[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: Good points, dumbass. Not really. Jimbo's just gotten his OMG-somebody- insulted-Maharishi buttons pushed, and is just lashing out thinking that insulting my former teacher will push mine. It's kinda childish of him, and displays all the intellect of a turnip. :-) For the record, the rape at gunpoint he's going on about never happened. The woman who made that claim to the media later rescinded it, and said that she was angry that a one-nighter with Rama turned into only that and not more. Was the guy a total dirtbag to sleep with his female students when there was such a power dif- ferential in place? You betcha. Did he need a gun to do so? No way. Anyway, now we can get back to watching Jimbo melt down and act like a kindergartener throw- ing a tantrum. MOMMY, MOMMY...he said bad things about my teacher...WW :-) And the funny thing is that I didn't even say bad things about Maharishi. I just treated him the way I think of him, as an ordinary guy with nothing much going for him except having run into the Beatles once, trying to milk that for money up to the end. :-) Just for fun, because turnip-brain is so button- pushed that he's not likely to let up with what he thinks is a zinger, and for those who are newbies here and *haven't read the things I've said about the Rama guy here before*, here's the real rape story. The person who claimed that was an attractive young woman named Annie Eastwood, who was actually a friend of mine during the short time she was around in the Rama trip, so I was up close and personal during this alleged rape. Annie was an aspiring actress who, like most aspiring actresses in L.A., never got anywhere with her aspirations. Having noticed that Fred (Rama) had no problems with sleeping with his female students, she set her sights on him. And one night it paid off. She got the phone call that was Rama's Narcissistic Personality Disorder seduction routine. That is, Come over to my house and we'll have tea and talk about your spiritual future. Which was code for, Come over to my house and have sex with me, after which I'll probably never do this again. It was a pretty sad routine, but women fell for it. Go figure. Anyway, Annie went over to his Malibu house, he showed her around, and in the process showed her his gun collection, mounted in a cabinet. Sure 'nuff, they had sex, and Annie spent the next two weeks telling all the women in the org how wonderful and celestial sex with him was, and saying that she was now Rama's new girlfriend. She believed that she was going to become Parvati to his Shiva, and started acting all hoity-toity with the other women. Many of them who had been in the same position laughed at her when she did this, and sure enough, Rama never called her again. She got the message that she was never going to be as special in the Rama trip as she'd imagined she'd be, and left. Months later, when the Cult Awareness Network-fueled anti-cult media attacks started in earnest, she took her revenge by going to one of the reporters and tried to turn having been shown a gun collection into rape at gunpoint. Years later she rescinded this completely, and retold the story of her one night stand with Rama pretty much the way I've told it above. Even vindictive women grow up in time. :-) That said, was Fred an absolute scumbag to have run this routine on women who were in awe of him, and thus not in a position to say No. Absolutely. Did he also do stuff like rip people off financially and fuck with their lives and their minds? Absolutely. In other words, Fred Lenz - Rama was in my opinion pretty much the *same* as Maharishi. Two guys suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder who got into the spiritual teaching business FAR too early, and who got taken out by it. The only real difference was that Rama had no *products* to sell like Maharishi did, only one-on-one teaching, so Fred's impact on large numbers of people was by definition always going to remain much smaller than MMY's. They were BOTH scumbags in my considered opinion. And they BOTH did some good, for some people. The problem with such teachers comes from considering them more than what they were, and being unwilling or unable to accept the full range of what they were. They were both sinners and saints -- IMO ordinary people with just the pseudo-charisma of NPD going for them. Now maybe Jimbo and Nabby can get back to their cultist Kill the messenger routine without thinking they can push my buttons over past spiritual teachers the way I've pushed theirs. Some of us, after all, toppled them from the pedestals we'd put them up on decades ago. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
About Rama and Maharishi: They were BOTH scumbags in my considered opinion. And they BOTH did some good, for some people. Exactly! I know some people, other than you, who were with Rama and respected him much. As far as I can tell, they meditate wonderfully, you see this when you meditate together with them, got good insights into spiritual principles, good recommendations for their professional life, and even good endorsement of other saints, both the same from Maharishi and Rama. Playing out one Guru against the other, you know only from hearsay, is just too dumb. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: Good points, dumbass. Not really. Jimbo's just gotten his OMG-somebody- insulted-Maharishi buttons pushed, and is just lashing out thinking that insulting my former teacher will push mine. It's kinda childish of him, and displays all the intellect of a turnip. :-) For the record, the rape at gunpoint he's going on about never happened. The woman who made that claim to the media later rescinded it, and said that she was angry that a one-nighter with Rama turned into only that and not more. Was the guy a total dirtbag to sleep with his female students when there was such a power dif- ferential in place? You betcha. Did he need a gun to do so? No way. Anyway, now we can get back to watching Jimbo melt down and act like a kindergartener throw- ing a tantrum. MOMMY, MOMMY...he said bad things about my teacher...WW :-) And the funny thing is that I didn't even say bad things about Maharishi. I just treated him the way I think of him, as an ordinary guy with nothing much going for him except having run into the Beatles once, trying to milk that for money up to the end. :-) Just for fun, because turnip-brain is so button- pushed that he's not likely to let up with what he thinks is a zinger, and for those who are newbies here and *haven't read the things I've said about the Rama guy here before*, here's the real rape story. The person who claimed that was an attractive young woman named Annie Eastwood, who was actually a friend of mine during the short time she was around in the Rama trip, so I was up close and personal during this alleged rape. Annie was an aspiring actress who, like most aspiring actresses in L.A., never got anywhere with her aspirations. Having noticed that Fred (Rama) had no problems with sleeping with his female students, she set her sights on him. And one night it paid off. She got the phone call that was Rama's Narcissistic Personality Disorder seduction routine. That is, Come over to my house and we'll have tea and talk about your spiritual future. Which was code for, Come over to my house and have sex with me, after which I'll probably never do this again. It was a pretty sad routine, but women fell for it. Go figure. Anyway, Annie went over to his Malibu house, he showed her around, and in the process showed her his gun collection, mounted in a cabinet. Sure 'nuff, they had sex, and Annie spent the next two weeks telling all the women in the org how wonderful and celestial sex with him was, and saying that she was now Rama's new girlfriend. She believed that she was going to become Parvati to his Shiva, and started acting all hoity-toity with the other women. Many of them who had been in the same position laughed at her when she did this, and sure enough, Rama never called her again. She got the message that she was never going to be as special in the Rama trip as she'd imagined she'd be, and left. Months later, when the Cult Awareness Network-fueled anti-cult media attacks started in earnest, she took her revenge by going to one of the reporters and tried to turn having been shown a gun collection into rape at gunpoint. Years later she rescinded this completely, and retold the story of her one night stand with Rama pretty much the way I've told it above. Even vindictive women grow up in time. :-) That said, was Fred an absolute scumbag to have run this routine on women who were in awe of him, and thus not in a position to say No. Absolutely. Did he also do stuff like rip people off financially and fuck with their lives and their minds? Absolutely. In other words, Fred Lenz - Rama was in my opinion pretty much the *same* as Maharishi. Two guys suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder who got into the spiritual teaching business FAR too early, and who got taken out by it. The only real difference was that Rama had no *products* to sell like Maharishi did, only one-on-one teaching, so Fred's impact on large numbers of people was by definition always going to remain much smaller than MMY's. They were BOTH scumbags in my considered opinion. And they BOTH did some
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch. I think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering. It was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Turq wrote: About Rama and Maharishi: They were BOTH scumbags in my considered opinion. And they BOTH did some good, for some people. Exactly! I know some people, other than you, who were with Rama and respected him much. As far as I can tell, they meditate wonderfully, you see this when you meditate together with them, got good insights into spiritual principles, good recommendations for their professional life, and even good endorsement of other saints, both the same from Maharishi and Rama. They got the meditate well thing from Rama. He could absolutely SMOKE in meditation. In contrast, I never felt that Maharishi could meditate worth a damn. That is, after all, the reason he invented a meditation technique that claimed that sitting there with your mind filled with thoughts and daydreams was correct meditation. Meditating in the same room with Maharishi was (for me) like meditating at home alone; there was almost never any more silence than usual going down. That, in my estimation, is the reason MMY spent so little time *ever* meditating with groups of his students, so that they wouldn't be able to notice that he wasn't very good at it. With Rama it was very different; the silence was so profound that if you were meditating in the same room with him the issue of having thoughts during meditation never arose because you *couldn't* have thoughts. *Very* different experience, one that tended to inspire you to develop deeper levels of meditation on your own. *That* was the main reason I stuck around with him for as long as I did. That and the fact that much of what we did, at least in the earlier years, was FUN. When *he* stopped meditating with his students (and IMO for the same reasons as MMY, having by then become addicted to Valium and lost his phwam! as a meditator) and the FUN went away, to be replaced with just standard cult bullshit, I went away, too. Playing out one Guru against the other, you know only from hearsay, is just too dumb. Jimbo really *isn't* very smart. He got his buttons pushed and so he did the same thing that Nabby (*also* not very smart) does and thought, Wow...him saying things I don't like about *my* spiritual teacher really pissed me off and pushed my buttons, so I'll try to do the exact same thing to him. So he read the Wikipedia article on Fred Lenz - Rama and extracted what he thought would be a good zinger from it, and then tried to use it to demonize me, via my previous association with Fred. It's pretty much classic cult behavior, Kill the messenger. Jim really doesn't have the intelligence to think of anything new and original. My participation in this is simply to point out the mechanics of what Jimbo and his fellow button-pushed TBs are doing. They're trying for a *diversion*, to steer the discussion away from any issues brought up about Maharishi by his critics, and towards dissing the critics themselves. It's pretty pitiful, but hey! that's all they've got. The *most* pitiful aspect of it, which we've seen here quite a few times over the years, is that when the TBs get stuck in a corner in which they cannot possibly deny the criticism (such as Maharishi having slept with his female students), they're reduced to the kinder- garten behavior of shouting, YEAH, BUT YOUR TEACHER DID IT, TOO. NYAAH NYAAH. *Of course* my teacher (for a time) did it, too. The ISSUE is what that said about both him and Maharishi, not what it says about their students. The cult aspect of all of this is getting your buttons pushed *personally* over something that isn't said about you *at all*. It was said about a teacher you once studied with. Taking that personally enough to get all angry and vindictive about it just indicates to me that the teacher in question must not have been much of one. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: Good points, dumbass. Not really. Jimbo's just gotten his OMG-somebody- insulted-Maharishi buttons pushed, and is just lashing out thinking that insulting my former teacher will push mine. It's kinda childish of him, and displays all the intellect of a turnip. :-) For the record, the rape at gunpoint he's going on about never happened. The woman who made that claim to the media later rescinded it, and said that she was angry that a one-nighter with Rama turned into only that and not more. Was the guy a total dirtbag to sleep with his female students when there was such a power dif- ferential in place? You betcha. Did he need a gun to do so? No way. Anyway, now we can get back to watching Jimbo melt down and act like a kindergartener throw- ing a tantrum. MOMMY, MOMMY...he said bad things about my teacher...WW :-)
[FairfieldLife] Ratu Bagus - latest Shaker meditation in Bali
This is from a friend, who says that this is the latest hype with Osho sannyasins. http://www.ratubagus.com/English/Bio+Energy+Meditation Seems that Ratu Bagus originally came from Subud http://thetaobums.com/topic/5341-shaking-practice-in-bali/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subud
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Thank you for the Rama clarification - it is unfortunate that people decide to abuse others under the guise of giving them something good - but I suppose it is part of human nature. As to Maharishi's sexual behavior, it doesn't bother me all that much that he did it, I was curious about how those who think he was the best thing since sliced bread worked it out in their heads that the skin boys had come forward with such stories - I figured most would say they thought the skinboys were lying, but they didn't. Although we didn't hear from folks like nabby. The reason I put such weight to what the former secretaries to M said was that they all had pretty consistent stories of how he behaved with women and there are more of the skin boys who have come forward than women who said they had relations with him. If he had been up front about his sexual energy and told everyone Hey, this is what is coming up in my awareness, I want to explore this for myself, if any of you would like to help me, then I would appreciate it. Then that would have been open and honest. It is the lying and hiding the behavior that I find objectionable. And when someone routinely lies, I don't think they are worth following or giving money to. From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 5:11 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Turq wrote: About Rama and Maharishi: They were BOTH scumbags in my considered opinion. And they BOTH did some good, for some people. Exactly! I know some people, other than you, who were with Rama and respected him much. As far as I can tell, they meditate wonderfully, you see this when you meditate together with them, got good insights into spiritual principles, good recommendations for their professional life, and even good endorsement of other saints, both the same from Maharishi and Rama. They got the meditate well thing from Rama. He could absolutely SMOKE in meditation. In contrast, I never felt that Maharishi could meditate worth a damn. That is, after all, the reason he invented a meditation technique that claimed that sitting there with your mind filled with thoughts and daydreams was correct meditation. Meditating in the same room with Maharishi was (for me) like meditating at home alone; there was almost never any more silence than usual going down. That, in my estimation, is the reason MMY spent so little time *ever* meditating with groups of his students, so that they wouldn't be able to notice that he wasn't very good at it. With Rama it was very different; the silence was so profound that if you were meditating in the same room with him the issue of having thoughts during meditation never arose because you *couldn't* have thoughts. *Very* different experience, one that tended to inspire you to develop deeper levels of meditation on your own. *That* was the main reason I stuck around with him for as long as I did. That and the fact that much of what we did, at least in the earlier years, was FUN. When *he* stopped meditating with his students (and IMO for the same reasons as MMY, having by then become addicted to Valium and lost his phwam! as a meditator) and the FUN went away, to be replaced with just standard cult bullshit, I went away, too. Playing out one Guru against the other, you know only from hearsay, is just too dumb. Jimbo really *isn't* very smart. He got his buttons pushed and so he did the same thing that Nabby (*also* not very smart) does and thought, Wow...him saying things I don't like about *my* spiritual teacher really pissed me off and pushed my buttons, so I'll try to do the exact same thing to him. So he read the Wikipedia article on Fred Lenz - Rama and extracted what he thought would be a good zinger from it, and then tried to use it to demonize me, via my previous association with Fred. It's pretty much classic cult behavior, Kill the messenger. Jim really doesn't have the intelligence to think of anything new and original. My participation in this is simply to point out the mechanics of what Jimbo and his fellow button-pushed TBs are doing. They're trying for a *diversion*, to steer the discussion away from any issues brought up about Maharishi by his critics, and towards dissing the critics themselves. It's pretty pitiful, but hey! that's all they've got. The *most* pitiful aspect of it, which we've seen here quite a few times over the years, is that when the TBs get stuck in a corner in which they cannot possibly deny the criticism (such as Maharishi having slept with his female students), they're reduced to the kinder- garten behavior of shouting, YEAH, BUT YOUR TEACHER DID IT, TOO. NYAAH NYAAH. *Of course* my teacher (for a time) did it, too. The ISSUE is what that said about both him and Maharishi, not what it
[FairfieldLife] Retracing early human journey from Gr Rift Valley
for Whatever Wednesday
- Forwarded Message -
From: DailyGood.org cl...@charityfocus.org
To: sharelon...@yahoo.com
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 10:52 PM
Subject: A 7 Year, 30 Million Steps Reporting Assignment
DailyGood.org
You're receiving this email because you are a DailyGood subscriber.
Trouble Viewing? On a mobile? Just click here. Not interested anymore?
Unsubscribe.
January 31, 2013 a project of ServiceSpace
Every day is a journey, and the journey itself is home.
- Matsuo Basho -
A 7 Year, 30 Million Steps Reporting Assignment
Call it the longest walk. In what is probably the longest, most arduous piece
of reportage ever undertaken, Paul Salopek, an experienced writer for National
Geographic, is embarking on the astonishing task of retracing the journey taken
by early man tens of thousands of years ago. Beginning in the exotic
surroundings of the Great Rift Valley in Ethiopia, Salopek will take an
estimated 30 million steps, reaching his destination seven years later, three
continents away at the most southerly point of South America. Along the way he
will be writing stories for National Geographic at the rate of one long article
a year, while maintaining a website that will be filled with regular multimedia
updates from his 21,000-mile journey. { read more }
Be The Change
Reflect on the journeys you've taken in the past. What are the main insights
you've gleaned from them?
COMMENT | RATE
Related Good News
Nursery Rhymes Bring Down the House 6 Ways to Keep Your New Years Resolutions
The Dash Between The Years 7 Must-Read Books on Education
Where Children Sleep: A Poignant Photo Series 20 Questions for Thanksgiving The
Art of Losing: Poems of Grief and Healing 8 Things That Are Better Than Free
DailyGood is a volunteer-run initiative that delivers good news to 124,953
subscribers. There are many ways to help. To unsubscribe, click here.
Other ServiceSpace projects include:
HelpOthers // CF Sites // KarmaTube // Conversations // More
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati? to ObbajeeBA
Isn't it funny how loneliness has almost nothing to do with other people? smiley face From: obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 10:26 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati? Been there, done that. Actually, I was pulling yer strings, anyone's. I am not so attached to what is not present, except my imagination, from the Moon's perspective. All talk, no play. A virgin at heart. A single goldfish in a fish bowl. A single caged Chimpanzee, throwing excrement at the onlookers. Just as lonely as all the other regular posters here on FFL. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVzCJK9DEYc --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: obbajeeba: As if I am going to pretend talking about tantic activity is not arousing In fact you're already a Sky Dancer from birth. But, until realization we think we are on a path to the other side, and we must pass through a gate. If you do cross over to the other side, you will find that there's no other side, a gateless gate, and there was no crossing over. Go figure. Yeshe Tsogyel, consort of Guru Padmasambhava, is the most famous of the enlightened women of Tibet. Women have a special place in tantra, but except for Sky Dancer there are few writings that present the spiritual practices and evolution of female aspirants. Here women are in an eminent position, and a path of practice is given for present-day initiates to emulate. Keith Dowman has added a commentary on the path of inner tantra, woman and the dakini, and the Nyingma lineages. 'Sky Dancer' The Secret Life And Songs Of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel by Keith Dowman Snow Lion, 1996 http://tinyurl.com/bdoz7jf I'm just saying that just as they shouldn't necessarily limit tantra to what they know about it, neither should you Bharitu: I have to respectfully disagree because there are classic definitions of tantra... Something tells me you two are not practicing tantrics. A sure sign that someone is not practicing tantra is that they deny the sexual origins and goals of tantra. LoL! Everyone knows that tantra yoga began as a sex cult in Gupta Age India; tantrics sought to fuse the male and female aspects of the cosmos into a blissful state of consciousness. There's no life without sex and the combination of male and female is the path to the non-dual experience. The rites of Tantric cults, while often steeped in symbolism, could also include group and individual sex. One text advised devotees to revere the female sex organ and enjoy vigorous intercourse. Candidates for worship included actresses and prostitutes, as well as the sisters of practitioners. Work cited: 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' By William J. Broad Posted on February 27, 2012 http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 4:11 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Turq wrote: About Rama and Maharishi: They were BOTH scumbags in my considered opinion. And they BOTH did some good, for some people. Exactly! I know some people, other than you, who were with Rama and respected him much. As far as I can tell, they meditate wonderfully, you see this when you meditate together with them, got good insights into spiritual principles, good recommendations for their professional life, and even good endorsement of other saints, both the same from Maharishi and Rama. They got the meditate well thing from Rama. He could absolutely SMOKE in meditation. In contrast, I never felt that Maharishi could meditate worth a damn. That is, after all, the reason he invented a meditation technique that claimed that sitting there with your mind filled with thoughts and daydreams was correct meditation. Meditating in the same room with Maharishi was (for me) like meditating at home alone; there was almost never any more silence than usual going down. That, in my estimation, is the reason MMY spent so little time *ever* meditating with groups of his students, so that they wouldn't be able to notice that he wasn't very good at it. With Rama it was very different; the silence was so profound that if you were meditating in the same room with him the issue of having thoughts during meditation never arose because you *couldn't* have thoughts. *Very* different experience, one that tended to inspire you to develop deeper levels of meditation on your own. *That* was the main reason I stuck around with him for as long as I did. That and the fact that much of what we did, at least in the earlier years, was FUN. When *he* stopped meditating with his students (and IMO for the same reasons as MMY, having by then become addicted to Valium and lost his phwam! as a meditator) and the FUN went away, to be replaced with just standard cult bullshit, I went away, too. Playing out one Guru against the other, you know only from hearsay, is just too dumb. Jimbo really *isn't* very smart. He got his buttons pushed and so he did the same thing that Nabby (*also* not very smart) does and thought, Wow...him saying things I don't like about *my* spiritual teacher really pissed me off and pushed my buttons, so I'll try to do the exact same thing to him. So he read the Wikipedia article on Fred Lenz - Rama and extracted what he thought would be a good zinger from it, and then tried to use it to demonize me, via my previous association with Fred. It's pretty much classic cult behavior, Kill the messenger. Jim really doesn't have the intelligence to think of anything new and original. My participation in this is simply to point out the mechanics of what Jimbo and his fellow button-pushed TBs are doing. They're trying for a *diversion*, to steer the discussion away from any issues brought up about Maharishi by his critics, and towards dissing the critics themselves. It's pretty pitiful, but hey! that's all they've got. The *most* pitiful aspect of it, which we've seen here quite a few times over the years, is that when the TBs get stuck in a corner in which they cannot possibly deny the criticism (such as Maharishi having slept with his female students), they're reduced to the kinder- garten behavior of shouting, YEAH, BUT YOUR TEACHER DID IT, TOO. NYAAH NYAAH. *Of course* my teacher (for a time) did it, too. The ISSUE is what that said about both him and Maharishi, not what it says about their students. The cult aspect of all of this is getting your buttons pushed *personally* over something that isn't said about you *at all*. It was said about a teacher you once studied with. Taking that personally enough to get all angry and vindictive about it just indicates to me that the teacher in question must not have been much of one. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: Good points, dumbass. Not really. Jimbo's just gotten his OMG-somebody- insulted-Maharishi buttons pushed, and is just lashing out thinking that insulting my former teacher will push mine. It's kinda childish of him, and displays all
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: From: navashok no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 3:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch. I think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering. It was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Answer to Serious Question Parts 1 and 2
Pro TMers and anti TMers are all sharing their experiences and their opinions which is filtered through their conditioning to varying degrees. All have both gifts and flaws as do all the teachers, friends, etc. they have ever had. But we will continue to talk about all this. For the fun and entertainment of it. Hopefully. That's my conditioning speaking (-: Just remember: No matter how high one lifts one's stick, Life is lifting itself even higher. Does anybody think I could become a millionaire with that bumper sticker? smiley face
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: Cosmic ego, maybe? I think that was actually Maharishis expression, was it? Or was that cosmic accident? Share, for all what I know of you - I rather see your comment as lighthearted and humorous - I don't group you with the dogmatic and fundies. That was srijau and he already got some flak. I guess his 'opinion' is something that grows in a spiritual mono-culture. For me, being out of it for decades now, this is rather some curious strange phenomenon, which I still remember, but I wonder at that sort of spiritual naivety, the almost innocent exhibition of ego. Is it really like this? Are there really many people in the movement, who believe this? I guess there are. But to anybody outside the mono-culture of the movement, this will only lead to eye-rolling. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Maharishi for what he did, I appreciate his role in popularizing meditation for the mainstream in the west, at our generation, I admire how he helped many people to make a major turn toward spirituality, again in our generation, lots of stories of a lot of people, myself included. But then I wonder at the unreflected exhibition of ego as in srijaus remark. ANY belief of 'My Guru/Hero/Avatar is the greatest of all time, far greater than any known historic person' is just that: plain materialistic ego projected on a spiritual ideal. Ego is something we cannot avoid, even if you are enlightened, there will be still a relative ego to take care of your body and survival. That I comment on this, I couldn't do without ego as well. But the ego in the enlightened will be one, where there is detachment from it. Once the ego claims the spiritual progress as it's own, it leads to a spiritual Super-Ego. It instrumentalizes the spiritual rather than surrendering to it. Now that's the critical point, where I think a lot of people fail. Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Contrast that with the comment of Anandamayi Ma which was recently posted here about unity consciousness. Does this make sense to you? From: navashok To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 3:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch.àI think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering.àIt was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Renouncing enlightenment
Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus..
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apaurusheya Bhasya as Explained by MMY
John: He stated that consciousness is the cause of the physical body... MMY taught dhyana yoga, that is, for every event that happens, there is a cause; one thing leads to another; there are no random events; everything happens for a reason. He enumerated three constituents which are the bases which support all organisms and human beings. All volitions derive from craving. Craving arises from sensation, sensation from contact, contact from the six senses, the six senses from physical form, physical form from psyhic constructions and the psychic constructions from ignorance. This, in a nutshell is what MMY taught: jus u b reg 2 x y med, ne alt sans 3 guns, seps abs, n' eyes-wide shut; nodoze, no bear down, jus u enjoy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Nice try - Lenz WAS a rapist at gunpoint. If this woman recanted her story, that is not evidence he wasn't. Boy, you sure ate it up, though, as a hard core refutation of this loser you followed around. Sticking your cock into a woman, at the point of a gun, IS RAPE, Barry - Have you figured that out yet? Even if YOU think the woman is a cunt. Did Freddie confuse you again?? If you insist this is the TRUTH, you may want to re-examine your standards for judging anyone else you don't like. What a lousy double standard. Fuck your TRUTH, Barry. I don't believe a word of it. I suppose those weren't drugs Lenz was addicted to, they were MMs, right Barry? And when he committed suicide, he didn't really, he was entering Mahasamadhi, right Barry? No, Maharishi was nothing like this depressed loser. However I appreciate your dishonesty, as usual.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: Good points, dumbass. Not really. Jimbo's just gotten his OMG-somebody- insulted-Maharishi buttons pushed, and is just lashing out thinking that insulting my former teacher will push mine. It's kinda childish of him, and displays all the intellect of a turnip. :-) For the record, the rape at gunpoint he's going on about never happened. The woman who made that claim to the media later rescinded it, and said that she was angry that a one-nighter with Rama turned into only that and not more. Was the guy a total dirtbag to sleep with his female students when there was such a power dif- ferential in place? You betcha. Did he need a gun to do so? No way. Anyway, now we can get back to watching Jimbo melt down and act like a kindergartener throw- ing a tantrum. MOMMY, MOMMY...he said bad things about my teacher...WW :-) And the funny thing is that I didn't even say bad things about Maharishi. I just treated him the way I think of him, as an ordinary guy with nothing much going for him except having run into the Beatles once, trying to milk that for money up to the end. :-) Just for fun, because turnip-brain is so button- pushed that he's not likely to let up with what he thinks is a zinger, and for those who are newbies here and *haven't read the things I've said about the Rama guy here before*, here's the real rape story. The person who claimed that was an attractive young woman named Annie Eastwood, who was actually a friend of mine during the short time she was around in the Rama trip, so I was up close and personal during this alleged rape. Annie was an aspiring actress who, like most aspiring actresses in L.A., never got anywhere with her aspirations. Having noticed that Fred (Rama) had no problems with sleeping with his female students, she set her sights on him. And one night it paid off. She got the phone call that was Rama's Narcissistic Personality Disorder seduction routine. That is, Come over to my house and we'll have tea and talk about your spiritual future. Which was code for, Come over to my house and have sex with me, after which I'll probably never do this again. It was a pretty sad routine, but women fell for it. Go figure. Anyway, Annie went over to his Malibu house, he showed her around, and in the process showed her his gun collection, mounted in a cabinet. Sure 'nuff, they had sex, and Annie spent the next two weeks telling all the women in the org how wonderful and celestial sex with him was, and saying that she was now Rama's new girlfriend. She believed that she was going to become Parvati to his Shiva, and started acting all hoity-toity with the other women. Many of them who had been in the same position laughed at her when she did this, and sure enough, Rama never called her again. She got the message that she was never going to be as special in the Rama trip as she'd imagined she'd be, and left. Months later, when the Cult Awareness Network-fueled anti-cult media attacks started in earnest, she took her revenge by going to one of the reporters and tried to turn having been shown a gun collection into rape at gunpoint. Years later she rescinded this completely, and retold the story of her one night stand with Rama pretty much the way I've told it above. Even vindictive women grow up in time. :-) That said, was Fred an absolute scumbag to have run this routine on women who were in awe of him, and thus not in a position to say No. Absolutely. Did he also do stuff like rip people off financially and fuck with their lives and their minds? Absolutely. In other words, Fred Lenz - Rama was in my opinion pretty much the *same* as Maharishi. Two guys suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder who got into the spiritual teaching business FAR too early, and who got taken out by it. The only real
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: in the same room with Maharishi was (for me) like meditating at home alone; there was almost never any more silence than usual going down. That, in my estimation, is the reason MMY spent so little time *ever* meditating with groups of his students, so that they wouldn't be able to notice that he wasn't very good at it. Hmmm... perhaps he didn't want people to become addicted to him, so to speak...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
PS While insulting me, to protect your misogynist SMOKIN' teacher, you mention I read an article on Wikipedia- BZT! I have heard this story five or six times, from various sources, and not just regarding one of Rama's rapes, but several of them. Did he encourage you to rape women too? Just curious, because you are SO incredibly defensive, and ignorant about this. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Nice try - Lenz WAS a rapist at gunpoint. If this woman recanted her story, that is not evidence he wasn't. Boy, you sure ate it up, though, as a hard core refutation of this loser you followed around. Sticking your cock into a woman, at the point of a gun, IS RAPE, Barry - Have you figured that out yet? Even if YOU think the woman is a cunt. Did Freddie confuse you again?? If you insist this is the TRUTH, you may want to re-examine your standards for judging anyone else you don't like. What a lousy double standard. Fuck your TRUTH, Barry. I don't believe a word of it. I suppose those weren't drugs Lenz was addicted to, they were MMs, right Barry? And when he committed suicide, he didn't really, he was entering Mahasamadhi, right Barry? No, Maharishi was nothing like this depressed loser. However I appreciate your dishonesty, as usual.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: Good points, dumbass. Not really. Jimbo's just gotten his OMG-somebody- insulted-Maharishi buttons pushed, and is just lashing out thinking that insulting my former teacher will push mine. It's kinda childish of him, and displays all the intellect of a turnip. :-) For the record, the rape at gunpoint he's going on about never happened. The woman who made that claim to the media later rescinded it, and said that she was angry that a one-nighter with Rama turned into only that and not more. Was the guy a total dirtbag to sleep with his female students when there was such a power dif- ferential in place? You betcha. Did he need a gun to do so? No way. Anyway, now we can get back to watching Jimbo melt down and act like a kindergartener throw- ing a tantrum. MOMMY, MOMMY...he said bad things about my teacher...WW :-) And the funny thing is that I didn't even say bad things about Maharishi. I just treated him the way I think of him, as an ordinary guy with nothing much going for him except having run into the Beatles once, trying to milk that for money up to the end. :-) Just for fun, because turnip-brain is so button- pushed that he's not likely to let up with what he thinks is a zinger, and for those who are newbies here and *haven't read the things I've said about the Rama guy here before*, here's the real rape story. The person who claimed that was an attractive young woman named Annie Eastwood, who was actually a friend of mine during the short time she was around in the Rama trip, so I was up close and personal during this alleged rape. Annie was an aspiring actress who, like most aspiring actresses in L.A., never got anywhere with her aspirations. Having noticed that Fred (Rama) had no problems with sleeping with his female students, she set her sights on him. And one night it paid off. She got the phone call that was Rama's Narcissistic Personality Disorder seduction routine. That is, Come over to my house and we'll have tea and talk about your spiritual future. Which was code for, Come over to my house and have sex with me, after which I'll probably never do this again. It was a pretty sad routine, but women fell for it. Go figure. Anyway, Annie went over to his Malibu house, he showed her around, and in the process showed her his gun collection, mounted in a cabinet. Sure 'nuff, they had sex, and Annie spent the next two weeks telling all the women in the org how wonderful and celestial sex with him was, and saying that she was now Rama's new girlfriend. She believed that she was going to become Parvati to his Shiva, and started acting all hoity-toity with the other women. Many of them who had been in the same position laughed at her when she did this, and sure enough, Rama never called her again. She got the message that she was never going to be as special in the Rama trip as she'd imagined she'd be, and left. Months later, when the Cult Awareness Network-fueled anti-cult media attacks started in earnest, she took her revenge by going to one of the reporters and tried to turn having been shown a gun collection into rape at gunpoint. Years later she rescinded this completely, and retold the story of her one night stand with Rama pretty much the way I've told it above. Even vindictive women
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
Bhairitu: There are some books by real tantrics... The 'Tantras' ARE books - 'Tantrism' originated in the early centuries CE and developed into a fully articulated tradition by the end of the Gupta period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra ...vibration/movement of consciousness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism ...all things are a manifestation of this Consciousness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism
[FairfieldLife] Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
Enlightenment isn't experiences. It is a state of consciousness, permanently, that continues to evolve, once it is established. You people that associate enlightenment with Flashy Experiences need to get beyond that concept. Has nothing to do with it. It is about not being overshadowed in activity, even the activity of thought. If you simply base it on flashy experiences, you can end up as bitterly confused, as you know who is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus..
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
Oh, that's right, you don't like Indians. Racism, like sexism, is an ugly trait, Barry. I recall several of your posts condemning the entire Indian subcontinent, because of some judgments you made about Indians in the US. Was Lenz a racist also?? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Sarina Grosswald, Ed.D., TM Conference at the Harvard Club
Great lecture of Sarina Grosswald, Ed.D., TM Conference at the Harvard Club http://doctorsontm.org/videos/alleviates-learning-disorders
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Um, my *exact* phrase, was, I AM ENLIGHTENED AND DON'T YOU EVER FORGET IT, BARRY! Pushed his buttons good! LOL, and possibly yours...:-) Have a nice day! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: Cosmic ego, maybe? I think that was actually Maharishis expression, was it? Or was that cosmic accident? Share, for all what I know of you - I rather see your comment as lighthearted and humorous - I don't group you with the dogmatic and fundies. That was srijau and he already got some flak. I guess his 'opinion' is something that grows in a spiritual mono-culture. For me, being out of it for decades now, this is rather some curious strange phenomenon, which I still remember, but I wonder at that sort of spiritual naivety, the almost innocent exhibition of ego. Is it really like this? Are there really many people in the movement, who believe this? I guess there are. But to anybody outside the mono-culture of the movement, this will only lead to eye-rolling. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Maharishi for what he did, I appreciate his role in popularizing meditation for the mainstream in the west, at our generation, I admire how he helped many people to make a major turn toward spirituality, again in our generation, lots of stories of a lot of people, myself included. But then I wonder at the unreflected exhibition of ego as in srijaus remark. ANY belief of 'My Guru/Hero/Avatar is the greatest of all time, far greater than any known historic person' is just that: plain materialistic ego projected on a spiritual ideal. Ego is something we cannot avoid, even if you are enlightened, there will be still a relative ego to take care of your body and survival. That I comment on this, I couldn't do without ego as well. But the ego in the enlightened will be one, where there is detachment from it. Once the ego claims the spiritual progress as it's own, it leads to a spiritual Super-Ego. It instrumentalizes the spiritual rather than surrendering to it. Now that's the critical point, where I think a lot of people fail. Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Contrast that with the comment of Anandamayi Ma which was recently posted here about unity consciousness. Does this make sense to you? From: navashok To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 3:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch.àI think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering.àIt was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: PS While insulting me, to protect your misogynist SMOKIN' teacher, you mention I read an article on Wikipedia- BZT! I have heard this story five or six times, from various sources, and not just regarding one of Rama's rapes, but several of them. Did he encourage you to rape women too? Just curious, because you are SO incredibly defensive, and ignorant about this. It would certainly explain some of his attitudes regarding women he projects here...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
It's ok, navashok, you often make tons of sense and I don't mind being a moron. It's actually quite liberating (-: Yes, that post on Unity from Anandamayi Ma was so beautiful. Between that and the Lady Keshe writing, I'm giving up on the whole enlightenment thing. Which I was pathetic at anyway, being the rajasic person I am. Srijau posted something beautiful about Krishna and the gopis. That that's what I mainly remember of his. But this is what people do, tend to remember the positive according to an article on happiness that I read recently, . Very perplexing in light of evidence to the contrary. I think people like to honor the person who helped so much to liberate them. I understand that gratitude though I don't think mine is as profound as Srijau's. And it's so difficult I think to grok a person's intention online. However, Srijau does seem very innocent to me. OTOH, from my own experience I'd say little ego is about the slipperyest thing on the planet. I'm strapping those cleats for walking on ice onto my snow boots now! Praying for grace. Do you know, even the Lady Keshe suffered from pride? Her guru told her that she was proud of being his consort and that was her only stumbling block. From: navashok no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 8:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: Cosmic ego, maybe? I think that was actually Maharishis expression, was it? Or was that cosmic accident? Share, for all what I know of you - I rather see your comment as lighthearted and humorous - I don't group you with the dogmatic and fundies. That was srijau and he already got some flak. I guess his 'opinion' is something that grows in a spiritual mono-culture. For me, being out of it for decades now, this is rather some curious strange phenomenon, which I still remember, but I wonder at that sort of spiritual naivety, the almost innocent exhibition of ego. Is it really like this? Are there really many people in the movement, who believe this? I guess there are. But to anybody outside the mono-culture of the movement, this will only lead to eye-rolling. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Maharishi for what he did, I appreciate his role in popularizing meditation for the mainstream in the west, at our generation, I admire how he helped many people to make a major turn toward spirituality, again in our generation, lots of stories of a lot of people, myself included. But then I wonder at the unreflected exhibition of ego as in srijaus remark. ANY belief of 'My Guru/Hero/Avatar is the greatest of all time, far greater than any known historic person' is just that: plain materialistic ego projected on a spiritual ideal. Ego is something we cannot avoid, even if you are enlightened, there will be still a relative ego to take care of your body and survival. That I comment on this, I couldn't do without ego as well. But the ego in the enlightened will be one, where there is detachment from it. Once the ego claims the spiritual progress as it's own, it leads to a spiritual Super-Ego. It instrumentalizes the spiritual rather than surrendering to it. Now that's the critical point, where I think a lot of people fail. Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Contrast that with the comment of Anandamayi Ma which was recently posted here about unity consciousness. Does this make sense to you? From: navashok To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 3:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch. I think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering. It was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: Cosmic ego, maybe? I think that was actually Maharishis expression, was it? Or was that cosmic accident? Share, for all what I know of you - I rather see your comment as lighthearted and humorous - I don't group you with the dogmatic and fundies. That was srijau and he already got some flak. I guess his 'opinion' is something that grows in a spiritual mono-culture. For me, being out of it for decades now, this is rather some curious strange phenomenon, which I still remember, but I wonder at that sort of spiritual naivety, the almost innocent exhibition of ego. Is it really like this? Are there really many people in the movement, who believe this? I guess there are. But to anybody outside the mono-culture of the movement, this will only lead to eye-rolling. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Maharishi for what he did, I appreciate his role in popularizing meditation for the mainstream in the west, at our generation, I admire how he helped many people to make a major turn toward spirituality, again in our generation, lots of stories of a lot of people, myself included. But then I wonder at the unreflected exhibition of ego as in srijaus remark. ANY belief of 'My Guru/Hero/Avatar is the greatest of all time, far greater than any known historic person' is just that: plain materialistic ego projected on a spiritual ideal. It's just strong love, nothing wrong with that. Maharishi never ever indicated that he was great, let alone the greatest. The teaching yes, himself, no. The greatest for him was Guru Dev, a notion strongly supported by Benjamin Creme who places Guru Dev at 6,0, one of the most senior and highest in evolution of all the Masters of Wisdom now guiding this planet.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. So is any indication that Maharishi or any other teacher has such an ability.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
No, didn't push buttons, just making a point and giving an opinion. For me, what you say there and now is just pure ego. Why would you even need to push buttons? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Um, my *exact* phrase, was, I AM ENLIGHTENED AND DON'T YOU EVER FORGET IT, BARRY! Pushed his buttons good! LOL, and possibly yours...:-) Have a nice day! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: Cosmic ego, maybe? I think that was actually Maharishis expression, was it? Or was that cosmic accident? Share, for all what I know of you - I rather see your comment as lighthearted and humorous - I don't group you with the dogmatic and fundies. That was srijau and he already got some flak. I guess his 'opinion' is something that grows in a spiritual mono-culture. For me, being out of it for decades now, this is rather some curious strange phenomenon, which I still remember, but I wonder at that sort of spiritual naivety, the almost innocent exhibition of ego. Is it really like this? Are there really many people in the movement, who believe this? I guess there are. But to anybody outside the mono-culture of the movement, this will only lead to eye-rolling. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Maharishi for what he did, I appreciate his role in popularizing meditation for the mainstream in the west, at our generation, I admire how he helped many people to make a major turn toward spirituality, again in our generation, lots of stories of a lot of people, myself included. But then I wonder at the unreflected exhibition of ego as in srijaus remark. ANY belief of 'My Guru/Hero/Avatar is the greatest of all time, far greater than any known historic person' is just that: plain materialistic ego projected on a spiritual ideal. Ego is something we cannot avoid, even if you are enlightened, there will be still a relative ego to take care of your body and survival. That I comment on this, I couldn't do without ego as well. But the ego in the enlightened will be one, where there is detachment from it. Once the ego claims the spiritual progress as it's own, it leads to a spiritual Super-Ego. It instrumentalizes the spiritual rather than surrendering to it. Now that's the critical point, where I think a lot of people fail. Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Contrast that with the comment of Anandamayi Ma which was recently posted here about unity consciousness. Does this make sense to you? From: navashok To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 3:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch.àI think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering.àIt was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up I did'nt take notes, he probably said: you would instantly burn up
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Good save (-: Sigh, I admit to liking the idea that Maharishi said the other phrase about socks. But appreciate your setting me straight. From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 10:15 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up I did'nt take notes, he probably said: you would instantly burn up
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: (snip) As to Maharishi's sexual behavior, it doesn't bother me all that much that he did it, I was curious about how those who think he was the best thing since sliced bread worked it out in their heads that the skin boys had come forward with such stories - I figured most would say they thought the skinboys were lying, but they didn't. Once Judith Bourque's book came out, there was no longer any question that the skinboys weren't lying. You really should read the discussions we had here about the book. They contain much more detailed reactions than you've been able to elicit. For most of us, by this time it's old news. Although we didn't hear from folks like nabby. Based on his past posts, he doesn't disbelieve it, but he doesn't find it upsetting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
I can't speak for Cesar. To comment, rather than have a knee-jerk reaction, see his video on Batgap and read his confession at FB. To see it you have to become a friend. And, yes I know all the Neo-Advaita standard phrase book, thanks, no need. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Enlightenment isn't experiences. It is a state of consciousness, permanently, that continues to evolve, once it is established. You people that associate enlightenment with Flashy Experiences need to get beyond that concept. Has nothing to do with it. It is about not being overshadowed in activity, even the activity of thought. If you simply base it on flashy experiences, you can end up as bitterly confused, as you know who is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus..
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-) What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-) What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Which just shows how little Osho knew about anything. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said. Speaking of spiritual Ego's...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
OHhhh ourself-luminous Self,self-revealing in everything Doesn't he say Life is effortless existence!? plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose (the more things change, the more they stay the same) Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr http://batgap.com/the-signposter-troy-of-is/ http://batgap.com/the-signposter-troy-of-is/ You neighbor beside me throws seed bread to the crows. There. That's how you can define me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus..
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-) What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said. What I find fascinating is anyone so weak-willed and wussy as to believe that such saviors could actually EXIST. In my book this is the height of New Age / Old Age delusional fantasy. It's all based on the wish that there is someone out there who can do it for them and make them instantly happy or enlightened or whatever it is they think would make them better than they are now, with no effort being required on their part. We used to call it the Beam me up, Scotty approach to enlightenment or self-realization. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: (snip) As to Maharishi's sexual behavior, it doesn't bother me all that much that he did it, I was curious about how those who think he was the best thing since sliced bread worked it out in their heads that the skin boys had come forward with such stories - I figured most would say they thought the skinboys were lying, but they didn't. Once Judith Bourque's book came out, there was no longer any question that the skinboys weren't lying. You really should read the discussions we had here about the book. They contain much more detailed reactions than you've been able to elicit. For most of us, by this time it's old news. Although we didn't hear from folks like nabby. Based on his past posts, he doesn't disbelieve it, but he doesn't find it upsetting. If someone tells you: I'm an normal human being, how could you become upset if this person had sex ? I wish people spent their energy on better things than speculating about the private lives of others.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
I was present when he answered pretty much the same question and M's answer was that it would be cruel because the person's physiology wouldn't be trained to maintain it and they would lose it just as easily. There was no mention of *burning up*, just the idea of the torment one would have at having something so wonderful and losing it. The ultimate *tease* so to speak. From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 8:15 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up I did'nt take notes, he probably said: you would instantly burn up
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-) What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said. What I find fascinating is anyone so weak-willed and wussy as to believe that such saviors could actually EXIST. In my book this is the height of New Age / Old Age delusional fantasy. It's all based on the wish that there is someone out there who can do it for them and make them instantly happy or enlightened or whatever it is they think would make them better than they are now, with no effort being required on their part. We used to call it the Beam me up, Scotty approach to enlightenment or self-realization. :-) Well, Barry, somebody who is in need of an authority, needs an authority to tell him, that he doesn't need an authority. And that's exactly what Krishnamurti did.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
On 02/06/2013 06:48 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote: Bhairitu: There are some books by real tantrics... The 'Tantras' ARE books - 'Tantrism' originated in the early centuries CE and developed into a fully articulated tradition by the end of the Gupta period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra ...vibration/movement of consciousness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism ...all things are a manifestation of this Consciousness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism Not paper books, Willy. The teachings are called Gharanas which is a system of teaching or loosely translated as books. They are mostly an oral tradition.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-) What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Which just shows how little Osho knew about anything. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said. Speaking of spiritual Ego's... Maybe read your own masters words: Again according to Creme, at the age of 49, Krishnamurti took the fourth initiation. Maitreya, through one of His associates, said of K: He was a true disciple of Maitreya. The teachings of Krishnamurti are the teachings of Maitreya. (Share International, 9/88,10)* http://www.share-international.org/archives/Krishnamurti/k_bs-teachings-MnK.htm
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Card -- Nokia writes its own review of their new phone
On 02/05/2013 11:19 PM, card wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: No *wonder* you still like them; they're just like the TMO. :-) http://theweek.com/article/index/239665/the-best-lines-from-nokias-absurdly-positive-review-of-its-own-windows-phone Now that the next exact Pluto/Uranus EF square is only a couple of weeks away, my view is that the (mainly fundie Christian?) clowns of Goldman Sachs are about to trigger the next 1929 style stock market crash. So, I guess I'd better sell all my stock (NOK and BT), and perhaps buy them back remarkably cheaper after the Wall Street boys' trick?? The only thing worse than getting spiritual advice on FFL would be financial advice. There's probably a lot of people here who had to declare bankruptcy when they couldn't pay off loans for the TM courses they took. :-D That said we seem to be repeating an 80 year cycle that also brought the 1929 crash. There is a a system of Nadi astrology based on 9 year periods which would have an 81 year repeating cycle. It's abstract but then astrology is really an abstract science. But I think the use of outer planets is bad astrologers trying to make up for wrong predictions due to rationalistic astrology which is NOT abstract.
[FairfieldLife] The USPS will be dropping Saturday delivery
About time. I actually heard this would be a good idea in the 1980s from a friend who was an officer in the postal union. He also told me that 3 day weekends were a mixed blessing because they would get a day off and twice as much mail to deliver the following day. He also said the 6 day delivery made it difficult to schedule a regular carrier. My local delivery is crazy usually starting out with early delivery by 11 AM at the beginning of the week to 7 PM at the end. I also ordered a used book out of Amazon which has taken over a week to get here from a city only 500 miles a way. Another book which came from Goodwill in San Francisco took a week too. And tracking on these is awful. The real problem with the USPS was that a criminal organization known as the GOP got legislation passed that the USPS must fund pensions of staff not even born yet! That legislation should be rescinded. We know the real purpose was a scheme to kill the USPS. Otherwise even with reduce letters due to email and electronic transactions they are making money on package delivery due to Internet sales.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Renouncing enlightenment
On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. It is an ongrowing experience. And of course obsessing over enlightenment is an impediment to developing it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Having been involved in as much channeling as I was the past 25 years, I have to agree. There are all sorts of permutations of it from the living masters, if you want to call them that, to the Space Brothers or Galactics who are going to come down and save us with their superior technology and or energy to the Ascended Masters and avatars and so on. It is all just a way of saying I ain't got no power and I dunno how to git any, so I am gonna wait for the Hand of God to come pick me up and carry me to heaven. From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 11:38 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: For some reason, this reminds me of a story I heard from what I think of as a reliable source: once on a course someone asked Maharishi if it's true that an enlightened man can just look at a person and pop them into enlightenment. Maharishi silently nodded his head. Well, Maharishi, said the guy, why don't you just look at us and pop us into enlightenment. Long pause. Because it would knock your sox off, replied Maharishi. I was there. What Maharishi said was it would instantly burn you up And you actually *believed* this horseshit? Either of you? At least now we know why Nabby is so gullible that he still believes in Benjamin Creme, who has been telling suckers like Nabby that his savior Maitreya is due to appear Any Day Now for over 54 years. He's still a no show. HaHa, ofcourse He is for you who are blind, deluded and dull. Not so much for tens and thousands of others who have seen Him with their own eyes :-) What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said. What I find fascinating is anyone so weak-willed and wussy as to believe that such saviors could actually EXIST. In my book this is the height of New Age / Old Age delusional fantasy. It's all based on the wish that there is someone out there who can do it for them and make them instantly happy or enlightened or whatever it is they think would make them better than they are now, with no effort being required on their part. We used to call it the Beam me up, Scotty approach to enlightenment or self-realization. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
The problem seems to be more that although the number of scientific journals and articles published is increasing each year, the rate of papers being retracted as invalid is increasing even faster and researchers like to portray their retractions as being the result of errors. Papers are retracted because of software errors (hopeful not done by Turquoisb)and past studies (such as this one http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2010/12/23/jme.2010.040923 http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2010/12/23/jme.2010.040923 ) seems to verify this. But new studies find that this isn't the case. Many retractions (over 15 percent by one measure) claim to be because of errors, but ultimately turn out to be because of fraud. You may easily discovered this by checking these reports prepared by the Office of Research Integrity, which polices research fraud. http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/ http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/ Research fraud exploded over the last decade and retractions don't always mention when data are fraudulent (43% of the time, in fact). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Oh, that's right, you don't like Indians. Racism, like sexism, is an ugly trait, Barry. I recall several of your posts condemning the entire Indian subcontinent, because of some judgments you made about Indians in the US. Was Lenz a racist also?? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-\ files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
The posts have now been restored. http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/wordpress-removes-anil-p\ otti-posts-from-retraction-watch-in-error-after-false-dmca-copyright-cla\ im/ http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/wordpress-removes-anil-\ potti-posts-from-retraction-watch-in-error-after-false-dmca-copyright-cl\ aim/ But let us not forget Potti's Duke program looking for gene patterns that would determine which drugs would best attack for a patient particular cancer considered a breakthrough at the time letting a cancer cell's own genes reveal the cancer's weaknesses out to be wrong and gene-based tests proved worthless . Patient died few months after this treatment and patients' relatives have retained lawyers. The scariest part of all in this time and world of domination by bank and financial breakdowns: The Duke researchers had even set up a company now disbanded and planned to sell their test to determine cancer treatments as already a mini-gold rush of companies trying to market tests based on the new techniques, at a time when good science has not caught up with the financial push. http://www.fhcrc.org/en.html http://www.fhcrc.org/en.html Duke University has this article on Potti. http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/potti-hires-online-reputation-manag\ er http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/potti-hires-online-reputation-mana\ ger Still, for Potti, the results so far appear to be mixed. Searches for his name bring up articles about his missteps published by The New York Times and The Chronicle, though many of the newly created positive sites rank high as well. Online Reputation Manager is generally willing to work with clients as long as the intent is not to hide criminal activity that has not yet been reported, even if the individual's past actions were offensive, said Ronald Smith, the company's manager of business development, who agreed to speak about the firm's methods generally but not about particular clients. The company takes on about 90 percent of clients who request the firm's help, he added. Offline, a lawyer is hired to help them out, fight their caseI think we're the online lawyers, he said. So it's quite ethical, on our part, and I think quite right to help them out at a certain charge. Consider if the TMO... [:D] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-\ files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. This is what he says. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. It is an ongrowing experience. This seems to be what is happening. And of course obsessing over enlightenment is an impediment to developing it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
OMG [#-o] loosing face forgot my smiley face should be : Papers are retracted because of software errors (hopeful not done by Turquoisb).. [:D] [;)] [;)] of course --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda wrote: The problem seems to be more that although the number of scientific journals and articles published is increasing each year, the rate of papers being retracted as invalid is increasing even faster and researchers like to portray their retractions as being the result of errors. Papers are retracted because of software errors (hopeful not done by Turquoisb)and past studies (such as this one http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2010/12/23/jme.2010.040923 ) seems to verify this. But new studies find that this isn't the case. Many retractions (over 15 percent by one measure) claim to be because of errors, but ultimately turn out to be because of fraud. You may easily discovered this by checking these reports prepared by the Office of Research Integrity, which polices research fraud. http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/ Research fraud exploded over the last decade and retractions don't always mention when data are fraudulent (43% of the time, in fact). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Oh, that's right, you don't like Indians. Racism, like sexism, is an ugly trait, Barry. I recall several of your posts condemning the entire Indian subcontinent, because of some judgments you made about Indians in the US. Was Lenz a racist also?? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-\ \ files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: (snip) Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. How many people are there who have renounced their enlightenment? And how did you learn of them? This is what he says. I wonder how anyone, enlightened, renounced, or otherwise, could possibly say this with any certainty about anyone but themselves.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. I would go so far as to say that I don't believe that anyone is fully enlightened, in the sense of having reached an end point, EVER. I think it's an ever- evolving continuum of ever-escalating enlightenments. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. Fortunately for me, my disposition is to keep my cards close to my vest, so when I first began having CC exper- iences in Fiuggi, I kept my mouth shut about them. Except with a small group of friends who were all having similar experiences at the same time. Some of these folks were as closed-mouthed about what they were experiencing as I was, but others (like Robin's ex-wife) were not, and went forth about the land proclaiming their enlightenment. Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Ain't no going back. Game over. All up from here, to GC and UC. No beyond, back in 1972. UC was It. :-) THAT is the reason I think so many TMers and TM-graduates get into trouble when they have awakening experiences. They still carry around within them this meme that if they are experiencing such things, they're PERMANENT, damnit, and just don't go away. I thank my lucky stars that my first CC experiences during that period DID go away. That taught me a lot, not the least of which was that when it came to defining enlightenment, Maharishi was no more authoritative than Groucho Marx. I think a lot of people -- especially those who have spent their whole lives in the TMO *without* having enlightenment or awakening experiences of their own -- *still* carry around this PERMANENT meme. I don't think it's necessary, and I think it's debilitating. It is an ongrowing experience. Forever. Ain't no end point. Just my opinion...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
OTOH Duke university seems to have it own kind of fraternity's `racist rager http://tinyurl.com/a9hkqj6 http://tinyurl.com/a9hkqj6 for what it's worth... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Oh, that's right, you don't like Indians. Racism, like sexism, is an ugly trait, Barry. I recall several of your posts condemning the entire Indian subcontinent, because of some judgments you made about Indians in the US. Was Lenz a racist also?? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-\ files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Men are from Earth, women are from Earth...get over it
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/04/study-debunks-notion-that-men-and-women-are-psychologically-distinct/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men
LOSING face ABSOLUTELY FREE, NO CHARGE mnemonic device: If the ring on your finger is too loose, it might slip off and you might lose it. The ring that is, not the finger. Probably. Also don't forget the rolling eyes along with Just consider if the TMO... From: merudanda no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 12:39 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fascinating article that reveals much about Indian con men OMG loosing face forgot my smiley face should be : Papers are retracted because of software errors (hopeful not done by Turquoisb).. of course --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda wrote: The problem seems to be more that although the number of scientific journals and articles published is increasing each year, the rate of papers being retracted as invalid is increasing even faster and researchers like to portray their retractions as being the result of errors. Papers are retracted because of software errors (hopeful not done by Turquoisb)and past studies (such as this one http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2010/12/23/jme.2010.040923 ) seems to verify this. But new studies find that this isn't the case. Many retractions (over 15 percent by one measure) claim to be because of errors, but ultimately turn out to be because of fraud. You may easily discovered this by checking these reports prepared by the Office of Research Integrity, which polices research fraud. http://www.ori.dhhs.gov/ Research fraud exploded over the last decade and retractions don't always mention when data are fraudulent (43% of the time, in fact). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Oh, that's right, you don't like Indians. Racism, like sexism, is an ugly trait, Barry. I recall several of your posts condemning the entire Indian subcontinent, because of some judgments you made about Indians in the US. Was Lenz a racist also?? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: Few articles have captured the depths to which con men from India will stoop as this one does. I noticed it because one of my hero sites is RetractionWatch, an activist science site that follows dodgy research and blows the whistle on it and the researchers who perpetrate it when it turns out to be bogus. One of their most famous takedowns involves the case of Anil Potti, a cancer researcher who worked at Duke University and who published a number of seemingly ground-shaing studies that got him a lot of attention. As RetractionWatch and other orgs dug beneath the surface, however, the truth began to come out. He had faked most of his research data, and used any number of other unscrupulous means to make claims that simply weren't supported by any of his experiments. Major scandal followed, in which he was forced to resign from Duke, and during which his reputation pretty much went into the toilet. RetractionWatch themselves published something like 22 papers on him and his con games. So what does Anil Potti do? He hires himself an Indian PR firm named Online Reputation Manager to clean up his rep, and shortly afterwards, RetractionWatch notices that 10 of its articles on Potti have been taken down by their ISP provider, responding to DMCA Takedown Notices. What seems to have happened is that this reputation manager plagiarized RetractionWatch's original articles, put them up on a bogus site in India, and then sent off the retraction notices, claiming that RetractionWatch's *originals* violated their copyrights. The poor provider Wordpress, had no option but to comply to the takedown notices, and thus the articles exposing a total fraud and con man are no longer available. Welcome to science as it's practiced in the 21st century... http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/site-plagiarizes-blog-posts-then-\ files-dmca-takedown-on-originals/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
Who said I *needed* to? Why do you eat vanilla ice cream, instead of chocolate? It was FUN, dude!!! Here was an arrogant jackass crowing over people's buttons being pushed, so I set him up - It worked beautifully! Awesome!! High five, jive! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: No, didn't push buttons, just making a point and giving an opinion. For me, what you say there and now is just pure ego. Why would you even need to push buttons? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Um, my *exact* phrase, was, I AM ENLIGHTENED AND DON'T YOU EVER FORGET IT, BARRY! Pushed his buttons good! LOL, and possibly yours...:-) Have a nice day! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good for oxes and morons? Well I'm not an Ox in Chinese astrology. So that only leaves...(-: Cosmic ego, maybe? I think that was actually Maharishis expression, was it? Or was that cosmic accident? Share, for all what I know of you - I rather see your comment as lighthearted and humorous - I don't group you with the dogmatic and fundies. That was srijau and he already got some flak. I guess his 'opinion' is something that grows in a spiritual mono-culture. For me, being out of it for decades now, this is rather some curious strange phenomenon, which I still remember, but I wonder at that sort of spiritual naivety, the almost innocent exhibition of ego. Is it really like this? Are there really many people in the movement, who believe this? I guess there are. But to anybody outside the mono-culture of the movement, this will only lead to eye-rolling. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Maharishi for what he did, I appreciate his role in popularizing meditation for the mainstream in the west, at our generation, I admire how he helped many people to make a major turn toward spirituality, again in our generation, lots of stories of a lot of people, myself included. But then I wonder at the unreflected exhibition of ego as in srijaus remark. ANY belief of 'My Guru/Hero/Avatar is the greatest of all time, far greater than any known historic person' is just that: plain materialistic ego projected on a spiritual ideal. Ego is something we cannot avoid, even if you are enlightened, there will be still a relative ego to take care of your body and survival. That I comment on this, I couldn't do without ego as well. But the ego in the enlightened will be one, where there is detachment from it. Once the ego claims the spiritual progress as it's own, it leads to a spiritual Super-Ego. It instrumentalizes the spiritual rather than surrendering to it. Now that's the critical point, where I think a lot of people fail. Just think of those posts of supposedly enlightened egos here who shout I AM ENLIGHTENED, GET IT!! Well, IMHO that is spiritual superego. Contrast that with the comment of Anandamayi Ma which was recently posted here about unity consciousness. Does this make sense to you? From: navashok To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 3:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing  I think 'universal ego' is an oxymoron. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch.àI think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering.àIt was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. Huh?! Who the fuck made you King? You are proclaiming what a person can, and cannot say, about enlightenment?? You are a reasonable person and movie buff, but, We don't nd no steen-keeng Badges! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. It is an ongrowing experience. And of course obsessing over enlightenment is an impediment to developing it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
I was not confused by it, since my first (dirty) witnessing experiences were on residence courses, and they faded about a day after the course. I was not ever told that this state was permanent, if experienced. Just the opposite. Shit, its been 40 years for Bee since the TM daze - He just doesn't remember accurately. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: I was not confused by it, since my first (dirty) witnessing experiences were on residence courses, and they faded about a day after the course. I was not ever told that this state was permanent, if experienced. Just the opposite. Yes, same here. Shit, its been 40 years for Bee since the TM daze - He just doesn't remember accurately. It's never clear whether Barry is remembering inaccurately, or is just making stuff up to support whatever putdown he's indulging in. I suspect the latter in this case. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: I was not confused by it, since my first (dirty) witnessing experiences were on residence courses, and they faded about a day after the course. I was not ever told that this state was permanent, if experienced. Just the opposite. Yes, same here. Shit, its been 40 years for Bee since the TM daze - He just doesn't remember accurately. It's never clear whether Barry is remembering inaccurately, or is just making stuff up to support whatever putdown he's indulging in. I suspect the latter in this case. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! I've wondered whether Barry actually gets some kind of twisted pleasure out of being repeatedly humiliated. He's smart enough to avoid it and still get his points across, so he must find it rewarding somehow. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: I was not confused by it, since my first (dirty) witnessing experiences were on residence courses, and they faded about a day after the course. I was not ever told that this state was permanent, if experienced. Just the opposite. Yes, same here. Shit, its been 40 years for Bee since the TM daze - He just doesn't remember accurately. It's never clear whether Barry is remembering inaccurately, or is just making stuff up to support whatever putdown he's indulging in. I suspect the latter in this case. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Camel hit on highway
I gasped when I saw this headline, from Concord, California. Turns out the camel wasn't hurt, but escaped onto a local road, twice, the second time being clipped by a minivan, which knocked the animal down, after which, the camel got up, ran around in circles, and was as good as new. Observations: 1. Pretty smart camel, to keep escaping over its fence. 2. Two million years of evolution can't be all bad, bouncing off a minivan without a scratch, and all. 3. Why would someone in the West own a camel? a) camel rides? b) camel milk and cheese? c) a future ottoman? d) because they can?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: What I find fascinating is anyone so weak-willed and wussy as to believe that such saviors could actually EXIST. In my book this is the height of New Age / Old Age delusional fantasy. It's all based on the wish that there is someone out there who can do it for them and make them instantly happy or enlightened or whatever it is they think would make them better than they are now, with no effort being required on their part. What basis has the Turq for making this statement ? None whatsoever, it's pure fantasy on his part. Again he makes a statement on a subject on which he has zero, nada, 0 experience or knowledge.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: I was present when he answered pretty much the same question and M's answer was that it would be cruel because the person's physiology wouldn't be trained to maintain it and they would lose it just as easily. There was no mention of *burning up*, just the idea of the torment one would have at having something so wonderful and losing it. The ultimate *tease* so to speak. Nervecenters in the body would not be able to handle a great current if it is not ready. Hence the word he used when I was present: burn.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl2-bu0XK-4 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! I've wondered whether Barry actually gets some kind of twisted pleasure out of being repeatedly humiliated. He's smart enough to avoid it and still get his points across, so he must find it rewarding somehow. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: I was not confused by it, since my first (dirty) witnessing experiences were on residence courses, and they faded about a day after the course. I was not ever told that this state was permanent, if experienced. Just the opposite. Yes, same here. Shit, its been 40 years for Bee since the TM daze - He just doesn't remember accurately. It's never clear whether Barry is remembering inaccurately, or is just making stuff up to support whatever putdown he's indulging in. I suspect the latter in this case. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
I honestly don't know which is sadder -- that Judy and Jimbo believe that FFL is all about a battle between themselves and me, or that they think they are winning. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! I've wondered whether Barry actually gets some kind of twisted pleasure out of being repeatedly humiliated. He's smart enough to avoid it and still get his points across, so he must find it rewarding somehow.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: What I read somewhere recently is (in the context of the 9 Ashoks), that Osho actually believed that Krishnamurti, who renounced the role of Maitreya, should have accepted this role, that it was a mistake of him not to do so. Which just shows how little Osho knew about anything. Krishnamurti in turn had said, that if the Maitreya was there, he would just exactly tell to the people what Krishnamurti said. Speaking of spiritual Ego's... Maybe read your own masters words: Who's master ? Not mine baby. Perhaps you should get in the habit of not only reading stuff but also try to digest what you read. Just a hint. For example, The teachings of Krishnamurti are the teachings of Maitreya. simply means that Krishnamurti, like Jesus, was overshadowed by The Christ who now has the name Maitreya. It doesn't mean that he was Maitreya or played the role Maitreya has in the world today. Again according to Creme, at the age of 49, Krishnamurti took the fourth initiation. Maitreya, through one of His associates, said of K: He was a true disciple of Maitreya. The teachings of Krishnamurti are the teachings of Maitreya. (Share International, 9/88,10)* http://www.share-international.org/archives/Krishnamurti/k_bs-teachings-MnK.htm
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here. It's very simple, and you are correct. It's the Turq who got the terms mixed up and thinks witnessing 24/7 is CC. Maharishi never said such a thing and the Turq makes confused claims, as usual.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here. It's very simple, and you are correct. It's the Turq who got the terms mixed up and thinks witnessing 24/7 is CC. Maharishi never said such a thing and the Turq makes confused claims, as usual. Er, well, Nabby, that's what *I* said, not what Barry said. It's certainly what I was taught.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: I honestly don't know which is sadder -- that Judy and Jimbo believe that FFL is all about a battle between themselves and me, or that they think they are winning. :-) That's OK, Barry, you just sit there and try to figure it out while we keep pushing your buttons. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! I've wondered whether Barry actually gets some kind of twisted pleasure out of being repeatedly humiliated. He's smart enough to avoid it and still get his points across, so he must find it rewarding somehow.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: I honestly don't know which is sadder -- that Judy and Jimbo believe that FFL is all about a battle between themselves and me, or that they think they are winning. :-) It sure makes fun reading. Hull breach immanent! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! I've wondered whether Barry actually gets some kind of twisted pleasure out of being repeatedly humiliated. He's smart enough to avoid it and still get his points across, so he must find it rewarding somehow.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here. It's very simple, and you are correct. It's the Turq who got the terms mixed up and thinks witnessing 24/7 is CC. Maharishi never said such a thing and the Turq makes confused claims, as usual. Er, well, Nabby, that's what *I* said, not what Barry said. It's certainly what I was taught. My point was that the Turq claims he was in CC in Fuiggi but in reality he had a few days of witnessing, believing it was CC. This short experience decades ago have made such an impression on the poor soul that he keeps referring to it as a major event in his life year after year here.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Camel hit on highway
On 02/06/2013 12:21 PM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote: I gasped when I saw this headline, from Concord, California. Turns out the camel wasn't hurt, but escaped onto a local road, twice, the second time being clipped by a minivan, which knocked the animal down, after which, the camel got up, ran around in circles, and was as good as new. Observations: 1. Pretty smart camel, to keep escaping over its fence. 2. Two million years of evolution can't be all bad, bouncing off a minivan without a scratch, and all. 3. Why would someone in the West own a camel? a) camel rides? b) camel milk and cheese? c) a future ottoman? d) because they can? The camels got loose (several of them) because someone stole the copper wiring to keep the fence closed.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
Nope, just passing on what a lot of gurus say. On 02/06/2013 11:46 AM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote: One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. Huh?! Who the fuck made you King? You are proclaiming what a person can, and cannot say, about enlightenment?? You are a reasonable person and movie buff, but, We don't nd no steen-keeng Badges! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. It is an ongrowing experience. And of course obsessing over enlightenment is an impediment to developing it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
Yeah, I have heard stuff like that before. I respect that not everyone feels like talking about it, from a personal point of view. On the other hand, if I want to, why not? I agree that the caution expressed by a lot of Gurus, is a good thing to have in place, though not as an absolute law. Also, as you always do, I stress enlightenment as an always growing state, once enlightenment is established. Life doesn't ever stop, and neither does enlightenment. It multiplies rapidly actually, because there is neither fear or uncertainty, in exploring anything. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Nope, just passing on what a lot of gurus say. On 02/06/2013 11:46 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. Huh?! Who the fuck made you King? You are proclaiming what a person can, and cannot say, about enlightenment?? You are a reasonable person and movie buff, but, We don't nd no steen-keeng Badges! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. It is an ongrowing experience. And of course obsessing over enlightenment is an impediment to developing it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here. It's very simple, and you are correct. It's the Turq who got the terms mixed up and thinks witnessing 24/7 is CC. Maharishi never said such a thing and the Turq makes confused claims, as usual. Er, well, Nabby, that's what *I* said, not what Barry said. It's certainly what I was taught. My point was that the Turq claims he was in CC in Fuiggi but in reality he had a few days of witnessing, believing it was CC. No, he said he had CC *experiences* in Fiuggi. An experience of witnessing, however brief, is an experience of CC, according to everything I was taught. So I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm questioning whether there was ever a time when, as Barry claims, TMers were taught that if they had an experience of CC, it meant they were permanently in CC.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
MEMO: Jimbo to Bee - the *thoughts* below, are yours, and yours alone. When you ascribe them to someone else, you are acting out a psychological process, the transference of your personal feelings onto another, called p-r-o-j-e-c-t-i-l-e-v-o-m-i-t-i-n-g. :-) :-) :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: I honestly don't know which is sadder -- that Judy and Jimbo believe that FFL is all about a battle between themselves and me, or that they think they are winning. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Ever notice how ego-maniacs end up looking like masochists, due to their arrogance? lol. ya can't make this stuff up folks! I've wondered whether Barry actually gets some kind of twisted pleasure out of being repeatedly humiliated. He's smart enough to avoid it and still get his points across, so he must find it rewarding somehow.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Thu 07-Feb-13 00:15:05 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 02/02/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 02/09/13 00:00:00 444 messages as of (UTC) 02/06/13 23:24:13 42 doctordumbass 42 Michael Jackson 37 nablusoss1008 36 turquoiseb 33 Share Long 27 authfriend 26 obbajeeba 26 Bhairitu 24 seventhray27 19 Richard J. Williams 18 navashok 15 Buck 12 Ravi Chivukula 11 card 9 srijau 9 salyavin808 9 merudanda 9 John 8 Ann 5 Mike Dixon 4 seekliberation 4 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 4 Alex Stanley 2 merlin 2 laughinggull108 2 feste37 2 david 1 wgm4u 1 martin.quickman 1 at_man_and_brahman 1 Yifu 1 PaliGap 1 FairfieldLife 1 Dick Mays Posters: 34 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
On this note, I shall not reveal how enlightened I have become, even if it is over 20 pounds less, for which this thread of this topic of renouncing enlightenment is really hilarious reading (minus the guru's with guns for pussy)reminds me of this sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww6z0EEEqu4 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Yeah, I have heard stuff like that before. I respect that not everyone feels like talking about it, from a personal point of view. On the other hand, if I want to, why not? I agree that the caution expressed by a lot of Gurus, is a good thing to have in place, though not as an absolute law. Also, as you always do, I stress enlightenment as an always growing state, once enlightenment is established. Life doesn't ever stop, and neither does enlightenment. It multiplies rapidly actually, because there is neither fear or uncertainty, in exploring anything. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Nope, just passing on what a lot of gurus say. On 02/06/2013 11:46 AM, doctordumbass@ wrote: One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. Huh?! Who the fuck made you King? You are proclaiming what a person can, and cannot say, about enlightenment?? You are a reasonable person and movie buff, but, We don't nd no steen-keeng Badges! :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: On 02/06/2013 06:26 AM, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Often people who renounce their enlightenment weren't enlightened to begin with. One should never claim enlightenment but it is perfectly okay to say one is experiencing some enlightenment. It is an ongrowing experience. And of course obsessing over enlightenment is an impediment to developing it.
[FairfieldLife] Buddha at the Gas Pump - 158. Fr. Thomas Keating
New post on Buddha at the Gas Pump http://s.wordpress.com/i/emails/blavatar-default.png http://batgap.com/?author=1 http://batgap.com/thomas-keating/ 158. Fr. Thomas Keating by http://batgap.com/?author=1 Rick Fr. Thomas Keating is a founding member and the spiritual guide of http://www.contemplativeoutreach.org/ Contemplative Outreach, LTD. He has served on Contemplative Outreach's Board of Trustees since the organization's beginning and is currently serving as the Chairman of the Board. Fr. Keating is one of the principal architects and teachers of the Christian contemplative prayer movement and, in many ways, Contemplative Outreach is a manifestation of his longtime desire to contribute to the recovery of the contemplative dimension of Christianity. Fr. Keating's interest in contemplative prayer began during his freshman year at Yale University in 1940 when he became aware of the Church's history and of the writings of Christian mystics. Prompted by these studies and time spent in prayer and meditation, he experienced a profound realization that, on a spiritual level, the Scriptures call people to a personal relationship with God. Fr. Keating took this call to heart. He transferred to Fordham University in New York and, while waiting to be drafted for service in World War II, he received a deferment to enter seminary. Shortly after graduating from an accelerated program at Fordham, Fr. Keating entered an austere monastic community of the Trappist Order in Valley Falls, Rhode Island in January of 1944, at the age of 20. He was ordained a priest in June of 1949. http://www.contemplativeoutreach.org/sites/default/files/images/pic11039.jpg In March of 1950 the monastery in Valley Falls burned down and, as a result, the community moved to Spencer, Massachusetts. Shortly after the move, Fr. Keating became ill with a lung condition and was put into isolation in the city hospital of Worcester, Massachusetts for nine weeks. After returning to the monastery, he stayed in the infirmary for two years. Fr. Keating was sent to Snowmass, Colorado in April of 1958 to help start a new monastic community called St. Benedict's. He remained in Snowmass until 1961, when he was elected abbot of St. Joseph's in Spencer, prompting his move back to Massachusetts. He served as abbot of St. Joseph's for twenty years until he retired in 1981 and returned to Snowmass, where he still resides today. During Fr. Keating's term as abbot at St. Joseph's and in response to the reforms of Vatican II, he invited teachers from the East to the monastery. As a result of this exposure to Eastern spiritual traditions, Fr. Keating and several of the monks at St. Joseph's were led to develop the modern form of Christian contemplative prayer called Centering Prayer. Fr. Keating was a central figure in the initiation of the Centering Prayer movement. He offered Centering Prayer workshops and retreats to clergy and laypeople and authored articles and books on the method and fruits of Centering Prayer. In 1983, he presented a two-week intensive Centering Prayer retreat at the Lama Foundation in San Cristabol, New Mexico, which proved to be a watershed event. Many of the people prominent in the Centering Prayer movement today attended this retreat. Contemplative Outreach was created in 1984 to support the growing spiritual network of Centering Prayer practitioners. Fr. Keating became the community's president in 1985, a position he held until 1999. Fr. Keating is an internationally renowned theologian and an accomplished author. He has traveled the world to speak with laypeople and communities about contemplative Christian practices and the psychology of the spiritual journey, which is the subject of his Spiritual Journey video and DVD series. Since the reforms of Vatican II, Fr. Keating has been a core participant in and supporter of interreligious dialogue. He helped found the Snowmass Interreligious Conference, which had its first meeting in the fall of 1983 and continues to meet each spring. Fr. Keating also is a past president of the Temple of Understanding and of the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue. Perhaps the biggest testament to Fr. Keating's dedication to reviving Christian contemplative practices is his choice to live a busy, public life instead of the quiet, monastic life for which he entered the monastery. Fr. Keating's life is lived in the service of sharing the gifts God gave him with others. Publications: * Open Mind, Open Heart * Manifesting God * Intimacy with God * Invitation to Love * The Human Condition * The Mystery of Christ * Awakenings * Reawakenings * The Kingdom of God is Like... * Crisis of Faith, Crisis of Love * Fruits and Gifts of the Spirit * The Better Part * St. Therese of Lisieux: a Transformation
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
Per Jerry Jarvis (his opinion not shared by many Buddhists) although he used the word Unity: After Unity and dropping the physical body, the purpose of evolution has been fulfilled and there's no further relative existence for subtle bodies since there's no need. ... This differs from many Buddhist Schools: After E., evolution may continue indefinitely, especially for the purpose of assisting others. The medium for this exchange would be any number of transformation bodies, and the impulse or momentum for ongoing Enlightenment objectives on behalf of all sentient beings would be the will power and energy of the Enlightened Buddha transferred to the subtle bodies. ... The implication - the tree that one hugs (if any) could be the transformation Body of an Enlightened Buddha. ... In any event, these options clearly differ from Jerry's (and insofar as J. was a mouthpiece for MMY, the latter also). ... In other words, Jerry is saying that entities may spend eons attempting to get Enlightened, and once the objective has been attained, there's no more existence. ... Obviously, this scenario differs from Christianity. The Goodfellas: http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/8/71192.jpg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: (snip) Bahd idea, as Ahnold might say. For many of them, the experiences soon faded, and they would have been thought of as fools or liars if they *admitted* that they had faded, because within the TM org at that time, it was *assumed* that if you experienced CC, it was PERMANENT. Could this have been one of those secret teachings divulged only to TM teachers? Because it was always my understanding that one could slip into and out of the experience of any state of consciousness, although at some point a particular state supposedly became permanent. After all, witnessing is said to be a temporary state of CC; CC is said to be a permanent state of witnessing. I learned TM in 1975; was the concept of witnessing as a temporary state something that was introduced after Barry's time but before mine? Genuinely curious here.
[FairfieldLife] Health benefits of Xanthohumol
http://www.xanthohumol.com ... virtual reality 3-D neosurrealism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbeSKFoKx1Y
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Our Navashok http://www.google.com/url?sa=irct=jq=refereesource=imagescd=cad=rj\ adocid=abOHSAIWjzpi1Mtbnid=-NRpQQPQflHtFM:ved=0CAUQjRwurl=http%3A%2F\ %2Fwww.123rf.com%2Fphoto_4021851_referee-blowing-the-whistle.htmlei=3hU\ TUdq1GoHzygHNm4CAAwbvm=bv.42080656,d.aWcpsig=AFQjCNGdI4yXlhvbN2DUTnqx7\ kr7Y0VOawust=1360291642542592
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
Looks like there's already a flag on the play - Navashok calls roughing the passer, but it looks like the officials will overturn it... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: Recently a friend alerted me that an Advaita teacher he knows, Cesar Teruel, 'renounced' his enlightenment, making a 'Confession' at his facebook page https://www.facebook.com/teruelcesar He is on Batgap too http://batgap.com/cesar-teruel/ The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. Our Navashok adocid=abOHSAIWjzpi1Mtbnid=-NRpQQPQflHtFM:ved=0CAUQjRwurl=http%3A%2F\ %2Fwww.123rf.com%2Fphoto_4021851_referee-blowing-the-whistle.htmlei=3hU\ TUdq1GoHzygHNm4CAAwbvm=bv.42080656,d.aWcpsig=AFQjCNGdI4yXlhvbN2DUTnqx7\ kr7Y0VOawust=1360291642542592
[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddha at the Gas Pump - 158. Fr. Thomas Keating
What an extraordinary man. How wonderful that you interviewed him. He was a huge part in the healing process for many of my friends when they moved forward from their time in the context with Robin back in the mid 1980's. I spent time at the monastery as well, a stunning place in Snowmass Colorado. Father Keating was a vital part in the transition for these people from pain and suffering to becoming productive and healthy individuals again. I will watch this interview with great interest. I have not seen Keating for 26 years. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer wrote: New post on Buddha at the Gas Pump 158. Fr. Thomas Keating by Rick Fr. Thomas Keating is a founding member and the spiritual guide of Contemplative Outreach, LTD. He has served on Contemplative Outreach's Board of Trustees since the organization's beginning and is currently serving as the Chairman of the Board. Fr. Keating is one of the principal architects and teachers of the Christian contemplative prayer movement and, in many ways, Contemplative Outreach is a manifestation of his longtime desire to contribute to the recovery of the contemplative dimension of Christianity. Fr. Keating's interest in contemplative prayer began during his freshman year at Yale University in 1940 when he became aware of the Church's history and of the writings of Christian mystics. Prompted by these studies and time spent in prayer and meditation, he experienced a profound realization that, on a spiritual level, the Scriptures call people to a personal relationship with God. Fr. Keating took this call to heart. He transferred to Fordham University in New York and, while waiting to be drafted for service in World War II, he received a deferment to enter seminary. Shortly after graduating from an accelerated program at Fordham, Fr. Keating entered an austere monastic community of the Trappist Order in Valley Falls, Rhode Island in January of 1944, at the age of 20. He was ordained a priest in June of 1949. In March of 1950 the monastery in Valley Falls burned down and, as a result, the community moved to Spencer, Massachusetts. Shortly after the move, Fr. Keating became ill with a lung condition and was put into isolation in the city hospital of Worcester, Massachusetts for nine weeks. After returning to the monastery, he stayed in the infirmary for two years. Fr. Keating was sent to Snowmass, Colorado in April of 1958 to help start a new monastic community called St. Benedict's. He remained in Snowmass until 1961, when he was elected abbot of St. Joseph's in Spencer, prompting his move back to Massachusetts. He served as abbot of St. Joseph's for twenty years until he retired in 1981 and returned to Snowmass, where he still resides today. During Fr. Keating's term as abbot at St. Joseph's and in response to the reforms of Vatican II, he invited teachers from the East to the monastery. As a result of this exposure to Eastern spiritual traditions, Fr. Keating and several of the monks at St. Joseph's were led to develop the modern form of Christian contemplative prayer called Centering Prayer. Fr. Keating was a central figure in the initiation of the Centering Prayer movement. He offered Centering Prayer workshops and retreats to clergy and laypeople and authored articles and books on the method and fruits of Centering Prayer. In 1983, he presented a two-week intensive Centering Prayer retreat at the Lama Foundation in San Cristabol, New Mexico, which proved to be a watershed event. Many of the people prominent in the Centering Prayer movement today attended this retreat. Contemplative Outreach was created in 1984 to support the growing spiritual network of Centering Prayer practitioners. Fr. Keating became the community's president in 1985, a position he held until 1999. Fr. Keating is an internationally renowned theologian and an accomplished author. He has traveled the world to speak with laypeople and communities about contemplative Christian practices and the psychology of the spiritual journey, which is the subject of his Spiritual Journey video and DVD series. Since the reforms of Vatican II, Fr. Keating has been a core participant in and supporter of interreligious dialogue. He helped found the Snowmass Interreligious Conference, which had its first meeting in the fall of 1983 and continues to meet each spring. Fr. Keating also is a past president of the Temple of Understanding and of the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue. Perhaps the biggest testament to Fr. Keating's dedication to reviving Christian contemplative practices is his choice to live a busy, public life instead of the quiet, monastic life for which he entered the monastery. Fr. Keating's life is lived in the service of sharing the gifts God gave him with others. Publications:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Renouncing enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Looks like there's already a flag on the play - Navashok calls roughing the passer, but it looks like the officials will overturn it... The confession is only recent. To me it seems that the guy has strong enlightenment experiences, and actually uncovers deeper layers of conditioning. It has nothing to do with forcefully de-enlightening oneself. To me this guy seems to be very honest and straightforward, so his 'confession' is rather a plus than a minus.. There was a five yard penalty for excessive display of ego, but because the player has acknowledged this, the penalty shall be cancelled. Still first down. A time out will not be assessed. http://www.google.com/url?sa=irct=jq=refereesource=imagescd=cad=rj\ adocid=abOHSAIWjzpi1Mtbnid=-NRpQQPQflHtFM:ved=0CAUQjRwurl=http%3A%2F\ %2Fwww.123rf.com%2Fphoto_4021851_referee-blowing-the-whistle.htmlei=3hU\ TUdq1GoHzygHNm4CAAwbvm=bv.42080656,d.aWcpsig=AFQjCNGdI4yXlhvbN2DUTnqx7\ kr7Y0VOawust=1360291642542592
