people who were certified sociopathic individuals. It was like being around Mahesh. The energy of the sociopathic type invades your space, ignores your boundaries (much like Judy is so often want to do in an effort to squelch critical thought about the realities of Mahesh and his delusional thinking that she'd rather not have to face), pushes our buttons, pulls your strings and just generally plays with your head. Mahesh, like many another sociopathic type enjoyed manipulating others. Mahesh enjoyed it on a grand scale because he could. No one called his bluff and was still there the next day to do it again. Anyone who seemed to clever, too intelligent, too insightful was sent on some mission of no return. Boy, you got royally f*cked over by Mahesh, huh? Why not just let go of it, much as Turquoise advocates for the [unidentified] TBs here? Or do you get a payoff from feeling this way? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote: Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant. Look, let's make it *real simple*. If I were to say, George Bush says God tells him what to do, would you automatically assume I believed God tells George Bush what to do? Or would you need some *context* to determine whether that's what I believed? Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to make a point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as *evidence* or backup that what they said is true. What you are saying is that people are offering MMY's quotes whether or not they believe them to be true, whether or not they back up their (the poster's) point. I'd say the context in which this happens on this board pretty much negates that, and it's nuts to think otherwise. You and other pro-TMers who use MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be true--or else are trying to deceive. So which is it? Or, O LIght of My LIfe [she still has me kill-filed], they're backing up their argument about what MMY says and apparently believes, by quoting him, regardless of whether or not they agree with what he says or believes... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Of course, she's only talking about how Barry and a few others deal with a specific situation, and not about ALL communication in general, but hey, you can high-five people for whatever reason you want. I mean, Major Combat Operations Over and all that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote: P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated What MMY sez... (or in this case, What MMY may have meant...) with What MMY sez is true. It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry simply cannot seem to make it. OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are *lies*? I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Is true in my formulation refers to what the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY believes. It's likely that someone who believes what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes it, but that's beside the point. OK... The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite understand. You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what it is you're driving at. It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to make it any clearer. When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting what he says without offering an opinion about whether they believe what he says is true, or (b) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is true, or even (c) indicating that they believe what they're quoting him as saying is *not* true. It depends on the context. Barry and some others here automatically assume that when a TMer says MMY says... the TMer is expressing their belief that whatever they're quoting MMY as saying is true. But that, of course, isn't necessarily the case. If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., MMY says X, but that's a load of crap, or MMY says do X, so you'd better start doing X right away), at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they believe what they're quoting is true. They might believe it, they might not believe it, they might think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't* likely, or they might have no earthly idea. And in many cases what they think on that issue may not even be relevant to the point they're making. Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes around appending and what I just said I firmly believe to be true, to every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that. It's what most communication is based on. What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation going with anyone? Sal 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: snip You and other pro-TMers who use MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be true--or else are trying to deceive. So which is it? Or, O LIght of My LIfe [she still has me kill-filed], they're backing up their argument about what MMY says and apparently believes, by quoting him, regardless of whether or not they agree with what he says or believes... Naaaw. Couldn't be. Pro-TMers NEVER quote MMY unless they believe what they're quoting him as saying, or unless they're lying. And anti-TMers NEVER quote MMY unless they're doing so to show he's insane. But anti-TMes, of course, NEVER lie, and they ALWAYS quote MMY accurately, so there's no reason for the pro-TMers to quote MMY to them in the first place. Life is apparently a whole lot simpler than you or I ever thought, Lawson. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] As it happens, I *don't* believe women should stay in the home and raise children. I don't support MMY's male chauvinism at all. I was quoting MMY to the first person not to support MMY's views but to point out that MMY is indeed a male chauvinist. In his defense, he's talking from a religious perspective that has valid biological roots: in general, women DO make better primary care-givers than men, and there are relatively few cases of wicked stepmothers, and MANY cases of abusive stepfathers. Good grief, people, get a grip! 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote: Let's take another example. Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a male chauvinist. And I respond, Well, he does say women should stay at home and raise the children. Would you assume I *believed* women should stay at home and raise the children? No. But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along is, Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist. See the difference? :) Except, what you clipped was Judy's explanation that she DOES believe that MMY ***IS*** a male chauvinist, so, you've presented us with two most-plausible scenarios: you don't really read what Judy writes, but only those parts that seem to verify what you already believe, OR you DID read what Judy wrote, and carefully snipt the context since it would have obviated the point you were trying to make by quoting her. BTW, how does an October wedding sound? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Barry knows I'm in the last category too, but he simply ignores the context and makes the default assumption that I agree with anything I quote MMY as saying, because he can always use that as a putdown. I honestly think that Barry came back to this forum simply to take snipes at TBers, mostly you, but potentially others as well. Very sad. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip Exactly right, wayback and Gerbal. I refuse to read her high horse drivel anymore and so are many others. It's a complete waste of timethe arguments are circular, and, quite frankly, there are many more topics (and posters) of interested on this forum than the My name is Judy and I'm so bright and you're so dumb and let me tell you why routine that she endlessly engages in. She's pathetic and obnoxious. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: [...] I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Yawn. Unlike yourself, who killfiles a potential suitor simply because you don't give a sh*t about what he says... [note to all: I am not really a potential suitor of Sal's but it's fun to carry on a one-sided flirtation that she will never see. It proves Judy's point that killfiiling cedes the field to someone and lets them say whatever they want without challenge] 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Of course, she's only talking about how Barry and a few others deal with a specific situation, and not about ALL communication in general, but hey, you can high-five people for whatever reason you want. I mean, Major Combat Operations Over and all that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: snip Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all. You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things they may or may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and others) claim MMY said. I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. Glenn Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had said as So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.' On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here who haven't spoken up. Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] There was excellent advice given in one of the early posts of this thread. It is: I am suggesting, in fact I am asking, that you consider NOT READING the posts of those who upset you, like Judy. The underlying theme of her posts is usually the same. You can't follow my superior logic. Let me try again to explain it to you, little feller. Her point is only to win and be as condescending as possible doing it. Ever hear her say hey, thanks. I was wrong? Ignore her pointless posts as I shall do from now on. Translation: Judy uses language and logic WY better than I do and it bugs the heck out of me... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote: Let's take another example. Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a male chauvinist. And I respond, Well, he does say women should stay at home and raise the children. Would you assume I *believed* women should stay at home and raise the children? No. But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along is, Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist. See the difference? :) Except, what you clipped was Judy's explanation that she DOES believe that MMY ***IS*** a male chauvinist, so, you've presented us with two most-plausible scenarios: you don't really read what Judy writes, but only those parts that seem to verify what you already believe, OR you DID read what Judy wrote, and carefully snipt the context since it would have obviated the point you were trying to make by quoting her. BTW, how does an October wedding sound? An October surprise, huh? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Um, it doesn't just happen to refute it, it's chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute it. (Actually the correct term here is rebut, not refute, unless we're talking about correcting a misquote. Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge.) Is this one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't arguments? Or perhaps marklar is marklar? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: How it works is, when someone says something that is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it, the people who use this dodge regularly (neither of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the exact argument that we who are TM teachers were taught to use in this situation. It takes the form, Well, MMY says... or The TMO says... or Scientific experiment X says... And whatever form it takes, what they say just happens to refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, or the criticism. But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes it in a completely spineless way. The persons using this particular dodge never have to say what *they* believe about the point under discussion. Exactly, and it's hardly just Judy and Lawson, I know others (not on this forum) that use this dodge as well. It's an effective way of basically putting forth something (oftentimes something really dumb or illogical) and then not having to take responsibility for it. O Radient One, your logic is beyond compare, as is your physical and inner beauty. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying home and raising the children). Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw man, in other words. And those weren't the posts I was referring to. Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the goofy interpretation is so, well, goofy. I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Yawn. Sal Absolutely correct, Sal. She has made herself utterly irrelevant on this forum. Another member of the Judy Stein Worship Club, I see... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] Barry knows I'm in the last category too, but he simply ignores the context and makes the default assumption that I agree with anything I quote MMY as saying, because he can always use that as a putdown. I honestly think that Barry came back to this forum simply to take snipes at TBers, mostly you, but potentially others as well. Of course he did. That's all he's done since he returned, and at even greater length and frequency than before he left. Very sad. 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 * 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly. snip Exactly right, wayback and Gerbal. Quite a lengthy chain now of people with their noses up other people's orifices, as gerbal so delicately puts it. I guess they figure it gives them some protection against the pro-TM viewpoint. I refuse to read her high horse drivel anymore and so are many others. It's a complete waste of timethe arguments are circular, and, quite frankly, there are many more topics (and posters) of interested on this forum than the My name is Judy and I'm so bright and you're so dumb and let me tell you why routine that she endlessly engages in. She's pathetic and obnoxious. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] Um, it doesn't just happen to refute it, it's chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute it. (Actually the correct term here is rebut, not refute, unless we're talking about correcting a misquote. Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge.) Is this one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't arguments? Or perhaps marklar is marklar? Huh?? 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for complimenting you on something you said that was totally wrong. But she may not think it is totally wrong. Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the argument --our mind goes blank. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: [...] I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Yawn. Unlike yourself, who killfiles a potential suitor simply because you don't give a sh*t about what he says... [note to all: I am not really a potential suitor of Sal's but it's fun to carry on a one-sided flirtation that she will never see. It proves Judy's point that killfiiling cedes the field to someone and lets them say whatever they want without challenge] It also leaves them vulnerable to the manipulations of dishonest posters who snip significant context or otherwise distort what the folks they've killfiled have written, leaving them in blissful delusion. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. Glenn Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had said as So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.' On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here who haven't spoken up. Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh? So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh? Actually, it sounds like something that someone with undiagnosed ADD would say... ...I resemble that remark. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Say, gerbal, why don't you affix your nose a little more permanently in one of Sal's orifices? She loves that stuff. You'll have to share with Curtis, but I'm sure said orifice is big enough to accommodate both your noses at once. Sorry Judy. I've already establihed my preeiminence in this position and none others need apply! Uh, oh. She might wonder what that line is about since she hasn't kill-filed you yet. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for complimenting you on something you said that was totally wrong. But she may not think it is totally wrong. Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the argument --our mind goes blank. I wish I could believe that, but in this case her mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the argument so precisely *away* from the logic that it had to have been calculated. You'd have to know what the logic *was* to do that. Also, she's done it before, several times, including in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] Um, it doesn't just happen to refute it, it's chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute it. (Actually the correct term here is rebut, not refute, unless we're talking about correcting a misquote. Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge.) Is this one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't arguments? Or perhaps marklar is marklar? Huh?? You said: Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge. marklar is marklar. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote: Let's take another example. Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a male chauvinist. And I respond, Well, he does say women should stay at home and raise the children. Would you assume I *believed* women should stay at home and raise the children? No. But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along is, Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist. See the difference? :) Except, what you clipped was Judy's explanation that she DOES believe that MMY ***IS*** a male chauvinist, so, you've presented us with two most-plausible scenarios: you don't really read what Judy writes, but only those parts that seem to verify what you already believe, OR you DID read what Judy wrote, and carefully snipt the context since it would have obviated the point you were trying to make by quoting her. BTW, how does an October wedding sound? An October surprise, huh? If/when she figures out what I've been doing and goes back and reads my responses to her, we may see another October Sky. Bam, boom, to the moon, Alice. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Say, gerbal, why don't you affix your nose a little more permanently in one of Sal's orifices? She loves that stuff. You'll have to share with Curtis, but I'm sure said orifice is big enough to accommodate both your noses at once. Sorry Judy. I've already establihed my preeiminence in this position and none others need apply! Selfish, or do you just have a really big nose? Uh, oh. She might wonder what that line is about since she hasn't kill-filed you yet. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for complimenting you on something you said that was totally wrong. But she may not think it is totally wrong. Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the argument --our mind goes blank. I wish I could believe that, but in this case her mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the argument so precisely *away* from the logic that it had to have been calculated. You'd have to know what the logic *was* to do that. Also, she's done it before, several times, including in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM. P.S.: And she's not even that rabid a TM critic. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote: [...] I just realized who you keep reminding me of. It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out on alt.m.t. And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away. Yawn. Unlike yourself, who killfiles a potential suitor simply because you don't give a sh*t about what he says... [note to all: I am not really a potential suitor of Sal's but it's fun to carry on a one-sided flirtation that she will never see. It proves Judy's point that killfiiling cedes the field to someone and lets them say whatever they want without challenge] It also leaves them vulnerable to the manipulations of dishonest posters who snip significant context or otherwise distort what the folks they've killfiled have written, leaving them in blissful delusion. Uh, oh. Someone finally quoted my remarks to Sal. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. Glenn Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had said as So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.' On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here who haven't spoken up. Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh? So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh? You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's semen on it? Actually, it sounds like something that someone with undiagnosed ADD would say... ...I resemble that remark. Looks more like MPD at this point... 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for complimenting you on something you said that was totally wrong. But she may not think it is totally wrong. Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the argument --our mind goes blank. I wish I could believe that, but in this case her mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the argument so precisely *away* from the logic that it had to have been calculated. You'd have to know what the logic *was* to do that. Also, she's done it before, several times, including in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM. That's my girl! 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] Um, it doesn't just happen to refute it, it's chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute it. (Actually the correct term here is rebut, not refute, unless we're talking about correcting a misquote. Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge.) Is this one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't arguments? Or perhaps marklar is marklar? Huh?? You said: Rebut means to prove wrong; rebut simply means to challenge. Urk. So I did. I meant refute means to prove wrong... marklar is marklar. No idea what marklar is. But your damned if you do wisecrack almost made me pee my pants now that you've pointed out my error. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Say, gerbal, why don't you affix your nose a little more permanently in one of Sal's orifices? She loves that stuff. You'll have to share with Curtis, but I'm sure said orifice is big enough to accommodate both your noses at once. Sorry Judy. I've already establihed my preeiminence in this position and none others need apply! Selfish, or do you just have a really big nose? A gentleman never tells... Uh, oh. She might wonder what that line is about since she hasn't kill-filed you yet. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. Glenn Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had said as So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.' On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here who haven't spoken up. Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh? So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh? You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's semen on it? Actually, it sounds like something that someone with undiagnosed ADD would say... ...I resemble that remark. Looks more like MPD at this point... In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest to fragment personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any consistent physiological correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period. 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What you are putting forth basically means the end of any and all honest communication. Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal. High five. What would have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase. Thanks. How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for complimenting you on something you said that was totally wrong. But she may not think it is totally wrong. Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the argument --our mind goes blank. I wish I could believe that, but in this case her mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the argument so precisely *away* from the logic that it had to have been calculated. You'd have to know what the logic *was* to do that. Also, she's done it before, several times, including in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM. P.S.: And she's not even that rabid a TM critic. Eh. She's got certain strong opinions and anyone that doesn't share those opinions might be seen as a threat to her. Better to denounce such people rather than re-evaluate the opinion. Also, she may just see red whenever she sees anything by you so there's a guilt- by-association thing going on and it dictates how she reacts to anything you or any other pro-TMer says. Been there, done that, though not-so-much about TM itself, I think. 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. Glenn Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had said as So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.' On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here who haven't spoken up. Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.' So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh? So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh? You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's semen on it? Actually, it sounds like something that someone with undiagnosed ADD would say... ...I resemble that remark. Looks more like MPD at this point... In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest to fragment personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any consistent physiological correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period. It's hard to believe until you start working with it clinically. Then you say, Oh! 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote: on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for Guru Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to set up hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start in 3 weeks or 2 months. This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had unstructured lives and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was applied to scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals accustomed to scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things with a few weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s conference was organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. The first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy. Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential participants, or to give the organizers something to do? There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized. JohnY 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/
