[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Your Inner Transformation Method Improve your Outer Life?
As Antonio said to Wolfgang, Too many notes. :-) Too many words to support too little concept. So I'll comment only on the part that interested me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marek reinforces the idea that looking collectively at many people in an organization is more effective than looking at one. Excellent point statistical sampling theory and all. One observation, one person, may just be odd to begin with. 100 out of 100 people in an organiztion who are odd paints a clearer picture. I agree with this one 100%. If you want to get a picture of whether the followers of a certain spiritual teacher have had their everyday lives benefitted by studying with that teacher, ask the waiters and waitresses who serve them. Ask their landlords whether they pay the rent, and on time. Ask their ex-girlfriends or boyfriends. Or, even better, ask the staff at the Bodhi Tree Bookstore in L.A. They've seen it all...*everybody*, no matter who they study with or what they study in the spiritual smorgasbord, sooner or later comes there to buy their books. And so, of course, the staff at the Bodhi Tree gets to see how they handle themselves. Are they nice? Are they rude and condescending? Are they total space cases, who have to be chased out of the store at closing time? Do they pick fights with other customers? Do they buy books and then return them in two days all dog-eared and claiming they hadn't opened them? Do they berate the staff for not hang- ing *their teacher's* photo higher than all the others on the wall? Do they have sex in the bath- room, and if so, is it with another human being? Do they hang out in the Spirit Possession and Channeling section and have conversations with themselves in several different voices? Do they drink up all your tea and eat all your cookies and then complain when they run out? ( You can probably tell that I once went out with a lovely lady who worked at the Bodhi Tree bookstore. These are all true stories. :-) The spiritual marketplace is just a ZOO. But the thing is, most people who *live* in the zoo are not really aware of how zoo-like it is. And how baggable they are. Other people, who maybe have been around the block a bit, can often look at a person as they enter the door of the bookstore ( my ex-girlfriend could do this, with frightening accuracy ), and tell you who they study with, and how long they *have* studied with them. The Rajneeshees and the Sikhs are easy to bag, of course, because they wear distinctive clothing. But some of the other groups/groupies are just as easy to bag because they wear distinctive auras. They have picked up the *mindset* of their teachers, and of the organization in which they study. I think it's a valuable way of looking at a teaching. If you can detect a sameness in the majority of students you meet who study in a certain group or with a certain teacher, *keep it in mind*, because if you choose to spend some time there, *that's what you're going to be like*. As to how this relates to TM, I can't tell you. I haven't been part of it, or any of its inbred commun- ities, for a long, long time. But I might suggest that if the locals in Fairfield came up with the term Ru's, there was a reason they did so.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Your Inner Transformation Method Improve your Outer Life?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So speak up oh experienced and wise ones who have been around the spiritual block. Do you have other criteria? Conciseness and simplicity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Your Inner Transformation Method Improve your Outer Life?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This has been a perennial question on FFL for years. Asked from different angles. Here is, I hope, a freash slant. Following are a list of criteria (an expansion of an earlier post) that I find useful in evaluating if, for me, an Inner Transformation Teacher, practice or organization is appealing to me, may be useful for me, and might be something I might consider trying. snip Personally, I would replace your one thousand, six hundred, and fifty eight words on this topic, with four: Use your common sense.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Your Inner Transformation Method Improve your Outer Life?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: This has been a perennial question on FFL for years. Asked from different angles. Here is, I hope, a freash slant. Following are a list of criteria (an expansion of an earlier post) that I find useful in evaluating if, for me, an Inner Transformation Teacher, practice or organization is appealing to me, may be useful for me, and might be something I might consider trying. snip Personally, I would replace your one thousand, six hundred, and fifty eight words on this topic, with four: Use your common sense.:-) Common sense is a good one to add to the list. Thanks Sort of my point is the 3rd paragraph just after the one where you snipped the rest. And these are sort of common sense criteria we, well me, instinctively use in assessing if someone has qualities that you like, and that you may try to emulate or obtain. Not just for Inner Transformation stuff. And if simple common sense works for you, or anyone, great. Go for it. And I am sure thats not a 'should implied in your imperative. Thus, what I have found, and observed (perhaps faultily) in others, is that the cognitive dissonance between walk and talk can sometimes be so vast, it can, sort of suspend critical faculties and common sense -- at least for just a bit. Some go Holy cowdung, what they are saying is so out there, and so inconsistent with their behavior, I must be missing something. I must not 'get it'. Better I check things out more, keep an open mind, and I know then I will 'get it' soon'. And sometimes soon never comes because the gap between new talk and walk gets bigger . I have to admit, its a powerful PR technique. Goebels used it, Bush used it (not drawu=ing any other correlations): Tell bigger and bigger mind boggling things, more and more audacious things, and after a while people just follow along. Even if the things are silly. Or even not true. As to why this technique works, is for people trained in such things to unravel. I just observe that it has worked to unravel some of the big stories used in the TMO and other orgs. And countries. So an effective antidote I have found -- for myself, and in others -- is to separate the claims into components, and evaluate the different parts. Such as Is this really true, always, often, almost never? etc. The process may seem anal for some -- so great, they probably don't need it. Its useful for me, for reasons its not worth articulating here. Others may get it also, and see the value of the process. Others won't. Or it may not be relevant for them. So good luck with your common sense. May it always be well grounded and accurate.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Does Your Inner Transformation Method Improve your Outer Life?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: This has been a perennial question on FFL for years. Asked from different angles. Here is, I hope, a freash slant. Following are a list of criteria (an expansion of an earlier post) that I find useful in evaluating if, for me, an Inner Transformation Teacher, practice or organization is appealing to me, may be useful for me, and might be something I might consider trying. snip Personally, I would replace your one thousand, six hundred, and fifty eight words on this topic, with four: Use your common sense.:-) Common sense is a good one to add to the list. Thanks Sort of my point is the 3rd paragraph just after the one where you snipped the rest. And these are sort of common sense criteria we, well me, instinctively use in assessing if someone has qualities that you like, and that you may try to emulate or obtain. Not just for Inner Transformation stuff. And if simple common sense works for you, or anyone, great. Go for it. Thus, what I have found, and observed (perhaps faultily) in others, is that the cognitive dissonance between walk and talk can sometimes be so vast, it can, sort of suspend critical faculties and common sense -- at least for just a bit. Some go Holy cowdung, what they are saying is so out there, and so inconsistent with their behavior, I must be missing something. I must not 'get it'. Better I check things out more, keep an open mind, and I know then I will 'get it' soon'. And sometimes soon never comes because the gap between new talk and walk gets bigger . I have to admit, its a powerful PR technique. Goebels used it, Bush used it (not drawu=ing any other correlations): Tell bigger and bigger mind boggling things, more and more audacious things, and after a while people just follow along. Even if the things are silly. Or even not true. As to why this technique works, is for people trained in such things to unravel. I just observe that it has worked to unravel some of the big stories used in the TMO and other orgs. And countries. So an effective antidote I have found -- for myself, and in others -- is to separate the claims into components, and evaluate the different parts. Such as Is this really true, always, often, almost never? etc. The process may seem anal for some -- so great, they probably don't need it. Its useful for me, for reasons its not worth articulating here. Others may get it also, and see the value of the process. Others won't. Or it may not be relevant for them. So good luck with your common sense. May it always be well grounded and accurate.- ==
