Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
On Jun 27, 2008, at 10:34 PM, yifuxero wrote: --Thx. How about TM plus the advanced techniques. Isn't there supposedly a 3-rd eye advanced technique (I haven't learned that one). Possibly TM plus the advanced techniques would be closer to your approval for completeness. In any event, I see no evidence of completeness in what Buddhists are offering to the public. Anyone: what's the 3-rd eye advanced technique? Thx again!. As far as I know, the techniques involving the third eye were either variations on the night technique--of which there are quite few discarded versions--or there were pranayamas which worked with activating the ajna. In the night technique I'm thinking of, the person meditated briefly before bed--a couple of minutes--and then had the intention that awareness moved out into the (dark) room. This is supposed to help maintain awareness during sleeping and dreaming. As far as Buddhists offering techniques which work towards samadhi, the primary and most widespread one might be the Shamabhala tradition, as they teach the unification of shamatha and vipassana along with nondual compassion meditation (for free or donation). Recent scientific evidence of samadhi in humans shows that compassion meditation, for some reason, can get people into samadhi quite quickly. Apparently love is all you need. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip There is *clearly* a great deal of anti-NeoAdvaita sentiment on this forum. I do not share in it, at least not completely. My theory for where it comes from is the TM dogma/indoctrination: 1) people are *resentful* of a path/non-path which claims that you already ARE what they have been trying to achieve for so long; Oh, nonsense. Maharishi made this same point many times. 2) they are sold out to *methods*, as if there really IS a method out there somewhere that is going to liberate them, maybe, someday, if they just wait long enough; TM doesn't liberate you. TM just gets rid of what is in the way of liberation. and 3) they distrust the smarmy language of avoidance and the ability to justify pretty much *anything* to claim that the speaker is all they could possibly be, right here, right now...and you're not...and the only reason you're not is that you're being obstinate. giggle I should go look up all the times you've said this to me. I'm with the bashers 100% on Door Number 3; the language of NeoAdvaita-speak is as disgraceful and as manipulative as the language of NeoConservatism; and often with just as questionable intent. It's all about the glorification of ME, the speaker. No kidding. Exactly what I was complaining about that inspired your being obstinate lectures. snip There IS nowhere to go and nothing to become to realize one's enlightenment. But at the same time, there is more to it than just saying those words, over and over. Just what I kept saying, to much mockery from you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip The language is used instead to *break patterns*, to get the student OUT OF HIS HEAD, out of intellectual constructs and the use of the intellect, period. The purpose is to create a mental environment that HAS NO CHOICE but to BE HERE NOW. It's the NOW that allows or facilitates the reali- zation IMO, not the language. Maharishi, almost never, used language this way. My experience was never, period. But I am open to the possibility that others who spent more time with him saw him use language this way. I doubt it seri- ously, because he did not ever strike me as being aware of this particular use of language AT ALL, but it's possible. He didn't use it often, but he did from time to time. In fact, I've quoted one instance here on several occasions, and it's gone right over your head. snip So it went for the next decade or so. Realization. Cool. Loss of realization. Bummer. And with each new bummer, a part of me was always trying to conceptually recreate the process that had made the last realization possible. And it never worked. Not once. The reason, as far as I can tell, is that THERE IS NO PROCESS. Like shit, realization just happens. There may have been some seeming catalyst TO it happening, but that's probably an illusion. And trying to recreate the catalyst never works. The SAME process that worked once to trigger an experience of realization never seems to work a second time when used as a kind of exercise in conceptual process modeling. Actually, what you describe fits MMY's model just about perfectly.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
On Jun 27, 2008, at 9:57 PM, authfriend wrote: 2) they are sold out to *methods*, as if there really IS a method out there somewhere that is going to liberate them, maybe, someday, if they just wait long enough; TM doesn't liberate you. TM just gets rid of what is in the way of liberation. Actually that's not a rote answer (like the one you gave). You can't predict, for example assuming that sentient beings reincarnate--what level of person you're initiating. So, for example, you could initiate an advanced yogi who was just a couple of transcendings away from pure siddhi of the Saraswati mantra--and you just happened to be the teacher who gave the person that mantra. In such a case, the person, with little or no effort; realizes very quickly. In such a case TM does liberate that person. Of course there are a gazillion variations on that theme, because people are very different. But, in general, for most mantrins, the purpose of the mantra is to introduce the thought- free state, so that a witness can hopefully arise, but mostly that it places positive seeds into the subconscious, with the hope that it will overshadow the collective chaos of the student and work towards that witness. If the person needs some type of deep samadhi to eradicate their samskaras, they won't get it with this technique, as it produces a light, fragile, trance state in most people (alpha- coherence). Since there a lot of hopeful things that are assumed of a good or perfect student (i.e. a successful recipient of a mantra for use in mental japa), there a lot of things that can potentially go wrong. Therefore there are always other techniques that the student can most appropriately apply. Without them, they can languish indefinitely. __ On a separate note, does it disturb anyone else that your foaming at the mouth and just waiting to leap at some Barry email is now done on UTC rather than Central time? WTF Judy? Get some help on this issue. Maybe that's the real reason your are so deeply hostile to John Knapp? Have you ever looked at this? I'm sure many here hope you well. In any event, it would be nice if you could work thru some of that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--Thx. How about TM plus the advanced techniques. Isn't there supposedly a 3-rd eye advanced technique (I haven't learned that one). Possibly TM plus the advanced techniques would be closer to your approval for completeness. In any event, I see no evidence of completeness in what Buddhists are offering to the public. Anyone: what's the 3-rd eye advanced technique? Thx again!. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 27, 2008, at 9:57 PM, authfriend wrote: 2) they are sold out to *methods*, as if there really IS a method out there somewhere that is going to liberate them, maybe, someday, if they just wait long enough; TM doesn't liberate you. TM just gets rid of what is in the way of liberation. Actually that's not a rote answer (like the one you gave). You can't predict, for example assuming that sentient beings reincarnate-- what level of person you're initiating. So, for example, you could initiate an advanced yogi who was just a couple of transcendings away from pure siddhi of the Saraswati mantra--and you just happened to be the teacher who gave the person that mantra. In such a case, the person, with little or no effort; realizes very quickly. In such a case TM does liberate that person. Of course there are a gazillion variations on that theme, because people are very different. But, in general, for most mantrins, the purpose of the mantra is to introduce the thought- free state, so that a witness can hopefully arise, but mostly that it places positive seeds into the subconscious, with the hope that it will overshadow the collective chaos of the student and work towards that witness. If the person needs some type of deep samadhi to eradicate their samskaras, they won't get it with this technique, as it produces a light, fragile, trance state in most people (alpha- coherence). Since there a lot of hopeful things that are assumed of a good or perfect student (i.e. a successful recipient of a mantra for use in mental japa), there a lot of things that can potentially go wrong. Therefore there are always other techniques that the student can most appropriately apply. Without them, they can languish indefinitely. __ On a separate note, does it disturb anyone else that your foaming at the mouth and just waiting to leap at some Barry email is now done on UTC rather than Central time? WTF Judy? Get some help on this issue. Maybe that's the real reason your are so deeply hostile to John Knapp? Have you ever looked at this? I'm sure many here hope you well. In any event, it would be nice if you could work thru some of that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 27, 2008, at 9:57 PM, authfriend wrote: 2) they are sold out to *methods*, as if there really IS a method out there somewhere that is going to liberate them, maybe, someday, if they just wait long enough; TM doesn't liberate you. TM just gets rid of what is in the way of liberation. Actually that's not a rote answer (like the one you gave). Yeah, Vaj, you forget that I don't consider you to be authoritative on much of anything in this area. I think half the time, maybe more, you just make it up as you go along. snip On a separate note, does it disturb anyone else that your foaming at the mouth and just waiting to leap at some Barry email is now done on UTC rather than Central time? WTF are you talking about? WTF Judy? Get some help on this issue. Maybe that's the real reason your are so deeply hostile to John Knapp? Have you ever looked at this? I'm sure many here hope you well. And we all hope you well too, Vaj. Are you drunk, or what? This is gibberish.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
On Jun 25, 2008, at 11:11 PM, new.morning wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might want to consider the fact that only 1 person here even bothered to GREET me when I arrived. Is it apathy, laziness, or have you all become this jaded? I understand that it may be awkward, even difficult to enter a new group. Particularly with people who have 4-5+ years of internet interactions with each other -- and sometimes 30 years of personal friendships, plus a sustained common experience some decades back. And the rudeness of some is not shared by all. But why the need to be greeted? When you visit a new city, do you expect everyone to drop what they are doing, and show you around town? Its nice if they do. But thats not an expectation I have,or observe in most when traveling. Advaita Barbie always gets greeted (although it's been difficult at times since Ken 'came out').
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
Turq, nice post summarizing some problems with neo-advaita. My two cents below: But for Door Number 1, my experience is that the NeoAdvaita satsang experience -- while VERY DEFINITELY being a technique -- *can* work for some, but doesn't work for most. The reason is that in most cases the *catalyst* that could make the technique or method work is missing. Ramana Maharishi (big daddy of advaita) makes it very clear that Atma-vichara or Self-inquiry is for the very few who have done, as he calls it, preliminary work. He never saw it as a technique. Basically if you Self-inquired and nothing happened, it was back to yoga until your intellect was sattvic enough to transcend with atma-vichara. This rather important point seems to be missing from the neo-advaita folks. The basic structure/technique is language designed to get the seeker OUT OF HIS HEAD, out of the intellect, and out of concepts of future enlight- enment and into an awareness of Now and only Now. If that is accomplished, *some people* can exper- ience in that Nowness a moment (or longer) of satori or realization. In my experience, the sat- sang experience works best for those who have had enlightenment experiences or realization experiences BEFORE, and who thus take advantage of the silence of Nowness to remember it and re-experience it. You make a critical point about language here. We tmer's are so used to language being used to construct a conceptual model of enlightenment that we fail to recognize any other use of language. Ramana rarely used language this way. For Ramana, language is a tool to trigger realization. Maharishi, almost never, used language this way. Maharishi built waking state models of realization that our minds could hold onto. Raman didn't build conceptual models. Unfortunatly, Neo-advaita speak, at its worst, builds conceptual process models that are, imho, ridiculous for the most part.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turq, nice post summarizing some problems with neo-advaita. My two cents below: But for Door Number 1, my experience is that the NeoAdvaita satsang experience -- while VERY DEFINITELY being a technique -- *can* work for some, but doesn't work for most. The reason is that in most cases the *catalyst* that could make the technique or method work is missing. Ramana Maharishi (big daddy of advaita) makes it very clear that Atma-vichara or Self-inquiry is for the very few who have done, as he calls it, preliminary work. He never saw it as a technique. Basically if you Self-inquired and nothing happened, it was back to yoga until your intellect was sattvic enough to transcend with atma-vichara. This rather important point seems to be missing from the neo-advaita folks. Exactly. Hey, I've had realization experiences myself in a NeoAdvaita setting, but I certainly don't credit the satsang or the teacher with having created them. I've had similar reali- zation experiences just by visiting a place of power, or by being placed in a out-of-the- ordinary situation (once, in fact, by having my life threatened by a mugger in Amsterdam... go figure). The 'ting is, many of us HAVE paid our dues, or at least *some* dues with the 'preliminary work.' So something comes along that triggers an experience *based* on that 'preliminary work.' That does NOT mean to me that the trigger or catalyst *caused* the realization experience. It merely built upon years or decades of 'preliminary work' and SOMETHING happened (we'll never know exactly what) that allowed us to get the hell out of our own way and appreciate what had always already been present. The basic structure/technique is language designed to get the seeker OUT OF HIS HEAD, out of the intellect, and out of concepts of future enlight- enment and into an awareness of Now and only Now. If that is accomplished, *some people* can exper- ience in that Nowness a moment (or longer) of satori or realization. In my experience, the sat- sang experience works best for those who have had enlightenment experiences or realization experiences BEFORE, and who thus take advantage of the silence of Nowness to remember it and re-experience it. You make a critical point about language here. We tmer's are so used to language being used to construct a conceptual model of enlightenment that we fail to recognize any other use of language. Exactly. The very *purpose* of language in the TMO is TO create conceptual models, and to immerse the student in more and more elaborate conceptual models. Ramana rarely used language this way. For Ramana, language is a tool to trigger realization. Exactly. It's anti-conceptual-model language. The closest parallel to it I can come up with is the use of the koan in traditional Zen. The objective is to use language to present a situation or scenario that CANNOT be reduced to a conceptual model. What, after all, IS the sound of one hand clapping? The solution CANNOT be reasoned out; it can never be achieved via intellectual effort. The language is used instead to *break patterns*, to get the student OUT OF HIS HEAD, out of intellectual constructs and the use of the intellect, period. The purpose is to create a mental environment that HAS NO CHOICE but to BE HERE NOW. It's the NOW that allows or facilitates the reali- zation IMO, not the language. Maharishi, almost never, used language this way. My experience was never, period. But I am open to the possibility that others who spent more time with him saw him use language this way. I doubt it seri- ously, because he did not ever strike me as being aware of this particular use of language AT ALL, but it's possible. Maharishi built waking state models of realization that our minds could hold onto. And that people DID hold onto, and still ARE. Ramana didn't build conceptual models. Unfortunatly, Neo-advaita speak, at its worst, builds conceptual process models that are, imho, ridiculous for the most part. I like that. Conceptual process models. That's it exactly. Those who are lured by the use of non- conceptual language in a satsang environment to GET OUT OF THEIR HEADS and let conceptualization fall away sometimes have a minor realization experience. Then, later, when that experience has faded, they put the PROCESS that, for them, led up to the mini- realization experience on a kind of mental pedestal and turn it into an ongoing exercise in moodmaking. They attempt -- without the assistance of a good satsang facilitator -- to create the PROCESS of satsang in their everyday lives. They eschew con- ceptual models and the idea of path or tech- nique, BUT THEY ARE PRACTICING A TECHNIQUE! They are trying to recreate the process that they now associate with their epiphanal moment of real- ization. They are trying to moodmake themselves back to
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not technique when the technique has truly been laid aside. This is where language doesn't suffice. Most of life is a trance and thus a search for techniques to find a way out. But the way out is in. But for Door Number 1, my experience is that the NeoAdvaita satsang experience -- while VERY DEFINITELY being a technique -- *can* work for some, but doesn't work for most. The reason is that in most cases the *catalyst* that could make the technique or method work is missing. It is not technique when the technique has truly been laid aside. This is where language doesn't suffice. Most of life is a trance and thus a search for techniques to find a way out. But the way out is in. Bullshit. Saying it twice doesn't make it any less bullshit. The very fact that you repeat it verbatim indicates that it is very MUCH a technique for you. snip I'm personally not into traditions. Of course not. Traditions have this tendency to actually evaluate and verify the claims of those who dare to teach in their name. It's SO much easier to dispense with that, and claim to be realized, with nothing to back it up. :-) snip There is seemingly no knowledge of further evolution, of unfolding newer levels of realization, of going forward. This is not my experience at all. Then explain. We'll wait. snip There IS nowhere to go and nothing to become to realize one's enlightenment. But at the same time, there is more to it than just saying those words, over and over. I absolutely agree with this last paragraph. Uh...then with all due respect, do something more than just repeating: It is not technique when the technique has truly been laid aside. This is where language doesn't suffice. Most of life is a trance and thus a search for techniques to find a way out. But the way out is in. No matter how many times you say it, that doesn't make it any less bullshit.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'll have to visit me in person for the photos. You'll be taking them by the way. Cool, I guess, if you're the lotusshaktigoddess whose photo (non-nekkid photo) is on seemingly dozens of blogs, according to Google. If that's really you (a recent statistic indicates that something like 40% of photos posted by people on the Internet aren't really photos of them), then you look very nice for 49. I'm a little older than 49 myself, but people who have seen my photo think that I still look pretty good: http://tinyurl.com/28ddsq :-) Anyway, just to follow up a little on my previous reply, I'm a bit...uh...outspoken. When I called bullshit on the blurb you kinda repeated like a mantra, it was intended to indicate that I thought that the *blurb* was bullshit, not you. You might be -- that is still undetermined -- but I was commenting on the blurb: It is not technique when the technique has truly been laid aside. This is where language doesn't suffice. Most of life is a trance and thus a search for techniques to find 'a way out.' But the way out is in. I call bullshit on blurbs like this for several reasons. The first is that they are non-provable and non-falsifiable. Someone is just *claiming* to live or act this way or to believe this. And in general, I follow the advice of a former spiritual teacher in regard to such claims: Listen to what people say, but watch what they DO. Following that dictum, everyone I've ever met in my life who claims to have laid aside techniques had more techniques and recognizable habit patterns and thought patterns goin' on for them than those who don't spout such bullshit. This *includes* most of the NeoAdvaita teachers mentioned in followups to your posts. And I'm sorry, but The way out is the way in is less profound to me than No matter where you go, there you are, and the latter was actually spoken by that great sage and master Buckaroo Banzai. :-) I have NOT been following these exchanges very carefully, but it seems to me that a lot of your responses have been canned; that is, you've used them before on one blog or chat forum or another, and that they actually *worked* for you there, because no one called you on them. As you may have guessed :-), a LOT of people on this forum are not terribly impressed or wowed by Newage (rhymes with 'sewage') canned bullshit. They had to put up with can after can after can of it in the TM movement, and some have opened a few cans of post-TM bullshit since they bailed on Maharishi and *his* canned bullshit. If you are the same person who posted on all those blogs, what I noticed in my quick scan was that on them you seemed to have a sense of humor. Some of the things you said there were spontaneous and NOT canned Newage bullshit. I, for one, would respond better to that kind of non-canned spontaneous humor; I tend to value humor over anything else. So if you're really interested in transcending all this petty anti-NeoAdvaita squabbling and gettin' down to some fun conversations, I'm game. Let's make an end run around all these people taking their pur- ported beliefs (or non-beliefs) so seriously and just chat and have fun. Works for me, anyway. And if it works for you and we wind up gettin' along, you can come to my little beach town in Spain and take nekkid pictures of me. I look just like the photo above. Really. No bullshit. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is too easy to put ourselves into a trance using familiar, high-sounding words ... so please don't start. I won't either. The great movers and shakers were not small egos; they were, in the very best sense of the term, big egos, precisely because the ego (the functional vehicle of the gross realm) can and does exist alongside the soul (the vehicle of the subtle) and the Self (vehicle of the causal). To the extent these great teachers moved the gross realm, they did so with their egos, because the ego is the functional vehicle of that realm. They were not, however, identified merely with their egos (that's a narcissist), they simply found their egos plugged into a radiant Cosmic source. The great yogis, saints and sages accomplished so much precisely because they were not timid little toadies but great big egos, plugged into the dynamic ground and goal of the Cosmos itself, plugged into their own higher Self, alive to the pure atman (the pure I-I) that is one with Brahman; they opened their mouths and the world trembled, fell to its knees, and confronted its radiant Goddess. I pray that I never have to say that again. How is that for a description dear SanDiego? Brilliant- Now you're talking! Thanks for this-- Yes, the individual becomes a vehicle plugged into the Cosmic Generator, in humble and blissful service to the Goddess. I was wondering if I would ever read such words as yours here-- it is very satisfying to do so. Thank you again for showing up. I am enjoying reading every word, like the brisk shower of standing under a very tall waterfall. Ha ha!
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matrix ~ You've zero awareness of anything but your own ego which is overshadowing this entire group, so it's safe to say that you're projecting again. Why be so hard on yourself? - This is clearly an adolescent whose entire intellectual magazine amounts to little more than I know you are, but what am I? I haven't checked the posting guidelines lately, isn't there an age limit for participants? -
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
On Jun 25, 2008, at 2:01 PM, mrfishey2001 wrote: This is clearly an adolescent whose entire intellectual magazine amounts to little more than I know you are, but what am I? I haven't checked the posting guidelines lately, isn't there an age limit for participants? Yeah, anyone over 100 is a no-no. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I just arrived, how would I know what you've heard before? How does this justify your social rudeness? Answer: It doesn't. I've pointed directly at your behaviors sans Advaita and there have been no intelligent responses. Your only response is to call me an Advaita-peddler. Answer: redundant. I've no interest in E. Tolle's books. None whatsoever. Nor in answering your mental masturbatory questions about TM (the biggest dead horse in the house). Answer: WTF! - Madam here's your opening post on this forum. Actually your second, after trolling with: Intelligent life in Fairfield? Say it's so I may as well respond to my own question. After all, it was a GOOD question and a FAIR question. Especially so, since much of what I see posted here (snipe after snipe) (at a rate of a post every minute, or so) doesn't reveal much awakening, enlightenment, nor integration present via the posters. Sorry guys. Next! That is presumptive in the worst kind of way. Your innocence's is feigned and your purpose obvious. As any number of previous posters have stated, your act is tired and overused. Stay and post. But please, do so using the same integrity you've accused others of lacking. ---
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just a gentle flower in a sea of mean old monkey minds. Yet I exist and for some reason that has bothered you. Consider that. I tried. I really tried. That you exist bothereth me not. That you can describe the world you see around you in your first sentence bothereth me somewhat.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even Amma says snip Amma has said in important step made by both Amma and Francis Lucille and many others. snip Amma also warns snip Jai Kali Amma, Oh yea. Amma, Amma, Amma. Been there.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might want to consider the fact that only 1 person here even bothered to GREET me when I arrived. Is it apathy, laziness, or have you all become this jaded? I understand that it may be awkward, even difficult to enter a new group. Particularly with people who have 4-5+ years of internet interactions with each other -- and sometimes 30 years of personal friendships, plus a sustained common experience some decades back. And the rudeness of some is not shared by all. But why the need to be greeted? When you visit a new city, do you expect everyone to drop what they are doing, and show you around town? Its nice if they do. But thats not an expectation I have,or observe in most when traveling. My experience, and inclinations, are different. I relish the anonymity of entering a new culture and just watching, pondering, absorbing for a while. So the world is made of different folks. Maybe I missed it, but did you introduce yourself? Usually, in forums such as this, when someone goes out of their way to introduce themselves, with some substance, people do stop a minute and say hi, welcome, and all. Particularly when one provides some insight as to why they chose to spend time in this group -- reflecting some substantive understanding of the group by observing, reading the archives, and then sharing common interests. I think people are naturally a bit jaded -- in that lot of strangers ride through town with less than stellar purposes. Often newcomers will drop in, promote some agenda, explicitly or covertly, and then soon ride off again. Others come and try to tell everyone how much their town sucks and how they ought to change things. Ok from a five year veteran, but from someone who has yet to spend time,and come to undertand and appreciate the culture and traditions -- not so much. So, perhaps you can introduce yourself. What are your interests, background, skills -- what roads have you traveled? And what brings you here (asked in a gracious and positive sense). Then perhaps the greetings will be more abundant. If you find such important and necessary (and explaining why that is so would provide insight.) If you have posted such, sorry, I don't catch all posts. Please reference the link(s). I primarily read half a dozen posters and skip the rest. When someone builds confidence that they have useful insights (for me), I tend to read them. Until someone takes the time to do that I usually don't have the time to audition new writers and posters. Sorry if that seems unfriendly, it is not the intention. But we all recognize we can't read posts all day -- and we limit our time to what interests us. Has social ineptness led you to this vast wasteland of redundant insult-slinging? Opps, you are not rising fast to the top ten yet. The degree of rage that exists within some of you is only matched by the degree of attachment to your so-called knowledge. Yikes. And what is it in you that you find so endearing that people should drop what they are doing and warmly greet you? I think I will move on for now. I will read a few more or your posts. If I see some common, useful or fun grounds to share a conversation, I will respond once more.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good ole boys (egos a-go-go) congratulating one another. Shall I provide the pom-poms? How about cheering the fact that there has been more SHAKTI since I've arrived on the scene than there has been in the past 5 years? How about that? Oh dear. Now why did you have to go and say that? Buh-bye.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GC, CC, XTC ... WOO!
--Can't speak for Jim but I liked it since it shows what a big difference there is between you and the Great Ones: (e.g. Karunamayi, Shreemaa, Amma, Guru Dev, MMY, Dalai Lama, SSRS, etc...on and on); vs the mediocre ones: (e.g. Ramesh Balsekar, Gangaji, Andrew Cohen, Byron Katie, Eckart Tolle, Wayne Liquorman;...in seemingly endless appearances like termites coming out of one's wall). Quick - call the bug man! - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sunyata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is too easy to put ourselves into a trance using familiar, high-sounding words ... so please don't start. I won't either. The great movers and shakers were not small egos; they were, in the very best sense of the term, big egos, precisely because the ego (the functional vehicle of the gross realm) can and does exist alongside the soul (the vehicle of the subtle) and the Self (vehicle of the causal). To the extent these great teachers moved the gross realm, they did so with their egos, because the ego is the functional vehicle of that realm. They were not, however, identified merely with their egos (that's a narcissist), they simply found their egos plugged into a radiant Cosmic source. The great yogis, saints and sages accomplished so much precisely because they were not timid little toadies but great big egos, plugged into the dynamic ground and goal of the Cosmos itself, plugged into their own higher Self, alive to the pure atman (the pure I-I) that is one with Brahman; they opened their mouths and the world trembled, fell to its knees, and confronted its radiant Goddess. I pray that I never have to say that again. How is that for a description dear SanDiego?
