I sleep so much better knowing that no matter how
accurate, valid, and factual the criticism of a Clinton,
FFL will be swiftly corrected by its own personal
Clintonista.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anybody who reads the article Robert just
HYPERLINK
"http://www.celsias.com/2008/02/19/an-open-letter-to-hillary-clinton-from-a-
wellesley-college-alumna/"Open Letter to Hillary Clinton From a Wellesley
College Alumna
February 19, 2008 ยท Filed under HYPERLINK
"http://www.celsias.com/category/agriculture-food/"Agriculture & Food,
HYPERLIN
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> Or he, could have just been full of it.
>
> I give you high marks for at least considering this possibility. I
> don't think he was full of it, just a great
Anybody who reads the article Robert just posted
from the Boston Globe about Rep. Jim Cooper's
battles with Hillary Clinton over her health care
plan during the Clinton administration needs to
know that Cooper's account of what happened is,
to say the least, distorted.
>From the American Prospect
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" wrote:
> [...]
> > So you are not sure if your behavior has improved that much after
> > decades of not only doing TM but advanced TM practices as well. What
> > does t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > do.rflex wrote:
> > > > What astonishes me is that it doesn't appear that many TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> >
> >
> > do.rflex wrote:
> > > What astonishes me is that it doesn't appear that many TMers at all
> > > look to God or right behavior as a beneficial thing to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> So you are not sure if your behavior has improved that much after
> decades of not only doing TM but advanced TM practices as well. What
> does that say about the practice. but when UNITY suddenly dawns ONE
> DAY
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Okay the "living in tune with nature" rant of "enlightened people"
> reminded me of something I often thought from the beginning of my TM
> practice and that it didn't necessarily lead to "improved behavior." I
> gues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> do.rflex wrote:
> > What astonishes me is that it doesn't appear that many TMers at all
> > look to God or right behavior as a beneficial thing to aim for.
> >
> >
> > =
> > "...God's Devotee can never stay dejecte
I, too, doubt that the Illuminati are enlightened.
But they for sure are not stupid.
--- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was just looking into the "Illuminati" yesterday
> because obviously the
> term means that it was (or is) a group that
> considers themselves
> "enlightened", "elit
do.rflex wrote:
> What astonishes me is that it doesn't appear that many TMers at all
> look to God or right behavior as a beneficial thing to aim for.
>
>
> =
> "...God's Devotee can never stay dejected.
>
> While staying in the forests, we were always under the all-powerful
> nature of Para
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante
> wrote:
> **snip
>
> > **
> >
> > Yeah, watching surfing is great (altho I'm just as happy seeing
big
> > surf all by its lonesome) -- when I liv
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> >
> > Okay the "living in tune with nature" rant of "enlightened people"
> > reminded me of something I often thought from the beginning of my TM
> > practice an
Rick Nash might well be in greater danger than
President(?) Obama... :0
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Okay the "living in tune with nature" rant of "enlightened people"
> reminded me of something I often thought from the beginning of my TM
> practice and that it didn't necessarily lead to "improved behavior." I
> gues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Okay the "living in tune with nature" rant of "enlightened people"
> reminded me of something I often thought from the beginning of my TM
> practice and that it didn't necessarily lead to "improved behavior." I
> gues
Great movie out now on the topic of sexuality:
"Beautifully paced with an eerily-consistent tone, Sciamma's mixture
of hormones, romanticism, and bruised emotions leads to sublime and
strange places unfamiliar to those who follow the straight and narrow
and quite reminiscent to those who still don
I was just looking into the "Illuminati" yesterday because obviously the
term means that it was (or is) a group that considers themselves
"enlightened", "elite" and therefore entitled to rule the world. Of
course that is "horse pucky" because any "enlightened" group of people
probably would no
Okay the "living in tune with nature" rant of "enlightened people"
reminded me of something I often thought from the beginning of my TM
practice and that it didn't necessarily lead to "improved behavior." I
guess the first thing we would need to look at was what exactly is
"improved behavior."
Curtis, it's great stuff to uncover a new and transformative skill
set and feel its magic start to work on you. I was talking to this
athletic young guy yesterday for a few moments as we were sitting in
the swell waiting for a set to come in and I stated that it sucked
to be this bad at surfin
On the Dog Friendly rant we discussed dogs and owners cleaning up after
them when they take them on walks. This morning I was reminded of
another problem. At the local waterfront park occasionally horse riders
will take to the trail. Dogs are banned at this park because it is a
wildlife ref
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > If he takes authorship of obeyeing God's will in waging
> > the war, he takes on its karmic consequences, according
> > to the premise.
>
> If
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > No surprise that "t'would seem" that way to you,
> > given that you've closed your mind to the
> > possibility that anybody could even have that
> > experi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> If he takes authorship of obeyeing God's will in waging
> the war, he takes on its karmic consequences, according
> to the premise.
>
If a guru takes authorship of believing he is enlightened and that all
his act
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
> > > wrote:
> > > >
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
> > > wrote:
> > > >
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > When a politician tells lies and manages to foul up people's
> > > judgmen
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
> wrote:
> >
> > When a politician tells lies and manages to foul up people's
> > judgment and gets elected as president, maybe nature wanted
> > him to do bad
> driving north on 101 and the sweep of Clam Beach comes into view just
> a few miles past Arcata I get a visceral reaction, a rush of
> excitement and anticipation and a strong kinesthetic response to the
> sight of the waves. Waves mean something to me now.\
Nice description Marek. I had t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Another angle to it is that whatever actions you assume
> > authorship of, you get to take (karmic) responsibility
> > for. Michael Dean
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On May 18, 2008, at 11:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > >> For me, with MMY, I did what he
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > When a politician tells lies and manages to foul up people's
> > > judg
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> The larger point is simply that it's impossible to know
> what nature "wants" and why.
And its impossible to know what a granite boulder wants. Or maybe its
a false premise to assume that the boulder or Natur
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Another angle to it is that whatever actions you assume
> authorship of, you get to take (karmic) responsibility
> for. Michael Dean Goodman has pointed out that in the
> phrase "spontaneous right action," the em
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
> wrote:
> >
> > When a politician tells lies and manages to foul up people's
> > judgment and gets elected as president, maybe nature wanted
> > him to do bad
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On May 17, 2008, at 9:32 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
[...]
> >> Interestingly, neuroscientists are now realizing that the acquisition
> >> of samadhi in growing meditation exp
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On May 18, 2008, at 11:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >> For me, with MMY, I did what he claimed to do: I went
> >> to the source.
> >
> > Well, actually, no, you di
New.morn, Would you please repeat your post.??
"new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 16:35:41 -
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Most Dangerous Dogma ?
>
> Can you define "wrong action"?
>
> I suggest that perhaps the underlying premise is h
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When a politician tells lies and manages to foul up people's
> judgment and gets elected as president, maybe nature wanted
> him to do bad things to test you. You trusted this candidate,
> because he had influen
On May 18, 2008, at 11:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For me, with MMY, I did what he claimed to do: I went
to the source.
Well, actually, no, you didn't. You went to a "source"
that he very explicitly said no longer represented
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Morals are relative. They change from time to time.
>
> Ethics are eternal and absolute. They never change.
>
> Actions that bring suffering to others are "wrong"
>
>
When a politician tells lies and manages to foul up people's judgment
and gets elected as president, maybe nature wanted him to do bad
things to test you. You trusted this candidate, because he had
influential supporters, who affirmed you him to be very trustworthy
and basically faultless.You voted
Morals are relative. They change from time to time.
Ethics are eternal and absolute. They never change.
Actions that bring suffering to others are "wrong"
Actions that bring happiness to others are "right"
Hindu philosophy calls th
New wrote:
> And of course the third premise I challenge
> is the concept and label of enlightenment.
>
The term "enlightenment" in South Asian
literature is the "liberation from the cycle
of death and rebirth"; the transcendence of
phenomenal being; a state of higher consciousness,
in which
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
**snip
> **
>
> Yeah, watching surfing is great (altho I'm just as happy seeing big
> surf all by its lonesome) -- when I lived in Honolulu, I used to go
> to the North Shore in winter and catch people doing
Right on, Sandi. And ditto for your statement on
Marshy. He is a good beginning. And, being a GOOD
beginning, it is self-sufficient, though some may need
more a string to wind up to let them in at heaven's
gate (Blake's metaphor) while some may not see how
good a beginning it is till they get to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> The more important issue IMO is that people
> who have chosen to believe that enlightenment
> is a state in which the enlightened can do no
> wrong
Can you define "wrong action"?
I suggest that perhaps the underl
Great post Vaj.
The thing about going to the Vatican to find out if
Luther was the real deal or not is not as bizarre as
it might seem to some. ANY path can get you there.
And any path must also be transcended.
Even intellect can be a path. As the Western
tradition in mathematics has pointed o
Entire Nation states, Corporate entities, Politicians and Organised
Religions all try to be free of responsibility of their actions.
So I don't understand what you disagree in this..??
With Great powers comes Great responsibilites.
Theoriticaly, along
On May 18, 2008, at 9:38 AM, Sal Sunshine wrote:On May 18, 2008, at 8:23 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:Yeah, yeah...but how did you do on the test? :-)http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl_hillary_clinton_quiz.htmI was honest enough to share with you my score.What's yours?Here's mine:The Hillary Clinto
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm really interested in whether anyone can come
> up with seemingly rational reasons for the belief
> that the enlightened have more of a clue than anyone
> else, free of appeals to "authority" of some kind.
> I'm not sur
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For me, with MMY, I did what he claimed to do: I went
> to the source.
Well, actually, no, you didn't. You went to a "source"
that he very explicitly said no longer represented the
authentic Shankara tradition.
> I sought out
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm really interested in whether anyone can come
> > > up with seemingly rat
On May 18, 2008, at 8:29 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Well, I wasn't talking about the Rama guy per se
but about the phenomenon. I have no problem with
you or anyone else not having a positive "gut
reaction" to him.
But say someone else *had* elicited a positive
"gut reaction" in you. Take the Rama g
It's true that since the 18th century there is no
*tradition* of enlightenment per se, but that's
partially because the official canon was devised by
those who do not favor it. The tradition is
definitely there, and continues to this day, but
you've got to look a little deeper than you've
apparent
On May 18, 2008, at 8:23 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:Yeah, yeah...but how did you do on the test? :-) http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl_hillary_clinton_quiz.htm I was honest enough to share with you my score. What's yours? Here's mine: The Hillary Clinton Loyalty Quiz10 Questions
Judy wrote:
> > The problem is, you have your own idiosyncratic
> > definition of it. You deliberately define it so
> > as to be indefensible. More solipsism.
> >
> > The way you define it has nothing to do with the
> > actual premise, which you clearly don't even
> > understand, even after some o
> > Because I say so. So there. :)
> >
TurquoiseB wrote:
> Maharishi said so, and we just bought it.
>
Mabe it was you who 'bought it' to the tune of
$50,000. So, why, exactly did you give all that
money to Marshy and Rama if you didn't believe
it?
>
> Go figure, eh?
>
I'm still trying to figur
Angela Mailander wrote:
> In the history of Western literature and philosophy
> you can see a sharp division between thinkers who
> would accept some notion of "enlightenment" and
> those who are completely grounded in the relative
> sphere.
>
You got mixed up again, Angela - there's no Wester
TurquoiseB wrote:
> I'm a big fan of "Before enlightenment, chop
> wood and carry water; after enlightenment,
> chop wood and carry water."
>
This is one of the most famous 'circle jerk'
statements in the enlightenment tradition.
The problem is that you haven't defined the
word 'enlightenment'
You're right on the money, Alex, in nailing down the
task as "impossible." In the history of Western
literature and philosophy you can see a sharp division
between thinkers who would accept some notion of
"enlightenment" and those who are completely grounded
in the relative sphere. In my erstwhil
TurquoiseB wrote:
> Circle jerk.
>
A 'circle jerk' is otherwise known as 'infinite regress'
in philosophy, In order to avoid regressus ad infinitum,
a theory or thesis must be put forth, in this case, you
have put forth the theory of 'enlightenment' and your
authority being Frederick Lenz. In ord
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On May 18, 2008, at 1:43 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> > So, those of you who still do, WHY do you still
> > choose to believe it? Can you present any arguments
> > to support your belief?
>
> Yes, I can, Barry.
>
> Be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> >
> > > One of my reasons for bringing up this subject in
> > > the first place was to see
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Posted as a mechanism to see if there is something --
> > > anything -- that J
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> > One of my reasons for bringing up this subject in
> > the first place was to see if anyone here (many
> > if not most of whom still believe this dogma
On May 18, 2008, at 1:43 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
So, those of you who still do, WHY do you still
choose to believe it? Can you present any arguments
to support your belief?
Yes, I can, Barry.
Because I say so. So there. :)
Well, it works with my kids. Actually, it doesn't...
Sal
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Q: What is "burned hydrogen" in Sanskrit?
>
> A: Perhaps 'jalam'?? ; )
>
Maybe Yes, maybe No. Try translating "water"
into Sanskrit, and settle for that.
uns.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> wrote:
> >
> > Posted as a mechanism to see if there is something --
> > anything -- that Judy feels positively about, since she
> > spent seven posts last night tr
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm really interested in whether anyone can come
> > > up with seemingly rati
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of my reasons for bringing up this subject in
> the first place was to see if anyone here (many
> if not most of whom still believe this dogma
> thoroughly) would try to come up with some intel-
> lectual reason FO
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > I'm really interested in whether anyone can come
> > up with seemingly rational reasons for the belief
> > that the enlightened have more of a clue t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Posted as a mechanism to see if there is something --
> anything -- that Judy feels positively about, since she
> spent seven posts last night trying (again) to demonize
> Barack Obama:
One post was a link to an Obam
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm really interested in whether anyone can come
> up with seemingly rational reasons for the belief
> that the enlightened have more of a clue than anyone
> else, free of appeals to "authority" of some kind.
> I'm not
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On May 18, 2008, at 3:47 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > Just to explain a bit why I made the "The Most
> > Dangerous Dogma" post, and am pursuing it, it
> > wasn't to push buttons. Well...Ok...it wasn't
> > JUST to push buttons
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > Circle jerk. So far among those Rama students, I
> > haven't encountered anyone who can discuss the
> > criteria they believe are associated with the state
On May 18, 2008, at 3:47 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> Just to explain a bit why I made the "The Most
> Dangerous Dogma" post, and am pursuing it, it
> wasn't to push buttons. Well...Ok...it wasn't
> JUST to push buttons. :-)
>
> The impetus for putting this fundamental piece
> of dogma on the table
On May 17, 2008, at 9:32 PM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 17, 2008, at 12:41 PM, BillyG. wrote:
Check out the bija (seed sounds) from the 5th, Vishuddha chakra! Do
you think MMY knew this all along? The Vishuddha chakra (wheel)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Just to explain a bit why I made the "The Most
> Dangerous Dogma" post, and am pursuing it, it
> wasn't to push buttons. Well...Ok...it wasn't
> JUST to push buttons. :-)
>
> The impetus for putting this fundamenta
Q: What is "burned hydrogen" in Sanskrit?
A: Perhaps 'jalam'?? ; )
Just to explain a bit why I made the "The Most
Dangerous Dogma" post, and am pursuing it, it
wasn't to push buttons. Well...Ok...it wasn't
JUST to push buttons. :-)
The impetus for putting this fundamental piece
of dogma on the table for discussion actually
didn't even have anything to do with F
82 matches
Mail list logo
