RE: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Reducing Tension in the Middle East
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: I think you're trying to idealize the situation. No one, including me, would not consider sitting with no-thought, no-mantra as non-meditation. It's just that given the descriptions of meditation given by Lawson and others here on FFL in the past, I am not convinced that's the situation we're talking about. (I have no such reservations when Xeno talks of what his meds are like.) I suspect instead that what we're talking about is siting with thoughts. That, to me, is not meditation, but daydreaming. In other traditions than TM, this is *not* looked upon as a productive use of one's time, because in practice extended periods of daydreaming leads to dullness, a tendency to dwell in the gray areas of the lower astral planes, and a number of less-than-positive behavioral traits such as being obsessive, dogmatic, and argumentative. In these traditions the behavioral symptoms are usually the tip-off that someone has replaced meditation with daydreaming. Just as inter-path information, provided for those interested in such things, in the traditions I've encountered who feel that daydreaming is a negative practice, the ultimate symptom of some- one who has fallen into this habit is revealed by one particular symptom. That is, how do they *react* when the teacher or teachers suggest that they're daydreaming rather than meditating. In such traditions, if the student reacts well, takes the advice of the teacher(s) into consideration, and actually *analyzes* his or her meditations to see if they're on track, then no problemo...the habit of mistaking daydreaming for meditation is not fully established, and can be reversed. If the student reacts angrily, or with significant *attachment* to how he or she is meditating now, then in these traditions this is taken as a symptom that the daydreaming habit is well established, so much so that the student has developed a Class A obsession with it. In such cases, further steps of intervention are often required to help him or her get back to the Beginner's Mind of meditation, as it was originally taught to them. You see a similar reactivity in the TMO, in my exper- ience. The more strongly a TMer feels that they don't need a checking, the more they probably need one. The allure of being lost in thoughts is strong, because it's all about ego. The more time one spends daydreaming, the stronger and more entrenched their ego becomes. In some extreme cases these egos' attachment to their own thoughts become so strong that they come to prefer them over either the mantra (or whatever the focus of their style of meditation might be) or even transcendence/samadhi. Constant thoughts cause the ego/self to grow, and to dig its heels in so that it can continue growing. In my experience about the only things that help to lessen the ego are periods of transcendence/samadhi and periods of focusing on others, putting their well-being ahead of one's own (selfless service). Just my opinion...
[FairfieldLife] Words of Wisdom...
[FairfieldLife] Nokia gets Indian CEO??
[FairfieldLife] RE: Nokia gets Indian CEO??
[FairfieldLife] Re: Words of Wisdom...
Salyavin drives by and sez: The veneration of the wise man is a blessing for those that venerate him - Epicurus Ah, but who defines what constitutes a wise man? If it's the person seeking veneration, I think one is justified in asking, What's in it for me? What *kind* of 'blessing' am *I* likely to get by venerating you as 'wise?' More often than not, the blessing in question in such situations turns out to be becoming a toady or slave to the supposedly-wise man. In Epicurus' case, he preached a philosophy of peace and freedom from fear, the absence of pain, and living a self- sufficient life surrounded by friends. But he *also* demanded, while preaching self-sufficiency, that his followers/students swear an oath of fealty to him, and only allowed them access to the extremely hierarchical levels of his teaching on the basis of such oaths. So where's the blessing in this? Seems to me that the person getting the blessing is the person being venerated (and obeyed) as if they were the wise man. Those doing the venerating get...uh...to venerate. Big whoop. So color me not convinced of the wisdom of Epicurus' saying about wise men. But he did create a great Web site and iPhone app, however. I use it often to find new recipes: http://www.epicurious.com/ http://www.epicurious.com/ :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Words of Wisdom...
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count Tue 10-Sep-13 00:15:06 UTC
OMG. Testing. This last one came in instantly. Woohoo! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@... wrote: Oh, looky testing. This one came in to the inbox and 27 others too. Today. Testing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@ wrote: Yep. Why would (Testing)yahoo just all of a sudden change things where one cannot receive emails on time? The only thing I can honestly believe, is their changing software, etc., issues coincide with certain politicians and companies wanting to go to war. Sorry to sound like a conspiracy theorist, just how can I come to any other conclusion with all of these things at least appearing like a coincidence? Call me anything you like, I (Testing) would love to be able to normally function like my morning bowel movement, in these confines we call FFL Yahoo Group Message Board. Amen. Om. Bing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@ wrote: Testing. Share does her regular program and can manage to stay on top, even with the ever changing Neo/FFL board. She is Hercules! Or Rocky? Go figure. Clearly, this new format and the holding back on our post by the Yahoo/NSA is cutting down the number of posts even compared to when there was a post count limit. Go Figure. Testing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, FFL PostCount ffl.postcount@ wrote: Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 09/07/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 09/14/13 00:00:00 247 messages as of (UTC) 09/09/13 18:21:31 25 Share Long 24 s3raphita 20 doctordumbass 19 richardatrwilliamsdotus 16 j_alexander_stanley 12 obbajeeba 12 emptybill 12 dhamiltony2k5 11 iranitea 11 Bhairitu 10 turquoiseb 10 Michael Jackson 7 cardemaister 6 authfriend 6 Ann Woelfle Bater 5 sharelong60 5 jr_esq 5 LEnglish5 4 awoelflebater 3 nablusoss1008 3 feste37 3 emilymae.reyn 3 Mike Dixon 3 Emily Reyn 2 wayback71 2 compost1uk 1 richard 1 martin.quickman 1 WLeed3 1 Steve Sundur 1 Rick Archer 1 Paulo Barbosa 1 Jason 1 Arhata Osho 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
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Words of Wisdom...
salyavin, I hope this is more than a drive by. Your presence here is venerated by all the wise loungers of the Funny Farm Lounge (-: turq wrote: Salyavin drives by and sez: ... Ah, but who defines what constitutes a wise man? From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 5:27 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Words of Wisdom... Ah, but who defines what constitutes a wise man? True enough, I think Epicurus must have been a wise man to come up with such a way of keeping his followers. If you agree that wisdom can be qualified by making life easy for yourself of course. I suppose you could also read it as a snarky way of saying that the only people who think venerating wise people is a blessing are the ones doing the venerating. At least I could Thanks to your link I am now venerating tuna on toast with sun dried tomatoes and avocado sprinkled with ground pepper. hmm, hmm --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Salyavin drives by and sez: The veneration of the wise man is a blessing for those that venerate him - Epicurus Ah, but who defines what constitutes a wise man? If it's the person seeking veneration, I think one is justified in asking, What's in it for me? What *kind* of 'blessing' am *I* likely to get by venerating you as 'wise?' More often than not, the blessing in question in such situations turns out to be becoming a toady or slave to the supposedly-wise man. In Epicurus' case, he preached a philosophy of peace and freedom from fear, the absence of pain, and living a self- sufficient life surrounded by friends. But he *also* demanded, while preaching self-sufficiency, that his followers/students swear an oath of fealty to him, and only allowed them access to the extremely hierarchical levels of his teaching on the basis of such oaths. So where's the blessing in this? Seems to me that the person getting the blessing is the person being venerated (and obeyed) as if they were the wise man. Those doing the venerating get...uh...to venerate. Big whoop. So color me not convinced of the wisdom of Epicurus' saying about wise men. But he did create a great Web site and iPhone app, however. I use it often to find new recipes: http://www.epicurious.com/ :-)
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
[FairfieldLife] Re: Syriasly
Apparently not a single Dem member of Congress who has seen the evidence has voiced doubt about the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. Bhairitu: ...the rebels could make it look like the military used the chemical weapons. It has not been established that the rebels have any chemical weapons. But, I think it is a fact that the Assad regime has some of the world's largest stockpiles of WMD - some may be even left over from his father who killed 30,000 Syrians civilians in Hama. So, there's no doubt Assad has hidden chemical stockpiles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_massacre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_massacre. What about the other atrocities going on in the world like Rwanda, Myanmar, etc? We don't seem so anxious to intervene there. A failure to back up the president's threats about Syria crossing a 'red line' will be proof that America is retreating from its global responsibilities to help free the people. This will not be overlooked by our allies like Taiwan and Poland and Israel. Our failure to act will probably embolden U.S. rivals such as North Korea, Iran, China and Russia.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
[FairfieldLife] RE: Quote of Derrida
[FairfieldLife] Squaw Valley
Any of y'all in these photos? http://thatwasthen1968.com/popculture/meditation.htm
[FairfieldLife] Les Crane Interviews MMY
Too bad its only audio http://theuncarvedblog.com/2013/07/06/les-crane-interviews-maharishi-mahesh-yogi/
Re: [FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Re: See? Anyone can wear the rosy glasses.
Quien es mas macho, Ricardo Montalban ora Fernando Lamas? From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:20 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Re: See? Anyone can wear the rosy glasses. I only meditate while sitting on my Chrysler Cordoba's Rich Corinthian Leather. Funny. But this is what Ricardo Montalban's meditations really look like: :-)
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
[FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi
Jason wrote:
Xeno, it's not clear what Nagel exactly means by
materialist.
Judy wrote:
Yes, it is. It's one who believes that everything can
be accounted for at the most basic level by the physical
sciences, extended to include biology.
Jason wrote:
In fact, many religionists and intelligent
design advocates, think that evolution is 100% percent
random. That is incorrect and not the case.
Judy wrote:
I could have sworn I told you that Nagel was neither a
religionist (he's an atheist) nor an intelligent design
advocate.
--- compost1uk compost1uk@ wrote:
Whilst I agree with the point you are making to Jason, it
seems to me that you could go along with all of the above,
but still deny 'materialism'. For example, in what sense
is a quantum field material? Or, what is the material
reality of a scientific law? Or what is the material
reality of a mathematical truth such as some infinities
are greater than others?
In other words, there may be a worthwhile difference to be
made between naturalism (to which I'm inclined) and
materialism (to which I am not inclined)
{Jeez - no preview option that I can see in this
NEO-crap-shit. Heaven knows how this will come out in the
wash).
'Quantum field', 'Scientific principles' and mathematical
principles are in fact, abstract, intangible aspects of
nature.
You are correct in saying that there is a worthwhile
difference, between 'materialism' and 'naturalism'.
After a carefull study of evolution, you will notice
that
evolution is partially deterministic and partially
random.
There seems to be a deterministic pattern, and yet
within
that deterministic pattern a lot of randomness plays
out.
The anology given is that of a football game, where
there is
a broad set of rules and yet every player can express
his
creativity in his own unique way.
Researchers state that 50,000 basic organic molecules,
each
can combine with each other in thousands of different
ways.
So there are thousands of different ways to create
life.
Thus the chances of life forming is quite probable.
A lot of Scientists now also say that the emergence
of life
might be a natural consequence of the laws of physics,
and
the laws of chemistry.
Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
Lawson, turq and Xeno, having done only TTC phase 1, my understanding is that there are 2 conditions for the session to be considered correct TM: having closed the eyes, a person has to *pick up* the mantra; a person has to continue *picking up* the mantra whenever they become aware that they are off it. Whatever else happens whether thoughts, emotions or sensations, is correct TM. What is not correct TM is trying to have the mantra at a certain level of clarity or a certain number of times. From: lengli...@cox.net lengli...@cox.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 5:43 PM Subject: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield What do you mean you use a mantra during TM? What does that MEAN? My experience is that what I call mantra in one TM session may or may not be like mantra in another. Characterizing it as even a thought is probably misleading by most people's standards as they have a very specific idea of what thought means. So... After all this time, what do you mean by mantra in the context of TM?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Offsite archive is toast?
Jason wrote: Also in the yahoogroups page, if I press the 'reply tab', all I get is a blank reply box. That's what I'm sayin'! That's why I was suggesting that respondents copy and paste the quoted text using right angle brackets to indicate the quoted text. Then snip the part of the text you are NOT replying to. Use the Enter key to break lines at about 40-50 characters. That way, it's easy to read the comments and to reply. It's just basic discussion group protocol. But, nobody wants to take the time - it might interfere with their shoot-from the hip post on top activities, I guess. Or, maybe they re using a mobile device with a tiny screen and they just can't take the time to do the formatting. Go figure. Like this. --- authfriend authfriend@ wrote: Nope, doesn't show up for me either. The pre-Neo posts do. I didn't check to see exactly when it changed. Rick needs to tell the Mail Archive folks, see if there's anything they can do. I rather doubt it. --- fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On a whim, I just went to the offsite archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com/ And, if I click on a post, it doesn't display any of the post's content. Is that the case with everyone else? Rick?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Inside, Outside, Upside Down
I thought our (UK) Prime Minister made a complete tit of himself... turquoiseb: I'm making a concerted effort to stay out of all this Syrian shit, but I did want to commend you on your turn of phrase above. LOL-worthy. But now I'm stuck trying to figure out whether David Cameron is a C-cup or a D-cup. :-) Addressing the important issues! Obama and the French president drew an unbelievably small red line, but they fell into a very deep hole. Go figure. 'The most feeble US president of modern times?' The Telegraph: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100235335/barack-obamas-\ syria-speech-was-an-incoherent-mess-he-is-outperforming-jimmy-carter-as-\ the-most-feeble-us-president-of-modern-times/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nokia gets Indian CEO??
Card: Nokia gets Indian CEO, Rajeev Suri?? From what I've read, the Nokia devices section has been sold to Microsoft and the Nokia patents will be sold soon. What are you going to do with all that cash from your Nokia stock? So, I wonder what happened to Risto Siilasmaa and what's going to happen to Stephen Elop? ... Shameful, but unavoidable. This is a complete failure of chosen strategy and its implementation. Nokia was not able to make it work. For Finland's sake I hope Microsoft will. - T. Anssi Vanjoki Nokia's interim CEO addresses the 'next 150 years': The Verge: http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4718320/nokia http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4718320/nokia-interim-ceo-addresses-t\ he-next-150-years Microsoft urged to put Ford's Mulally on CEO short list: Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-busines\ s/us-business/seeking-turnaround-microsoft-urged-to-put-fords-mulally-on\ -ceo-shortlist/article14213147/
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Quote of Derrida
Seraphita, now this bring to mind Maharishi's distinction bt attention, focused consciousness, and pure consciousness which for me if more field like, with the potentiality for focused attention to happen. As for Sartre and his misery, I wish him a merrier lifetime at some point in his journey (-: From: s3raph...@yahoo.com s3raph...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 9:19 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Quote of Derrida Sartre did not believe that pure conciousness (consciousness-without-an-object) was possible (neither did Freud or Jung). If Sartre had had the good sense to learn TM from Maharishi he would have seen that his existentialism was based on a fundamental error at its base . . . er, at its fundament . . . er, . . . His was essentially a misanthropic philosophy. He was a miserable old git. --- In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: iranitea, Sartre's being for itself reminds me of CC and yes it is somehow incomplete. So the journey to GC begins, the journey in which the object comes to be known in first its most glorious or divine aspect and then in UC in its infinite aspect. So beautiful how he defines God, the project by which humanity attempts to unite matter, Being in itself and consciousness, Being of itself. BUT...what of the personal God? Sartre's definition brings to mind the impersonal God. And perhaps that is enough. At least for a gyana yogi. Maybe only the bhaktis need a personal God. Ha! and you said you didn't understand this, only posted it for those who would (-: thank you, iranitea, I so much enjoyed reading your explanation and thinking about it. Okay, Share, since the word Koan seems to be overused here, in contexts it wasn't really intended to be, I will give you some explanation, that is necessarily limited, as I didn't really read and study whole books of these authors. I will try to explain, using some TM speak, for easy understanding. Here is the quote again: At the end of Being and Nothingness...[,] Being in-itself and Being for-itself were of Being; and this totality of beings, in which they were effected, itself was linked up to itself, relating and appearing to itself, by means of the essential project of human-reality. What was named in this way, in an allegedly neutral and undetermined way, was nothing other than the metaphysical unity of man and God, the relation of man to God, the project of becoming God as the project constituting human-reality. Atheism changes nothing in this fundamental structure. Being and Nothingness: A book by Jean Paul Sartre, who was a friend of Derrida. I have never read that book in full, just some excerpts in a small booklet by Reclam (a German publisher who makes small booklets about great authors). Being in-itself: As a TMer you might think that Being in-itself is just pure self-aware Being, but according to Sartre it is inanimate Matter. For him Matter is just there, it simply IS, it is not conscious OF something. So it is Being in-itself. Being for-itself: This is consciousness, as we know it. Being for-itself refers to the self-conscious aspect of consciosuness. Consciousness is always self-conscious, but this Being of consciousness is always related in some kind of subject-object relationship. It is always related TO something, that something could also be itself. This subject object relationship is also described in TM and the vedic literature, as the Knower, the Known, and the process of knowledge. This is even there in consciousness being aware of itself, and according to TM philosophy it is the first starting of duality. With Sartre, he feels that the Being for-itself always feels somehow incomplete, because it can never really reach Being in-itself, which is actually ultimately matter, the object. For Being in-itself, there is no division, as there is no self-awareness, but Being of-itself, there is the devision between subject and object, even within self-awareness, and, according to Sartre, Being of-itself can not really overcome this gap. Now here, Derrida points out, that at the end of his book, Sartre found/ or came close to a solution, or suggested a solution, which was that both, these modes of Being, where OF BEING, like two modes of the same Being, and he says: and this totality of beings, in which they were effected, itself was linked up to itself, relating and appearing to itself, by means of the essential project of human-reality. So he feels, that through human life, through our conscious endeavor, these two modes of being were linked, and that would be nothing other than the metaphysical unity of man and God, the relation of man to God, the project of becoming God as the project constituting human-reality. So he defines God this way, as the human project of uniting this fundamental division in Being, and Derrida, himself an
[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Offsite archive is toast?
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Describing Communal (Meditating) Fairfield
authfriend: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzrNesqOVF8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzrNesqOVF8 Addressing the important issues! A YouTube video about making marshmallow fluff, in German posted on a thread entitled 'Communal Meditating Fairfield'. LoL! Never mind the bollocks! It might be a good time to review some discussion forums protocols. 1. Try to avoid posting links to web sites or videos without posting any of your own comments. 2. Clearly indicate the quoted text. 2. When posting, try to stay on topic. 3. If you're changing the subject, post it on a new thread. http://earlydues.usanethosting.com/ieel/netiquette.htm http://earlydues.usanethosting.com/ieel/netiquette.htm
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Reducing Tension in the Middle East
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chilling
The Sons of Anarchy are much better shots. Quite a season opener there. This season Peter Weller and Kim Dickens join the series. On 09/10/2013 10:27 AM, j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com wrote: Yeah, the crap-ass shooting annoyed me like it did on The A Team, where in every hail of bullets, no one ever gets hit. Although this episode did have its fun moments, it didn't strike me as anything special... almost just a filler episode in the lead-up to the finale. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Yup, good episode and cliffhanger. A bunch of bad shooters though. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Re: See? Anyone can wear the rosy glasses.
Mike Dixon: Quien es mas macho, Ricardo Montalban ora Fernando Lamas? Que Paso? http://youtu.be/L6ON9tlAQ-8%20 Texas Tornado - Hey Baby Que Paso http://youtu.be/4tXhAYl173U http://youtu.be/4tXhAYl173U Texas Tornados, Who Were You Thinking Of?, Gruene Hall, 1992 http://youtu.be/L6ON9tlAQ-8 http://youtu.be/L6ON9tlAQ-8
[FairfieldLife] Re: Offsite archive is toast?
Also in the yahoogroups page, if I press the 'reply tab', all I get is a blank reply box. authfrined: Gosh, it would be interesting to know what you mean by yahoogroups page. Maybe he means the Yahoo Groups Page; the page that has the FFL Yahoo Groups reply tab; the text box that comes up blank when you click on reply. LoL! Not to mention what that would have to do with the offsite archive that is the topic of this thread. That the offsite archive is toast and when he clicks on a message it comes up blank? It's probably just as well - when looking at the offsite index, it's a real mess with those RE: all over the place. Why is it so difficult to key in a simple Subject line? http://www.mail-archive.com/fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com/ http://www.mail-archive.com/fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com/ Between you guys and the Yahoo staff you've made this group's postings look like a bunch of newbie posts. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Protocols of the Elder
Alex: Protocols of the Elder of FFL We were all young once, so don't let it bother you that some informants don't know how to format messages to discussion groups. With a little practice, you'll wonder how you ever got along without sending text messages to groups of people you don't even know and that may be a lot older than yourself. LoL! Basic tips on posting: 1. When you are replying to a post, hit the REPLY button. 2. Place the cursor on the left of the text box and Key in your reply. 3. Then, hit the SEND button. Was this tip helpful? Arhata Osho wrote: Arhata It might be a good time to review some of the basic protocols for postingto discussion groups. 1. Try to post something that pertains to the topic being discussed. 2. Don't waste band space posting just your handle as a message. 3. Snip what you're not commenting on. http://www.albion.com/netiquette/ http://www.albion.com/netiquette/
[FairfieldLife] Rive Gauche, Rive Droite
Paris is very much about either/or. Has been for centuries. Parisians make assumptions about you and who you are based on whether you live on the Left Bank or the Right Bank of the Seine. And I kinda understand those assumptions. I'm very much a rive gauche kinda guy, so I don't mind being pigeonholed as one. Traditionally, although I don't pretend to understand the reasons for it, the Left Bank (the third of Paris to your left as you stand on a bridge over the Seine and face downstream) has always been associated with free thinkers and free livers. The academics lived there, because it was close to the Sorbonne. Artists and writers lived there, because it was cheap, and artists and writers are poor. The intellectuals hung there, because the cafes were cheap and the talk not. The Right Bank, by comparison, was the home of business, artisans, pawnbrokers, bankers, and those more attracted to money than to artistic or intellectual pursuits. Although the lines have blurred considerably lately, Parisians still to some extent pigeonhole people according to these historical stereotypes, depending on whether they are rive gauche dwellers or rive droite dwellers. It's a duality that is so accepted that it almost defines the city. So it's been interesting for me this month to live in a place that is ni gauche ni droite, neither left nor right. I'm living on an island in the middle of the Seine. Even the river hasn't decided to go left or right around the island when it gets to Ile Saint-Louis. There is a tiny park at the Eastern end of the island where you can sit and watch it decide. That's where I'm sitting as I write this, watching it decide whether to flow along the left-hand path, or the right-hand path. Given the occasional waves, the river sometimes seems to be having a hard time making this decision. Maybe the Seine is Buddhist. Buddhists make a big deal about whether they take the left-hand path or the right-hand path, too. The right-hand path is considered safer, and even its proponents admit that it takes longer. But its adherents are seeking (from their point of view) a lofty goal. They believe that their path leads eventually to what they desire, which is total absorption, annihilation of the self. Right-hand path Buddhists are a lot like Hindus that way. The left-hand path Buddhists aren't seeking annihilation, to get off the wheel of karma and rebirth. About the most they seek as an ultimate goal is to become boddhisattvas, and return to this plane forever. They say it's because they want to help their fellow man, but personally I think it's because they secretly dig it here. As a result, the left-hand path of Buddhism tends to embrace things like tantra (the reconciliation of opposites) and living in the world, as opposed to going all monastic and withdrawing from it. So that brings me to here and now, as I sit here on Ile Saint-Louis, trying to decide where to go tonight to seek cool writing cafes. I'm here in the middle, neither Left Bank nor Right Bank, and only a few steps from either. Which is more appealing? Where would I have the most fun writing? Which bank would inspire more interesting writing? Duh.
[FairfieldLife] What you do not focus on, you become less like
There is a saying that appears in many, if not most, spiritual trips I've investigated or been part of. It is, What you focus on, you become. I cannot nor would not dispute the validity of this saying. I think it's pretty much spot-on, even in its variant, Where you place your attention grows stronger in your life. That's the alternate version of the saying often taught to students who are starting to focus on shit that's lowering their states of attention, like apocalypse fantasies or general feelings of self-importance. The teachers saying this are IMO reminding the students of a Law Of Nature (if you believe in such things) that they have forgotten. That is, that the power of attention is immense, and that where you place your attention and what you place it *on* can radically affect your overall state of attention. Naturally, this teaching tends to appear in spiritual trips that believe in free will, because to take advantage of the teaching -- and choose where to place your attention -- you kinda *have* to have free will. Duh. If ya ain't got no free will, ya ain't got no control over what you focus on. Me, I believe in free will, so the saying/teaching actually has some value for me. Having practiced meditation and mindfulness for many years, I've become convinced that we do, indeed, have some control over what we focus on. And doing so is as easy as -- dare I say it? -- effortlessly coming back to the mantra when you realize that you are no longer thinking it. That action -- and the ability to perform it -- seems, to me, to imply a *choice*. And the *existence* of that choice seems, to me, to imply free will. So, now that I've got free will, and have proved this to my satisfaction experientially in many meditations of many types, the Great Existential Question would seem to be: Cool. You've got free will. So WTF are you going to do with it? If, as all of the sages and gurus and teachers who have said What you focus on, you become were right, WTF do I want to focus on? WTF do I want to become? Pondering this question lately, one of the things that I've realized is that it's easier for me to pinpoint that which I *don't* want to become than it is to pinpoint what I do want to become. For one thing, the latter implies that you've got some fixed idea of who or what you *want* to become, and when it comes to such things (like George Castanza) I've got nuthin'. I don't seek enlightenment, I don't seek a teacher, I certainly don't seek becoming one...bottom line is that I just don't seek. Possibly as a result, it's been easier for me to pinpoint some of the things I specifically *don't* seek than to pinpoint the ones that I do. And some of them have to do with my Internet habits. What I've come up with is that at this point in time, I *don't* seek to focus my attention on a number of people and subjects I often encounter on the Internet, because I *don't* want to become more like them. So I'm conducting an experiment. For the next however-the-fuck-long-it-turns-out-to-be, I'm going to attempt to use my free will to avoid certain people and certain topics that I know tend to lower my state of attention, just as a result of giving them *my* attention. It's as if by allowing my focus to drift to such people and things, I catch lower-your-state-of-attention cooties from them. So as a kind of mindfulness practice, I'm going to try to pay more attention to what I'm paying attention to -- what I'm focusing on. And every time I catch myself focusing on the people or things I've decided that I'd rather *not* be focusing on, I'll just use my free will and shift my focus. I'll effortlessly come back to the mantra. That's the theory, anyway. We'll see how it turns out. The mantra, by the way (avert your eyes if you believe that speaking or writing down mantras in public is bad karma), is WTF. As in, WTF are you *thinking* by focusing on that? Do you want to *become* that? :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] What you do not focus on, you become less like
However if everything is line on water then you don't become what you focus on. It's just stuff floating down the stream. ;-) On 09/11/2013 11:21 AM, turquoiseb wrote: There is a saying that appears in many, if not most, spiritual trips I've investigated or been part of. It is, What you focus on, you become. I cannot nor would not dispute the validity of this saying. I think it's pretty much spot-on, even in its variant, Where you place your attention grows stronger in your life. That's the alternate version of the saying often taught to students who are starting to focus on shit that's lowering their states of attention, like apocalypse fantasies or general feelings of self-importance. The teachers saying this are IMO reminding the students of a Law Of Nature (if you believe in such things) that they have forgotten. That is, that the power of attention is immense, and that where you place your attention and what you place it *on* can radically affect your overall state of attention. Naturally, this teaching tends to appear in spiritual trips that believe in free will, because to take advantage of the teaching -- and choose where to place your attention -- you kinda *have* to have free will. Duh. If ya ain't got no free will, ya ain't got no control over what you focus on. Me, I believe in free will, so the saying/teaching actually has some value for me. Having practiced meditation and mindfulness for many years, I've become convinced that we do, indeed, have some control over what we focus on. And doing so is as easy as -- dare I say it? -- effortlessly coming back to the mantra when you realize that you are no longer thinking it. That action -- and the ability to perform it -- seems, to me, to imply a *choice*. And the *existence* of that choice seems, to me, to imply free will. So, now that I've got free will, and have proved this to my satisfaction experientially in many meditations of many types, the Great Existential Question would seem to be: Cool. You've got free will. So WTF are you going to do with it? If, as all of the sages and gurus and teachers who have said What you focus on, you become were right, WTF do I want to focus on? WTF do I want to become? Pondering this question lately, one of the things that I've realized is that it's easier for me to pinpoint that which I *don't* want to become than it is to pinpoint what I do want to become. For one thing, the latter implies that you've got some fixed idea of who or what you *want* to become, and when it comes to such things (like George Castanza) I've got nuthin'. I don't seek enlightenment, I don't seek a teacher, I certainly don't seek becoming one...bottom line is that I just don't seek. Possibly as a result, it's been easier for me to pinpoint some of the things I specifically *don't* seek than to pinpoint the ones that I do. And some of them have to do with my Internet habits. What I've come up with is that at this point in time, I *don't* seek to focus my attention on a number of people and subjects I often encounter on the Internet, because I *don't* want to become more like them. So I'm conducting an experiment. For the next however-the-fuck-long-it-turns-out-to-be, I'm going to attempt to use my free will to avoid certain people and certain topics that I know tend to lower my state of attention, just as a result of giving them *my* attention. It's as if by allowing my focus to drift to such people and things, I catch lower-your-state-of-attention cooties from them. So as a kind of mindfulness practice, I'm going to try to pay more attention to what I'm paying attention to -- what I'm focusing on. And every time I catch myself focusing on the people or things I've decided that I'd rather *not* be focusing on, I'll just use my free will and shift my focus. I'll effortlessly come back to the mantra. That's the theory, anyway. We'll see how it turns out. The mantra, by the way (avert your eyes if you believe that speaking or writing down mantras in public is bad karma), is WTF. As in, WTF are you *thinking* by focusing on that? Do you want to *become* that? :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] RE: What you do not focus on, you become less like
[FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] Re: What you do not focus on, you become less like
Yeahbut I was just sitting on an island watching the stream flow by. Shit floats down the stream, too. When it comes to which water I'd prefer to imbibe, Eau de Seine ain't at the top of the list. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: However if everything is line on water then you don't become what you focus on. It's just stuff floating down the stream. ;-) On 09/11/2013 11:21 AM, turquoiseb wrote: There is a saying that appears in many, if not most, spiritual trips I've investigated or been part of. It is, What you focus on, you become. I cannot nor would not dispute the validity of this saying. I think it's pretty much spot-on, even in its variant, Where you place your attention grows stronger in your life. That's the alternate version of the saying often taught to students who are starting to focus on shit that's lowering their states of attention, like apocalypse fantasies or general feelings of self-importance. The teachers saying this are IMO reminding the students of a Law Of Nature (if you believe in such things) that they have forgotten. That is, that the power of attention is immense, and that where you place your attention and what you place it *on* can radically affect your overall state of attention. Naturally, this teaching tends to appear in spiritual trips that believe in free will, because to take advantage of the teaching -- and choose where to place your attention -- you kinda *have* to have free will. Duh. If ya ain't got no free will, ya ain't got no control over what you focus on. Me, I believe in free will, so the saying/teaching actually has some value for me. Having practiced meditation and mindfulness for many years, I've become convinced that we do, indeed, have some control over what we focus on. And doing so is as easy as -- dare I say it? -- effortlessly coming back to the mantra when you realize that you are no longer thinking it. That action -- and the ability to perform it -- seems, to me, to imply a *choice*. And the *existence* of that choice seems, to me, to imply free will. So, now that I've got free will, and have proved this to my satisfaction experientially in many meditations of many types, the Great Existential Question would seem to be: Cool. You've got free will. So WTF are you going to do with it? If, as all of the sages and gurus and teachers who have said What you focus on, you become were right, WTF do I want to focus on? WTF do I want to become? Pondering this question lately, one of the things that I've realized is that it's easier for me to pinpoint that which I *don't* want to become than it is to pinpoint what I do want to become. For one thing, the latter implies that you've got some fixed idea of who or what you *want* to become, and when it comes to such things (like George Castanza) I've got nuthin'. I don't seek enlightenment, I don't seek a teacher, I certainly don't seek becoming one...bottom line is that I just don't seek. Possibly as a result, it's been easier for me to pinpoint some of the things I specifically *don't* seek than to pinpoint the ones that I do. And some of them have to do with my Internet habits. What I've come up with is that at this point in time, I *don't* seek to focus my attention on a number of people and subjects I often encounter on the Internet, because I *don't* want to become more like them. So I'm conducting an experiment. For the next however-the-fuck-long-it-turns-out-to-be, I'm going to attempt to use my free will to avoid certain people and certain topics that I know tend to lower my state of attention, just as a result of giving them *my* attention. It's as if by allowing my focus to drift to such people and things, I catch lower-your-state-of-attention cooties from them. So as a kind of mindfulness practice, I'm going to try to pay more attention to what I'm paying attention to -- what I'm focusing on. And every time I catch myself focusing on the people or things I've decided that I'd rather *not* be focusing on, I'll just use my free will and shift my focus. I'll effortlessly come back to the mantra. That's the theory, anyway. We'll see how it turns out. The mantra, by the way (avert your eyes if you believe that speaking or writing down mantras in public is bad karma), is WTF. As in, WTF are you *thinking* by focusing on that? Do you want to *become* that? :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace
Bikers vs Muslims sounds like one of those z-movie horror films. Happening today in Washington DC: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/11/2-million-bikers-roar-dc-honor-911-protest-muslim-/ On 09/11/2013 12:37 PM, s3raph...@yahoo.com wrote: The better of two evils you mean. For the Christians definitely the better. Assad is himself from a minority group in Syria so it's in his interests to maintain freedom of religion (not freedom of political expression, obviously). He's an Alawite, a mystical sect so secretive no one outside the faith is sure what they believe! Along with Islamic festivals, they also seem to celebrate Christian festivals, including the birth of Jesus and Palm Sunday. It's a shitty choice though: do you cast in your lot with heart-eating, Catholic priest murdering Al Qaeda rebels or would you prefer someone who uses chemical weapons on his own civilians? This whole Middle East nightmare is a consequence of the British and French carving up the Ottoman Empire after WWI. Maybe the best solution would be to give Syria back to the Turks! --- In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: Thanks, Seraphita, this is the missing piece of the puzzle for me. If Assad TRULY supports religious freedom, then I support him. Or for the Christians is he simply the worse of two evils? *From:* s3raphita@... s3raphita@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Wednesday, September 11, 2013 2:21 PM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace Spaghetti and meatballs is almost as delicious as pizza. But is peace worth having at ALL costs, I wonder? Doesn't that depend on whose terms the peace is established? The Christians in Syria are supporting Assad as they've seen what happened to their co-religionists in Iraq. If the secular government is overthrown, they will be targeted by jihadist rebels calling for the establishment of an Islamic state and their Christian communities (possibly the oldest in the world - they even speak Aramaic!) will be destroyed. --- In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote: Seraphita, As a matter of fact, I had a delicious spaghetti and meatballs meal after the fast. And, overall I still lost a few pounds of weight. So, it was a win-win situation. If Pope Francis ask for another fast for other reasons, I'll do it again. It appears that he's starting a Pope Francis Effect. And you don't have to be a pandit to do it.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] Richard Dawkins in trouble again
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] RE: Reducing Tension in the Middle East
[FairfieldLife] Feeding the Change Machine video
[FairfieldLife] Barbara Walters
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Reducing Tension in the Middle East
[FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] Raja Hagelin's Invitation to Yogic Flyers
September 10, 2013 Dear Governors and Sidhas, During times of tension, and when potentially dramatic events threaten our nation and the world, Maharishi would remind us that we possess a singularly powerful technology for restoring harmony and security in national and world consciousness. Group practice of the TM® and TM-Sidhi® programs has been shown time and again to help defuse the buildup of tensions that might otherwise erupt in violence and war. In this light we encourage you, at this delicate time, to enjoy group practice in your area as much as possible—and when it is not possible, to synchronize your Yogic Flying times with others in your area. Yogic Flyers commonly say that group practice revitalizes their program and immediately results in a rapid personal growth of bliss and fulfillment. Better yet, if you live in Fairfield—or if it is convenient to go there, even for a week—now is an opportune time to join the most powerful Coherence-Creating Group in the country, and really help tip the scales toward an Invincible America and a more harmonious world. Synchronized Flying Times Starting immediately and throughout September, we encourage all Governors and Sidhas across the country to enhance the peace-creating power of their program by coordinating their Yogic Flying with thousands of other Sidhas. Effective immediately, suggested times to begin Yogic FlyingSM in each time zone are as follows: Eastern Time Morning: 7:30 AM (optional: 9:15 AM to lift off with the Invincible America Assembly in the Golden Domes) Evening: 6:45 PM (in synchrony with the Golden Domes) Central Time Morning: 7:30 AM (optional: 8:15 AM to lift off with the Invincible America Assembly in the Golden Domes) Evening: 5:45 PM (in synchrony with the Golden Domes) Mountain Time Morning: 7:15 AM (in synchrony with the Golden Domes) Evening: 6:30 PM (optional: 4:45 PM to lift off with the Invincible America Assembly in the Golden Domes) Pacific Time Morning: 7:30 AM Evening: 6:30 PM Thank you for joining together to create much-needed coherence and powerful positivity at this crucial time. Jai Guru Dev John Hagelin Raja of America © 2013 Maharishi Foundation USA, a non-profit educational organization. All rights reserved. Transcendental Meditation®, TM®, TM-Sidhi®, and Yogic Flying are protected trademarks and are used in the U.S. under license or with permission. TM Program | PO Box 670 | Fairfield, IA 52556
[FairfieldLife] RE: What you do not focus on, you become less like
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: Fasting for Peace
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Feeding the Change Machine video
Re: [FairfieldLife] Feeding the Change Machine video
that was great Jim. sound track went well with the visuals. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 8:44 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Feeding the Change Machine video You've heard the soundtrack, now see the movie! (3:28) There's a guy that flies in it, and lots of robots, too: http://tinyurl.com/oppvnz6 or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY9jJHbB CXU copyright 2013- temple dog
[FairfieldLife] For Alex and Swami Gulabjamunanda
Re the esteemed Swami's cognition that while Brahman is the formless source of all forms, bacon is the source of Brahman: [http://31.media.tumblr.com/ed39398621dfb1b2d42d482b5ba694bf/tumblr_msxd\ ba9XcF1r0wqrdo1_500.jpg] :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: Fasting for Peace
[FairfieldLife] Joking Bad
For those Breaking Bad addicts who just can't get enough of the blue stuff. Cameos by Saul, Jesse, Walt, and some guy at the end I don't recognize: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/jimmy-fallon-breaking-bad-parod\ y-joking-bad_n_3910976.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/jimmy-fallon-breaking-bad-paro\ dy-joking-bad_n_3910976.html
