---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, richard@... wrote :
Is it alright with you if I call you curtisdeltablues, since that seems to
be your real professional name AND your alias for social media? Thanks.
Richard,
It is not my professional name. It is a name I use nowhere else but on
Sorry about the confusion. At the risk of getting banned from posting to the
group and just for the record, I found your name on Facebook and so I posted a
friend's request, but I never received a reply. Is it alright if we call you
Curtis? Thanks.
http://tinyurl.com/pdtuus3
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
However, I do feel the need to point out that the approach you outline above
still leaves you as The man behind the curtain, not only censoring the flow
of content to Fairfield Life, but doing so in secret.
If you delete
From: dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 5:41 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion
snip to
Writing more generally, soon I am goingto start following Rick's lead on this
and start
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote (to Curtis) :
That personalized invasion of your privacy was a low point on FFL that was way
against Rick's original intentions for the site and clearly against what are
now the yahoo-groups guidelines. Yours was proly not the
Doug, thanks for taking the time to fully explain your new role here. I am
certainly more comfortable interacting with an actual person rather than an act
so this change is welcome. I will intersperse my comments below.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote :
CDB, I am
Excellent distinctions! I think I could tighten up a bit in my own use of the
term.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote (to Curtis) :
That personalized invasion of your privacy was a low point on FFL
/Thanks for all the comments. You can call me Richard, or Dick, or
Willytex, or anything else you want to call me - I don't care. LoL!/
Quoting authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com:
I think this excess of caution from you and others, frankly, is
just
/Thanks for the clarification. I am sorry I ever called you Buck. It
sounds complicated, so you can just call me troll for from now on -
eveyone will know who you mean, right? LoL!/
Quoting dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com:
CDB, I am glad you are
/Just don't call me Shirley ever again. LoL!/
Quoting curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com:
When he let Richard back on I realized that I am on my own here and I have
no trust in the system to protect my interests here.
---In
/Is it alright with you if I call you curtisdeltablues, since that seems
to be your real professional name AND your alias for social media? Thanks./
Quoting curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com:
Doug, thanks for taking the time to fully explain your
Thanks for all the information. I apologize for ever calling you
authorfriend - I didn't realize that you preferred your real name, Judy.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I think this excess of caution from you and others, frankly, is just another
way to express
Thanks Judy, I had not seen that and it does answer some of my concerns about
Rick's intentions as well as supports your view that it is OK to use Doug's
real name officially. Much appreciated.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
---In
CDB, I am glad you are back and I hope I can lend you as well as some others
who would return some protection of trust and safety here to write more freely.
The railroading of you by invasion of privacy was one of the more infamous
times of abuse on FFL.
That personalized invasion of your
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I think this excess of caution from you and others, frankly, is just another
way to express resistance to the new moderation regime, by making it seem far
more
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
FWIW, Buck hasn't been around for quite some time now. The person appointed
to moderate FFL (i.e., to ensure posts do not violate the Yahoo Guidelines) is
Doug Hamilton.
That should answer at least some of your questions.
Thank
FWIW, Buck hasn't been around for quite some time now. The person appointed
to moderate FFL (i.e., to ensure posts do not violate the Yahoo Guidelines) is
Doug Hamilton.
That should answer at least some of your questions.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 1:44 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion
FWIW, Buck hasn't been around for quite some time now. The person
appointed to moderate FFL (i.e., to ensure posts do not violate the Yahoo
Guidelines) is Doug Hamilton.
That should
--In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
My recollection is that Doug was here, as Doug, for quite awhile after you
joined us before becoming Buck. Maybe someone else remembers the chronology
more clearly.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
I didn't snip it as a statement about your posting it Judy. I am just
exercising and abundance of caution in these changing times where I don't
expect the benefit of any doubt. I looked back at a few of Buck's posts and
didn't see his name so until he directly says it is OK to me I am trying to
My recollection is that Doug was here, as Doug, for quite awhile after you
joined us before becoming Buck. Maybe someone else remembers the chronology
more clearly.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
causality of Buck's ascendency to the
moderator's throne after all.
From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 1:44 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion
FWIW, Buck hasn't been around for quite
Regarding your snippage below, Rick's policy has always been that the use of
real names is prohibited only if the person wishes to remain anonymous. Doug
uses his real first name to sign his posts, and his last name is in the header
of his posts, so there was no need to snip it. Mine isn't in
I think this excess of caution from you and others, frankly, is just another
way to express resistance to the new moderation regime, by making it seem far
more onerous than it has any likelihood of turning out to be. Doug will get
bounced as moderator by Rick if he overdoes things, and he knows
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I think this excess of caution from you and others, frankly, is just another
way to express resistance to the new moderation regime, by making it seem far
more onerous than it has any likelihood of turning out to be.
Me: I don't
Perhaps I've misunderstood, perhaps you have, or perhaps Shankara is simply
wrong.
L
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote :
Lawson sez:
L: In order for perception to be perception, there must be a physical nervous
system.
This is contradicted by the
On 10/5/2014 11:19 AM, lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] wrote:
Perhaps I've misunderstood, perhaps you have, or perhaps Shankara is
simply wrong.
/MMY points out that even samadhi, which is already the state of Yoga in
the sense of transcendental consciousness, serves as a means to the
Do you mean this?
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad - Shankara Bhashya translated by Swami Madhavananda
https://archive.org/stream/Brihadaranyaka.Upanishad.Shankara.Bhashya.by.Swami.Madhavananda#page/n137/mode/2up
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad - Shankara Bhashya translated by Swami Madhavananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 17, 2007, at 11:20 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:24 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
On Sep 18, 2007, at 11:40 AM, authfriend wrote:
Stop trying to twist people intentions as if you knew what
they were.
Yeah, it's a drag when somebody sees right through
your intentions, ain't it?
You tell me.
Bhairitu wrote:
Indian yogis personified the fields of nature...
You need to get some smarts, Mr. Bharat2. There
were no 'yogis' mentioned in the Vedas. It was
the Vedic authors who personified the forces of
nature. Patanjali does not mention any 'forces
of nature' in his Yoga Sutras.
When the Rishis wanted to express the silent value
of pure consciousness they gave a name Shiva
Mr. Henry Herzberger needs to read some Indian history.
There's no mention of 'Shiva' in the Rig Veda and no
mention of any bija mantras. The various Hindu sects,
Shaivaism, Vaishnaiva, and
emptybill wrote:
Over the years I have heard an argument professed by
some former TM meditators who stopped practicing because
they claimed they were deceived about the meaning
of mantra-s.
Have you noticed, Bill, how rapidly the content of messages
like this go from intelligence to
Richard J. Williams wrote:
Bhairitu wrote:
Indian yogis personified the fields of nature...
You need to get some smarts, Mr. Bharat2. There
were no 'yogis' mentioned in the Vedas. It was
the Vedic authors who personified the forces of
nature. Patanjali does not mention any
All the Indian deified heros such as Vasudeva,
Rama, Ramchandra, and Krishna came long after
the composition of the Vedas in 1500 B.C.
Bhairitu wrote:
Depends upon the translations doesn't it?
No. You are mistaken if you mean the Rig Veda refers
to a dark lustful youth playing on a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Belief is gods is silly.
OffWorld
Belief in humans is silly.
The gods, over cocktails
The gods need humans to invent things like cocktails.
--- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Belief is gods is silly.
OffWorld
Belief in humans is silly.
The gods, over cocktails
To
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The gods need humans to invent things like cocktails.
Wouldn't that be a cool thing to have on your resume?
Bartender, the Samadhi bar at the Brahmaloka Hilton:
* Designed, mixed and served cocktails from the finest
*
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
I think it dismisses way too much to reduce the gods to qualities
of consciousness. In the sense that we are all just qualities of
consciousness, I suppose you could say that's true. But in the
practical sense, the gods are unique
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
I think it dismisses way too much to reduce the gods to
qualities
of consciousness. In the sense that we are all just qualities of
consciousness, I suppose you
On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:24 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
I think it dismisses way too much to reduce the gods to
qualities
of consciousness. In the sense that we are all just
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:24 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
I think it dismisses way too much to reduce the
On Sep 17, 2007, at 11:20 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:24 AM, authfriend wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
I think it dismisses way too much to reduce the gods to qualities of
consciousness. In the sense that we are all just qualities of
consciousness, I suppose you could say that's true. But in the
practical sense, the gods are unique
On Sep 17, 2007, at 7:51 PM, emptybill wrote:
On Sep 16, 2007, at 11:51 PM, Bronte Baxter wrote:
I think it dismisses way too much to reduce the gods to qualities of
consciousness. In the sense that we are all just qualities of
consciousness, I suppose you could say that's true. But in the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Over the years I have heard an argument professed by some former TM
meditators who stopped practicing because they claimed they were
deceived about the meaning of mantra-s. I have also seen
similar declarations put
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of off_world_beings
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:55 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion between mantras and deities in
meditation
Belief is gods is silly.
You don’t think
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Indian yogis personified the fields of nature they perceived to
make the science of yoga more understandable to the general public.
I heard a great lecture on this when in Cochin once. Personification
also makes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote:
snip
Indian yogis personified the fields of nature they perceived to
make the science of yoga more understandable to the general
public.
I heard a
--Thx, Authfriend, excellent article! (but there's one minor flaw in
it). He's implying that such entities are only symbolic of
impersonal forces and forgot the convenient fact that the Deities
are also real Personalities that can interact with humans, just as
humans can interact with other
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of off_world_beings
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:55 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion between
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of off_world_beings
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 9:09 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion between mantras and deities in
meditation
Do you think any subtle or celestial beings
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of off_world_beings
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 9:09 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Confusion between
Judy, a very good find, thanks.
**
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote:
snip
Indian yogis personified the fields of nature they perceived to
make the science of yoga more understandable to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Judy, a very good find, thanks.
I'd completely forgotten it existed. I can't
believe I came across it entirely accidentally
right on the heels of emptybill's post on the
same topic.
Indra The Unifying Value of the Self which unifies all the laws of
nature in order to promote evolution (the Power of dharma)
Indrani or Sachi The feminine power of unification and evolution
Hmm. If gods are simply anthropomophisms invented by the sages to explain
concepts they
Bronte Baxter wrote:
Indra The Unifying Value of the Self which unifies all the laws of
nature in order to promote evolution (the Power of dharma)
Indrani or Sachi The feminine power of unification and evolution
Hmm. If gods are simply anthropomophisms invented by the sages
57 matches
Mail list logo
