[FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Classic! This year is going to be an eventful year..Something big is going to happen, but I don't know what. Not that I don't believe in astrology, I actually do. But cold weather, conflict and wars. pretty easy to predict even without astrology. seekliberation
[FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
I think that *everyone* who feels that gay marriage is wrong should do exactly what this Utah man is doing, and go on hunger fasts to the death to stand up for their beliefs. This would actually solve much of the problem, and leave the world a better place without them. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/04/trestin-meacham-gay-hunger-st\ rike_n_4540369.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/04/trestin-meacham-gay-hunger-s\ trike_n_4540369.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
John and seek, The Farmer's Almanac already predicted an abnormally cold winter. Plus they noted that there would be wildly fluctuating temps. And there have been such. Almanac has an 86% accuracy rate btw. I would LOVE to know on what they base their predictions! On Sunday, January 5, 2014 4:09 AM, seekliberat...@yahoo.com seekliberat...@yahoo.com wrote: Classic! This year is going to be an eventful year..Something big is going to happen, but I don't know what. Not that I don't believe in astrology, I actually do. But cold weather, conflict and wars. pretty easy to predict even without astrology. seekliberation
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
turq, though I disagree with this man's beliefs, I admire that he's willing to go to such lengths to express them. And in the process, to pursue an action that does not physically harm others. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 5:08 AM, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: I think that *everyone* who feels that gay marriage is wrong should do exactly what this Utah man is doing, and go on hunger fasts to the death to stand up for their beliefs. This would actually solve much of the problem, and leave the world a better place without them. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/04/trestin-meacham-gay-hunger-strike_n_4540369.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: I think that *everyone* who feels that gay marriage is wrong should do exactly what this Utah man is doing, and go on hunger fasts to the death to stand up for their beliefs. This would actually solve much of the problem, and leave the world a better place without them. Oh my, oh my. That Bawwy is certainly a simplistic kind of fellow. How simple, how uncomplicated, how convenient it would be if all those who we disagreed with simply died. Just imagine, no need to grow or absorb or become adaptable and understanding as a human being. Yessiree, just die all you bastards and bitches out there who don't think the way I do! http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/04/trestin-meacham-gay-hunger-strike_n_4540369.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/04/trestin-meacham-gay-hunger-strike_n_4540369.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room
The *ruling capitolist elite* of course! You know, the *banksters* and Illuminati, Mwahahahahahahahaaha. From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 4, 2014 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room They who? Football is probably the closest thing they could come to gladiators killing each other to satisfy the masses with bread and circuses. it's a national distraction.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room
Yet authoritarian totalitarianism is about the only way your going to make communism *look* like it might work. It would require that the human spirit destroy it's own desire for more, to be free and surrender it's own desires for others yet still be motivated to produce maximum effort for minimal gain,. Bud... that just ain't happenin'. From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 4, 2014 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room What you are really talking about is authoritarian totalitarian states. There's quite a difference to between Cuba and North Korea. People also make a similar mistake with the term fascist when they really mean authoritarian. Fascism is a corporate run state.Because we have now shrunk the world to a nanosecond with the Internet the is tremendous pressure to change the way countries are won. It will be an interesting time. On 01/04/2014 07:09 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: Not sure if it is still communist but the Communist Party used to win the elections there years ago and control it's state and local governments. Yes the term *communist* is denigrating, especially to people that have lived it. Just look at the nations that have abandoned it. I'm certain China would if the party didn't control the army and police forces. But we do have wonderful nations with a good communist party ... like Cuba and North Korea! From: Bhairitu mailto:noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 3, 2014 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room Ya been there? Seemed to be very prosperous small businesses there and little or no begging (they give those folks jobs selling things). Cochin is a very modern city. Not sure is the state government communist or socialist since the former is a denigrating term fascists use to scare people. On 01/03/2014 11:09 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: No, I'm sure you would love Kerala. Nice communist state government. From: Bhairitu mailto:noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 3, 2014 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room Global warming is so retro just as climate change. The new term climate disruption. Gotta stay up to date. A friend and his wife went on their honeymoon in June a couple years ago. They went to New Zealand and came back with colds. Duh! Hey, I'd be living in the tropics if I had my choice. But then those regions tend to have really corrupt or unstable governments. Southern India like Kerala might not be bad (87 degrees year round) but they drive on the wrong side of the road. :-D On 01/03/2014 10:41 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: It's not *climate disruption* dude, it's global warming! B. The ship that got stuck in ice was researching global warming, media didn't say much about that. Isn't it summer in the Southern Hemisphere? From: Bhairitu mailto:noozg...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 3, 2014 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room Thanks. I find it interesting to find out what people are doing with climate disruption. Keep warm. Us old sods don't do well with home temperatures under 68 degrees. I have taken to using my heater tower as electricity is cheaper than gas and besides I'm only in one room at a time. On 01/03/2014 10:04 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Just after midnight, it was -8 degrees where my sister lives in Vermont. It's -3 there now, the high for the day. Predicted to go down to -15 tonight. Around 8 inches of snow, but that's piddling for Vermont. Ten inches of snow where I am on the Jersey shore (the snowfall has stopped), temp 18 degrees and sunny, going down to zero tonight, warming up to the high 20s-low 30s tomorrow, 40s on Sunday and Monday, then down again to the 10s and low teens on Tuesday, warming again to 40s (with rain) Wednesday through the weekend. The ups and downs keep you on your toes. Anything else you want to know? Did you find that fascinating? (We weren't really talking much about whether Jesus was real; that's a complicated topic. We were discussing what the Bible says about his resurrection, which is pretty simple if you can read. Barry made the same mistake.) For the moment at least that gorilla should be the winter weather the US is having. I haven't seen much mention of it here. Nah, let's waste our time talking about whether Jayzuz was real or not. So how are folks doing with climate disruption? Even here in the SF Bay Area we've had a long month or more of 30 degree temperatures in the morning then sometimes reaching the 70s in the afternoon. Usually such weather is delegated for a couple weeks in late January. We also have had very dry weather though
[FairfieldLife] The Ideal Home Office
[image: Inline image 1] Example of an ideal home office, above; below a description of a poor home office: There's a nerd guy I know that lives down the street who does almost all of his homework sitting on a twin bed with his dog - the bed is a mattress on the floor, no frame. He has an old army sleeping bag which also doubles as a pillow when not in use for sleeping or on really hot days. This guy has a large box fan sitting on the floor, usually set to high. The guy has an old laptop computer with a 14 inch display, but no internet; a 21 inch cathode ray TV set with rabbit ears sitting on a TV tray. There is a game box with two controllers and several game discs on the floor next to a cardboard box. There's an Emerson microwave on the counter next to a small sink in the corner of the room. His place is located out back behind the main house next to the alley. Two large dogs roam the back yard which is mostly dirt and rocks with a few sprouts of Johnson grass. There is no water hose but there is a spigot at the side of the main hose. He parks his car on the street at the curb in front of the house. There is a sidewalk made of square flat concrete slabs that he got at Home Depot garden center. His door has a combination padlock on the outside of the door with a chain for security. Inside the door has a sliding bolt assembly he bought at Ace Hardware. This nerd guy has an old Lazy Boy recliner for his chair that he found at the curb from a house down the street that he found during free curb-side trash pick up. His main light is a cord hanging from the center of the ceiling with an aluminum shield on it that he got at the Family Dollar. He has a radiant electric heater on the floor near the foot of the bed. There is a window in the back of the room covered with aluminum foil and it opens, but has no screen. This nerd has a styro-foam cooler for keeping beer cooled, which doubles as a table for an ash tray, which is large coffee can filled with sand. There is a bathroom in this guys home office, but it contains no tissue of any kind and no soap. Go figure. Suggestions for an Ideal Home Office: A ideal home office should be designed for getting things done. The ideal home home office will have a desk; a chair; a table light; and some writing paper and a box of pencils. The ideal home office would be a separate room with a door and window to allow natural light to enter the room. In addition to the above an ideal office will have its own bathroom for easy convenience. The ideal home office will have a long counter (with drawers or cabinets or both); a sink (double or single, ceramic or aluminum); a refrigerator (double or single door with a freezer) and a stove (gas or electric) to food cook on. The ideal office will have a coffee pot (drip, automatic; and a glass water kettle for boiling water. The ideal home office will have a coffee bean grinder. The desk should be stable, constructed of wood or metal, and at a suitable position for maximum utility. The chair should be comfortable and supporting. The table light should provide ample lighting for doing work. The ideal home office would be located in a place free of unwanted distractions. In addition, the ideal home office would be equipped with a telephone (land line or cell); a computer (desktop or laptop) preferably with two or more large flat-screen monitors and a sound system; a file cabinet (metal or wood); a printer (inkjet or laser); and a fax machine (or computer fax software) and a flat-bed scanner. The bathroom should include a roll of tissue; a box of tissues; and soap (bar or bottle). In the ideal home office will have a computer connected to the internet (high speed local network or wireless) and will be equipped with personal productivity tools such as a web browser, a text editor, a calculating program and imaging software Additional recommendations: 1. The room should be large with plenty of room for working on projects. The floor should be constructed of hardwood, highly polished, with a large oriental carpet in the center of the room with a pillow for sitting on to meditate and get inspiration. 2. The room should be equipped with a hot and cold central HVAC system, such as a Trane, if needed. The ideal home office would be designed with a fireplace (wood or gas). 3. The room should be secure, with a dead bolt lock on the door. The ideal home office would be equipped with security cameras and motion sensors connected to a security agency such Brinks. 4. The desk should be large and sturdy with plenty of room for writing, drawing, computing, collating or for completing projects. The ideal desk would have some drawers for storing the paper and pencils. 5. The chair should be adjustable for height; be able to swivel 360 degrees, have a high back; and padded arms; wheels for rolling around the room, for quick access to items when needed; the chair should be covered either in leather or vinyl or cloth. 6. The table light
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! On Sunday, January 5, 2014 7:31 AM, waybac...@yahoo.com waybac...@yahoo.com wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room
noozguru, when I watch TV dvds from the library I realize I'm willingly participating in a similar kind of distraction. Even when I open some of the superficial yahoo news stories, I feel a little guilty. So far however, I've only opened one story about the dreaded KimKar and that was only because Ellen DeGeneres was also in it! On Saturday, January 4, 2014 1:48 PM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: Football is probably the closest thing they could come to gladiators killing each other to satisfy the masses with bread and circuses. it's a national distraction. On 01/04/2014 10:55 AM, Share Long wrote: Yes, Mike I read about that game between 49ers and Green Bay. If I didn't already think football players are crazy, this would convince me! My oldest nephew played for Ariz St and another played for UConn, Storrs. I don't think it's a health producing sport! I figured out that the FFL guys pretty much don't do smiley faces but I thought maybe you were serious about 54 being chilly since you live in Texas. On Saturday, January 4, 2014 9:27 AM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com wrote: Share... I'm glad you can't believe it! I say things facetiously all the time. Maybe I should put a smiley face afterwords:) Those poor 49ers are going to be playing football in Greenbay at -8 with a windchill around -30 argh... If it were the Texans, they'd just forfeit the game and not go. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 3, 2014 5:43 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room Mike, I can't believe you were saying brr to 54F! I guess it really is all relative. They're predicting a HIGH of -4 in FF on Monday! On Friday, January 3, 2014 3:57 PM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: It was only 130 degrees in Australia yesterday. On 01/03/2014 11:06 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: About 54 degrees here in Tombal Tx. br. From: mailto:anartax...@yahoo.com mailto:anartax...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 3, 2014 10:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room The temperature here (Brewster, NY) is 10F (-8C) with a wind chill of -8F (-22C). Tomorrow morning it is expected to be -8F (-22C) without wind chill factored in, but the wind is expected to be almost nil by then. This is not so bad. Currently at the summit of Mt. Everest, it is -18F (-28C) with a wind chill of -51F (-46C) and winds of 45mph (75kph). It's summertime in Antarctica, a balmy -9F (-23C) at the South Pole.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Where People Live
Richard, there's a forum called city-data that will help you find info concerning any aspect of a prospective new home. People are very generous with regards to a wide range of topics: best dentist in the area, best school, taxes, etc. My lesbian friends actually traveled to lots of places. They were down to TN and CO. Then they realized that their chosen lifestyle would be welcome in Ft. Collins. They moved there from more expensive California and are very happy with their choice. I have a friend who warns people about what he calls Venus fly trap towns. Place like Boulder and Santa Fe and Asheville, NC. People, he says think they and their lives will improve miraculously in such magic towns. On Saturday, January 4, 2014 2:06 PM, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Plano, Texas Rita's niece and her husband, a bean counter, both work and live in Plano - it's right next to Dallas. According to what I've read, Plano, Texas is one of the best managed cities in the U.S. More than half of Plano’s adult population have at least a bachelor’s degree last year, one of the best rates in the nation. Plano's close proximity to Dallas, combined with efficient public transportation, offers residents easy access to jobs in the larger city. More than 12% of Plano workers were employed in the finance industry last year Go figure. It's all about management. When I worked at the community college I took several courses in Business Management - Small Business Management, Business Communications, Business Math, Records Management and Accounting. I was awarded a Level One Certification in Business Administrative Systems. So, it's interesting to read about city management. In a recent survey, the best-run city is Irvine, California and the worst run city is San Bernardino, California. Go figure. Read more: 'The Best and Worst Run Cities in America' http://finance.yahoo.com/news/best-worst-run-cities-america-193707188.html On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Someday soon we are going to be selling everything and packing up what's left to move to a place that's right for us. There are good reasons to move and good reason to stay where we are. Each area has its pros and cons. Every place you live is a compromise and there is no perfect place For example some place have good weather all year like Laguna Beach, California, and some places have weather that sucks, like Cut Bank, Montana. For others, weather is perhaps not as big of a deal. Most people like what they already know and the older people get the more they have resistance to change. For me, moving isn't a big deal, since I spent eighteen years a military brat, living in over ten U.S. states, England and Japan. After college I lived in California for thirteen years, both north and south, and then moved to Austin, Texas for twelve years. Recently Rita and I visited her hometown, Detroit, and visited her sister for a few weeks. And, I've driven through most of the U.S. at one time or another. I love northern California and the Escondido area around San Diego - lots of business opportunities;good schools; avocados.. These are the many reasons people like to live near the ocean or the mountains. But, there are some negatives also, like in California where the state is struggling, which means the cities are now struggling. The bureaucracy is increasing out there. Some people are getting tired of dealing high property taxes - Prop 13 sets property tax on homes at 1% - and sales taxes are going up all the time. If you buy a $1M home you'll pay $10,000 just in taxes to live in San Diego County! Is there some place that would be an almost ideal place to live? If you take out a map of the U.S. you can easily cross off several locations. The first thing we did was cut out places where homes are very expensive, like Seattle, Washington or San Francisco, California or Portland, Oregon. We want someplace that is cheap where you can park a lot of cars and play loud music. So, you can cross off places where it's too hot or too dry or too wet - bad weather. And, we want to avoid tornadoes, hurricanes, flooding, earthquakes, blizzards and deserts. That rules out most of the middle of the country, California, Texas, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Montana and most of the Gulf of Mexico states, and the far north both east and west. Some people don't like living in flat lands - they prefer mountains with trees and scenery. We want a place that has rivers, lakes, and less traffic. So, after ruling out those places (there are still some rural places in California, Oregon, and Washington, but they're not ideal for one reason or another). Years ago Stephen Gaskin and his family opted to move from San Francisco to Tennessee to be on The Farm. So, I started to consider places like Nashville and Memphis where Rita could still continue playing in her
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, do you think that suffragettes who went on hunger strikes when jailed for their protests were also likely mentally disturbed? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:59 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Anyone who genuinely has the intention of starving themselves to death is likely mentally disturbed, i.e., suicidal. Typically, though, it's a publicity stunt meant to call attention to the cause. Judy, do you think that suffragettes who went on hunger strikes when jailed for their protests were also likely mentally disturbed? Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, usually the phrase *publicity stunt* is used pejoratively. Is that how you mean it? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:25 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Anyone who genuinely has the intention of starving themselves to death is likely mentally disturbed, i.e., suicidal. Typically, though, it's a publicity stunt meant to call attention to the cause. Judy, do you think that suffragettes who went on hunger strikes when jailed for their protests were also likely mentally disturbed? Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: All About Zen
According to the The Pali Canon, which is the oldest known teachings of the historical Buddha, meditation is mentioned numerous times. Other types of meditation taught by the Buddha are also found in the found in ancient commentary Visuddhimagga Practice in detail here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/library/http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/burns/wheel088.html#other On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.comwrote: [image: Inline image 1] Sumi painting by Shunryo Suzuki Zen Master Dogen got the Soto Zen practice from his teacher in China - Dogen was a master linguist and the author of 'Shobogenzo' in which he describes in detail the Soto Zen practice - sitting meditation. In Dogen's Zen practice, the primary realization is the *oneness* of practice-enlightenment. The practice of zazen and the experience of enlightenment are one and the same - there is no difference - no duality.According to Georg Feurerstein, the Buddha Shakya the Muni was the first historical yogin in India - Buddha taught meditation that was transcendental. It' s like a Zen koan: Wind flag, mind moves, The same understanding. When the mouth opens All are wrong. - Mumon The practice of 'just sitting' is non-different from the enlightenment - there is no gap between your practice and your enlightenment. Just sitting IS enlightenment. Zazen is not step-by-step process - it is all-at-once or nothing at all. There are no steps along the way. According to Shunryo Suzuki, a master in the Soto Zen sect, meditation is 'zazen', regular sitting, based on the teachings of Zen Master Dogen. It's just like TM practice, sitting meditation. Anyone who has practiced TM and Soto Zen knows this - it's pretty common knowledge without even going into any linguistics. Dogen Kigen: Fifty-four years lighting up the sky. A quivering leap smashes a billion worlds. Hah! Entire body looks for nothing. Living, I plunge into Yellow Springs. Exerpt: Once we turn our eyes from Japan to the Western scene, we find that virtually nothing has been introduced concerning Dogen - this is unfortuenant indeed, given that ignorance of Soto Zen is tantamount to ignorance of Dogen, its founder. Ken Wilber says that Zen practice is very similar to TM practice. Apparently Wilber's parents have started TM practice some time ago. Wilber ascribes to the 'two truths doctrine' of Nagarjuna. For Wilber no metaphysical doctrine or apparent reality is true in an absolute sense: only formless awareness, the simple feeling of being, exists absolutely. Works cited: 'The Yoga Tradition: Its History, Literature, Philosophy and Practice' by Georg Feuerstein and Ken Wilbur Hohm Press, 2001 'Dogen Kigen--Mystical Realist' by Hee-Jin Kim Wisdom Publications, 2004 'A Brief History of Everything' By Ken Wilber Shambhala, 2007 Page 42-3 On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:49 PM, s3raph...@yahoo.com wrote: There is simply nothing better than 60-s blah blah Yes. Alan Watts, D. T. Suzuki and Krishnamurti turned the world upside down. (At least my inner world.) And lets not forget MMY's Science of Being and Art of Living. Though not in the same league it was an original and optimistic work.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Depends on the stunt in question and what cause it's promoting. I don't think a hunger strike is the most effective of stunts, though, even for a good cause. Judy, usually the phrase *publicity stunt* is used pejoratively. Is that how you mean it? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:25 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Anyone who genuinely has the intention of starving themselves to death is likely mentally disturbed, i.e., suicidal. Typically, though, it's a publicity stunt meant to call attention to the cause. Judy, do you think that suffragettes who went on hunger strikes when jailed for their protests were also likely mentally disturbed? Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
[FairfieldLife] RE: The Ideal Home Office
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Example of an ideal home office, above; below a description of a poor home office: There's a nerd guy I know that lives down the street who does almost all of his homework sitting on a twin bed with his dog - the bed is a mattress on the floor, no frame. He has an old army sleeping bag which also doubles as a pillow when not in use for sleeping or on really hot days. This guy has a large box fan sitting on the floor, usually set to high. The guy has an old laptop computer with a 14 inch display, but no internet; a 21 inch cathode ray TV set with rabbit ears sitting on a TV tray. There is a game box with two controllers and several game discs on the floor next to a cardboard box. There's an Emerson microwave on the counter next to a small sink in the corner of the room. His place is located out back behind the main house next to the alley. Two large dogs roam the back yard which is mostly dirt and rocks with a few sprouts of Johnson grass. There is no water hose but there is a spigot at the side of the main hose. He parks his car on the street at the curb in front of the house. There is a sidewalk made of square flat concrete slabs that he got at Home Depot garden center. His door has a combination padlock on the outside of the door with a chain for security. Inside the door has a sliding bolt assembly he bought at Ace Hardware. This nerd guy has an old Lazy Boy recliner for his chair that he found at the curb from a house down the street that he found during free curb-side trash pick up. His main light is a cord hanging from the center of the ceiling with an aluminum shield on it that he got at the Family Dollar. He has a radiant electric heater on the floor near the foot of the bed. There is a window in the back of the room covered with aluminum foil and it opens, but has no screen. This nerd has a styro-foam cooler for keeping beer cooled, which doubles as a table for an ash tray, which is large coffee can filled with sand. There is a bathroom in this guys home office, but it contains no tissue of any kind and no soap. Go figure. This guy doesn't sound like a nerd he sounds like he's economically disadvantaged; in other words - poor. Suggestions for an Ideal Home Office: A ideal home office should be designed for getting things done. The ideal home home office will have a desk; a chair; a table light; and some writing paper and a box of pencils. The ideal home office would be a separate room with a door and window to allow natural light to enter the room. In addition to the above an ideal office will have its own bathroom for easy convenience. The ideal home office will have a long counter (with drawers or cabinets or both); a sink (double or single, ceramic or aluminum); a refrigerator (double or single door with a freezer) and a stove (gas or electric) to food cook on. The ideal office will have a coffee pot (drip, automatic; and a glass water kettle for boiling water. The ideal home office will have a coffee bean grinder. The desk should be stable, constructed of wood or metal, and at a suitable position for maximum utility. The chair should be comfortable and supporting. The table light should provide ample lighting for doing work. The ideal home office would be located in a place free of unwanted distractions. In addition, the ideal home office would be equipped with a telephone (land line or cell); a computer (desktop or laptop) preferably with two or more large flat-screen monitors and a sound system; a file cabinet (metal or wood); a printer (inkjet or laser); and a fax machine (or computer fax software) and a flat-bed scanner. The bathroom should include a roll of tissue; a box of tissues; and soap (bar or bottle). In the ideal home office will have a computer connected to the internet (high speed local network or wireless) and will be equipped with personal productivity tools such as a web browser, a text editor, a calculating program and imaging software Additional recommendations: 1. The room should be large with plenty of room for working on projects. The floor should be constructed of hardwood, highly polished, with a large oriental carpet in the center of the room with a pillow for sitting on to meditate and get inspiration. 2. The room should be equipped with a hot and cold central HVAC system, such as a Trane, if needed. The ideal home office would be designed with a fireplace (wood or gas). 3. The room should be secure, with a dead bolt lock on the door. The ideal home office would be equipped with security cameras and motion sensors connected to a security agency such Brinks. 4. The desk should be large and sturdy with plenty of room for writing, drawing, computing, collating or for completing projects. The ideal desk would have some drawers for storing the paper and pencils. 5. The
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
It's called logical outcome though sometimes it defies logic. An example is that we know the propping up of the financial institutions in 2008 was just a short term fix and didn't really address the real problem. What should have been done is just let them fail. The public would have been hurt a lot less than they would be now and many of the greedy rich would have been put out of business. On 01/05/2014 02:09 AM, seekliberat...@yahoo.com wrote: Classic! This year is going to be an eventful year..Something big is going to happen, but I don't know what. Not that I don't believe in astrology, I actually do. But cold weather, conflict and wars. pretty easy to predict even without astrology. seekliberation
Re: [FairfieldLife] 2014 Predictions
Pluto isn't even a planet and has an erratic orbit. It hasn't even been observed long enough to see if it's orbit is going to follow some logical path. Some western astrologers hang their hats on Chiron too which has an even more erratic orbit. One can run a numerical integrator to create terms based on what logically might happen in it's orbit but those are just educated guesses. On 01/04/2014 11:17 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote: Joni Patry, a Neo-vedic astrologer, makes some startling predictions for this year, including the very cold winter that the US is experiencing now. She also predicts a breakout of wars in March due to the conjunctions of Mars with Saturn and Rahu. The details are recorded in this video clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZWnK1a8QcQ
[FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Seek, If you know a little bit of jyotish, you can understand some of her reasoning for making such predictions. So, it would appear that Congress will have another battle to increase the debt limit in February of this year. I would hope that the Tea Party members have learned a lesson from the last standoff in October. From the looks of it, Senator Cruz of Texas still has an ax to grind for the rest of his party and the Democrats. As we're seeing a preview of the situation in the Middle East already, it would appear that a civil war may flare up in Iraq and Egypt. Also, North Korean dictator may make another threat of war against the US and its allies. But, not to worry, as Jupiter will eventually enter Cancer, it's exaltation sign, and should bring a resolution to the conflicts for the rest of the year. It's also a good indicator that the US forces in Afghanistan will get out of that war-torn country, in spite of Karzai's grand standing at the present time.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: MMY's Adwaita
Because there has to be duality before a subject (you, for example) can speculate about an object. The One has to divide for that to happen; and so the One + the subject + the object = three terms. *Everything* depends on that Original Trinity. The original trinity was probably invented by the Indo-Europeans who migrated into India from Persia. One of the oldest systems to explain duality were the adherents of the ancient Samkhya sect, one of the so-called Six Systems of Indian Philosophy; The Sanskrit word samkhya a word which pertains to number - the three gunas and the 32 tattwas, constituents of nature, etc. Samkhya is probably the oldest and most widespread system explaining the basic duality - it spread to China (Tao) and the Far East (yin-yang). It might correctly be said that Samkhya is the oldest dualism philosophy - it's even mentioned in the Rig Veda and in the Zen Avesta. In Advaita philosophy AUM (not to be confused with the the monosyllable OM) is frequently used to represent or symbolize the three subsumed into one; a triune; a common theme in Hinduism since ancient times. The use of symbolic AUM implies that our current existence is characterized by maya, or a falsehood - an appearance only. And that in order to go beyond sensing a mere appearance, we must know the full truth that is transcendental to the body, mind, or intellect. In MMY's advaita, we comprehend the true nature of the absolute, Purusha. All the authors of the Upanishads were of the transcendentalist persuasion. Transcendental knowledge is essentially a realization (Sanskrit moksha) - a state of realization where one can not only see but know the absolute existence and to become it: you know, (Sanskrit jnana) existence for what it really is. When one gains true knowledge (Sanskrit vidya) - there is no split between the knower and known: one becomes knowledge-consciousness itself. So AUM, like the auspicious hand-sign (Sanskrit mudra) is in essence, the signifier of the ultimate truth. On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:13 PM, s3raph...@yahoo.com wrote: Re Why is it so difficult for you to understand the one, before you go off speculating on the three? : Because there has to be duality before a subject (you, for example) can speculate about an object. The One has to divide for that to happen; and so the One + the subject + the object = three terms. *Everything* depends on that Original Trinity. Let Uncle Aleister explain: The Chinese, like ourselves, begin with the idea of Absolute Nothing. They make an effort, and call it the Tao; but that is exactly what the Tao comes to mean, when we examine it. They see quite well, as we have done above, that merely to assert Nothing is not to explain the Universe; and they proceed to do so by means of a mathematical equation even simpler than ours, involving as it does no operations beyond simple addition and subtraction. They say Nothing obviously means Nothing; it has no qualities nor quantities. (The Advaitists said the same, and then stultified themselves completely by calling it One!) But, continue the sages of the Middle Kingdom, it is always possible to reduce any expression to Nothing by taking any two equal and opposite terms. (Thus n + (-n) = 0.) We ought therefore to be able to get any expression that we want *from*Nothing; we merely have to be careful that the terms shall be precisely opposite and equal. (0 = n + (-n). This then they did, and began to diagrammatize the Universe as a pair of opposites, the Yang or active male, and the Yin or passive Female, principles. - (Aleister Crowley)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Share, IMO, in the past farmers used to look at the animals' furs to determine how the winter temperature would be like. So, before the start of this winter, the animals in your region of the country may have had a very thick growth of hair in preparation for this winter. :) But, in this modern times, there are weather data from NOAA and other government agencies which can be used for weather predictions through complicated mathematical simulations. If they ever invent the quantum computer, weather prediction should become an exact science.
[FairfieldLife] For Dixon
Comrade Mike, I thought you might like this article about car prices in Havana. You'll note the North Korean like military uniforms the Cubans are required to wear: http://news.yahoo.com/cubans-aghast-car-prices-law-kicks-050343367.html Seems like Cuba is encouraging decent mass transit.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
John, that makes sense. Whenever the squirrels look especially plump in autumn, I figure we're in for a very cold winter. But I wonder how they compensate when the temps are wildly fluctuating, as they have been this winter. Yesterday I actually went outside without gloves! If I did this today, I'd probably lose some digits! On Sunday, January 5, 2014 11:19 AM, jr_...@yahoo.com jr_...@yahoo.com wrote: Share, IMO, in the past farmers used to look at the animals' furs to determine how the winter temperature would be like. So, before the start of this winter, the animals in your region of the country may have had a very thick growth of hair in preparation for this winter. :) But, in this modern times, there are weather data from NOAA and other government agencies which can be used for weather predictions through complicated mathematical simulations. If they ever invent the quantum computer, weather prediction should become an exact science.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Oh, PLEASE, Share! If you can't or don't want to answer the question, just say so. Don't pretend you can't find it. How lame. Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room
Comrade Mike, you mean the bourgeoisie. Comrade Judy's question was ridiculous anyway. On 01/05/2014 07:07 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: The *ruling capitolist elite* of course! You know, the *banksters* and Illuminati, Mwahahahahahahahaaha. *From:* authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Saturday, January 4, 2014 11:48 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room They who? Football is probably the closest thing they could come to gladiators killing each other to satisfy the masses with bread and circuses. it's a national distraction.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
I had to laugh when I read this - me? Get enlightened??? I'll settle for enough clients to pay the bills. or selling a few stories - my desires have gone way down since the days I thought enlightenment was possible. Happy New Year to you too. Gotta go check my chicken stew - bought a new 7 qt crock pot and did a very acceptable venison stew last week (courtesy of my nephew who is an avid deer killer) On Sun, 1/5/14, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, January 5, 2014, 4:09 PM Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
RE: [FairfieldLife] RE: Holding back
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2014 12:14 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Holding back I've always compared FFL to the General Topics of forums. This seemed to Rick's intent. It's a place for folks of a similar background to discuss anything. There are already plenty of spiritual experience groups though they may well be moderated by folks who will boot anyone who gets a little to pesky with attacking the messenger than focusing on the message. Partly this is due to the fact that I don’t have time to moderate it. But I think this anything goes approach has proven valuable. Despite all the bickering and pettiness, FFL has been much more lively and interesting than it would have been if some moderator had tried to contain it within his personal comfort zone. On 01/02/2014 08:55 AM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com mailto:doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote: Happy New Year, Ann! Yep, I like the little shops. Regarding truth and accuracy on FFL, that ship sailed a long time ago. What started out as more of an earnest place to discuss spiritual experiences, has devolved into simply a chat room, where anyone can say anything, about anything, and anyone. So if Judy wants to keep upholding the truth on here, that is her choice, but I am with Steve on this one. This place just isn't worth the effort anymore, regarding its original intent, though I do enjoy chatting here, from time to time. I am also a huge proponent of actions speaking louder than words, and I am very active. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, assuming this is what you mean by a question, I think preserving life and preserving the sacredness of life are two different issues because though life is inherently and unconditionally sacred in principle, there are degrees of perceived sacredness in actuality. For example, if a robber with a gun broke into a family's home, a family member would shoot him based on the principle that at that moment, in those circumstances, the lives of the family members were more sacred than the life of the robber. And the legal system would uphold this idea. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 11:25 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Oh, PLEASE, Share! If you can't or don't want to answer the question, just say so. Don't pretend you can't find it. How lame. Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that individuals are not expected to martyr themselves. Fighting for a cause, dying in battle, putting yourself in front of a bullet meant for your loved one - all good. But martyrdom is another. It is not really considered admirable. I like that approach.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let#39;s talk about the big gorilla in the room
Why was it ridiculous, Tovarich? And what's the difference between the bourgeoisie and the ruling capitalist elite? Comrade Mike, you mean the bourgeoisie. Comrade Judy's question was ridiculous anyway. On 01/05/2014 07:07 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: The *ruling capitolist elite* of course! You know, the *banksters* and Illuminati, Mwahahahahahahahaaha. From: authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 4, 2014 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room They who? Football is probably the closest thing they could come to gladiators killing each other to satisfy the masses with bread and circuses. it's a national distraction.
[FairfieldLife] Transcendental Unified Field Masonry
Yes, and the Transcendental Masons. Dear RJ Das, that is a very good observation you make here. This being winter and a storm upon us now these are my favorite days to Be holed-up inside watching Tolstoy's War and Peace. The recently BBC remastered DVD has a lot more scenes edited in that make an even better telling of Tolstoy's War and Peace. A favorite part is the conversation while at a stage stop of the spiritual iconoclast seeker as Pierre talking with the old transcendentalist there that is given in voice as a Mason. That mysticism is quite a lot like old Quakerism and TM transcendentalism also. -Buck in the Dome http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-BBC-Production-Box/dp/6304246579 http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-BBC-Production-Box/dp/6304246579 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Just to offer a contrast, Buck, my father was raised in a Quaker household, too. But he lived his entire life without ever saying a word about it to any of his kids. It wasn't that it didn't mean anything to him. Quite the contrary. It meant enough to him that he kept it to himself and never talked about what he thought or what he believed to anyone else. What they believed was their business, and what he believed was his business. Now *that* is doing Quakerism justice. Anyone is a quaker if they call themselves a quaker. But, if you don't call yourself a quaker then you're probably not a Quaker. Being a Quaker isn't about keeping secrets from your family. There are no hidden or closet Quakers - there is no esoteric meaning to being a Quaker. So, it sounds like your father might have been a Mason - I don't know. There are a lot of secrets with the Masons. One of the rules of Mason is to never talk about being a Mason. They admit to being Masons, but they never talk about the Masonry. They keep all the masonic secrets to themselves. Go figure. Local Masonry in San Antonio On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: No brag just fact. I'm pointing out that the fact you're so proud of is something that most people worth knowing got over a long time ago -- being deadly serious about something as silly as religion. Just to offer a contrast, Buck, my father was raised in a Quaker household, too. But he lived his entire life without ever saying a word about it to any of his kids. It wasn't that it didn't mean anything to him. Quite the contrary. It meant enough to him that he kept it to himself and never talked about what he thought or what he believed to anyone else. What they believed was their business, and what he believed was his business. Now *that* is doing Quakerism justice. Trying to sound more holy or more evolved or more *anything* because of some shit you do that you call religion? That's just posturing and ego-masturbation and embarrassing. Being deadly serious about it? Even more embarrassing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Turqb, my people are old Quaker and I too am Quaker and by experience I take that very seriously and even deadly seriously, which is why I am in Fairfield, Iowa as an attender of the large group meditations in the Golden Domes of the Fairfield meditating community. Well, if you want to brag about something (being serious) that many people would perceive as a weakness or a failing, that's your business. Seriousness is not a virtue. - G.K. Chesterton O
[FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
Resolve: The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of consciousness. So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up in small things, and then it will be yours. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi MJ writes: ..Enlightened Marshy can be explained in light of Girish's behavior, or perhaps I have it all wrong, maybe it is Girish practicing life as is our tradition. Doc writes: Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
[FairfieldLife] Liv Tyler and Sean Lennon Help Raise Funds for TM Scholarships
http://www.tm.org/blog/people/liv-tyler-sean-lennon-raise-funds-for-tm-scholarships/?leadsource=CRM1407 http://www.tm.org/blog/people/liv-tyler-sean-lennon-raise-funds-for-tm-scholarships/?leadsource=CRM1407
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
The legal system would exonerate the shooter, but not because the robber's life was considered less sacred than the lives of the shooter and his or her family. Judy, assuming this is what you mean by a question, (As if you didn't know. As I said, lame.) I think preserving life and preserving the sacredness of life are two different issues because though life is inherently and unconditionally sacred in principle, there are degrees of perceived sacredness in actuality. Then you're saying you don't believe in the principle itself, because it doesn't allow for degrees of perceived sacredness. That would put conditions on it. Nothing wrong with that; I don't believe in it myself. But you've been beating around the bush--sliding off the road--instead of coming right out with it. Now tell us how your belief applies to the guy who claims he's going to starve himself to death if same-sex marriage isn't prohibited. Is his life less sacred than...whose? For example, if a robber with a gun broke into a family's home, a family member would shoot him based on the principle that at that moment, in those circumstances, the lives of the family members were more sacred than the life of the robber. And the legal system would uphold this idea. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 11:25 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, PLEASE, Share! If you can't or don't want to answer the question, just say so. Don't pretend you can't find it. How lame. Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not that I've spoken with any martyrs! Of course he thinks of himself as a martyr: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle He is most likely mentally disturbed. wayback wrote: Share, I disagree, especially for an action like gay marriage, that really does not harm you or harm others. It is a difference of opinions. There are so many many other truly significant issues on this planet. Starve yourself to death over this? Please, go find someone to donate your time or money to - someone suffering or hungry. Another thought, it is my understanding that in Judaism life is held to be so precious that
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
The family member shooting the robber is by action saying that the lives of family members are more sacred in those circumstances and the legal system would in essence be upholding that opinion. I think the guy starving himself to death is saying that his belief about gay marriage is more sacred than his life. I do believe in the principle that all life is sacred. I also see that in actual, day to day living, people make choices that express imo, their belief in degrees of sacredness. I do too. For example, as much as I hate to do it, I will kill certain bugs if I find them in my house. I say a little prayer for them. But dispatch them I do! On Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: The legal system would exonerate the shooter, but not because the robber's life was considered less sacred than the lives of the shooter and his or her family. Judy, assuming this is what you mean by a question, (As if you didn't know. As I said, lame.) I think preserving life and preserving the sacredness of life are two different issues because though life is inherently and unconditionally sacred in principle, there are degrees of perceived sacredness in actuality. Then you're saying you don't believe in the principle itself, because it doesn't allow for degrees of perceived sacredness. That would put conditions on it. Nothing wrong with that; I don't believe in it myself. But you've been beating around the bush--sliding off the road--instead of coming right out with it. Now tell us how your belief applies to the guy who claims he's going to starve himself to death if same-sex marriage isn't prohibited. Is his life less sacred than...whose? For example, if a robber with a gun broke into a family's home, a family member would shoot him based on the principle that at that moment, in those circumstances, the lives of the family members were more sacred than the life of the robber. And the legal system would uphold this idea. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 11:25 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, PLEASE, Share! If you can't or don't want to answer the question, just say so. Don't pretend you can't find it. How lame. Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the issue when you can't come up with a solid case. Judy, I agree that life is sacred. And I also recognize that other people may have very different ideas than mine about what constitutes that sacredness, what is necessary for it to be preserved. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 9:57 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Non sequitur. But wayback, if one were to die in battle or put one's self in front of a bullet, that entails violence and violence involving another person or persons! Whereas starving one's self does not involve getting or giving harm to another. The point is that suicide (in this case by starvation) for a cause that does not involve preventing physical harm to another is against the principle of the sacredness of life. Like I said, I don't agree with his cause, but I admire that he's taking a strong, non violent stand about it. He's doing violence to himself. That is not the only way--and certainly not the most effective way--to take a strong, non violent stand against gay marriage. BTW, he didn't sound like a martyr to me at all. Not
[FairfieldLife] RE: Transcendental Unified Field Masonry
are you a Meditator? In the War and Peace script, Unified Field Masonry: Tolstoy's War and Peace, Book V: 1806 - 07 Paraphrased: Pierre the non-meditator asking: Allow me to ask, he said, are you a Meditator? Bazdeev the old meditator answering: Yes, I belong to the movement of the transcendental meditators, said the stranger, looking deeper and deeper into the non-meditator's eyes. And in their name and my own I hold out a brotherly hand to you. I am afraid, said the non-meditator, smiling, and wavering between the confidence the personality of the transcendental meditator inspired in him and his own habit of ridiculing the meditator beliefs--I am afraid I am very far from understanding--how am I to put it?--I am afraid my way of looking at the world is so opposed to yours that we shall not understand one another. Yes, and the Transcendental Masons. Dear RJ Das, that is a very good observation you make here. This being winter and a storm upon us now these are my favorite days to Be holed-up inside watching Tolstoy's War and Peace. The recently BBC remastered DVD has a lot more scenes edited in that make an even better telling of Tolstoy's War and Peace. A favorite part is the conversation while at a stage stop of the spiritual iconoclast seeker as Pierre talking with the old transcendentalist there that is given in voice as a Mason. That mysticism is quite a lot like old Quakerism and TM transcendentalism also. -Buck in the Dome http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-BBC-Production-Box/dp/6304246579 http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-BBC-Production-Box/dp/6304246579 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Just to offer a contrast, Buck, my father was raised in a Quaker household, too. But he lived his entire life without ever saying a word about it to any of his kids. It wasn't that it didn't mean anything to him. Quite the contrary. It meant enough to him that he kept it to himself and never talked about what he thought or what he believed to anyone else. What they believed was their business, and what he believed was his business. Now *that* is doing Quakerism justice. Anyone is a quaker if they call themselves a quaker. But, if you don't call yourself a quaker then you're probably not a Quaker. Being a Quaker isn't about keeping secrets from your family. There are no hidden or closet Quakers - there is no esoteric meaning to being a Quaker. So, it sounds like your father might have been a Mason - I don't know. There are a lot of secrets with the Masons. One of the rules of Mason is to never talk about being a Mason. They admit to being Masons, but they never talk about the Masonry. They keep all the masonic secrets to themselves. Go figure. Local Masonry in San Antonio On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: No brag just fact. I'm pointing out that the fact you're so proud of is something that most people worth knowing got over a long time ago -- being deadly serious about something as silly as religion. Just to offer a contrast, Buck, my father was raised in a Quaker household, too. But he lived his entire life without ever saying a word about it to any of his kids. It wasn't that it didn't mean anything to him. Quite the contrary. It meant enough to him that he kept it to himself and never talked about what he thought or what he believed to anyone else. What they believed was their business, and what he believed was his business. Now *that* is doing Quakerism justice. Trying to sound more holy or more evolved or more *anything* because of some shit you do that you call religion? That's just posturing and ego-masturbation and embarrassing. Being deadly serious about it? Even more embarrassing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Turqb, my people are old Quaker and I too am Quaker and by experience I take that very seriously and even deadly seriously, which is why I am in Fairfield, Iowa as an attender of the large group meditations in the Golden Domes of the Fairfield meditating community. Well, if you want to brag about something (being serious) that many people would perceive as a weakness or a failing, that's your business. Seriousness is not a virtue. - G.K. Chesterton Om
Re: [FairfieldLife] 2014 Predictions
Neither are Raahu and Ketu planets??
[FairfieldLife] Re: Transcendental Unified Field Masonry
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: are you a Meditator? As if the answer to that question could *possibly* be more important than the answer to the question, Are you a sentient being, a fellow human being, and thus my equal on this planet?
[FairfieldLife] RE: Transcendental Unified Field Masonry
Oh, Buck, Paraphrasing the Bible is OK, but doing the same to Tolstoy is sacriligeous! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: are you a Meditator? In the War and Peace script, Unified Field Masonry: Tolstoy's War and Peace, Book V: 1806 - 07 Paraphrased: Pierre the non-meditator asking: Allow me to ask, he said, are you a Meditator? Bazdeev the old meditator answering: Yes, I belong to the movement of the transcendental meditators, said the stranger, looking deeper and deeper into the non-meditator's eyes. And in their name and my own I hold out a brotherly hand to you. I am afraid, said the non-meditator, smiling, and wavering between the confidence the personality of the transcendental meditator inspired in him and his own habit of ridiculing the meditator beliefs--I am afraid I am very far from understanding--how am I to put it?--I am afraid my way of looking at the world is so opposed to yours that we shall not understand one another. Yes, and the Transcendental Masons. Dear RJ Das, that is a very good observation you make here. This being winter and a storm upon us now these are my favorite days to Be holed-up inside watching Tolstoy's War and Peace. The recently BBC remastered DVD has a lot more scenes edited in that make an even better telling of Tolstoy's War and Peace. A favorite part is the conversation while at a stage stop of the spiritual iconoclast seeker as Pierre talking with the old transcendentalist there that is given in voice as a Mason. That mysticism is quite a lot like old Quakerism and TM transcendentalism also. -Buck in the Dome http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-BBC-Production-Box/dp/6304246579 http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-BBC-Production-Box/dp/6304246579 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Just to offer a contrast, Buck, my father was raised in a Quaker household, too. But he lived his entire life without ever saying a word about it to any of his kids. It wasn't that it didn't mean anything to him. Quite the contrary. It meant enough to him that he kept it to himself and never talked about what he thought or what he believed to anyone else. What they believed was their business, and what he believed was his business. Now *that* is doing Quakerism justice. Anyone is a quaker if they call themselves a quaker. But, if you don't call yourself a quaker then you're probably not a Quaker. Being a Quaker isn't about keeping secrets from your family. There are no hidden or closet Quakers - there is no esoteric meaning to being a Quaker. So, it sounds like your father might have been a Mason - I don't know. There are a lot of secrets with the Masons. One of the rules of Mason is to never talk about being a Mason. They admit to being Masons, but they never talk about the Masonry. They keep all the masonic secrets to themselves. Go figure. Local Masonry in San Antonio On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: No brag just fact. I'm pointing out that the fact you're so proud of is something that most people worth knowing got over a long time ago -- being deadly serious about something as silly as religion. Just to offer a contrast, Buck, my father was raised in a Quaker household, too. But he lived his entire life without ever saying a word about it to any of his kids. It wasn't that it didn't mean anything to him. Quite the contrary. It meant enough to him that he kept it to himself and never talked about what he thought or what he believed to anyone else. What they believed was their business, and what he believed was his business. Now *that* is doing Quakerism justice. Trying to sound more holy or more evolved or more *anything* because of some shit you do that you call religion? That's just posturing and ego-masturbation and embarrassing. Being deadly serious about it? Even more embarrassing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Turqb, my people are old Quaker and I too am Quaker and by experience I take that very seriously and even deadly seriously, which is why I am in Fairfield, Iowa as an attender of the large group meditations in the Golden Domes of the Fairfield meditating community. Well, if you want to brag about something (being serious) that many people would perceive as a weakness or a failing, that's your business. Seriousness is not a virtue. - G.K. Chesterton Om
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
No, now you're going way off the road and using sacred to mean whatever you want it to mean (in this case, more valuable to me is probably closer), not what it means in the context of the principle in question. The family member shooting the robber is by action saying that the lives of family members are more sacred in those circumstances and the legal system would in essence be upholding that opinion. I think the guy starving himself to death is saying that his belief about gay marriage is more sacred than his life. In which case he's saying he's a martyr. And as Susan pointed out to start with, martyring oneself is against the principles of Judaism. I do believe in the principle that all life is sacred. I also see that in actual, day to day living, people make choices that express imo, their belief in degrees of sacredness. Then they don't believe in the principle. You can't have it both ways. I do too. For example, as much as I hate to do it, I will kill certain bugs if I find them in my house. I say a little prayer for them. But dispatch them I do! The principle Susan was talking about is that human life is sacred, so this is another non sequitur, no matter how holy you think it makes you look. In any case, Susan's main point was that going on a hunger strike (or as Barry, the Writer, puts it, a hunger fast) is a terrible waste of effort given how much real suffering there is in the world that he could be doing something to prevent. I agree with Susan, there isn't a thing admirable about what he's doing. Either he's looking for publicity, or he's mentally disturbed. I find it interesting that you haven't addressed this at all. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: The legal system would exonerate the shooter, but not because the robber's life was considered less sacred than the lives of the shooter and his or her family. Judy, assuming this is what you mean by a question, (As if you didn't know. As I said, lame.) I think preserving life and preserving the sacredness of life are two different issues because though life is inherently and unconditionally sacred in principle, there are degrees of perceived sacredness in actuality. Then you're saying you don't believe in the principle itself, because it doesn't allow for degrees of perceived sacredness. That would put conditions on it. Nothing wrong with that; I don't believe in it myself. But you've been beating around the bush--sliding off the road--instead of coming right out with it. Now tell us how your belief applies to the guy who claims he's going to starve himself to death if same-sex marriage isn't prohibited. Is his life less sacred than...whose? For example, if a robber with a gun broke into a family's home, a family member would shoot him based on the principle that at that moment, in those circumstances, the lives of the family members were more sacred than the life of the robber. And the legal system would uphold this idea. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 11:25 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, PLEASE, Share! If you can't or don't want to answer the question, just say so. Don't pretend you can't find it. How lame. Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car on an icy road--you keep sliding off the point at issue rather than dealing with it directly. You use this as a tactic to prevent rational discussion that might show you to be on the wrong side of the
[FairfieldLife] Re: Transcendental Unified Field Masonry
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: are you a Meditator? As if the answer to that question could *possibly* be more important than the answer to the question, Are you a sentient being, a fellow human being, and thus my equal on this planet? I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. I immediately ran over and said Stop! Don't do it! Why shouldn't I? he said. I said, Well, there's so much to live for! Like what? Well ... are you religious or atheist? Religious. Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish? Christian. Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant? Protestant. Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist? Baptist. Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord? Baptist Church of God. Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God? Reformed Baptist Church of God. Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915? Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915! To which I said, Die, heretic scum! and pushed him off.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
Doc, very wise personal advice you give below to MJ and people in his state. To finding that practical state of an embodied illumination of grace where one can then actually add balm in field effect of coherence to incoherence. That Christ-like state where one can bring along a spiritual neutrality while also having compassion as opposed to just adding anger to anger at that level all the time. It is a beautiful practical advice in spiritual experience. Thank you. Jai George Fox and all the real spiritual gurus devs, -Buck in the Dome Resolve: The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of consciousness. So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up in small things, and then it will be yours. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi MJ writes: ..Enlightened Marshy can be explained in light of Girish's behavior, or perhaps I have it all wrong, maybe it is Girish practicing life as is our tradition. Doc writes: Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
And pray tell, just what state am I in and how do you know? On Sun, 1/5/14, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com dhamiltony...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, January 5, 2014, 7:37 PM Doc, very wise personal advice you give below to MJ and people in his state. To finding that practical state of an embodied illumination of grace where one can then actually add balm in field effect of coherence to incoherence. That Christ-like state where one can bring along a spiritual neutrality while also having compassion as opposed to just adding anger to anger at that level all the time. It is a beautiful practical advice in spiritual experience. Thank you. Jai George Fox and all the real spiritual gurus devs,-Buck in the Dome Resolve: The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of consciousness. So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up in small things, and then it will be yours. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi MJ writes:..Enlightened Marshy can be explained in light of Girish's behavior, or perhaps I have it all wrong, maybe it is Girish practicing life as is our tradition. Doc writes: Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
[FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Bhairitu, It appears that Joni Patry was originally a western astrologer who learned jyotish later. So, now she is integrating her western astrology knowledge with jyotish analysis. There are a few American astrologers who are doing this type of work, such as David Frawley, Dennis Harness, Brendan Feeley and Dennis Flaherty. However, one does get some very interesting insights using western astrology as taught by Santos Bonacci in his videos called, Prisca Theologia. In particular, his points relating to syncretism is very a propo in understanding the western culture, history and the Judeo-Christian religions. Having said that, yes, you're correct in saying that Pluto is no longer considered a planet. But a tradition has been established in western astrology to determine its meaning and signification in context with astrological analysis. Nonetheless, I personally don't use it as you can get the same results using the 9 grahas recognized in jyotish.
[FairfieldLife] RIP Phil Everly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTYe9eDqxe8#t=57 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTYe9eDqxe8#t=57
[FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Carde, That's correct. But there are also several shadowy grahas, such as Mandi and the Upagrahas, which are discussed by Mantreshwar in his classic book, Phala Deepika.
[FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Bhairitu, What we're seeing in the economic and political fronts is the power of human consciousness in its attempt to solve the problems in the world today. For example, the US Federal Reserve officials attempted to use the available resources and financial tools to stabilize the US and world economy. So far, they've managed to improve the economy through its Quantitative Easing (QE) program by buying US bonds in the world market. I originally thought that this would eventually lead to high inflation. But so far it hasn't. The next hurdle will be this coming February when the US will again reach its debt limit. The politicians will again have to debate whether to raise the debt limit or not. It's obvious to me that the debt limit must be raised. But Senator Cruz and his Tea Party members may have other ideas which can disrupt the government operations and the eventual collapse of the stock market. On a positive note, since Jupiter will eventually enter its exaltation sign in Cancer this summer, the collective world consciousness should change for the better which should alleviate the tensions that we're experiencing now. At least, that's the positive forecast that we can see using jyotish analysis.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
John, astrology has it's basis on the visual planets and the nodes. Western astrology started adding the newly discovered planets and making things up about them. The visual planets and nodes had already centuries of observation. You can't see Uranus and Neptune with the naked eye so they're just making things up about them. Same for Pluto. It's like western astrologers were having problems with their charts working out because they don't take in account the precession of the equinox as jyotish does so they adopted these outer planets. The lunar nodes were observed as points where eclipses take place. They are a scientific part of astronomy. They have been personified as Rahu and Ketu to make them easier to understand for simple people. As I've mentioned here before one of the astrologers from India once pointed out that most Indian astrologers who make good predictions use very simple techniques. I also pointed out how many westerners trying to do Jyotish glum onto the icing instead of the cake and make lame predictions. It may well be just as primitive tribes counted moons the evolution of jyotish may well have been tracking cycles via the other planets. These cycles may have nothing to do at all with the planets themselves other than they occur near repeating positions of these planets. So they were used as markers to see if the same kind of events would reoccur. I met some of these western astrologers at a joint jyotish and western astrology conference in Lynnwood, Washington in 1996. The jyotish practitioners were mostly humble and spiritual and the western ones were about their image and like Amway salespeople. On 01/05/2014 11:59 AM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote: Bhairitu, It appears that Joni Patry was originally a western astrologer who learned jyotish later. So, now she is integrating her western astrology knowledge with jyotish analysis. There are a few American astrologers who are doing this type of work, such as David Frawley, Dennis Harness, Brendan Feeley and Dennis Flaherty. However, one does get some very interesting insights using western astrology as taught by Santos Bonacci in his videos called, Prisca Theologia. In particular, his points relating to syncretism is very a propo in understanding the western culture, history and the Judeo-Christian religions. Having said that, yes, you're correct in saying that Pluto is no longer considered a planet. But a tradition has been established in western astrology to determine its meaning and signification in context with astrological analysis. Nonetheless, I personally don't use it as you can get the same results using the 9 grahas recognized in jyotish.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Holding back
It makes for an interesting psych lab or mouse maze. ;-) On 01/05/2014 09:29 AM, Rick Archer wrote: *From:*FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Bhairitu *Sent:* Thursday, January 2, 2014 12:14 PM *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Holding back I've always compared FFL to the General Topics of forums. This seemed to Rick's intent. It's a place for folks of a similar background to discuss anything. There are already plenty of spiritual experience groups though they may well be moderated by folks who will boot anyone who gets a little to pesky with attacking the messenger than focusing on the message. Partly this is due to the fact that I don’t have time to moderate it. But I think this anything goes approach has proven valuable. Despite all the bickering and pettiness, FFL has been much more lively and interesting than it would have been if some moderator had tried to contain it within his personal comfort zone. On 01/02/2014 08:55 AM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com mailto:doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote: Happy New Year, Ann! Yep, I like the little shops. Regarding truth and accuracy on FFL, that ship sailed a long time ago. What started out as more of an earnest place to discuss spiritual experiences, has devolved into simply a chat room, where anyone can say anything, about anything, and anyone. So if Judy wants to keep upholding the truth on here, that is her choice, but I am with Steve on this one. This place just isn't worth the effort anymore, regarding its original intent, though I do enjoy chatting here, from time to time. I am also a huge proponent of actions speaking louder than words, and I am very active. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] 2014 Predictions
They are the well observed lunar nodes near where eclipses take place and are part of astronomy. The mean node calculation is very simple (one line of computer code) though they aren't that accurate for predicting eclipses while true nodes which take into account the earth's wobble are. As I mentioned elsewhere they are personified as Rahu and Ketu for easy understanding. On 01/05/2014 10:57 AM, cardemais...@yahoo.com wrote: Neither are Raahu and Ketu planets??
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let#39;s talk about the big gorilla in the room
It was ridiculous because you knew the answer to begin with. Asking it made you look stoopid. Besides my statement was facetious so like someone said the other day you seem to be irony challenged. I would expect you to be better than that. There is no difference between the bourgeoisie and capitalist elite. Bourgeoisie is just an antiquated term for the same thing. But I do think Marx rather lamely defined it too since it would have indicted artists and musicians too. He should have just stuck to those who profit off the labors of others which apparently Mike believes is OK. On 01/05/2014 09:39 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: *Why was it ridiculous, Tovarich?* *And what's the difference between the bourgeoisie and the ruling capitalist elite?* Comrade Mike, you mean the bourgeoisie. Comrade Judy's question was ridiculous anyway. On 01/05/2014 07:07 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: The *ruling capitolist elite* of course! You know, the *banksters* and Illuminati, Mwahahahahahahahaaha. *From:* authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Saturday, January 4, 2014 11:48 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room They who? Football is probably the closest thing they could come to gladiators killing each other to satisfy the masses with bread and circuses. it's a national distraction.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
Bhairitu, I attended that conference back in 1996. As I remember, KN Rao was there who started the conference with a puja. But he didn't make any lecture presentation. Also, David Frawley was there and I chatted with him about TM and Chopra's new meditation mantras. He said that Chopra consulted with him in designing the mantras that was going to be used for his new movement. Then, I attended Chakrapani Ullal's class in the conference. If you were in that class, we may have crossed paths and didn't even know about it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Share, you are about two steps away.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Check
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
and Mate.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Steve, your posts don't contain the previous post so I'm not sure what you're replying to. For example, what did you mean when you said I was 2 steps away? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:47 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote: Check
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
I think you checkmated Judy.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
That triplet somewhere in the B-Gita, ..and 'equanimity towards the wicked'. mjackson74@... wrote And pray tell, just what state am I in and how do you know? Yes, as opposed to just adding more anger to anger and only being aggravating to a deeper inner and outer flow of the spiritualized subtle bodies there is that cultivated state of Being embedded with spiritual depth where comes the triplet within something enlightened in 'rejoicing for the good', a being of 'compassion for the sufferings', and 'neutrality towards the wicked'. That neutrality is not of indifference but a state of Unperturbed-idity Unified Field Being. -Buck in the Dome Doc, very wise personal advice you give below to MJ and people in his state. To finding that practical state of an embodied illumination of grace where one can then actually add balm in field effect of coherence to incoherence. That Christ-like state where one can bring along a spiritual neutrality while also having compassion as opposed to just adding anger to anger at that level all the time. It is a beautiful practical advice in spiritual experience. Thank you. Jai George Fox and all the real spiritual gurus devs, -Buck in the Dome Resolve: The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of consciousness. So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up in small things, and then it will be yours. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi MJ writes: ..Enlightened Marshy can be explained in light of Girish's behavior, or perhaps I have it all wrong, maybe it is Girish practicing life as is our tradition. Doc writes: Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: 2014 Predictions
That was a very small conference. I hung out a bit with Hart DeFouw because he wasn't into ACVA's new interest in sports because Rao had criticized western jyotishis for their disinterest in it. So they were following the baseball playoffs (yawn). David did my chart in the ayurveda/jyotish session he did. Did you attend that? I miss those conferences but ACVA became too focused on legitimizing jyotish with their certifications and trying to set up colleges. They they started having symposiums in places like Hawaii which were beyond my budget. And the symposiums became more focused on beginners so there was little there for the old timers. The early symposiums were really fun (like the ones in San Rafael and even San Diego). On 01/05/2014 01:07 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote: Bhairitu, I attended that conference back in 1996. As I remember, KN Rao was there who started the conference with a puja. But he didn't make any lecture presentation. Also, David Frawley was there and I chatted with him about TM and Chopra's new meditation mantras. He said that Chopra consulted with him in designing the mantras that was going to be used for his new movement. Then, I attended Chakrapani Ullal's class in the conference. If you were in that class, we may have crossed paths and didn't even know about it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Thanks, Steve, it's hard for me to tell. I think I'm being very clear but her response often indicates otherwise. I think Judy and I simply think differently. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:55 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote: I think you checkmated Judy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
It doesn't even matter, Share. Stevie would declare you the winner whatever you or I said. And he ain't gonna quote because he doesn't want to look STOOOPID. Haven't you ever noticed how often he refuses to back up his claims? Steve, your posts don't contain the previous post so I'm not sure what you're replying to. For example, what did you mean when you said I was 2 steps away? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:47 PM, steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@... wrote: Check
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Judy, actually I think human life is always about having it both ways. Meaning that we humans are matter and spirit, each informing the other, and sometimes not jiving with each other. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 1:25 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: No, now you're going way off the road and using sacred to mean whatever you want it to mean (in this case, more valuable to me is probably closer), not what it means in the context of the principle in question. The family member shooting the robber is by action saying that the lives of family members are more sacred in those circumstances and the legal system would in essence be upholding that opinion. I think the guy starving himself to death is saying that his belief about gay marriage is more sacred than his life. In which case he's saying he's a martyr. And as Susan pointed out to start with, martyring oneself is against the principles of Judaism. I do believe in the principle that all life is sacred. I also see that in actual, day to day living, people make choices that express imo, their belief in degrees of sacredness. Then they don't believe in the principle. You can't have it both ways. I do too. For example, as much as I hate to do it, I will kill certain bugs if I find them in my house. I say a little prayer for them. But dispatch them I do! The principle Susan was talking about is that human life is sacred, so this is another non sequitur, no matter how holy you think it makes you look. In any case, Susan's main point was that going on a hunger strike (or as Barry, the Writer, puts it, a hunger fast) is a terrible waste of effort given how much real suffering there is in the world that he could be doing something to prevent. I agree with Susan, there isn't a thing admirable about what he's doing. Either he's looking for publicity, or he's mentally disturbed. I find it interesting that you haven't addressed this at all. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: The legal system would exonerate the shooter, but not because the robber's life was considered less sacred than the lives of the shooter and his or her family. Judy, assuming this is what you mean by a question, (As if you didn't know. As I said, lame.) I think preserving life and preserving the sacredness of life are two different issues because though life is inherently and unconditionally sacred in principle, there are degrees of perceived sacredness in actuality. Then you're saying you don't believe in the principle itself, because it doesn't allow for degrees of perceived sacredness. That would put conditions on it. Nothing wrong with that; I don't believe in it myself. But you've been beating around the bush--sliding off the road--instead of coming right out with it. Now tell us how your belief applies to the guy who claims he's going to starve himself to death if same-sex marriage isn't prohibited. Is his life less sacred than...whose? For example, if a robber with a gun broke into a family's home, a family member would shoot him based on the principle that at that moment, in those circumstances, the lives of the family members were more sacred than the life of the robber. And the legal system would uphold this idea. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 11:25 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, PLEASE, Share! If you can't or don't want to answer the question, just say so. Don't pretend you can't find it. How lame. Judy, except for the first sentence of this post of yours, I don't see where you actually asked me a question! If I missed it, could you repeat? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:44 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe I said one way or the other whether I agreed with the principle, did I? No, I'm not against abortion. Try again. See if you can keep the car on the road this time and actually answer the question I asked. From that line of reasoning, Judy, can we assume that you are against abortion? On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:31 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Oh, do elaborate for us on why you believe preserving the sacredness of life is a different issue from preserving life, given that the principle in question is that life is inherently and unconditionally sacred. Judy, I don't agree with you about what it takes to preserve the sacredness of life. Yes, I agree that to preserve life, one must stay alive. But that's a different issue imo. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:20 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Um, Share, what it takes for the sacredness of life to be preserved isn't a matter of opinion or ideas, it's a matter of biological facts. If you die by your own hand, you have deliberately destroyed the sacredness of your own life. You aren't engaging with what wayback and I are saying. As usual with any matter of dispute, your mind is like a car
[FairfieldLife] RE: RIP Phil Everly
The Everly Brothers Reunion Live at the Royal Albert Hall in London, 1983 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXkXY_BEd4Y http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXkXY_BEd4Y I know it's a long video with Phil Everly, who with his brother Don made up the duo the Everly Brothers, but they both deserve a long look in memory Kings of duet harmony captured the yearning and angst of a nation of teenage baby boomers looking for a way to express themselves The Beatles, early in their career, once referred to themselves as the English Everly Brothers. And Bob Dylan once said, We owe these guys everything. They started it all. Bye bye love Bye bye sweet caress Hello emptiness I feel like I could die Bye bye my love goodbye Wake up Phil in Paradise http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X7b2E_Jq-k http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X7b2E_Jq-k
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
It's not so much that you aren't being clear as that you aren't engaging with what's on the road, with the actual issue and the points it raises. You go off on all these side trips in order to distract from what you can't deal with. You did this from the very first post Susan made. And poor Stevie doesn't know the difference. He thinks any response you come up with must be a killer because it's you who made it. (Especially when it's in a discussion with me, of course.) Thanks, Steve, it's hard for me to tell. I think I'm being very clear but her response often indicates otherwise. I think Judy and I simply think differently. On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:55 PM, steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@... wrote: I think you checkmated Judy.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
'Firm as a rock the soul shall shine.' That is true and reminds me of a beautiful hymn, “Unshaken as the sacred hill, and firm as mountains be, firm as a rock the soul shall rest that leans, Om Unified Field on thee.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WaVSPkr_LY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WaVSPkr_LY There is that triplet somewhere in the B-Gita, ..and 'equanimity towards the wicked'. mjackson74@... wrote And pray tell, just what state am I in and how do you know? Yes, as opposed to just adding more anger to anger and only being aggravating to a deeper inner and outer flow of the spiritualized subtle bodies there is that cultivated state of Being embedded with spiritual depth where comes the triplet within something enlightened in 'rejoicing for the good', a being of 'compassion for the sufferings', and 'neutrality towards the wicked'. That neutrality is not of indifference but a state of Unperturbed-idity Unified Field Being. -Buck in the Dome Doc, very wise personal advice you give below to MJ and people in his state. To finding that practical state of an embodied illumination of grace where one can then actually add balm in field effect of coherence to incoherence. That Christ-like state where one can bring along a spiritual neutrality while also having compassion as opposed to just adding anger to anger at that level all the time. It is a beautiful practical advice in spiritual experience. Thank you. Jai George Fox and all the real spiritual gurus devs, -Buck in the Dome Resolve: The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of consciousness. So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up in small things, and then it will be yours. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi MJ writes: ..Enlightened Marshy can be explained in light of Girish's behavior, or perhaps I have it all wrong, maybe it is Girish practicing life as is our tradition. Doc writes: Hey, MJ --- Happy New Year! my unasked for and unwelcome advice would be to stop speculating about some old dude in India, get enlightened yourself, and find out the truth of the expression, first-hand. Simpler, and far more satisfying.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let#39;s talk about the big gorilla in the room
Well, I suspected in general terms, only because that's always who you blame. But I did think there'd be more to the story than that! It was ridiculous because you knew the answer to begin with. Asking it made you look stoopid. Besides my statement was facetious so like someone said the other day you seem to be irony challenged. I would expect you to be better than that. I figured, again, that there would be more to it than that. There is no difference between the bourgeoisie and capitalist elite. Bourgeoisie is just an antiquated term for the same thing. But I do think Marx rather lamely defined it too since it would have indicted artists and musicians too. He should have just stuck to those who profit off the labors of others which apparently Mike believes is OK. On 01/05/2014 09:39 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: Why was it ridiculous, Tovarich? And what's the difference between the bourgeoisie and the ruling capitalist elite? Comrade Mike, you mean the bourgeoisie. Comrade Judy's question was ridiculous anyway. On 01/05/2014 07:07 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: The *ruling capitolist elite* of course! You know, the *banksters* and Illuminati, Mwahahahahahahahaaha. From: authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 4, 2014 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Let's talk about the big gorilla in the room They who? Football is probably the closest thing they could come to gladiators killing each other to satisfy the masses with bread and circuses. it's a national distraction.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
My Lord Judy, you didn't see it coming did you? You just got your clock cleaned! Just gracefully move off the stage and regroup. It's okay. Really.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Share, you should share more of these tidbits on Batgap. Can you imagine how they would have said the same thing!!
[FairfieldLife] And Lord Ganesh testing the water of FFL
And Lord Ganesh testing the water of FFL Sure you'll think Remarkable echoes of Rudyard Kipling’s children’s story, The Elephant’s Child, which tells how the animals got their trunks after a crocodile grabbed a baby elephant’s nose and kept pulling it stretching it out and creating its trunk- and proves it might have been true (At least seems happen to Him in FFL -Fairy Field -forever Live, now--?) But what he is doing with a long trunk? Nosing in Fairy Field around looking for something to be found --? OTOH Isn't my nosy nose not long enough?-do i need a trunk ? Lord Ganesh doesn't like it when you start bite noses Isn't it just a question which mere number poses ? By remembering always keep His nosy nose clean Mark my word,-then no amount of troubles will be seen Breaking peaceful 'maun vrat' with 'Happy 2014
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Yep, Share really took auth to the cleaners in this thread. Auth flails around hopelessly but Share is always one step ahead. And of course, auth hates losing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
[FairfieldLife] RE: The game is afoot again
Just finished watching the second episode in the new series of Sherlock and I can inform FFLifers it was the most self-indulgent pile of crap I've ever witnessed on TV. Two-thirds of the story was devoted to Sherlock and Watson's relationship with some cringe-worthy attempts at humour and generous dollops of mawkish buddy-bonding. The third segment devoted to an actual attempt at crime-solving was leaden and unconvincing. You have been warned - ignore any favourable reviews.. Fortunately, this Christmas I was gifted the first series of The Mentalist with crime solver Patrick Jane. I'd not seen it before and it is way more involving and clever than Sherlock. Simon Baker as the former psychic is an engaging and amusing character.
[FairfieldLife] Jet in #39;near miss#39; with UFO
An airline pilot reports a close encounter with a UFO near Heathrow Airport which has baffled the aviation authorities. Something's out there. http://tinyurl.com/pv2sgzs http://tinyurl.com/pv2sgzs
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
As I told Share, Stevie-poo, you can't tell the difference between good arguments and bad ones. The only distinction you're capable of making is whose argument it is: If it's Share's, it's Good; if it's Judy's, it's Bad. If you had any clue other than that, you'd be able to actually participate in the discussion, or at least provide some analysis. But you can't do that. All you can do is throw spitballs from the sidelines. My Lord Judy, you didn't see it coming did you? You just got your clock cleaned! Just gracefully move off the stage and regroup. It's okay. Really.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Regarding Girish
Girish Varna, the son of one of the MMY's paternal uncles (The first complaint in the case was lodged on March 24. After nine months, police registered a case against Varma on December 29 and arrested him the next day. Prisoner No. 6364 on judicial remand till January 15) broke his silence on Saturday by delivering a religious discourse to a group of inmates. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhopal/Maharishi-Vidya-Mandir-chairman-breaks-maun-vrat-in-jail/articleshow/28441089.cms http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhopal/Maharishi-Vidya-Mandir-chairman-breaks-maun-vrat-in-jail/articleshow/28441089.cms ( http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhopal/Maharishi-Vidya-Mandir-chairman-breaks-maun-vrat-in-jail/articleshow/28441089.cmsramraj radio is down http://www.ramrajtv.com/%5Cwww.ramrajyaradio.com http://www.ramrajtv.com/%5Cwww.ramrajyaradio.com and Tv http://www.ramrajtv.com/index.html http://www.ramrajtv.com/index.html “Varma said he wanted to resume work on the book on religion he was writing. He asked his mother and Vasudev to send the text of the book that he was writing so that he can finalize it, as he has a lot of free time in jail. “ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8A3ZlbojLM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8A3ZlbojLM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTcKzZtbxAcfeature=c4-overview-vllist=PLC38F5CD9DEDCDC78 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTcKzZtbxAcfeature=c4-overview-vllist=PLC38F5CD9DEDCDC78 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTcKzZtbxAcfeature=c4-overview-vllist=PLC38F5CD9DEDCDC78
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Was wondering when you'd barge in, Feste. But like Stevie, either you can't tell the difference between a good argument and a bad one, or you feel you have to support Share and oppose me just on general principles even when she's wrong. And like Stevie, you're incapable of actually participating in the discussion. Let's see, now: Do you admire the guy who's starving himself to death to protest same-sex marriage? (Regardless of whether you agree with his position--is this a good way to achieve his goal?) Yep, Share really took auth to the cleaners in this thread. Auth flails around hopelessly but Share is always one step ahead. And of course, auth hates losing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Nice try, auth, but I am not taking the bait. I think it's best if you just accept your defeat and move on. Tomorrow is another day. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Was wondering when you'd barge in, Feste. But like Stevie, either you can't tell the difference between a good argument and a bad one, or you feel you have to support Share and oppose me just on general principles even when she's wrong. And like Stevie, you're incapable of actually participating in the discussion. Let's see, now: Do you admire the guy who's starving himself to death to protest same-sex marriage? (Regardless of whether you agree with his position--is this a good way to achieve his goal?) Yep, Share really took auth to the cleaners in this thread. Auth flails around hopelessly but Share is always one step ahead. And of course, auth hates losing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
[FairfieldLife] Fuges and Fuging Tunes in Spiritual Practice
Fuging Tunes, This is some really awesome bhakti harmony singing in method. For instance, watch her and you can see and hear inside the fuging of the whole group practice as it unfolds. This a distinctly American technique in methodology, it is chakra tuning stuff to be in the middle of and then with some good text overlay it becomes completely Yoga Patanjali-iac like. A spiritual practice. For instance, Bridgewater http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7CWwgt_2IM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7CWwgt_2IM Blessings, -Buck fuging tune, a form of hymnody developed by American composers of the so-called First New England school during the period of the American Revolution (1775–83). A typical fuging tune places the tune in the tenor voice and harmonizes it with block chords. In the next-to-last phrase, called the fuging section or fuge, each of the four voices enters in turn singing the tune or a slightly varied version of it. The last phrase is again chordal. The fuge, although all four parts follow each other in melodic imitation, is not a classical fugue http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/221495/fugue but merely a passage that uses imitative writing. The term fuging tune is a shortened form of the English phrase “fuging psalm tune,” a type of hymn http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/279350/hymnsetting popular in England in the 17th and early 18th centuries. Minor features of style—angular melodic writing, rhythmic simplicity and precision, and diatonic harmony (i.e., little use of notes foreign to the composition’s key)—and the placement of the fuging section in the next-to-last, not the last, line distinguish the American fuging tune from its British parent. James Lyon’s collection Urania (1762) contains the first fuging psalm tune published in America. The first fuging tunes appeared in William Billings’ Singing Master’s Assistant of 1778. Other American composers such as Daniel Read, Timothy Swan, Jacob French, and Justin Morgan preferred writing this type of piece until around 1800; assertions that the style was crude relative to the works of European composers led to its decline in New England. But the fuging tune, carried to the west and south in various shape-note hymnals (which use a characteristic musical notation), remained popular outside of New England for at least another 50 years. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/221466/fuging-tune http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/221466/fuging-tune
[FairfieldLife] RE: Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
People who starve themselves to make a political point should be ignored and allowed to die. I detest people who use emotional blackmail to get their points across. We were given the gift of rationality so let's use it. Give me reasons why Position X is preferable to Position Y and I'll either agree with you or offer counter-arguments. The only possible situation in which the threat of self-starvation is (maybe) justified is one in which the state doesn't allow people free expression of their views. That doesn't apply in the UK or USA.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Oh, and by the way, I've been defending wayback's position. That may put you and Stevie in a little bit of a bind, because, I suspect, she is one of the Good Guys in your alleged minds. Was wondering when you'd barge in, Feste. But like Stevie, either you can't tell the difference between a good argument and a bad one, or you feel you have to support Share and oppose me just on general principles even when she's wrong. And like Stevie, you're incapable of actually participating in the discussion. Let's see, now: Do you admire the guy who's starving himself to death to protest same-sex marriage? (Regardless of whether you agree with his position--is this a good way to achieve his goal?) Yep, Share really took auth to the cleaners in this thread. Auth flails around hopelessly but Share is always one step ahead. And of course, auth hates losing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
[FairfieldLife] Bollywood Movies
[image: Inline image 1] There are several Bollywood movies that we enjoy. Here's a list of good Indian-themed movies to get started and then a list detailing the major stars of Bollywood. *'The Guru'* Starring Heather Graham, Marisa Tomei and Jimi Mistry Director: Daisy von Scherler Mayer Universal Studios, 2003 Trailer: Movie Trailer: http://youtu.be/lEIEb5jPhhA Heather Graham does a great job as a warm-hearted woman of debatable morals. Marisa Tomei also does a great job as a warm-hearted woman of debatable judgement. Jim Mistry has some really funny lines. A superb indie-like studio picture that benefits from bright dialogue and the impressive cast. *'Bollywood Hollywood'* Staring Lisa Ray, Rahul Khanna, Moushumi Chatterjee, Dina Pathak Director: Deepa Mehta Lionsgate, 2005 Movie Trailer: http://youtu.be/js3N8e8InnY This is by far the best satirical movie on Indians in the west. If you live in Canada, you will appreciate the humor of the Indian Bollywood movie audience and family parody. - Amazon review *'Bend it Like Beckham'* Staring Parminder Nagra, Keira Knightley, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers Director: Gurinder Chadha 20th Century Fox, 2002 Movie Trailer: http://youtu.be/J2Dv9f6bCwg [image: Inline image 2] Despite it's soccer-themed title, Bend It Like Beckham is a fabulous and heart-warming story about family, traditions, friendship, love, fulfilling your dreams, and - yes - soccer (or football to non-US audiences). - Amazon review *'Marigold'* Staring Ali Larter, Salman Khan, Ian Bohen and Gulshan Grover Director: Willard Carroll Echo Bridge, 2008 Movie Trailer: http://youtu.be/34j9ChkjK6w The film has Bollywood superstar Salman Khan and American actress Ali Larter from the TV show Heroes. The musical numbers are done pretty well as is the dancing. Overall, the movie is a lot of fun. The two of them make a nice couple, and I actually bought the love story. I highly recommend the film.- Amazon review *'Bride and Prejudice'* Lionsgate 2005 Staring Aishwarya Rai, Naveen Andrews, Anupam Kher and Indira Varma Director: Gurinder Chadha Movie Trailer: http://youtu.be/nFYwqts1_TI Aishwarya has been referred to as the most beautiful woman on the planet. A clash of cultures in the spirit of My Big Fat Greek Wedding, this modern musical retelling of Jane Austen's classic Pride and Prejudice is a hilariously entertaining tale of one girl's unlikely search for love! - Amazon review *'Monsoon Wedding'* Starring Naseeruddin Shah, Lillete Dubey, and Shefali Shetty Director: Mira Nair Focus Features, 2001 Movie Trailer - The Criterion Collection http://youtu.be/sjQjw-UyAX0 This is another outstanding film by director Mira Nair, who has previously directed such wonderful films as Academy Award nominee Salaam Bombay, the lush and erotic Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love, and Mississippi Masala. This is a director whose very touch turns all her films to gold. She is truly an artist, and her films are palpable with feeling and emotion that move the storyline. - Amazon review *Notes:* Lisa Ray: [image: Inline image 3] Lisa Ray is a Canadian actress, model, host, philanthropist and social activist. A Times of India poll named her the ninth most beautiful woman of the millennium, the only model in the top ten. She is often compared to Aishwarya Rai. Lisa Ray - Bollywood Hollywood: http://youtu.be/vQuqYdGsOXo Aishwarya Rai: [image: Inline image 4] Aishwarya Rai is an Indian film actress and model. She was the first runner-up of the Miss India pageant, and the winner of the Miss World pageant of 1994. Rai is regarded as one of the most popular and influential celebrities in India, and is often cited in the media as the most beautiful woman in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aishwarya_Rai_Bachchan 'God bless the high n mighty! By Anjali Chandra The Times of India, July 29, 2005 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1185090.cms *Notes from the Indian Bollywood press:* Juhi Chawla: - Juhi won Ms.India crown and The Best Costumes award in the Ms. Universe competition in '84 well before her debut in films and while she enjoyed her place in the BOLLYWOOD, she won the Best Actress award from Filmfare in '94 for Hum Hain Rahi Pyar Ke and Most Sensational Female award in '99 from New York's Bollywood for her performance in Duplicate. Sonali Bendre - Fresh faced, born on January 1st 1975. She is 50kgs wieght and 5'7 height with three sisters. Sonali Bendre started out as a model before being selected for the Stardust Talent Search. She switched to Bollywood with Aar Aur Narztz film in 1994. Her innocence and fresh charm are indeed just part of her costume - two more ways of getting ahead in a perilous profession. Riya Sen - The 5'1 tall, budding actress, Riya is a grand daughter of legendary film actress Suchitra Sen and daughter of Moon Moon Sen. She lives with her mother and sister Raima Sen in a cosy apartment in Juhu, the north Mumbai suburb. Bipasha Basu - This 5' 8, light-eyed, Calcutta girl,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Translation: I really don't approve of the dude's hunger strike, but I can't possibly express an opinion contrary to Share's, or I'd look very, very silly. Like Stevie, Feste, your worst flaw is your moral cowardice. Nice try, auth, but I am not taking the bait. I think it's best if you just accept your defeat and move on. Tomorrow is another day. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Was wondering when you'd barge in, Feste. But like Stevie, either you can't tell the difference between a good argument and a bad one, or you feel you have to support Share and oppose me just on general principles even when she's wrong. And like Stevie, you're incapable of actually participating in the discussion. Let's see, now: Do you admire the guy who's starving himself to death to protest same-sex marriage? (Regardless of whether you agree with his position--is this a good way to achieve his goal?) Yep, Share really took auth to the cleaners in this thread. Auth flails around hopelessly but Share is always one step ahead. And of course, auth hates losing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Mon 06-Jan-14 00:15:04 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 01/04/14 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 01/11/14 00:00:00 171 messages as of (UTC) 01/06/14 00:12:07 25 authfriend 25 Share Long 16 Bhairitu 12 dhamiltony2k5 11 TurquoiseB 11 Richard Williams 10 awoelflebater 9 jr_esq 8 s3raphita 7 steve.sundur 5 wgm4u 5 Mike Dixon 4 cardemaister 3 srijau 3 merudanda 3 feste37 3 Michael Jackson 2 yifuxero 2 nablusoss1008 2 doctordumbass 1 wleed3 1 wayback71 1 seekliberation 1 Rick Archer 1 Paulo Barbosa Posters: 25 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] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Leave go Judy, leave go. It's all good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RrLAgi_mBY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RrLAgi_mBY
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: All About the Fighting Ascetics of India
Kanchi Shakaracharya Jayendra Saraswati was on Thursday night arrested by the Tamil Nadu Police in Mehboobnagar in Andhra Pradesh. Thiru (Sri Jayendra Swamigal Saraswathi of Kanchipuram Sankara Matth) was arrested at 10 pm tonight at Mehboobnagar in Andhra Pradesh as one of the prime accused in a case relating to murder of Thiru Sankararaman, manager of Varadaraja Perumal temple in Kanchipuram on 3.9.2004. Sri Jayendra Saraswati cannot be regarded as a Sankaracharya at all, because the Kanchi math is not one of the four peethas constituted by Adi Sankaracharya. It is only a shakha (branch) of the Sringeri peetham. - Swaroopananda Saraswati 'Cops Arrest Kanchi Shankaracharya' Times of India On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: This is not a football game. TM is a joke compared to the centuries long tradition and knowledge of the Shakaracharya tradition. On 01/02/2014 03:19 AM, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com wrote: Wow! Where does this stand now? Does Maharishi's guy have an inside track now? Is there now any defference or are they still fighting? Follow the money? Nadir Ram apparently recently appealed to [a] the shankaracharya to rule on his legitimacy as heir to TM around the recent revolt of Mother Divine within TM. Which Shankaracharya is his guy? This article cited was from 2003. What up now? Who is our guy? -Buck
[FairfieldLife] RE: All About the Fighting Ascetics of India
Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati and his followers, all 23 accused in the Shankararaman murder case have been acquitted by a court in Pondicherry. The judge said that the complainant had failed to support the prosecution http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAPI72os-uM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAPI72os-uM
[FairfieldLife] RE: The game is afoot again
If you are interested in the Us series Elementary:See here some discussion /remarks about it at :http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages /309629 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages /309629 May be the part-time female assistance in this new episode is a reference to the US version.Could be? What You think? Sorry about Victorianlabel -thanks for reminder .Has to chuckle and partly agree with your cringe-worthy attempts at humour and generous dollops of mawkish buddy-remark.Sad May be it's only because I am so fond of waterfalls.. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, s3raphita@... wrote: The BBC Sherlock is a worldwide hit but I read that the USA is *not* so enamoured and viewing figures there are quite low. I love the original Holmes tales (though Poe's Dupin is the original and the best) so I enjoy this modern updating but the series does strike me as a bit smug and self-congratulatory. Too much style over substance perhaps? Still, there are classy moments and I never miss an episode. IMHO Jeremy Brett's Holmes is the best-ever representation. Astonishing performance. Truly brilliant. Popular entertainment as high art! My fave Holmes story was The Adventure of the Copper Beeches. A key plot element is the auburn hair of the central character. A young woman applying for the job of a governess is offered excellent wages thanks to her red hair. Is the employer a sexual fetishist? Is something sleazy going on? Because Holmes is asexual the Copper Beeches plot adds an element of sexual frisson which is all the more effective thanks to the background of period respectability and decorum. On a side note: we Brits call the Sherlock period Edwardian. When we use labels like Victorian or Edwardian do Yanks (or Europeans for that matter) refer to it by some other designation? After all, Ed and Vicky were not *your* sovereigns. (Though you are always welcome to rejoin the club and become loyal subjects of Liz II.) I've never seen US series Elementary - would you recommend that?
[FairfieldLife] Re: All About Sadhus and Yogis
Hundreds of Naga Sadhus gathered in the compound of Maya Devi Temple, befoe going in a procession to take a holy dip in the ganges. ..Sadhus gather here and perform all kind of feats, to show off their warrior skills, with their weapons, which include sticks, tridents, swords and spears...Kumbh Mela, 2010, Haridwar, Uttarakhand... Naga sadhu procession 1998 Kumbh Mela: [image: Inline image 1] The Naga Sadhus of India: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhu Kumbh Mela: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbh_Mela On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.comwrote: According to the Sage Patanjali, Raja Yoga has nothing to do with 'union with the gods', but has everything to do with 'isolation from prakriti', that is, the 'cessation of the fluctuations of the mindstuff'. To Patanjali, the Royal Yoga is the attainment of freedom, based on the sheer willpower of the individual. The Sage Kapila said that success in attaining freedom from suffering is found in individual willpower to knowledge; individual freedom is not the result of any source of power outside one's own body-mind. It is obvious, to even a casual seeker, that the term 'god' and 'yoga' are contradictory. You can't have freewill and be under the power of another; that would be a contradiction in terms, would it not? We are either free or we are not; if free, then there is no need for yoga practice. If we are not free, then by what means are we to free ourselves? It's that simple - there is either other-power or self-power. Now, if Sage Patanjali had intended for yoga aspirants to attain liberation by calling the out nickname of demi gods, he would have said so, would he not? Confusion arises from erroneously identifying words, objects, and ideas with one another; knowledge of the cries of all creatures comes through perfect discipline of the distinctions between them (YS 3.17). So, ask yourself 'who am I' and then look inside yourself for the answer, inside your own mind, and apply common sense and intelligence based on your own experience and reasoning. Now, having tested and known your Self by yourself, know such to be wise and true, not by mere speculation, hearsay or because you read it, overheard it or were told it, but because you, yourself, having known it, experienced it, and confirmed it, found it to be wise and true. So, let's review what we know: The origin of Buddhist and Hindu yogic and tantric practices is Shamanism, a tradition which came to India about 10,000 years ago. This tradition, called Sramana in Sanskrit, was revived by the historical Buddha who was called Shakya the Muni, the first historical yogin in India. He advocated yoga and meditation which he equated with an eight-fold path, i.e. a systematic, verifiable, technique for self-culture. It should be obvious to even the casual seeker that Maharishi is a Buddhist, as we all are. Not for nothing is the Buddha depicted in Indian iconography as sitting underneath a rose apple tree with his eyes closed! The first writing in India appears on an Ashokan pillar at Sarnath, the Kalinga Edict. So popular was the Buddha in ancient India that he was drafted into the Hindu pantheon to become the ninth incarnation of Mahavishnu, one of four humans, not counting a dwarf! Why do you think the cow is now sacred in India? According to Swami Ageananda Bharati, it is clear that the Buddhist tantras preceded the Hindu tantras, and hence, yogic practices are tantric in nature, e.g. the non-Vedic practices such as yoga, mudra, dhyana, mantra, yantra, dharani, puja, pradakshina; and monasticisn, ahimsa, instruction by sutra, relic worship, edifice architecture, etc., etc. However, in original, pre-sectarian Buddhism there are no 'dieties'; Buddhism has no ontology, that is, a theory of the origin of the universe. Yogic practices and thus yogins, and yogic practice, is firmly rooted in the teachings of Shakya and the Sramanas such as Natatputra. According to the teachings of the Shakya, the 33 Gods, such as Lord Brahma, Prajapati, Mahavishnu, etc. may exist as mental mind-constructs, but they are not 'things-in-themselves', that is, the gods conceived by humans do not have their 'own nature', apart from and separate from prakriti and the five evolutes and the conditions set by the activity of the three gunas. The gods, if they exist, are subject to the same laws of karma as humans, and when their store of karma runs out they will experience rebirth just like you and I. According to the law of cause and effect, whatever goes up must come down - that is, human excrement always flows down stream - the second law of thermodynamics. The Shakya, Patanjali, Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhva, Nimbarka, Chaitanya, and Vallabah and Maharishi all agree on this. In contrast to the gods, a Yogin, that is, one who has attained Freedom and Immortality, has broken the chain that binds him or her to the law of karma:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally, an anti-gay marriage protest I like
Is that worse than being a lying jackass, auth, because that's what you were calling me a couple of weeks ago. I know that following your failure to get the better of Share, who is far too nimble for you ever to lay a glove on, you need to find someone to beat up. Be my guest, if it makes you happy. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Translation: I really don't approve of the dude's hunger strike, but I can't possibly express an opinion contrary to Share's, or I'd look very, very silly. Like Stevie, Feste, your worst flaw is your moral cowardice. Nice try, auth, but I am not taking the bait. I think it's best if you just accept your defeat and move on. Tomorrow is another day. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Was wondering when you'd barge in, Feste. But like Stevie, either you can't tell the difference between a good argument and a bad one, or you feel you have to support Share and oppose me just on general principles even when she's wrong. And like Stevie, you're incapable of actually participating in the discussion. Let's see, now: Do you admire the guy who's starving himself to death to protest same-sex marriage? (Regardless of whether you agree with his position--is this a good way to achieve his goal?) Yep, Share really took auth to the cleaners in this thread. Auth flails around hopelessly but Share is always one step ahead. And of course, auth hates losing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Share, if you don't mind me saying, you had her tied up loops like we haven't seen a while. Really, you feel kind of bad for her. Or at least I do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Transcendental Unified Field Masonry
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: are you a Meditator? As if the answer to that question could *possibly* be more important than the answer to the question, Are you a sentient being, a fellow human being, and thus my equal on this planet? Says Bawwy now after having rejoiced earlier this morning that the hunger striker offed himself over his protestation of gay marriage. You can't have it both ways dear boy; you either wish those with differing opinions dead (you said this) or you find important the fact that sentient beings, fellow human beings are your equal on this planet. You need to figure out exactly what you do believe. I'll leave you to it...
