--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
However, I like it because it reinforces the recognition
that these Sanskrit words (read Arabic for Houri) are
provisional terms, not necessarily fit yet to be
reified into English.
I understand how you, as an
Thanks for the input.
authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
However, I like it because it reinforces the recognition
that these Sanskrit words (read Arabic for Houri) are
provisional terms, not necessarily
off_world_beings wrote:
Bliss is entirely comfortable, as those who have
experienced it know. Total comfort is entirely
blissful, as those who can appreciate it to
the fullest know.
Tautology is mere rhetoric, the use of redundant
language that adds no information whatsoever.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--Thanks, Offworld, btw one of my hobbies is getting a rise out
of
people...it's a fun game;
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were a retard, since that is the
games of the mentally deficient. I am sorry. (Great hobby
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
off_world_beings wrote:
Bliss is entirely comfortable, as those who have
experienced it know. Total comfort is entirely
blissful, as those who can appreciate it to
the fullest know.
Tautology is
Tautology is mere rhetoric, the use of redundant
language that adds no information whatsoever.
Lol, I'm afraid a quick jump into Wikipedia will not
educate you on this topic willtex.
off_world_beings wrote:
Take 3 weeks, come back when you understand tautology
in LOGIC, which is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tautology is mere rhetoric, the use of redundant
language that adds no information whatsoever.
Lol, I'm afraid a quick jump into Wikipedia will not
educate you on this topic willtex.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--There are some non-sequiturs in the paragraph below. It says you
are at home in that (the dynamic aspect of life). Then it
says Being
at home, therefore you are happy. Non-Sequitur.
Not.
Being at home here
---Off_world, your arguments amount to a tautology: Life is Bliss
because it's Bliss. First you said at home and then changed
to Entirely comfortable; but that's the problem! You're changing
the definitions to suit your purpose and wind up with a self-evident
truth, a tautology, since Bliss
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sinhlnx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---Off_world, your arguments amount to a tautology:
Thankyou.
(you seem to be under the delusion that a tautology is a bad thing in
logic. It is actually the highest goal of logic. You're understanding
of tautology needs
---Offworld, your premises simply don't lead to the conclusion Life
is Bliss. So, you're saying one can conclude this from logic alone?
Preposterous! There's no more weight to that conclusion from the
shoddy premises you have presented that the conclusion Life is a
bummer, then you die...which
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mathatbrahman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---Offworld, your premises simply don't lead to the
conclusion Life
is Bliss. So, you're saying one can conclude this from logic
alone?
Absolutely.
Preposterous! There's no more weight to that conclusion from
---Aristotle arrived at the conclusion that life is Bliss (he used
the phrase Being-In-Itself) on the basis of his own experience, as
does (who's the person you're speaking on behalf of, Byron Katie?)?
But I keep up on modern philosophical topics, and haven't seen one
statement from academic
Yagyax wrote:
Aristotle arrived at the conclusion that life is Bliss (he used
the phrase Being-In-Itself ) on the basis of his own experience, as
does (who's the person you're speaking on behalf of, Byron Katie?)?
But I keep up on modern philosophical topics, and haven't seen one
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yagyax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---Aristotle arrived at the conclusion that life is Bliss (he
used
the phrase Being-In-Itself) on the basis of his own experience,
as
does (who's the person you're speaking on behalf of, Byron Katie?)?
That's right,
Ha ha yagyax can't remoteley engage in rational sentences except to
say: that is wrong, that is bullshit, you don't know what you
are talking about, or pure baloney
Truly the most pathetic excuses for ignorance I have ever seen.
You and GW Bush should write a book together on how to avoid
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yagyax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---Thanks, Bronte!...precisely what I said. Those that say Life is
Bliss have arrived at that conclusion through direct experience. One
would have difficulty arriving at that conclusion through logic
alone.
You are
--I agree with Yagyax on this. There is no serious attempt to
connect the premise statements to the final conclusion; and thus the
logic is seriously deficient. Grade, F.
- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
---Thanks, Bronte!...precisely what I said. Those that say Life is
Bliss have arrived at that conclusion through direct experience. One
would have difficulty arriving at that conclusion through logic alone.
Invariably, such logical arguments tend to be on the same level of
flawed discourse as
--Below - pure baloney, sounds like Maharishi-talk, not even worth
commenting on; count me out of this discussion from now on. I have
some serious TV watching to do.:
to quote, utter gobbledegook:...
Existence exists, therefore interaction of the full potential of
existence - its opposite
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--I agree with Yagyax on this. There is no serious attempt to
connect the premise statements to the final conclusion; and thus
the
logic is seriously deficient. Grade, F.
Lol, you still don't have a clue what a
--Thanks, Offworld, btw one of my hobbies is getting a rise out of
people...it's a fun game; nevertheless this doesn't detract from my
claim of illogic in your chain of statements. I'll just mention one
item:, to quote:
Being at home, therefore you are
happy in this universe, which is your
--- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry writes in his summary:
So have a go at it, eh? And if you are able to come
up with some statement -- any statement -- that is
true for all beings, in all periods of time, in all
contexts,
--- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry writes in his summary:
So have a go at it, eh? And if you are able to come
up with some statement -- any statement -- that is
true for all beings, in all periods of time, in all
contexts,
--There are some non-sequiturs in the paragraph below. It says you
are at home in that (the dynamic aspect of life). Then it says Being
at home, therefore you are happy. Non-Sequitur. There are
plenty of creatures at home but grossly unhappy.
Then it says Therefore life is bliss. Doesn't
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
Because of this somewhat elitist POV, numerous schools and
numerous
realizers did view Shankara as a fanatic of demon. The dvaita
master
Sorry to take so long to reply. It's just a result of my job and the
fifty women that I slavishly serve - they made me not do it -
whatever that means.
Card is right about why I hyphenate these plural loan words. I first
saw this particular usage in Trevor Leggett's translation of
Shankara's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim emptybill@ wrote:
snip
The Houri-s sound so much better.
OK, I can't stand it any longer.
With plural nouns, why do you put a hyphen between the
word and the s?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
Ain't it awful? You work so hard trying to
confuse me, and you're never
On Sep 23, 2007, at 7:43 PM, billy jim wrote:
OK Vaj, I'm going to enter the fray here.
The way this conversation is preceding you’re going to get tired
soon from the suffocating squeeze of the pythoness. (I actually
mean this as a complement to Judy.) Then the conversation will
On Sep 23, 2007, at 7:18 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ain't it awful? You work so hard trying to
confuse me, and you're never successful.
For the record, the very *definition* of
paranoia.
Unless of course she was
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because of this somewhat elitist POV, numerous schools and numerous
realizers did view Shankara as a fanatic of demon. The dvaita
master
Madhava called Shankara a deceitful demon who had perverted the
teachings of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim emptybill@
wrote:
snip
The Houri-s sound so much better.
OK, I can't stand it any
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:25 PM, authfriend wrote:
Tom didn't say enlightenment became words, he
said words became enlightenment through the
discrimination of the intellect, when the
translucent intellect is as clear as the Self.
But, it's important to point out, that the translation Tom is
On Sep 22, 2007, at 6:29 PM, emptybill wrote:
Very accurate description of just how the culture of Vedanta was in
Shankara's day. Quite dispassionate reporting too.
Congradulations to you. We rarely see these kinds of simple, unleaved
observations here of FFL. I find it refreshing. Even Vaj
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 6:29 PM, emptybill wrote:
Very accurate description of just how the culture of Vedanta was
in
Shankara's day. Quite dispassionate reporting too.
Congradulations to you. We rarely see these kinds
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:25 PM, authfriend wrote:
Tom didn't say enlightenment became words, he
said words became enlightenment through the
discrimination of the intellect, when the
translucent intellect is as clear as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 6:29 PM, emptybill wrote:
Very accurate description of just how the culture of Vedanta
was in Shankara's day. Quite dispassionate reporting too.
Congradulations to you. We rarely see these kinds of
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:15 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:25 PM, authfriend wrote:
Tom didn't say enlightenment became words, he
said words became enlightenment through the
discrimination of the intellect,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:15 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:25 PM, authfriend wrote:
Tom didn't say enlightenment became words, he
said
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:15 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:25 PM, authfriend wrote:
Tom didn't say enlightenment became words, he
said
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 6:29 PM, emptybill wrote:
Very accurate description of just how the culture of Vedanta
was in Shankara's day. Quite
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:40 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:15 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:25 PM, authfriend wrote:
Tom
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:40 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 1:15 PM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
On Sep 23, 2007, at 2:20 PM, authfriend wrote:
Actually not. The verse Tom quoted refers to viveka-khyati my dear.
Please review my previous posts, poopsie. The
sutra Tom quoted refers to kaivalya, final
liberation.
Ah, I see where you are confused! Yes it does use that word Judy...in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 2:20 PM, authfriend wrote:
Actually not. The verse Tom quoted refers to viveka-khyati my dear.
Please review my previous posts, poopsie. The
sutra Tom quoted refers to kaivalya, final
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ain't it awful? You work so hard trying to
confuse me, and you're never successful.
For the record, the very *definition* of
paranoia.
OK Vaj, I'm going to enter the fray here.
The way this conversation is preceding youre going to get tired soon from
the suffocating squeeze of the pythoness. (I actually mean this as a complement
to Judy.) Then the conversation will attenuate into a final pair of mutual -
the pox on
--- Thanks, billy jim! During my first 6 weeks in the Army long ago
they used to call us maggots.
Let me get this straight: are you saying that Vaj is saying that
MMY's TM can only facilitate people getting into CC, and not Unity?
Is that a concise summary?
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
Ain't it awful? You work so hard trying to
confuse me, and you're never successful.
For the record, the very *definition* of
paranoia.
Hard to get
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
So
let me try to restate your referenced argument in simplified
form one that even a fecal larvae like me can understand:
FWIW, Vaj's argument is with Tom and with
Shearer's translation of the Yoga Sutras, not
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
Ain't it awful? You work so hard trying to
confuse me, and you're never successful.
For the record, the very *definition* of
paranoia.
Spaeking of
I'm not sure that I should reply to you. You must be a devil since Sin is the
better part of your name - and don't tell me its Sine. I think it's a sign.
As far as Vaj is concerned, I wouldn't want to speak for him since he is the
author of his own arguments. I'm actually waiting for this
--Maybe you were a Conqueror Worm, a genuine evolutionary hero.
But see, amid the mimic rout
A crawling shape intrude!
A blood-red thing that writhes from out
The scenic solitude!
It writhes!it writhes!with mortal pangs
The mimes become its food,
And seraphs sob at vermin fangs
In human gore
Hmm. the r at the end must be for rishi. What else could explain such
insights?
I have to admit I'm hoping life in deva-land beats moping around feeling bad
for humans.
Angels ... mere sexless, boring slaves of yhvh - who needs them?
The Houri-s sound so much better.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
The Houri-s sound so much better.
OK, I can't stand it any longer.
With plural nouns, why do you put a hyphen between the
word and the s?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I think that what may be going on is that a number
of people who paid their dues in the TM movement
don't realize how heavily they have been influenced
by Patanjali and his hangups. He may have *been*
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
snip
I think that what may be going on is that a number
of people who paid their dues in the TM movement
don't realize how heavily they have been
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
snip
I think that what may be going on is that a number
of people who paid
Hey Judy,
Very accurate description of just how the culture of Vedanta was in
Shankara's day. Quite dispassionate reporting too.
Congradulations to you. We rarely see these kinds of simple, unleaved
observations here of FFL. I find it refreshing. Even Vaj should be
able to agree - and I'm not
Good observation. I found Judy's analysis very helpful. Thanks.
**
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Judy,
Very accurate description of just how the culture of Vedanta was in
Shankara's day. Quite dispassionate reporting too.
Congradulations
Thanks, Marek and emptybill, for your kind comments.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good observation. I found Judy's analysis very helpful. Thanks.
**
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptybill@
wrote:
Hey Judy,
62 matches
Mail list logo
