> > > > Cool. If you're claiming to be "Realized," that
> > > > can be your definition of what you're claiming to
> > > > be, eh? I'm not claiming to be anything...
> > >
> > > No claims here. No claim checks needed either ;). Just writing
> > > about experience. What else is there?
> >
> > The
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Cool. If you're claiming to be "Real
All experience comes and goes, no matter how sublime, but the source of
these experiences, the Awareness, doesn't come and go.
By going nowhere, continue to experience having arrived. By not taking one
step in any direction, you arrive instantly.
You arrive by not going anywhere. Just stay there.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> How can this guy have experiences of realization and not be the
least
> bit aware of his addiction to being a dishonest, pompous, self-
> important asshole?
>
Was he having Realization or was he having Experienc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Cool. If you're claiming to be "Realized," that
> > can be your definition of what you're claiming to
> > be, eh? I'm not claim
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > > > > > > How can this guy have experiences of realization and
not
> > > > > > > be the least bit aware of his addiction to being a
> > > > > > > dishonest, pompous, self-important asshole?
> >
> > Because he is
> > > > > > How can this guy have experiences of realization and not
> > > > > > be the least bit aware of his addiction to being a
> > > > > > dishonest, pompous, self-important asshole?
>
> Because he is having 'experiences of realization', plural.
>
> Realization is not something that comes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.co
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > How can this guy have experie
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > How can this guy have experiences of realization and not be
> > the least bit aware of his addiction to being a dishonest,
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> How can this guy have experiences of realization and not be
> the least bit aware of his addiction to being a dishonest,
> pompous, self-important asshole?
Ignoring your attempt to start a fight yet again,
where
How can this guy have experiences of realization and not be the least
bit aware of his addiction to being a dishonest, pompous, self-
important asshole?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
<[EMAIL P
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Pete
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This subtle, celestial stuff is absol
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This subtle, celestial stuff is absolutely,
> > > incredibly, charming, fascinating, mind-blowing when
> > > it opens-up, but it
On Dec 28, 2005, at 11:29 AM, Rick Archer wrote:on 12/28/05 10:19 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My first impession was that they had been instructed in or were doing on their own, 16-limbed worship of their devata (or similar worship). This is very common in the tradition of the Shankaracha
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Season's Greetings from Interfaith Charities International
on 12/28/05 10:19 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My first impession was that they had been instructed in or were doing on their own, 16-limbed worship of their devata (or similar worship). Th
On Dec 28, 2005, at 11:07 AM, Marek Reavis wrote:Question below: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Dec 28, 2005, at 10:27 AM, Rick Archer wrote: on 12/28/05 8:41 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I was last at South Fallsburg with Purusha, they ha
On Dec 28, 2005, at 11:07 AM, Marek Reavis wrote:Question below: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Dec 28, 2005, at 10:27 AM, Rick Archer wrote: on 12/28/05 8:41 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I was last at South Fallsburg with Purusha, they ha
Question below:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 28, 2005, at 10:27 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
>
> > on 12/28/05 8:41 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> When I was last at South Fallsburg with Purusha, they had visual
> >> forms of their d
On Dec 28, 2005, at 10:27 AM, Rick Archer wrote:on 12/28/05 8:41 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:When I was last at South Fallsburg with Purusha, they had visual forms of their devatas in their rooms.Were they instructed to have them? That was unclear. They were all on puja altars.
To sub
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Season's Greetings from Interfaith Charities International
on 12/28/05 8:41 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I was last at South Fallsburg with Purusha, they had visual forms of their devatas in their rooms.
Were they instructed to have them?
On Dec 27, 2005, at 7:15 PM, Rick Archer wrote:on 12/27/05 5:54 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Rick Archer wrote: Maharishi always said, and we said in lectures, that you could transcend on any sound but that the mantras, due to their life-supporting vibratory quality, provi
On Dec 27, 2005, at 4:09 PM, Peter wrote: --- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: on 12/27/05 2:05 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say that you eventually do perceive the deity associated with your mantra. Sure. But is it an actual per
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uvulonicus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Everyone bow down to the effulgence of Shri Shri Barryji, who is
> obviously immersed in realization and much much superior to us poor
> little Sidhas.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL
On Dec 27, 2005, at 10:44 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- authfriend wrote: Gillam wrote: Yet people in the know tell me [the mantra] is an ishta-deva -- "the god one prays most" (Wikipedia). People in *what* know? People with knowledge of what? I can't cite posts, but I seem to recall that p
On Dec 27, 2005, at 1:44 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- authfriend wrote: The more abstract the understanding of the nature of devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like "Christ" the divine/human center of the Christian religion, versus the universal "Christ" as a mode of consciousness.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uvulonicus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Everyone bow down to the effulgence of Shri Shri Barryji,
> who is obviously immersed in realization and much much
> superior to us poor little Sidhas.
See what happens when you've been trained for decades
to bow do
Everyone bow down to the effulgence of Shri Shri Barryji, who is
obviously immersed in realization and much much superior to us poor
little Sidhas.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
--- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bbrigante
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > And although on some superficial level it may be true that
the "vibratory
> > influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the
benefits result
> > from aligning onesel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bbrigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > >> And although on some superficial level it may be true that
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > --- authfriend wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The more abstr
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > --- authfriend wrote:
> >>
> >> The more abstract the understanding of the nature of
> >> devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > This subtle, celestial stuff is absolutely,
> > incredibly, charming, fascinating, mind-blowing when
> > it opens-up, but it really has nothing to do with
> > Realization. Like the TM-siddhis, the value is in the
>
on 12/27/05 5:54 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- Rick Archer wrote:
>>
>> Maharishi always said, and we said in lectures, that you could
>> transcend on any sound but that the mantras, due to their life-supporting
>> vibratory quality, provided benefits that other sounds didn
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > And although on some superficial level it may be true that
the "vibratory
> > influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the
benefits result
> > from aligning onesel
--- Rick Archer wrote:
>
> Maharishi always said, and we said in lectures, that you could
> transcend on any sound but that the mantras, due to their life-supporting
> vibratory quality, provided benefits that other sounds didn't.
This dovetails nicely with Peter's post about his TM
mantra genera
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > on 12/27/05 2:05 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say
> > that you eventually
> > >> do perce
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > And although on some superficial level it may be true that
the "vibratory
> > influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the
benefits result
> > from aligning onesel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> And al
on 12/27/05 4:25 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> on 12/27/05 2:05 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say that you eventually
do perc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 2:05 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say that you eventually
> >> do perceive the deity associated with your mantra.
> >
> > Sure. But is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > >> And although on some superficial level it may be
> > true that
> > > the "vibratory
> > >> influence"
on 12/27/05 3:55 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- Rick Archer wrote:
>>
>> And although on some superficial level it may be true that the "vibratory
>> influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the benefits result
>> from aligning oneself with the "impulse of int
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 2:38 PM, Rick Archer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > on 12/27/05 2:30 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> Because the correct use of the mantra in TM requires
--- Patrick Gillam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > And although on some superficial level it may be
> true that the "vibratory
> > influence" of the mantra causes TM to work,
> ultimately, the benefits result
> > from aligning oneself with the "impulse of
> intellige
--- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> on 12/27/05 3:04 PM, Peter at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> I understand that Bob. I'm just saying that I
> >> believe that this is what's
> >> really going on. A physicist who understands how
> >> gravity works and another
> >> man who doesn'
--- Rick Archer wrote:
>
> And although on some superficial level it may be true that the "vibratory
> influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the benefits result
> from aligning oneself with the "impulse of intelligence" or Devata that the
> mantra represents.
Is there any way to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> And although on some superficial level it may be true that
> > the "vibratory
> >> influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the
> > b
on 12/27/05 3:04 PM, Peter at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> I understand that Bob. I'm just saying that I
>> believe that this is what's
>> really going on. A physicist who understands how
>> gravity works and another
>> man who doesn't are both influenced equally by
>> gravity. Their understandi
--- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> on 12/27/05 2:05 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say
> that you eventually
> >> do perceive the deity associated with your
> mantra.
> >
> > Sure. But is it an actual personified bei
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > --- authfriend wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The more abstra
--- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> on 12/27/05 2:38 PM, Rick Archer at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > on 12/27/05 2:30 PM, bbrigante at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> Because the correct use of the mantra in TM
> requires that no meaning
> >> be assi
--- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> And although on some superficial level it may be
> true that
> > the "vibratory
> >> influence" of the mantra causes TM to work,
> ultimately, the
> > benefits result
> >> from ali
on 12/27/05 2:51 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> And although on some superficial level it may be true that
> the "vibratory
>> influence" of the mantra causes TM to work, ultimately, the
> benefits result
>> from aligning oneself with the "impulse of intelligence" or Devata
> that
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 2:38 PM, Rick Archer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > on 12/27/05 2:30 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> Because the correct use of the mantra in TM requires
on 12/27/05 2:42 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I'd rephrase this: whether or not you believe or perceive that
> your mantra
>> is associated with "some being," if it is, it is.
>>
>
>
>
> You can rephrase as you please, but you are well aware that the
> correct
on 12/27/05 2:38 PM, Rick Archer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> on 12/27/05 2:30 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> **
>>
>> Because the correct use of the mantra in TM requires that no meaning
>> be assigned to the mantra during the practice of TM -- what meanings
>> peo
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 2:30 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > **
> >
> > Because the correct use of the mantra in TM requires that no
meaning
> > be assigned to the mantra during the practice of TM
on 12/27/05 2:30 PM, bbrigante at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> **
>
> Because the correct use of the mantra in TM requires that no meaning
> be assigned to the mantra during the practice of TM -- what meanings
> people want to assign or not assign outside of meditation has
> nothing t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Peter wrote:
> >
> > You might characterize the TMO as a religion, but the
> > techniques themselves I have a hard time seeing as
> > religious in nature.
>
> I, too, have a hard time seeing the techniques
on 12/27/05 2:23 PM, jyouells2000 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> He also said that eventually your mantra goes on perpetually,
> whether or not
>> you're meditating. Reminds me of something Irmeli described.
>>
>
> Began to notice that on TTC in 1976. Tried to ask about it. Course
> leaders
on 12/27/05 2:05 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say that you eventually
>> do perceive the deity associated with your mantra.
>
> Sure. But is it an actual personified being, or is it
> how one's own perception translates the abstracti
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 1:31 PM, shempmcgurk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say that you eventually
> > do
> >> perceive the deity associated with your mantra.
> >>
> >
> > Wow.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > --- authfriend wrote:
> >>
> >> The more abstract the understanding of the nature of
> >> devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like
>
on 12/27/05 1:31 PM, shempmcgurk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Although on a Rishikesh TTC, Maharishi did say that you eventually
> do
>> perceive the deity associated with your mantra.
>>
>
> Wow. Then that kinda confirms my experience which I related in
> another post...
He also said tha
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > --- authfriend wrote:
> >>
> >> The more abstract the understanding of the nature of
> >> devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like
>
on 12/27/05 12:44 PM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- authfriend wrote:
>>
>> The more abstract the understanding of the nature of
>> devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like
>> "Christ" the divine/human center of the Christian
>> religion, versus the universal "Chris
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- authfriend wrote:
> >
> > The more abstract the understanding of the nature of
> > devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like
> > "Christ" the divine/human center of the Christian
> > religion, ver
--- authfriend wrote:
>
> The more abstract the understanding of the nature of
> devas, the less "religious" they seem. Sort of like
> "Christ" the divine/human center of the Christian
> religion, versus the universal "Christ" as a mode of
> consciousness.
I've been trying to remember if I've ev
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The general public (whomever they are!) seem to like
> simple answers with black and white distinctions.
> Unfortunately life is not like that.
Last year I read in one of David Brooks' columns
in the New York Times that th
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Patrick Gillam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- Peter wrote:
> > >
> > > But what is a religion? I certainly see how
> > someone
> > > would call the practice of TM "religious" because
> > the
> > > bija mant
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- authfriend wrote:
> >
> > Gillam wrote:
> > > Yet people in the know tell me [the mantra]
> > > is an ishta-deva -- "the
> > > god one prays most" (Wikipedia).
> >
> > People in *what* know? People with
Patrick Gillam wrote:
> I can't cite posts, but I seem to recall that people who've
> seen lists of ishta devas have seen the TM mantras on the list.
>
>From what I've read, Mr. Gillam, almost all the TM bija mantras are
derived from the path of Sri Vidya, a tantric tradition in South
India, tha
--- Peter wrote:
>
> According to the Sri Tantra (i think its that one) the
> bija mantras used in TM are the seed form of specific
> devatas(Saraswati and Lakshmi). The effect of the
> mantra, according to MMY, would be two-fold. The
> enlivening of that specific value of nature in one's
> life th
on 12/27/05 9:44 AM, Patrick Gillam at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- authfriend wrote:
>>
>> Gillam wrote:
>>> Yet people in the know tell me [the mantra]
>>> is an ishta-deva -- "the
>>> god one prays most" (Wikipedia).
>>
>> People in *what* know? People with knowledge of what?
>
> I can't
--- Patrick Gillam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Peter wrote:
> >
> > But what is a religion? I certainly see how
> someone
> > would call the practice of TM "religious" because
> the
> > bija mantras are associated with certain " Hindu"
> > dieties, but does that make it a religion? Ask a
>
--- Patrick Gillam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- authfriend wrote:
> >
> > Gillam wrote:
> > > Yet people in the know tell me [the mantra]
> > > is an ishta-deva -- "the
> > > god one prays most" (Wikipedia).
> >
> > People in *what* know? People with knowledge of
> what?
>
> I can't ci
--- authfriend wrote:
>
> Gillam wrote:
> > Yet people in the know tell me [the mantra]
> > is an ishta-deva -- "the
> > god one prays most" (Wikipedia).
>
> People in *what* know? People with knowledge of what?
I can't cite posts, but I seem to recall that people who've
seen lists of ishta
--- Peter wrote:
>
> But what is a religion? I certainly see how someone
> would call the practice of TM "religious" because the
> bija mantras are associated with certain " Hindu"
> dieties, but does that make it a religion? Ask a hindu
> if TM is a religion and he'll think the very question
> is
--- Patrick Gillam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Peter wrote:
> >
> > You might characterize the TMO as a religion, but
> the
> > techniques themselves I have a hard time seeing as
> > religious in nature.
>
> I, too, have a hard time seeing the techniques as
> religious. But there's been
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Peter wrote:
> >
> > You might characterize the TMO as a religion, but the
> > techniques themselves I have a hard time seeing as
> > religious in nature.
>
> I, too, have a hard time seeing the techniques
--- Peter wrote:
>
> You might characterize the TMO as a religion, but the
> techniques themselves I have a hard time seeing as
> religious in nature.
I, too, have a hard time seeing the techniques as
religious. But there's been talk in this forum of the
mantras being devas that the teacher cha
You might characterize the TMO as a religion, but the
techniques themselves I have a hard time seeing as
religious in nature. The TMO I could see more easily
characterized as a religion, or a quasi-religion or a
cult. But you have to consider the level of
involvement of individuals. There is such a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> on 12/26/05 9:05 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >It's
> > perfectly plausible that some bored ultra-rich, extremely famous,
> > extremely eccentric, black singer might dabble in ALL of TM-
> > associate
on 12/26/05 9:05 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>It's
> perfectly plausible that some bored ultra-rich, extremely famous,
> extremely eccentric, black singer might dabble in ALL of TM-
> associated practices without making it his religion...
Who are you referring to? Michael Jackson?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> TM is not a religion? PUH-lease!
>
> TM claims it is not a religion, but if it walks like a duck and
> quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
>
> TM is nothing more then westernized, fundamentalist Hindusim.
> Nothing wrong w
TM is not a religion? PUH-lease!
TM claims it is not a religion, but if it walks like a duck and
quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
TM is nothing more then westernized, fundamentalist Hindusim.
Nothing wrong with that, but TM's denials only go so far.
How else does one explain Rajas, yagnas, God
TM is not a religion? PUH-lease!
TM claims it is not a religion, but if it walks like a duck and
quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
TM is nothing more then westernized, fundamentalist Hindusim.
Nothing wrong with that, but TM's denials only go so far.
How else does one explain Rajas, yagnas, God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "InterFaith Charities
Secretariat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Season's Greetings
> May the New Year brings you and your
> loved ones Health, Wealth & Prosperity.
>
> Click here to view the full card on Net
>
> or paste the following lin
93 matches
Mail list logo
