[FairfieldLife] Re: Zriingg! : )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XngXWmVQ-B0 Excellent Card, here is one of my favorite piano players back atcha! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--Sj_soVKo0mode=relatedsearch= Whoa! There's something in a black man's sense of rhythm that's prolly hard to imitate for most white people. Had to listen to that a second time to get the feeling. The effect is quite different from that of e.g. Mr. Zingg's.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would agree. The artists in question, unlike TM Yogic Flyers, probably didn't have to rely on imagination. They'd have seen it actually done, as I have. Seriously? Sure, as did hundreds of other folks who studied with the guy I did. many times over a couple of decades. But I don't expect you to necessarily believe it, or for it to mean anything even if you did. It's just levitating, or flying through the air. It's just a siddhi. That's not the same as enlight- enment in my book. That said, it is a lot of fun to see. Breaks your boundaries about what is possible and what is not. I wouldn't doubt anyones experience, it's just I've never heard anyone say they have seen it for real. Just to be clear, this wasn't in a TM context. The person levitating or flying through the air was a guy named Frederick Lenz, who also called himself Rama. He taught a hodge-podge of things from dif- ferent traditions, but the majority of them were Buddhist. He didn't teach how to do this stuff directly; he just did it. As far as I know, none of his students ever developed the knack. Even though I've had a few astonishingly good YF experiences there's nothing that would win me James Randi's million dollar prize for proving the existence of the paranormal as you're either hovering or you're not, there's no almost flying in my book. Nor in mind. What I'm talking about is slowly lift- ing up off the sofa and sitting in midair for two to three minutes. Or stepping up off the ground in the desert and then flying around several feet above the ground for a while. I would like to see it for myself, in fact I would travel anywhere to see it as it would, as you say, break a few boundaries! Actually, I wouldn't consider it just anything as it would mean everthing I'd been taught was wrong and I'd love that. *That* is the benefit of seeing such things. All I can tell you is that the experience itself breaks far more boundaries than you thought you had. It can be pretty mindboggling the first time you see it. But seriously...over time, his students got so used to seeing shit like this that they ho-hummed their way through it. So I guess you can categorize almost any experience away if that's your predilection. Can I ask who this guy was? Covered above. He's dead now, by his own hand. Some of his students believe it was because he was ill, and decided not to waste away. I think it's because he got more than a little strung out on ego and money and Valium. He was also called a cult leader in the U.S. press, and there is some truth in that. And yet he could do this stuff. Go figure. That's one reason (among many) that I do not link the performance of siddhis and enlightenment. Apples and oranges, completely unrelated. One need not be enlightened to perform them, and performing them says absolutely nothing about one's enlightenment. In my opinion, of course. Anyway, if you're interested, I wrote some stuff about the fellow and what it was like to study with him in a book that's on the Web at: http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind And that's just opinion, too. :-) Thanks, I've put that in my favourites. I shall have a browse at my leisure. I always thought siddhi powers were an indication of approaching enlightenment or at least a sign you're on the right track obviously your teacher had worse things inside he had to deal with. I heard another story recently about someone in the TMO actually levitating but the guy who told me wouldn't divulge her name as she doesn't want a fuss made. Infuriating for me but maybe just a sop to keep us at it. I often have a real crisis of sanity with YF, it really is bizarre to me I still do it but it works in some way even if it is just for the bliss or the enhanced perceptions I get. So as it feels good I carry on and if I'd never felt like I was floating I probably would have stopped but I do get this nagging feeling we've all been had. In my minds eye I can see Maharishi and Deepak Chopra talking and D says I've got them sipping hot water every ten minutes now! and M replies thats nothing I've got them jumping around in their pyjamas! much laughter!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Getting strokes from the TM teacher syndrome
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Actually my post focused on Jim's mischaractorizations concerning the blues and the men who invented the form, and his factual errors concerning their lives. Brahman doesn't make mistakes. Ha! but Brahman is complete and includes opposites. Therefore in order to be complete, Brahman must include making mistakes. Perhaps He doesn't *make* anything. According to Vedaanta-suutra 1.1.2 janmaadyasya yataH (janma+aadi; asya; yataH) Prolly means something like The creation, and stuff, (brahmaa, viSNu and shiva?) of this *from which* (whom?) The relative pronoun /yataH/ (=from which, whom) obviously refers to /brahma/ in the preceding suutra: athaato brahmajijñaasaa (atha+ataH; brahma-jijñaasaa) Now, certainly, (begins) investigation of (on?) Brahma(n).
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: I wouldn't doubt anyones experience, it's just I've never heard anyone say they have seen it for real. Even though I've had a few astonishingly good YF experiences there's nothing that would win me James Randi's million dollar prize for proving the existence of the paranormal as you're either hovering or you're not, there's no almost flying in my book. I would like to see it for myself, in fact I would travel anywhere to see it as it would, as you say, break a few boundaries! Actually, I wouldn't consider it just anything as it would mean everthing I'd been taught was wrong and I'd love that. Just as a followup and a hearty What he said! to your insight about meaning that everything you'd been taught was wrong, here's a funny story. When I still lived in L.A. and was studying with Rama, I ran into an old girlfriend who was still heavily into Maharishi and TM. She asked me what I was up to and I told her and even told her that I was going to a public lecture of Rama's that night and asked if she'd like to go. To her credit, she said yes. So we go to the lecture, which was in that most spiritual of locations, the Los Angeles Convention Center :-), and we're sittin' there in the second row, watching as Rama does his thing, and she starts...uh...vocalizing. She does that a lot. Suffice it to say that when we'd been going out, my neighbors had called to complain about her vocalizing more than once. :-) So in this public talk she wasn't moaning or anything When Harry Met Sally-like, but she did start talking to herself, out loud. I and another friend sat there and heard her say, Oh my God, he's levitating. Or, Holy shit, he just disappeared. Or, The whole room is full of gold light. Or, Did the walls of the room just disappear? She went on like this for two hours, but then after the talk was over didn't say a word on the whole drive home, and then just said good night and bolted for her door. The next day, when I called to ask if she had enjoyed herself, she claimed to have seen *nothing* and experienced *nothing* out of the ordinary. The moral of this story? Even when you *do* run into such phenomena, you can make them go away if you choose not to have seen them. In her case (since she's a super TM blissninny), I suspect that the issue was that it wasn't *Maharishi* doing these things. If it had been, she could admit to having witnessed them. But because it was someone else, she couldn't. Interesting, eh? Very, my definition of a true believer is someone who compares all things to whether or not it agrees with what they know to be the truth. It always scares me when people wont see what's in front of them because it doesn't fit in, the blinkers go on and that is that. I guess some people need a solid view of things to keep insecurities at bay and some just like to have everything already explained as it saves thinking things out for themselves. And there's often a self congratulatory tone that grates on my teeth a bit. Nout so queer as folk eh? So while I believe without reservation that you would be open to seeing such phenomena, do you think that Judy would be able to see them? I suspect she wouldn't admit that someone (other than an official On The Program TMer) was really levitating even if he flew over her head, dropped trou, and shat on her head. Can't you just see her sitting there, a big turd in her coiffure, saying over and over, Nothing happened. Nothing happened. Nothing happened. :-) Boy, I'm starting to think you two will never be friends ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: since the topic is lively, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW6pVFOpE6Q I think I'v sneered derisively at this before, I shall be more creatively critical this time. I doubt this because it looks how it would if I was to hang from a crane by my shoulders. I wish it was light though so we could see for sure. It's a bit like the old Indian rope trick where they would wait until dusk and light fires to dazzle onlookers so they wouldn't see the hook being thrown up to a rope strung between two trees above, well that's the official explanation anyway. When I took initiation in my new path, the universe is asked May the truth be entered of the silence of Self's nature, which is the real essence and power behind all words and thoughts, May he bypass all false lower knowledge and siddhi powers.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reincarnation as Organic Metaphor
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The rebirth process was carried out by the vasanas, infinitely
subtle,
wave-like energy patterns. Vasanas transmigrated from body to
body, bridging
incarnations. Curiously, the word vasana comes from the root VAS,
which
means to perfume.
Hmmm... according to Monier-Williams, there are ten homonymic
words (most of which are verbal roots) 'vas'. My favourite in
this context is to remain or keep on or continue in any condition
(root 7 below). But I didn't read all those through.
vas 1 (encl.) acc. dat. gen. pl. of 2nd pers. pron. (cf. Pa1n2. 8-
1 , 21 , 24 c.) RV. c. c.
3 vas 2 (a Vedic root connected with 1. %{uS} q.v. ; not in
Dha1tup.) cl. 6. P. , %{uccha4ti} (pf. %{uvA4sa} , %{USu4H} RV.
c. ; aor. %{avAt} [?] AV. ; %{avasran} RV. ; Cond. %{avatsyat}
S3Br. ; Ved. Inf. %{va4stave} , %{-u4Si}) , to shine , grow bright
(esp. applied to the dawn) RV. ; to bestow by shining upon (dat.)
ib. i , 113 , 7 ; (with %{dUre4}) to drive away by shining ib. vii ,
77 , 4: Caus. %{vAsa4yati} , to cause to shine RV. [Cf. %{vasar} in %
{vasar-han} ; Gk. $ for $ ; 281910[930 ,1] Lat. {ve1r} c.]
4 vas 3 cl. 10. P. %{vAsayati} (aor. %{avIvasat}) , to love ; to cut
off ; to accept , take ; to offer ; to kill (%{ni-vAsita} , killed)
Dha1tup. xxxiii , 70 (only with prep. ; see %{pari-vas} ; but
accord. to some the Impv. %{vasiSva} [RV. viii , 70 , 10] and %
{uSa} , ` a lover ' [x , 95 , 5] , and %{va4siSTha} [ib. 17]
belong also to this root , which has developed an obscene meaning =
Gk. $ , 282465[932 ,1] futuere).
5 vas 4 cl. 2. A1. (Dha1tup. xxiv , 13) %{va4ste} (Impv. %{vasiSva}
RV. ; %{vaddhvam} Kaus3. ; p. %{va4sAna} , once %{usAna4} and %
{usa4mAna} RV. ; pf. %{vavase} S3is3. ; %{vAvase} , p. %{-sAna4}
RV. ; aor. %{avasiSTa} ib. ; fut. %{vasitA} Gr. ; %{vasiSyate} ib. ;
%{vatsyati} Hariv. 11206 ; inf. %{vasitum} MBh. R. ; ind. p. %
{vasitvA} Mn. BhP. ; %{-vasya} MBh.) , to put on , invest , wear ,
(clothes c.) , assume (a form c.) , enter into RV. c. c.: Caus. %
{vAsa4yati} , %{-te} (Pass. %{vAsyate}) , to cause or allow to put
on or wear (clothes) , clothe (A1. ` one's self ') with (instr.)
RV. Gr2S3rS. Mn.: Desid. %{vivasiSate} Gr.: Intens. %{vAvasyate} , %
{vAvasti} ib. [Cf. Gk. $ 282480[932 ,1] for $ ; Lat. {vestis} ;
Goth. {wasjan} ; Angl. Sax. {werian} ; Eng. {wear}.]
6 vas (ifc.) , clothed in , wearing (e.g. %{pre7ta-cUvara-vas} , `
wearing the garments of dead men '). Ragh.
7 vas 5 cl. 1. P. (Dha1tup. xxiii , 36) %{va4sati} (m. c. also %{-
te} ; pf. %{uvAsa} , %{USuH} RV. c. c. ; p. %{vAvasAna} RV. i ,
46 , 13 ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Up. ; aor. %{avAtsIt} AV. ; %{avAksam}
AitBr. [where it is artificially connected with %{vAc}] ; %{avAstam}
Up. ; fut. %{vastA} Gr. ; %{vatsyati} , %{-te} Br. c. ; %
{vasiSyati} MBh. ; inf. %{vastum} , %{vasitum} MBh. c. ; ind. p. %
{uSitvA4} Br. ; %{uSTvA} MBh. ; %{-u4Sya} Br. c.) , to dwell ,
live , stop (at a place) , stay (esp. ` overnight ' , with or
without %{rAtrim} or %{rAtrIs}) RV. c. c. ; to remain , abide with
or in (with loc. of pers. ; loc. or acc. of place , esp. with %
{vAsam} or %{vasatim}) S3Br. c. c. ; to remain or keep on or
continue in any condition (with a pp. , e.g. with %{channa} ,
` to continue to be covered ' Ka1tyS3r. ; or with an acc. , with %
{brahmacaryam} , ` to practise chastity ' AitBr. ; or with an adv.
e.g. with %{sukham} , ` to live pleasantly or at ease ' ; with or
without %{dUratas} , ` tñto keep aloof ') TS. c. c. ; to have
sexual intercourse with (loc.) Hariv. ; to rest upon (loc.) Subh. ;
to charge or entrust with (instr.) Hariv. ; cl. 10. P. %{vasayati} ,
to dwell Dha1tup. xxxv , 84 , e: Pass. %{uSyate} (aor. %{avAsi}) ,
to be dwelt c. MBh. Ka1v. c.: Caus. %{vAsa4yati} , %{-te} (cf.
Pa1n2. 1-3 , 89 ; aor. %{avIvasat} MaitrS.: Pass. %{vAsya4te} Br. , %
{-ti} MBh.) , to cause to halt or stay (overnight) , lodge , receive
hospitably or as a guest S3Br. MBh. c. ; to cause to have sexual
intercourse with (loc.) MatsyaP. ; to let anything stand overnight
(with %{tisro} , scil. %{ratrIs} , ` three nights ') Kaus3. ; to
cause to wait , keep in suspense RV. ; to delay , retard Ka1m. ; to
cause to exist , preserve S3Br. ; to cause to be inhabited ,
populate (a country) Hit. ; to put in , place upon (loc.) MBh.
Hariv. Ka1v. ([EMAIL PROTECTED] , to put restraint on the mouth ,
refrain from speaking) ; to produce Sarvad.: Desid. %{vivatsati} ,
to wish to dwell S3Br.: Intens. %{vAvasyate} , %{vAvasti} , to
remain , be in , be engaged in MW. [Cf. Goth. {wisan} [932,3] ;
Germ. {wsan} , {ge-wesen} , {war} c. ; Angl. Sax. {wsan} ; Eng.
{was} , {were}.]
8 vas 6 (only in gen. %{va4sAm}) , prob. either ` an abode ' or `
a dweller ' RV. v. 2 , 6.
9 vas 7 (only %{vasiSva} , [%{anu}]%{-vAvase} , %{vAvasAna4} , and %
{va4stos}) , to rush or aim at , attack RV. viii , 70 , 10 (cf.
under 3. %{vas}) ; viii , 4 ,
[FairfieldLife] 'Nice Car'
From The Sunday Times var RStag = ; try{ RStag = segQS; } catch(e){ RStag =
; } document.write('');
July 8, 2007
Tesla RoadsterThe most fun you can have without fuel
/* Global variables that are used for image browsing. Used on article pages
to rotate the images of a story. */ var sImageBrowserImagePath = ''; var
aArticleImages = new Array(); var aImageDescriptions = new Array(); var
aImageEnlargeLink = new Array(); var aImageEnlargePopupWidth = '500'; var
aImageEnlargePopupHeight = '500'; var aImagePhotographer = new Array(); var
nSelectedArticleImage = 0; var i=0; aArticleImages[i] =
'/multimedia/archive/00185/Tesla_Roadster_185650a.jpg'; aImageEnlargeLink[i]
= '/multimedia/archive/00185/Tesla_Roadster_185650a.jpg'; i=i+1;
to not show photographer information -- to not show image description -- to
not show enlarge option
--fCreateImageBrowser(nSelectedArticleImage,'landscape',/tol/)
Jay Leno
People think that if youre a car enthusiast you have something against
electric cars. Not in the least. To me the nice thing about electric vehicles
is, if nothing else, they free up the gasoline for our other cars.
I think many car enthusiasts see the future as one where they will use some
kind of electric car or hydrogen car during the week and will save their sports
cars for the weekend, just as you would play golf or football at the weekend.
What Tesla, an American company that has made an electric version of the very
British Lotus Elise, has done is find a way to enjoy a sports car all week long
and be green.
The problem with electric cars up to this point is what I call the veggie
burger syndrome. When they came out with the veggie burger they made it look
like a hamburger, which was disappointing because it doesnt taste anything
like a hamburger. It had been the same with electric cars until this point.
function pictureGalleryPopup(pubUrl,articleId) { var newWin =
window.open(pubUrl+'template/2.0-0/element/pictureGalleryPopup.jsp?id='+articleId+'offset=0sectionName=DrivingNewCarReviews','mywindow','menubar=0,resizable=0,width=615,height=655');
} Related Links
Top ten green cars
Toyota Prius review
They would take a Volkswagen Golf or some equivalent, rip out the innards and
replace it with an electric motor. So you get a car that is not only slower but
would not be as safe because most of the safety features were probably taken
out of it, it wouldnt go as far and youd have something that was less than
what you started with.
Tesla is quite smart in that it is reaching the enthusiasts of the market. If
you like sports cars and you want to be green, this is the only way to go. The
Tesla is a car that you can live with, drive and enjoy as a sports car. I had a
brief drive in the car and it was quite impressive. This is an electric car
that is fun to drive. Prior to this, most electric cars were driven by people
with earth shoes.
I love electric cars. One of the favourites in my garage is my 1909 Baker
Electric car. But in the 98 years since that car was made, battery technology
and therefore electric car technology has not changed a huge amount.
In the early 1900s Thomas Edison developed an alkaline battery to double or
triple the range of the electric car. It didnt quite do that, but alkaline
batteries were neat in that they could be rinsed out and used over and over
again. In fact Im still using the alkaline battery that came with the Baker
and was made by Edison himself.
In 1909 a frustrated Edison wrote on a napkin at a dinner and handed it to
Henry Ford. On it hed written: The electric car is dead. Almost from that
note right up until Tesla, Edison wasnt far wrong. Not much has been done to
progress the battery-powered car since.
Tesla is not the first major manufacturer to have an electric car. GM came out
with the EV1 in the early 1990s. I had one for a week and I loved it. It was
quick but it only went about 125 miles on a charge. In 80 years it went only 10
miles further that my 1909 Baker Electric, and really a 125-mile range means
you only have about a 60-mile range, because you have to come back.
One of the hidden things they dont tell you about electric cars is that you
get good mileage when the temperature is 20C, but when it drops down towards
freezing you lose 20-40% because theyre dependent on the ambient temperature.
What Tesla has done is put in a cooling/heating system that keeps the battery
at a constant temperature.
Its also built a car that weighs 2,600lb, which is a few pounds heavier than
the standard Lotus, whereas most electric cars would be hundreds of pounds
heavier. And it handles and drives, for all intents and purposes, like a real
sports car.
The difference with this is that its faster than a standard Lotus. For
something to succeed it has to not only do it as well but better. The Wankel
engine was the only brand new engine of the 20th century, but the
[FairfieldLife] Re: So Judy..what's Samadhi like?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Ultimately bliss is quite stupid! Sort of like tits. Excellent analogy. Tits are useful for producing milk for young'uns, but as it turns out, small, almost non- existent tits produce just as much milk as big ones. So why do big ones develop? According to one study on apes that I read a few years ago, it's entirely for the purposes of sexual attraction. In great apes, the female apes with the biggest tits get the biggest, baddest alpha apes, the ones most able to provide for them. So it might be with bliss. If you're a spiritual teacher trying to attract devotees, if you give bliss short shrift or talk about it as just another relative phen- omenon, you get ho-hum devotees, and not very many of them. But talk Big Bliss, and the importance of bliss, and you get *lots* of devotees, all hoping to suck on Big Bliss. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, I've put that in my favourites. I shall have a browse at my leisure. I always thought siddhi powers were an indication of approaching enlightenment or at least a sign you're on the right track obviously your teacher had worse things inside he had to deal with. As do we all. I consider my time with him a marvelous education. When I first ran into him, he ran a remarkably clean teaching and ogranization IMO. No hierarchies, low tuitions, no bullying of students or requiring any specific behavior of them towards him, and great experiences and fun were had by all. But as time went by, I got to watch him believe more and more of his own PR. Hierarchies developed in which the more money you contributed, the higher you were. His word became law, and if anyone questioned his authority they were out the door and demonized forever. And then the Valium happened. I hear that it was pre- scribed for him originally because of an athletic injury, but he got to like the buzz of it, and at one point he was gulping handfuls of them before meet- ing with his students or with other Buddhist teachers. His behavior became erratic, his well-known sense of humor started to fade, and he didn't appear to be enjoying his life that much any more. Finally, being a classic I can handle it kinda guy, he decided to quit the Valium cold turkey, even though every web- site on the subject of Valium addiction says DON'T do this because of the high possibility of suicide. Within a week he was dead, a suicide. Like I said, a real education. Marvelous experiences that I will always treasure, both positive and negative. I learned as much about what to do wrong as a spir- itual teacher as I did about what to do right as a spiritual teacher. When he was on, I've never encountered a teacher more gifted, and more able to convey both the intel- lectual concepts behind advanced spiritual phenomena *and* the experience of them. When he *wasn't* on, he could be a real prick. Go figure. The Wikipedia article on Lenz is actually pretty balanced. A little more pro right now than con (which probably means that some Rama TBs have been active lately...a the neutrality of this article is under dispute notice has appeared since yesterday), but on the whole I think it's a fairly good overview. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Lenz
[FairfieldLife] The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. What I'm wondering is whether this teaching might have something to do with some fairly remarkable (from my point of view) posts made here recently, in which long- term TMers seem to merely *assume* that if they see it, it's true. And that if they do it, it's right. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have noticed a *strong* tendency in long-term TMers to *assume* these things, as opposed to a tendency in, say, long- term Buddhists to *not* assume them. Their philosophy and practice places as much emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions to avoid the possible pitfalls of ego and obsession and projecting belief and expectation onto the world as one makes one's way through life as they do on meditation. I think it's fair to say that the TM philosophy not only does not emphasize such monitoring, it tends to dismiss such practices as moodmaking, the intellect trying to monitor and evaluate something that is better handled by just becoming more in tune with the laws of nature. In other words, just meditate and everything will be OK -- your perceptions will almost by definition be accurate, and your actions will almost by definition be sattvic or dharmic. But is this true? We've seen folks here lately -- folks who claim to be enlightened -- say that there can *be* no other way to see a situation than the way that they see it. We've seen these folks (from my point of view) lash out at someone who has bruised their ego, and then claim that they had only the best intentions in mind. In other less recent posts, we've seen someone title a post Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot, and then claim over and over and over and over that she wasn't criticizing him or the film that she'd never seen. We've seen (IMO) some of the most massive non-self-awareness and denial I've ever encountered anywhere on the planet. So I guess my questions for this topic are: Is 'just meditate and everything will be OK' accurate, and a valuable teaching, or can it possibly lead to intellectual and ethical blindness about the real nature of one's thoughts, emotions and actions? Could a little emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions be a useful addition to 20/20 TM (now more like 120/120 to be con- sidered truly on the program)? Who would you trust more in a situation in which your life depended on them -- someone who *assumed* that their every perception was accurate and that their every action was right, or someone who was open to the possibility that they might be just as prone to errors of perception and behavior as anyone else? Just questions to think about. Or ignore. Your call.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a note for you Ron. I've been in the Movement for a long time, having seen some people freak out here and there. What always, always is the case is that they did not follow the programme Maharishi gave them through his teachers. Perhaps a few would space out due to sickness, previous substance abuse or for various physical reasons, but this is not what I am adressing now. They always would add something there, substract something there, doing a little longer programme perhaps, fasting or whatever. Somehow they always felt they were special and that Maharishis detailed instructions wasn't really meant for them but for the others. Gradually their bodies/nervoussystems could not cope with the extra silence or hightened vibrations anymore. Usually the Movement would pick this up well in advance and send them home to the field to stabilize. The idea being that more activity would help the person to digest the higher vibrations and he would gradually feel ok. This usually works very well. But there will always be those who refuse to see that they are harming themselves by their own actions done from their own free will. Then perhaps they end up in a clinic with a nervous breakdown or worse, on a railwayline. What is sickening by your endless crusade about SatGurus who is there with you and blabla, is that you, Ron or whoever, do not seem to understand that you are responsible for your own evolution. You blame Maharishi for not taking care of people who obviously did not want to take instruction anyway, ignoring his advice ! What did you expect him to do; materialize before you or others to repeat instructions already given so that you/others could feel special ? I'm sorry my friend, but that is just not how things work. And yes, I still think it was a mistake not to follow Mother Meeras kind advice to find a job. Fooling around on the internet writing rubbish about Masters is not a job Ron.
[FairfieldLife] YogaH karmasu kaushalam!
BG II 50 buddhiyukto jahaatiiha ubhe sukRtaduSkRte . tasmaadyogaaya yujyasva yogaH karmasu kaushalam .. 2\-50.. (Attempt at sandhi-vigraha: buddhi-yuktaH;jahaati+iha ubhe sukRta-duSkRte . tasmaat; yogaaya yujyasva yogaH karmasu kaushalam .. 2\-50..) Maharishi's translation: He whose intellect is united (with the Self) casts off both good and evil even here. Therefore, devote yourself to Yoga. Yoga is skill in action. He whose intellect is united (buddhi-yuktaH) (with the Self) casts off (jahaati) both (ubhe) good and evil (sukRta-duSkRte) even here (iha). Therefore (tasmaat), devote yourself (yujasva) to Yoga (yogaaya). Yoga is skill (kaushalam) in action[s] (karmasu; locative plural).
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: Thanks, I've put that in my favourites. I shall have a browse at my leisure. I always thought siddhi powers were an indication of approaching enlightenment or at least a sign you're on the right track obviously your teacher had worse things inside he had to deal with. As do we all. No kidding. I consider my time with him a marvelous education. When I first ran into him, he ran a remarkably clean teaching and ogranization IMO. No hierarchies, low tuitions, no bullying of students or requiring any specific behavior of them towards him, and great experiences and fun were had by all. But as time went by, I got to watch him believe more and more of his own PR. Hierarchies developed in which the more money you contributed, the higher you were. His word became law, and if anyone questioned his authority they were out the door and demonized forever. And then the Valium happened. I hear that it was pre- scribed for him originally because of an athletic injury, but he got to like the buzz of it, and at one point he was gulping handfuls of them before meet- ing with his students or with other Buddhist teachers. His behavior became erratic, his well-known sense of humor started to fade, and he didn't appear to be enjoying his life that much any more. Finally, being a classic I can handle it kinda guy, he decided to quit the Valium cold turkey, even though every web- site on the subject of Valium addiction says DON'T do this because of the high possibility of suicide. Within a week he was dead, a suicide. Like I said, a real education. Marvelous experiences that I will always treasure, both positive and negative. I learned as much about what to do wrong as a spir- itual teacher as I did about what to do right as a spiritual teacher. When he was on, I've never encountered a teacher more gifted, and more able to convey both the intel- lectual concepts behind advanced spiritual phenomena *and* the experience of them. When he *wasn't* on, he could be a real prick. Go figure. The Wikipedia article on Lenz is actually pretty balanced. A little more pro right now than con (which probably means that some Rama TBs have been active lately...a the neutrality of this article is under dispute notice has appeared since yesterday), but on the whole I think it's a fairly good overview. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Lenz He sounds like quite a character, especially concerning his attitude to women. Shame he killed himself, I don't know but, it sounds like he couldn't cope with the fame. Or is it a case of 'the flame that burns twice as bright burns only half as long' I must hear some of his music though, could be right up my street.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
Just a comment related to The 'I did it, therefore it must be the dharma' phenomenon topic I started today: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But there will always be those who refuse to see that they are harming themselves by their own actions done from their own free will. Then perhaps they end up in a clinic with a nervous breakdown or worse, on a railwayline. What is sickening by your endless crusade about SatGurus who is there with you and blabla, is that you, Ron or whoever, do not seem to understand that you are responsible for your own evolution. Interesting juxtaposition of ideas. In the first paragraph, those who use their free will are harming themselves, and may end up institutionalized. In the next paragraph, these same people are responsible for their own evolution. It would seem to me that Nablus is saying that their responsibility revolves around *doing what they are told to do*. Anything else is potentially harmful, and may result in being institutionalized or committing suicide. The only valid use of free will is to DO WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD BY MAHARISHI. Interesting world view. And as a speculation, hasn't Maharishi warned his students often about the danger of seeing other spirit- ual teachers? Hasn't seeing them, and sometimes even reading their books or writing, been used as an excuse to keep people from attending courses or being part of the TM movement? I've personally seen Maharishi tell someone to leave and never come back because he went to see another spiritual teacher, so this Do what I say and *only* what *I* say approach is not just coming from the Bevans of the movement, as Nablus likes to imply. It's coming from the top of the power pyramid. One wonders how Nablus reconciles his involvement with Benjamin Creme and Maitreya. Isn't he courting mad- ness or suicide by doing it? Isn't it a somewhat dan- gerous exercise in free will on his part? Again, the relationship of this comment to my earlier post is that Nablus is obviously *unable* to consider his *own* actions off the program, even though Maharishi certainly would. He is *not* doing what Maharishi says, but it's OK, because he's doing it. *This* is the very doublethink that I was talking about in my earlier post. He doesn't even see a conflict between demonizing free will in his first paragraph and then stating that everyone is responsible for their own evolution in the next paragraph. And he *certainly* doesn't see that his *own* actions are in direct conflict with what he's telling Ron to do. Nablus is *not* doing what Maharishi told him to do. But he can't see that. T'would seem to me that Nablus' advice to Ron is based on Do what I say, not what I do. And its corollary, Do what I say I'm doing, not what it appears to anyone with a brain that I'm doing.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Jesus Camp
On Jul 8, 2007, at 8:08 PM, off_world_beings wrote: The MSAE kids do remind me of what you are saying, the difference is they can refer to hundres of studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Well, understand that only TB types or the occasional outsider who is duped actually believe those studies. Yes, like several universities around the country and the NIH, several judges in Missouri and many others. And Vaj, i don't know if anyone ever taught you this, but belief has no place in science. Science is all about double-blind studies using rigorous methods - which the TM studies use the most rigorous. You might want to look up science, scientific method, peer-review, etc and get an education. You have no argument against hundreds of studies published in peer- reviewed journals. You point is pure prejudice. If people believe their biased studies then people should be flocking to Maharishi schools. Are they?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Jesus Camp
In a message dated 7/9/07 7:09:38 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If people believe their biased studies then people should be flocking to Maharishi schools. Are they? Nearly every student can thrive in a small private school with small classes, lots of personal attention and teachers who care about the students. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a comment related to The 'I did it, therefore it must be the dharma' phenomenon topic I started today: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: But there will always be those who refuse to see that they are harming themselves by their own actions done from their own free will. Then perhaps they end up in a clinic with a nervous breakdown or worse, on a railwayline. What is sickening by your endless crusade about SatGurus who is there with you and blabla, is that you, Ron or whoever, do not seem to understand that you are responsible for your own evolution. Interesting juxtaposition of ideas. In the first paragraph, those who use their free will are harming themselves, and may end up institutionalized. In the next paragraph, these same people are responsible for their own evolution. It would seem to me that Nablus is saying that their responsibility revolves around *doing what they are told to do*. Anything else is potentially harmful, and may result in being institutionalized or committing suicide. The only valid use of free will is to DO WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD BY MAHARISHI. snip He doesn't even see a conflict between demonizing free will in his first paragraph and then stating that everyone is responsible for their own evolution in the next paragraph. Hmm, I thought you insisted that being able to hold two contradictory ideas in one's mind at once without seeing a conflict was a sign of advanced spiritual development. I guess it's only such a sign when you do it. When a TMer does it, it's doublethink. In any case, though, what Nablus said about free will isn't at all contradictory. Suppose you were taking Valium for a back problem, and your doctor told you not to quit taking the Valium cold turkey because it might lead you to commit suicide. You quit cold turkey anyway and shortly thereafter commit suicide. Would it be demonizing free will to point out that you were responsible for your own demise?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Jesus Camp
On Jul 9, 2007, at 8:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/9/07 7:09:38 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If people believe their biased studies then people should be flocking to Maharishi schools. Are they? Nearly every student can thrive in a small private school with small classes, lots of personal attention and teachers who care about the students. As I well know, my own children going to private schools with small classes. But their schools are bursting at the seams to hold enough kids. There are waiting lists, etc. MSAE was barely afloat last I heard. Must be no support of nature? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip In other less recent posts, we've seen someone title a post Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot, and then claim over and over and over and over that she wasn't criticizing him or the film that she'd never seen. Were you monitoring yourself when you wrote this to avoid the possible pitfalls of ego and obsession, such as, for example, grossly misrepresenting something someone has said in order to demonize them? I never said I wasn't criticizing Gibson. That's just a flat-out lie, and you knew it was a lie when you wrote it. And when I said I wasn't criticizing the film, I made it very clear I meant I was not criticizing it *with regard to its artistry*. I was criticizing its *content* on the basis of what *many* other people, scholars of Maya history and culture who had seen the film, said were factual misrepresentations of that history and culture. You knew that as well when you wrote the above. If the brand of mindfulness that you're touting doesn't keep you from telling blatant lies with the intent of demonizing someone you consider your enemy, exactly how do you imagine that if TMers practiced it, they wouldn't suffer from ethical and intellectual blindness?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Just a comment related to The 'I did it, therefore it must be the dharma' phenomenon topic I started today: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: But there will always be those who refuse to see that they are harming themselves by their own actions done from their own free will. Then perhaps they end up in a clinic with a nervous breakdown or worse, on a railwayline. What is sickening by your endless crusade about SatGurus who is there with you and blabla, is that you, Ron or whoever, do not seem to understand that you are responsible for your own evolution. Interesting juxtaposition of ideas. In the first paragraph, those who use their free will are harming themselves, and may end up institutionalized. In the next paragraph, these same people are responsible for their own evolution. It would seem to me that Nablus is saying that their responsibility revolves around *doing what they are told to do*. Anything else is potentially harmful, and may result in being institutionalized or committing suicide. The only valid use of free will is to DO WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD BY MAHARISHI. snip He doesn't even see a conflict between demonizing free will in his first paragraph and then stating that everyone is responsible for their own evolution in the next paragraph. Hmm, I thought you insisted that being able to hold two contradictory ideas in one's mind at once without seeing a conflict was a sign of advanced spiritual development. I guess it's only such a sign when you do it. When a TMer does it, it's doublethink. In any case, though, what Nablus said about free will isn't at all contradictory. Suppose you were taking Valium for a back problem, and your doctor told you not to quit taking the Valium cold turkey because it might lead you to commit suicide. You quit cold turkey anyway and shortly thereafter commit suicide. Would it be demonizing free will to point out that you were responsible for your own demise? Hmmm. It seems to me that your argument is built on the premise that the doctor (Maharishi, in this metaphor) knows what he is doing, and is right. In that case, ignoring your free will and doing what he said would be a valid approach. But what if the metaphor-doctor were Harold Bloomfield, and the advice he gave you was *wrong*, and was in fact likely to kill you if you followed it? (This happened to a friend of mine in L.A. who was his patient; the doctors she went to to *save* her from the prescription he wrote for her advised her to sue him for mal- practice, and even offered to testify on her behalf. She didn't do it, because at the time he was a TMO honcho and a darling of MMY.) In such a case, are you wise to follow the doctor's advice? Are you wise to continue following it if it lands you in the hospital? I'm asking because your metaphor was clearly intended to convey the wisdom of following Maharishi's advice by portraying him as a know- ledgeable doctor. There is a *presumption* on your part that he knows best. What if he doesn't? Isn't your argument based on the very phenomenon I was talking about in my other post this morning, a *presumption* that Maharishi's advice is right because he's in tune with the laws of nature? What if he isn't? What if there is *no such thing* as being in tune with the laws of nature, merely human beings saying what they believe to be true and doing the things that they believe to be right? Was it a good idea for the woman in my story above to *not* sue Harold Bloomfield because he was a TMer? As it turned out, he was later busted for much more serious lapses of attention and infractions of the law. Was she correct to *assume* that because he was one of Maharishi's darlings that he knew what he was doing and that he had the support of the laws of nature? Is *your* assumption that Maharishi knows what he is doing and that he has the support of the laws of nature any more sound than my friend's in L.A.? No answers from my side, just questions, to see how you deal with them. Your call.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: since the topic is lively, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW6pVFOpE6Q When I took initiation in my new path, the universe is asked May the truth be entered of the silence of Self's nature, which is the real essence and power behind all words and thoughts, May he bypass all false lower knowledge and siddhi powers. I'd buy that for a dollar!!! :-) I am not sure what you mean in this joke but it is a general knowledge point coming from my path here. As there is a variety of methodologies and ways of expressing knowledge, the stuff coming from here will most likely be mirrored with Ramana Maharishi. The point is a siddha Guru is one that has risen above the sidhis, and rests in the greatest siddhi of them all which is to know the absolute. Lower knowledge, sidhis- this is in the realm of duality and transcient. Maybe psychic, clairvoyant, often there is not peace in the lives of these people. These things have nothing to do with being spiritually advanced. Does your guru also say the same about the transient, dual, kundalini awakening experiences that you are so fixated on?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. You're significantly oversimplifying this teaching. As you note, the capacity for spontaneous right action develops over time; it isn't complete and perfected the instant one learns and begins to practice TM. As you will recall from your TM teacher days, MMY spends quite a bit of time in Science of Bein and Art of Living explaining how one is to determine the right course of action prior to enlightenment: you look to the laws of the land, the prescriptions of the scriptures of your heritage, and the wisdom of your elders. He has also said many times, Don't do anything you think might be wrong. He has even provided a list of what he calls behavioral rasayanas, general guidelines about behavior, that one is to refer to occasionally to keep them lively in the mind. Obviously all of this requires reflection; and even with reflection, you aren't necessarily going to get it right (in terms of what you call the dharma) every time. To my knowledge, MMY has never said one shouldn't engage in monitoring one's thoughts, emotions, and actions, only that one shouldn't *obsess* over it or *strain* to get every last thing just right. snip Could a little emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions be a useful addition to 20/20 TM (now more like 120/120 to be con- sidered truly on the program)? This is already part of the TM program, as noted.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Nice Car'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, when you do refuel, it's the equivalent of five cents a gallon, or something similar. Yeah, it's $.05 per gallon... until you factor in the $20,000 battery that has to be replaced every 5 years or so.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi on Brahman
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Dean Goodman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for your beautiful, and thought-provoking, vision. I have two questions about it: Thanks, it does stimulate the imagination What happened to Prakriti, the Mother? She doesn't get investigated in any state of consciousness? Her realm, her importance, is so in- significant? [It's not nice to make Mother angry.] Prakriti is God's Maya or lila-shakti (play, of the gunas), as such it has no reality and is essentially an illusion. Be without the three gunas, reveal the secret of 'arriving' (expanding into) at the state of pure consciousness. MMY GitaIIvs45 The Purusha is the soul of the Universe/s and a spark of that purusha is man..made in the 'image' of God. When man realizes himself (Self-Realization) he realizes 'his' purusha, when that expands and embraces the Universe he realizes 'God's' Purusha (God Realization, which is also his), beyond that is Brahman/Unity. 2. GOD snip He stands somewhere between the manifest state and the unmanifest state, presiding over both. This is a very exciting phrase, if you got this from you notes, that's amazing as it suggests a state (perhaps the Buddhic plane) where the immanent God (GC) is transcendental to the three worlds, (Physical, astral and causal) yet still 'manifest', that would be the Purusha or MMY's personal God. I've never heard him state it this way Namaste, Michael PARA - THE CENTER FOR REALIZATION Michael Dean Goodman, Ph.D., D.D., Director Boca Raton (Palm Beach County) Florida 561-350-3930 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dedicated to removing the constrictions to the full flow of life - whether they be physical, mental/emotional, or spiritual - and to the unfoldment of peace, freedom, awareness, love, and ecstasy Spiritual guide (ashtanga yoga/meditation, tantra, vedanta, ayur veda) Counselor * Life Coach * Speaker/Educator * Author Private Sessions * Classes * Workshops Retreats * Satsangs (Self-inquiry) Clients and programs throughout the United States, Europe, and India Working in person or by phone Free initial consultation to discuss your needs and goals
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Just a comment related to The 'I did it, therefore it must be the dharma' phenomenon topic I started today: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: But there will always be those who refuse to see that they are harming themselves by their own actions done from their own free will. Then perhaps they end up in a clinic with a nervous breakdown or worse, on a railwayline. What is sickening by your endless crusade about SatGurus who is there with you and blabla, is that you, Ron or whoever, do not seem to understand that you are responsible for your own evolution. Interesting juxtaposition of ideas. In the first paragraph, those who use their free will are harming themselves, and may end up institutionalized. In the next paragraph, these same people are responsible for their own evolution. It would seem to me that Nablus is saying that their responsibility revolves around *doing what they are told to do*. Anything else is potentially harmful, and may result in being institutionalized or committing suicide. The only valid use of free will is to DO WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD BY MAHARISHI. snip He doesn't even see a conflict between demonizing free will in his first paragraph and then stating that everyone is responsible for their own evolution in the next paragraph. Hmm, I thought you insisted that being able to hold two contradictory ideas in one's mind at once without seeing a conflict was a sign of advanced spiritual development. I guess it's only such a sign when you do it. When a TMer does it, it's doublethink. (I notice you didn't respond to this.) In any case, though, what Nablus said about free will isn't at all contradictory. Suppose you were taking Valium for a back problem, and your doctor told you not to quit taking the Valium cold turkey because it might lead you to commit suicide. You quit cold turkey anyway and shortly thereafter commit suicide. Would it be demonizing free will to point out that you were responsible for your own demise? Hmmm. It seems to me that your argument is built on the premise that the doctor (Maharishi, in this metaphor) knows what he is doing, and is right. In that case, ignoring your free will and doing what he said would be a valid approach. Ignoring your free will? How is it not your free will to decide to do what someone says? snip Isn't your argument based on the very phenomenon I was talking about in my other post this morning, a *presumption* that Maharishi's advice is right because he's in tune with the laws of nature? Nope. It's because I assume he knows more than I do about how to maximize the benefits of the technique and avoid negative effects. (As you know, I disagree strenuously with some of his advice in other areas, so the way you phrased your question was disingenuous.) One makes a decision whether or not to trust an authority figure or expert. If one's judgment is wrong, one is responsible for any ill effects (whether one should have trusted the expert and did not, or shouldn't have and did). How exactly is that demonizing free will?
Re: [FairfieldLife] The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
On Jul 9, 2007, at 5:56 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Could a little emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions be a useful addition to 20/20 TM (now more like 120/120 to be con- sidered truly on the program)? Meditation researcher and master B. Alan Wallace in a recent book tells his story of learning TM back in the 60's and notes that the reason TM never tended to deepen as a meditation practice, despite long hours rounding, was because there were no practices done in the interim between sessions to facilitate expansion. This is actually common in a number of pop meditation fads. He says that it's an element of our materialist society that we see meditation techniques as a bandaid for the festering wound of our dysfunctional lives. He claims people who meditate like this would not reach real awakening even if they meditated (rounded) for hundreds of years. This is partially because mental afflictions are not diminished.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. Sure, all of that is true..but how long are you willing to wait.? Why not just 'chip in' and speed the process along. God helps those who help themselves, help God help you by using self discipline and free will to command results.NOW! snipped for brevity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Nice Car'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel babajii_99@ wrote: However, when you do refuel, it's the equivalent of five cents a gallon, or something similar. Yeah, it's $.05 per gallon... until you factor in the $20,000 battery that has to be replaced every 5 years or so. Yeah, I guess you're right about that... I'm wondering though since we're already so entrenched in this oil thing... That if there is some way to get more energy out of the oil, through some better refining process, That would turn the liquid into a compressed fuel, or something along the lines of getting more bang for the buck, so to speak. Maybe someone with a little physics background could see if this were possible to get more energy by a different way of processing the oil? Eventually we will work our way out of the current condition. There are many technologies I'm sure, just over the horizon, which will be beyond that which we know of now...
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Nice Car'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel babajii_99@ wrote: However, when you do refuel, it's the equivalent of five cents a gallon, or something similar. Yeah, it's $.05 per gallon... until you factor in the $20,000 battery that has to be replaced every 5 years or so. And, actually its more like 3-4 cents per mile, not gas gallon equivalent. Thats better than gas at 10 cents or so per mile, but is is nowhere in the range of 5 cents / gallon.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. Sure, all of that is true..but how long are you willing to wait.? Why not just 'chip in' and speed the process along. God helps those who help themselves, help God help you by using self discipline and free will to command results.NOW! snipped for brevity. All of this spontaneous stuff can get quite confusing, if you attempt to analyze 'it', in terms of time, or sequence. The whole process of transcending requires one to take a break from time. Taking a break from time is like taking a break from the ego, and just being with the self. The self, when devoid of ego, acts in a way which is quite different than how the ego thinks and acts: Many passages in 'A Course In Miracles' , attempts to shed light on the difference between the ego, and the Self, the soul. Therefore, whether one meditates with TM or not is not relevant to how one transcends the ego. The ego can be transcended in many ways. Any attempt to quantify 'spontaneous right action' will fail to gather the whole picture. It's like the more you 'wake up', the more aware you become of all the choices, so, for the first time, you really have 'free will'. True 'free will', means getting out of the robotic pavlov dog responses to stimuli from people, places and things, and living completely in the moment. The more 'light' one gathers in the cells of the body, the more magnetic, electric energy one has, the more prana one is living... This is how one becomes in tune with the cosmos, which is pure energy, pure prana...
[FairfieldLife] Reincarnation?
An interesting tale from India. http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14488118cid=2485name=Don't
[FairfieldLife] Re: Jesus Camp
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 9, 2007, at 8:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/9/07 7:09:38 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If people believe their biased studies then people should be flocking to Maharishi schools. Are they? Nearly every student can thrive in a small private school with small classes, lots of personal attention and teachers who care about the students. As I well know, my own children going to private schools with small classes. But their schools are bursting at the seams to hold enough kids. There are waiting lists, etc. MSAE was barely afloat last I heard. Must be no support of nature? :-) MUM was saved from bankruptcy by importing africans and their student loans and hopes for green cards. I don't think that strategy will work at the high school level.
[FairfieldLife] What Maharishi didn't tell you....
Well, since TM is being taught as a Science there's lots he didn't tell you. In fact, since originally meditation was taught in the context of Religion, (the eternal Religion of the Vedas, Sanatana Dharma) there are volumes and volumes of literature that explain the mysteries of God and creation, we all know that! Today, TM is being tailored to satisfy the 'modern' man, the scientific boob! Sort of an advanced cave man! You know, still fiddling with the wheel. At any rate, TM is *Yoga-lite* for modernity, deal with it! It worked for me, I was an idiot till MMY caught up with me, may MMY have as much success with the rest of suffering humanity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. Sure, all of that is true..but how long are you willing to wait.? Why not just 'chip in' and speed the process along. God helps those who help themselves, help God help you by using self discipline and free will to command results.NOW! snipped for brevity. All of this spontaneous stuff can get quite confusing, if you attempt to analyze 'it', in terms of time, or sequence. The whole process of transcending requires one to take a break from time. Taking a break from time is like taking a break from the ego, and just being with the self. The self, when devoid of ego, acts in a way which is quite different than how the ego thinks and acts: Many passages in 'A Course In Miracles' , attempts to shed light on the difference between the ego, and the Self, the soul. Therefore, whether one meditates with TM or not is not relevant to how one transcends the ego. The ego can be transcended in many ways. Any attempt to quantify 'spontaneous right action' will fail to gather the whole picture. It's like the more you 'wake up', the more aware you become of all the choices, so, for the first time, you really have 'free will'. True 'free will', means getting out of the robotic pavlov dog responses to stimuli from people, places and things, and living completely in the moment. The more 'light' one gathers in the cells of the body, the more magnetic, electric energy one has, the more prana one is living... This is how one becomes in tune with the cosmos, which is pure energy, pure prana... Can't argue with that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
I am not sure what you mean in this joke but it is a general knowledge point coming from my path here. As there is a variety of methodologies and ways of expressing knowledge, the stuff coming from here will most likely be mirrored with Ramana Maharishi. The point is a siddha Guru is one that has risen above the sidhis, and rests in the greatest siddhi of them all which is to know the absolute. Lower knowledge, sidhis- this is in the realm of duality and transcient. Maybe psychic, clairvoyant, often there is not peace in the lives of these people. These things have nothing to do with being spiritually advanced. Does your guru also say the same about the transient, dual, kundalini awakening experiences that you are so fixated on? Where shakti meets shiva, the kundalini journey is over, yes it is transcient. Kundalini is like roto rooter for consciousness in that it clears the pathways and brings to the front issues quickly- it is shati in motion- it certainly can be misused as well or the benefits that can be derrived from it are missed totaly because one didn't have proper guidance. I just say from my own experience it is awesome. I have said this to my Guru and she understands. How can I not be fixated on it? I wake up in the morning often and it is woow- it is there, it has it's effect, it is an awesome one for me, and YOU ALL GOT THAT THERE KUNDALINI YOURSELVES. What ever way it happens, if it wakes up, it will be interesting to hear what you have to say. However, it seems that one can unfold enlightenment without kundalini awakening, and who could say how fast with one path compared with another. I don't know exactly what those kalki folks are experiencing and it doesn't look like it is going to be part of my agenda to find out. To be honest, yes there is a curiousity- this is just how it is for me- can't hide or lie about that. Hard to say the right pleasing words about all this- I guess it is always possible to look over what was written and say that could have been delivered in a different softer way, etc I was never interested in kundalini, didn't know what it was, it didn't mean much to me, and I can imagine it is the same for many. It is just a new ball game when it is a part of one;s life. Just like some of the Kalki people talking about things that I am not sure of and won't know, I am in a similar situation I suppose as if one has this curiosity about hearing the kundalini but doesn't know it from experience. But it is not necessarily a thing where If my kundalni is awakened, I am more advanced than you. I am saying it is awesome from my own experience- some others here on ffl have described it as something that happens to very evolved people- h- I think they read that somewhere- I don't know. I also can't tell you how evolved I am - I think a reasonable response if one asks where am I? I am coming along in my journey- it is the kundalini path, and the kundalini is awake. I have written a lot about my experiences, and alot of the writting was spontaneous and from the state itself that I was talking about- but it is just difficult to find the right use of words because it feels like the words are sometimes overinflated and also underinflated for what was and is here. I used the word silence alot but that may have been an overinflated description, maybe if I say the kundalini has brought about this unusual settled state. Anyway, my Guru obviously has lots to say about Kundalini, that is why she wrote a book on it, the book is also in 21st century book store in FF- Kundalini, from hell to heaven. By the way, if anyone think's my Guru is out for money, that is way off the mark. My Guru has a military pension, lives on that. The path is donation only, and very little has come in in the last 8 years. There is $4000 in an acount from the donations, that will be used for an ashram one day. I cant say that there will ever be enough money for an ashram, or maybe if someone lets my guru use a place even, but as it stands now, My Guru lives in an apartment in Los Angeles. Probably will move after next february, was in Mexico last year, and Seatle the year before that. Anyone that wants to take initialtion would probably have to stay in a hotel or maybe there is one guy that has a nice house out there but how often we can imposition him, I dont know. I stayed with him when I visited last month, I was the first out of town visitor to come see my Guru since she moved to LA last february. There are a few people saving up money now to cover their epenses to come to LA and take initiation. I think this will be the first once since about a year to take initiation. The one in question has a long history with being on the path and is now living in a monostary studying for the priesthood. My Guru came from the same background at one point in her journey. Tanmay
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
Seriously? TurquoiseB wrote: Sure, as did hundreds of other folks who studied with the guy I did. 'Surfing the Himalayas: A Spiritual Adventure' by Frederick Lenz St. Martin's, 1996 Amazon Used $.55 http://tinyurl.com/39zxtv
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
I wouldn't doubt anyones experience, it's just I've never heard anyone say they have seen it for real. TurquoiseB wrote: The person levitating or flying through the air was a guy named Frederick Lenz, who also called himself Rama. 'Snowboarding to Nirvana' by Frederick Lenz St. Martin's, 1998 Amazon Used $.01 http://tinyurl.com/363von
[FairfieldLife] Forgiveness
FORGIVENESS In the Babemba tribe of South Africa, when a person acts irresponsibly or unjustly, he is placed in the centre of the village, alone and unfettered. All work ceases, and every man, woman, and child in the village gathers in a large circle around the accused individual. Then each person in the tribe speaks to the accused, one at a time, each recalling the good things the person in the centre of the circle has done in his lifetime. Every incident, every experience that can be recalled with any detail and accuracy, is recounted. All his positive attributes, good deeds, strengths, and kindnesses are recited carefully and at length. This tribal ceremony often lasts for several days. At the end, the tribal circle is broken, a joyous celebration takes place, and the person is symbolically and literally welcomed back into the tribe. ~The Art of Forgiveness~ No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/891 - Release Date: 7/8/2007 6:32 PM To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reincarnation?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An interesting tale from India. http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14488118cid=2485name=Don't It's neither interesting nor a tale. It's bullshit. Ever wonder why these claims of reincarnation are always of famous people? Don't ditchdiggers and garbagemen deserve to be reincarnated, too?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
One wonders how Nablus reconciles his involvement with Benjamin Creme and Maitreya. Isn't he courting mad- ness or suicide by doing it? Isn't it a somewhat dan- gerous exercise in free will on his part? Again, the relationship of this comment to my earlier post is that Nablus is obviously *unable* to consider his *own* actions off the program, even though Maharishi certainly would. He is *not* doing what Maharishi says, but it's OK, because he's doing it. Haha, why on earth do I bother responding to the endless rubbish of this Turq Barry ? Free will must be mobilizing somehow. The reason one does not mix systems is because different systems from different Traditions create different kinds of rays or energies in the nervoussystem. This is something everone knows, but a point apparently the turq has missed. Am I mixing systems ? No because I do not do the meditations that Mr. Creme advocates. Secondly; if you have a strong foundation in a path there is no reason not to be inspired by other Saints. But you just can't say that to beginners on any path because before long they will be running all over the place getting their energies messed up. Knowing that his turq fellow will twist and bend all of the above to suit his rather limited wino-world, they were intended for others who might be interested.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi on Brahman [was: So Judy..what's Samadhi like?]
Michael Dean Goodman wrote: snip Then came his famous quote about Brahman - these were his exact words: Like the Absolute IS, Brahman is NOT. Brahman is not the Absolute. Brahman is not the relative. Brahman is not both of them together. Brahman is not neither of them. Brahman is The Knower. Somebody is really confused. Has Marshy been reading Ken Wilber? Somebody needs to get some smarts! Madhyamaka: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhyamika ...like a flame that does not flicker in a windless place This is almost pure Buddhism. Nirvana: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana ...body, no body, existence, non-existence, fullness, emptiness... This is almost pure Mahayana Buddhism. Perfection of Wisdom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prajna_Paramita Judy Stein wrote: Here's Nagarjuna's Four Negations: Brahman is not the relative. Brahman is not the Absolute. Brahman is not the relative and the Absolute. Brahman is not neither the relative nor the Absolute.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi on Brahman [was: So Judy..what's Samadhi like?]
Maharishi observes that: The 1st mandala of Rig Veda is about Wholeness, Brahman. The 10th mandala is about Purusha, the Absolute. They are distinct. They are not the same. If they were, they wouldn't need their own mandalas. Billy wrote: Beautiful point, one not often understood... So, Billy, you are thinking that Brahman is separate from Purusha? Does that make any sense? The basic teachings of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta is that Brahman is non-dual. That Brahman and Atman are a unity. And that plurality is an appearance only. ...here's the analogy to explaining the difference between Brahman, Purusha and Prakriti. Let's say Brahman represents a white light from the Sun, and Prakriti a *blue* crystal ball set in that light. Once the white light of the Sun (Brahman) enters the blue crystal ball it becomes a luminescent blue color, that is the Purusha, circumscribed by the limitations of the crystal ball, but still essentially unchanged Brahman. That is the difference between Brahman the unqualified Absolute. Purusha, immanent (all- pervading) *in* Creation as the Personal God Consciousness. This is saguna Brahman, which is Ishvara, the Transcendental Lord. Advaita teaches that Brahman's own nature is svarupa, as seen for the temporary purposes of worship - Brahman with attributes. And Prakriti or Mother Nature, hence the saying, the only begotten of the Father. Brahman is the Father. (UC) Prakriti is the Mother. Purusha is the Son or the only begotten of the Father. (GC CC) So, now you're thinking that Brahman is a trinity instead of a duality in Rig Veda? But Judy says that Brahman is one-without-a-second - a Monism. Go figure. Father, Son and Holy Spirit...now imagine the blue crystal ball to be our Solar System, get the idea? Now this IS confusing!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi on Brahman [was: So Judy..what's Samadhi like?]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Dean Goodman Wrote: Like the Absolute IS, Brahman is NOT. Brahman is not the Absolute. Brahman is not the relative. Brahman is not both of them together. Brahman is not neither of them. Brahman is The Knower. MMY really quoted Nagarjuna's Four Negations? Probably not, but Marshy has obviously read Ken Wilber! So it comes as no surprise how confused people can get. But in a previous post you denied that these were Nagarjuna's Four Negations. No, I didn't. Neither you nor Michael seem to realize that the term Brahman is a metaphysical term - it is not apparent to the senses, therefore your quasi-syllogism is non-sensical. It's not a syllogism, quasi or otherwise. As I said, you don't have the foggiest notion of what I or Nagarjuna was talking about (or Michael either, or MMY for that matter).
[FairfieldLife] Re: A book I think many here would enjoy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: I would agree. The artists in question, unlike TM Yogic Flyers, probably didn't have to rely on imagination. They'd have seen it actually done, as I have. Seriously? Sure, as did hundreds of other folks who studied with the guy I did. many times over a couple of decades. But I don't expect you to necessarily believe it, or for it to mean anything even if you did. It's just levitating, or flying through the air. It's just a siddhi. That's not the same as enlight- enment in my book. That said, it is a lot of fun to see. Breaks your boundaries about what is possible and what is not. ...same way it breaks boundaries when Chris Angel does the same trick as Lenz or Sai Baba fakes producing holy ash. Angel, Lenz, Baba: all fakers. Yet when you believe it, like Barry does, it has a value, especially when, a decade or so later, you still believe the fakery.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Forgiveness
In a message dated 7/9/07 10:11:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: FORGIVENESS In the Babemba tribe of South Africa, when a person acts irresponsibly or unjustly, he is placed in the centre of the village, alone and unfettered. All work ceases, and every man, woman, and child in the village gathers in a large circle around the accused individual. Then each person in the tribe speaks to the accused, one at a time, each recalling the good things the person in the centre of the circle has done in his lifetime. Every incident, every experience that can be recalled with any detail and accuracy, is recounted. All his positive attributes, good deeds, strengths, and kindnesses are recited carefully and at length. This tribal ceremony often lasts for several days. At the end, the tribal circle is broken, a joyous celebration takes place, and the person is symbolically and literally welcomed back into the tribe. ~The Art of Forgiveness~ Is that all? The person that did wrong does not have to make any kind of restitution or correct the grievances against him before the circle is made? Of course, this could be a very shaming experience for someone who is basically good and doesn't cause much trouble but for a real scoundrel it sounds like a pat on the back. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What's lacking in Sicko
bob_brigante wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're also saying that because an elite supposedly have good health insurance the rest of the populace should suffer? This reply is so typical of the lack of intelligence on this list that I am, as usual in dealing with the clueless, speechless... That's because you're too clueless, Bob Brigante, to answer the question. Your lack of intelligence is typical of the TB'ers we see on this list. What you said certainly implied that we shouldn't upset the apple cart for those who already have insurance. Either you don't get it or you sell or work for the health insurance industry.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Nice Car'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel babajii_99@ wrote: Eventually we will work our way out of the current condition. There are many technologies I'm sure, just over the horizon, which will be beyond that which we know of now... I'm not so sure, the trouble with energy is you don't get out any more than you put in. The energy from oil was put in 600 million years ago by mother nature, soon we will be through it and there is no replacement. Meaning that as the energy crisis bites we are going to be in ever deeper trouble as the world economy is 100% dependent on oil. The era of free energy is nearly over, everything is going to have to change. Compared to this I don't know why people worry about global warming so much.
[FairfieldLife] Swami G's comments-death penalty and enlightenment for animals
I found this interesting when I was visiting, it was right around the time when this Guy in California was executed- Tooky Williams or however you spell it. I was talking with SwamiG in the Ashram, which always means it is Satsang. I think Satsang means association with Truth. If that is so, there is a transmission that occurs- shaktipat- so shatipat comes out of satsang. Anyway, I was surprised at the comments and they were interesting. I will do my best to convey it. Swami G said there is no death, all is eternal. These people have lost their chance this time around. Swami G said I would even administer the chemicals . They will get some help on the other side. They are in a hell relm and will be with a like kind. It is not out of retribution to execute them but for those reasons above. it balances out what they have done. Tokey Williams said he had found peace. Swami G said if this is the case, what is better- sitting in the jail cell the rest of his life? and if he has not found this eternal peace, he will deal with the full effects of the returning Karma. Swami G said people may not like to hear this but this is the truth. I told Swami G a comment from the late Charlie Lutes- he said they shouldnt execute people because all that stuff will be released into the envirornment. Swami G said that is nonsense, they take it with them. Regarding animals, they have consciousness. It was said that Ramana Maharishi had an enlightened cow, and I think crow and maybe other animals. Swami G said it can happen but it is rare. Swami G has 2 dogs, and they sleep in the same bedroom. She said Chico just has a dog's consciousness. However , regarding Miss Rhade, Swami G asked me- have you ever seen devotion like that? Swami G said not all Guru's agree with this. Other comments about eatiing meet, sex celebacy, all is covered in the satsang tapes. Regarding the discussions at present, I found this in today;s posts, may apply: Question: So I guess my question is to which degree we should get involved in discussions about worldly matters, where the egos desire to be right can be very strong. G: the world is not going to change no matter how much you argue. If you want to see global change FIRST begin with yourself and climb out of your own suffering. Or must you impose your suffering on others by making them Hear what the ME wants - desires - fears - etc. ? Regarding nabulouses comments to me: You are disgusted with what I have to say? it is some comments- each receives it as they like. In summary, i was in TM, left to another path, come here and tell of the new path, and looks like point out what is in the new path that was not in the old, then finding faults in the old where could be improved, and even stating that the things that can be improved are in place in the new path. Big range in FFL, some are anti TM, some are pro, maybe some have never had anything to do with TM, some were in TM, then left to one or more Guru's, etc- I think sky is the limit for what is here, I dont know exactly- havent been around for 3 years. So, depending on what your status is, this may have a big influeunce on what people have to say I posted last year about this and saw like zero interest, this year is slightly above that so a change is there, break out the champagne !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi on Brahman [was: So Judy..what's Samadhi like?]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, Billy, you are thinking that Brahman is separate from Purusha? Does that make any sense? NO, I think you misread my poorly compiled paragraph- The basic teachings of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta is that Brahman is non-dual. That Brahman and Atman are a unity. And that plurality is an appearance only. Correct! This is saguna Brahman, which is Ishvara, the Transcendental Lord. Advaita teaches that Brahman's own nature is svarupa, as seen for the temporary purposes of worship - Brahman with attributes. Agreed! So, now you're thinking that Brahman is a trinity instead of a duality in Rig Veda? But Judy says that Brahman is one-without-a-second - a Monism. Not really, only Ishvara and his lila-shakti consort Maha-Prakriti, lots of terms Willy, so little time. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
Quick comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. What I'm wondering is whether this teaching might have something to do with some fairly remarkable (from my point of view) posts made here recently, in which long- term TMers seem to merely *assume* that if they see it, it's true. And that if they do it, it's right. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have noticed a *strong* tendency in long-term TMers to *assume* these things, as opposed to a tendency in, say, long- term Buddhists to *not* assume them. Their philosophy and practice places as much emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions to avoid the possible pitfalls of ego and obsession and projecting belief and expectation onto the world as one makes one's way through life as they do on meditation. I think it's fair to say that the TM philosophy not only does not emphasize such monitoring, it tends to dismiss such practices as moodmaking, the intellect trying to monitor and evaluate something that is better handled by just becoming more in tune with the laws of nature. In other words, just meditate and everything will be OK -- your perceptions will almost by definition be accurate, and your actions will almost by definition be sattvic or dharmic. But is this true? We've seen folks here lately -- folks who claim to be enlightened -- say that there can *be* no other way to see a situation than the way that they see it. We've seen these folks (from my point of view) lash out at someone who has bruised their ego, and then claim that they had only the best intentions in mind. In other less recent posts, we've seen someone title a post Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot, and then claim over and over and over and over that she wasn't criticizing him or the film that she'd never seen. We've seen (IMO) some of the most massive non-self-awareness and denial I've ever encountered anywhere on the planet. So I guess my questions for this topic are: Is 'just meditate and everything will be OK' accurate, and a valuable teaching, or can it possibly lead to intellectual and ethical blindness about the real nature of one's thoughts, emotions and actions? Could a little emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions be a useful addition to 20/20 TM (now more like 120/120 to be con- sidered truly on the program)? Who would you trust more in a situation in which your life depended on them -- someone who *assumed* that their every perception was accurate and that their every action was right, or someone who was open to the possibility that they might be just as prone to errors of perception and behavior as anyone else? Just questions to think about. Or ignore. Your call. **end** Turq, just a quick comment (not much time for more as I'm visiting with my new [and first] granddaughter here in Seattle and watching over this new incarnation is a total trip). First of all, it's not a binary issue with a right side and a wrong side of the fence; everyone does exactly what they feel is right 100% of the time (IMO). If mindfulness is part of what feels right for them then mindfulness is part of the package for them; if not, then not. It seems clear to me that Maharishi has always assumed that what he felt like doing or saying was the correct thing to say or do. Similarly, as my own life has played out, I've been increasingly confident that what is supposed to happen is what will (and does) happen. I've been happy with the outcomes so far. Were I not happy with the outcome, that would still be part of the story of a life, in this case 'my' life. I have had (as we all have) enough unhappiness and pain to realize that it, too, is part of everyone's life story. The key is whether you identify with the story or just appreciate it (or enjoy it) for what it is, whatever it is. For the most part, living in this time and in this country, with that background and this particular genetic legacy, allows me a 'leg up' and a predeliction to appreciate all this stuff in a way that a childhood in Sudan or Gaza or Iraq might not have. Regardless of how any of us may differ or disagree with others here, it seems clear to me that everyone who posts here seems very sincere in what they post;
[FairfieldLife] The Masque of the Red Death
Rory writes snipped big time: As for the rest, I'll just reiterate that I am not saying you guys are damaged -- just that you and Vaj (Curtis less so) seem self- condemned to repeat yourselves over and over, making broad, sweeping (and easily disputed) statements without ever getting to your personal integrity, to your undisputable personal experience, and to the core of your discontent, where IME great treasure lies. Tom T: Patanjali Chapter 2 verse 30 something When the person is established in Personal Integrity all actions achieve the desired result. Followed immediately by When the person is established in truthfulness all riches flow. Tom T
[FairfieldLife] Hello
Hello, I would like to invite you to join the Death Penalty Debate Board at http://deathpenalty3.proboards103.com/index.cgi We debate the death penalty world wide from both sides, pro and anti and also discuss many other topics, such as religions, politics and general crime discussion. Greetings, DP Debate Administration Team
Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Cindy Wants Pelosi's Scalp'
Pelosi isn't the only one under fire in California by their constituents for not pushing impeachment. I was at a talk a while back given by my Congressman George Miller who is pretty popular in the Bay Area but not that night as he argued that impeachment would delay stopping the war. The crowd was not pleased. We believe that Congress can do both. A lot of progressive Californians are not happy with Senator Feinstein either which Sheehan last year threatened to run against. Demand that Impeachment both of Cheney and Bush be put on the table. Robert Gimbel wrote: Sheehan considers challenge to Pelosi CRAWFORD, Texas - Cindy Sheehan, the soldier's mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to seek House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks. Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That's when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group's war protest site near Bush's Crawford ranch. Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership, Sheehan told The Associated Press. We hired them to bring an end to the war. I'm not too far from San Francisco, so it wouldn't be too big of a move for me. I would give her a run for her money. Messages left with Pelosi's staff were not immediately returned. The White House declined to comment on Sheehan's plans. She plans her official candidacy announcement Tuesday. Sunday wrapped up what is expected to be her final weekend at the 5-acre Crawford lot that she sold to California radio talk show host Bree Walker, who plans to keep it open to protesters. Sheehan announced in late May that she was leaving the anti-war movement. She said that she felt her efforts had been in vain and that she had endured smear tactics and hatred from the left, as well as the right. She said she wanted to change course. She first came to Crawford in August 2005 during a Bush vacation, demanding to talk to him about the war that killed her son Casey in 2004. She became the face of the anti-war movement during her 26-day roadside vigil, which was joined by thousands. But it also drew counter-protests by Bush supporters, many who said she was hurting troop morale. Sheehan, who has never held political office, recently said that she was leaving the Democratic Party because it caved in to the president. Last week, she announced her caravan to Washington, an undertaking she calls the people's accountability movement. I didn't expect to be back so soon, but the focus is different than it was before, Sheehan said Sunday. Instead of talking and making accusations, we're going into communities and talking to the people who've been hurt by the Bush regime. We're finding out how we can help people. Sheehan, who will turn 50 on Tuesday, said Bush should be impeached because she believes he misled the public about the reasons for going to war, violated the Geneva Convention by torturing detainees, and crossed the line by commuting the prison sentence of former vice presidential aide I. Lewis Scooter Libby. She said other grounds for impeachment are the domestic spying program and the inadequate and tragic response to Hurricane Katrina. Libby was convicted of lying and obstructing justice in an investigation into the leak of a CIA officer's identity. Sheehan said she hopes Pelosi files the articles of impeachment so Sheehan can move onto her next projects, including overseas trips for humanitarian work. But if not, Sheehan said she is ready to run for office. I'm doing it to encourage other people to run against Congress members who aren't doing their jobs, who are beholden to special interests, Sheehan said. She (Pelosi) let the people down who worked hard to put Democrats back in power, who we thought were our hope for change. Pelosi was elected to the House in 1987 and became the first female speaker in January. Sheehan said she lives in a Sacramento suburb but declined to disclose which city, citing safety reasons. The area is outside Pelosi's district, but there are no residency requirements for congressional members, according to the California secretary of state's office. By ANGELA K. BROWN, Associated Press Writer - Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Levitation on youtube
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One wonders how Nablus reconciles his involvement with Benjamin Creme and Maitreya. Isn't he courting mad- ness or suicide by doing it? Isn't it a somewhat dan- gerous exercise in free will on his part? Again, the relationship of this comment to my earlier post is that Nablus is obviously *unable* to consider his *own* actions off the program, even though Maharishi certainly would. He is *not* doing what Maharishi says, but it's OK, because he's doing it. Haha, why on earth do I bother responding to the endless rubbish of this Turq Barry ? Free will must be mobilizing somehow. The reason one does not mix systems is because different systems from different Traditions create different kinds of rays or energies in the nervoussystem. This is something everone knows, but a point apparently the turq has missed. Am I mixing systems ? No because I do not do the meditations that Mr. Creme advocates. Secondly; if you have a strong foundation in a path there is no reason not to be inspired by other Saints. But you just can't say that to beginners on any path because before long they will be running all over the place getting their energies messed up. Knowing that his turq fellow will twist and bend all of the above to suit his rather limited wino-world, they were intended for others who might be interested. Hi and thanks for the insight. I've always felt intuitively not to mix more than one type of meditation and now your explanation makes perfect sense. It also explains why turq/barry/whatever displays such an absence of integrity, clinically speaking.:-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] 'Live Earth Concert- 9 million internet streams for MSN'
I watched a little of it. Enough to remind me of how little of this stuff is music anymore but corporate contrived sound pieces. The choreography, especially Madonna's, looked like it was a high school cheerleader routine. Of course I'm arrogant because I'm a classically trained musician who created dumbed down pieces for some of the rock groups I played in. Thus I know how the scheme works. Ironic to watch Chevrolet sponsor the show on NBC which BTW had a lower bitrate feed and thus poorer sound than Universal HD (also a part of GE owned NBC). Robert Gimbel wrote: EAST RUTHERFORD, New Jersey (Reuters) - The Live Earth global pop concerts on Saturday broke a record for an online entertainment show by generating more than 9 million Internet streams, Microsoft Corp. Web portal MSN said. As the last two of the nine Live Earth concerts got underway, MSN product manager Karin Muskopf said the number of streams had surpassed the previous record held by 2005's Live 8 global concerts to fight poverty. We have exceeded any other online entertainment event, Muskopf said. It's really exciting to see the enthusiasm for the concert. An Internet stream is when a person watches on a computer. People can stream an event more than once -- by switching it on and off -- so 9 million streams does not necessarily mean 9 million people watching, MSN said. Live 8 was the first major multi-venue event successfully streamed live with Time Warner Inc.'s AOL portal on the Web. AOL said 5 million people had logged on to the event on the day of those shows, but it did not say how many Internet streams of the event there had been. MSN said it would not be able to immediately determine the number of people who logged on to Live Earth. Control Room, producer of Live Earth and Live 8, said it found that the on-demand streams in the days after the Live 8 had the most impact, especially after clips were passed around by e-mail. Live 8 was streamed by users more than 100 million times in the six weeks following the shows. Live Earth is predicted to be three times bigger with organizers expecting more than 80 percent of the viewership will be on-demand in the days after the event. - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The I did it, therefore it must be the dharma phenomenon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quick comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Here's a topic that some might want to chime in on. I suspect Curtis will, at least, and hopefully Marek and some of the more balanced thinkers here. I think we're all familiar with one of the basic tenets of Maharishi's philosophy, that as one meditates and evolves, one becomes capable of spontaneous right action. In this philosophy, there is no need for mind- fulness or monitoring one's thoughts, emotions and actions, because it is *assumed* that they will, over time, become more in tune with the laws of nature and therefore right, an innocent refection of the dharma. What I'm wondering is whether this teaching might have something to do with some fairly remarkable (from my point of view) posts made here recently, in which long- term TMers seem to merely *assume* that if they see it, it's true. And that if they do it, it's right. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have noticed a *strong* tendency in long-term TMers to *assume* these things, as opposed to a tendency in, say, long- term Buddhists to *not* assume them. Their philosophy and practice places as much emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions to avoid the possible pitfalls of ego and obsession and projecting belief and expectation onto the world as one makes one's way through life as they do on meditation. I think it's fair to say that the TM philosophy not only does not emphasize such monitoring, it tends to dismiss such practices as moodmaking, the intellect trying to monitor and evaluate something that is better handled by just becoming more in tune with the laws of nature. In other words, just meditate and everything will be OK -- your perceptions will almost by definition be accurate, and your actions will almost by definition be sattvic or dharmic. But is this true? We've seen folks here lately -- folks who claim to be enlightened -- say that there can *be* no other way to see a situation than the way that they see it. We've seen these folks (from my point of view) lash out at someone who has bruised their ego, and then claim that they had only the best intentions in mind. In other less recent posts, we've seen someone title a post Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot, and then claim over and over and over and over that she wasn't criticizing him or the film that she'd never seen. We've seen (IMO) some of the most massive non-self-awareness and denial I've ever encountered anywhere on the planet. So I guess my questions for this topic are: Is 'just meditate and everything will be OK' accurate, and a valuable teaching, or can it possibly lead to intellectual and ethical blindness about the real nature of one's thoughts, emotions and actions? Could a little emphasis on mindfulness and monitoring one's thoughts and emotions and actions be a useful addition to 20/20 TM (now more like 120/120 to be con- sidered truly on the program)? Who would you trust more in a situation in which your life depended on them -- someone who *assumed* that their every perception was accurate and that their every action was right, or someone who was open to the possibility that they might be just as prone to errors of perception and behavior as anyone else? Just questions to think about. Or ignore. Your call. **end** Turq, just a quick comment (not much time for more as I'm visiting with my new [and first] granddaughter here in Seattle and watching over this new incarnation is a total trip). Congratulations. How exciting. First of all, it's not a binary issue with a right side and a wrong side of the fence; everyone does exactly what they feel is right 100% of the time (IMO). On some level, you are correct. Even if they know that what they are doing is wrong, they think they are doing the right thing. Then again, so did Son Of Sam. :-) If mindfulness is part of what feels right for them then mindfulness is part of the package for them; if not, then not. Again, I can't disagree. On one level of reality, and from one high-level point of view. that is. :-) It seems clear to me that Maharishi has always assumed that what he felt like doing or saying was the correct thing to say or do. I sure can't disagree with that. I might disagree with what he considers the correct thing to do or say, but I agree with you that the thought that it's *not* correct has probably never entered his mind. It can't. He's just drawn that way. That's what my original questions were about. There is no question that such a never question my actions or what I believe to be true mindstate exists, and that some people are just drawn that way. My question has to do
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Live Earth Concert- 9 million internet streams for MSN'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I watched a little of it. Enough to remind me of how little of this stuff is music anymore but corporate contrived sound pieces. The choreography, especially Madonna's, looked like it was a high school cheerleader routine. Of course I'm arrogant because I'm a classically trained musician who created dumbed down pieces for some of the rock groups I played in. Thus I know how the scheme works. Ironic to watch Chevrolet sponsor the show on NBC which BTW had a lower bitrate feed and thus poorer sound than Universal HD (also a part of GE owned NBC). Very interesting. I was disappointed that the bands were mostly Top 40 Music group. I didn't see a single Jazz artist there much less musical artists from the underground scene, any underground group. It's the same ole, same ole. I'm a musician also; I specialize in the Free Jazz. Heaven forbid if Live Earth had shown one of us performing! ;-) Peace, Marc Robert Gimbel wrote: EAST RUTHERFORD, New Jersey (Reuters) - The Live Earth global pop concerts on Saturday broke a record for an online entertainment show by generating more than 9 million Internet streams, Microsoft Corp. Web portal MSN said. As the last two of the nine Live Earth concerts got underway, MSN product manager Karin Muskopf said the number of streams had surpassed the previous record held by 2005's Live 8 global concerts to fight poverty. We have exceeded any other online entertainment event, Muskopf said. It's really exciting to see the enthusiasm for the concert. An Internet stream is when a person watches on a computer. People can stream an event more than once -- by switching it on and off -- so 9 million streams does not necessarily mean 9 million people watching, MSN said. Live 8 was the first major multi-venue event successfully streamed live with Time Warner Inc.'s AOL portal on the Web. AOL said 5 million people had logged on to the event on the day of those shows, but it did not say how many Internet streams of the event there had been. MSN said it would not be able to immediately determine the number of people who logged on to Live Earth. Control Room, producer of Live Earth and Live 8, said it found that the on-demand streams in the days after the Live 8 had the most impact, especially after clips were passed around by e-mail. Live 8 was streamed by users more than 100 million times in the six weeks following the shows. Live Earth is predicted to be three times bigger with organizers expecting more than 80 percent of the viewership will be on-demand in the days after the event. - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Masque of the Red Death
Thanks U tom for your responce to the emails of ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Live Earth Concert- 9 million internet streams for MSN'
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of medwards520 Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 2:36 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Live Earth Concert- 9 million internet streams for MSN' Very interesting. I was disappointed that the bands were mostly Top 40 Music group. I didn't see a single Jazz artist there much less musical artists from the underground scene, any underground group. It's the same ole, same ole. I'm a musician also; I specialize in the Free Jazz. Heaven forbid if Live Earth had shown one of us performing! ;-) I tuned in periodically and saw a few things I liked – Sarah Brightman, The Police, The Dave Matthews Band – but most of the rest of the “music” was young tattooed guys screaming. I guess I’m an old fogey now, but it didn’t sound like music to me. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/891 - Release Date: 7/8/2007 6:32 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reincarnation?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: An interesting tale from India. http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14488118cid=2485name=Don't It's neither interesting nor a tale. It's bullshit. Ever wonder why these claims of reincarnation are always of famous people? Don't ditchdiggers and garbagemen deserve to be reincarnated, too? Yep, it's almost Forrest Gumpian in nature. Almost everyone who describes past lives seems to have been somebody famous. Rory Goff, for instance, claims to have been Hitler's second in command. Past-life memories came floating up of following the highly charismatic Hitler; of being his second-in-command; of developing an elite flying cadre for him to bring about a new world order; of being promised the kingdom upon his death, and of being betrayed as he slipped further and further into madness. Speaking of slipping further and further into madness, Rory seems to have dissapeared. On to Initiation 21 of his Cosmic Astral Jouney perhaps?
[FairfieldLife] 'Obama Maharishi'
July 09, 2007 Obama and the Maharishi.. Senator Barak Obama, high-flying candidate, has visited the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's community in Iowa..the community has been there forty years since the Maharishi founded it. If you want more, the BBC site has it. Makes a change from that Superman photo, anyway.. Posted by Libby Purves on July 9, 2007 in Barak Obama - Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reincarnation?
On Jul 9, 2007, at 5:49 PM, geezerfreak wrote: Yep, it's almost Forrest Gumpian in nature. Almost everyone who describes past lives seems to have been somebody famous. Personally, I'm sure I was Forrest Gump in my latest past lifetime. Rory Goff, for instance, claims to have been Hitler's second in command. Cut the guy a break, Geez--he could have claimed he was Eva Braun. Now that's not an image anybody wants to deal with just after dinner. Past-life memories came floating up of following the highly charismatic Hitler; of being his second-in-command; of developing an elite flying cadre for him to bring about a new world order; of being promised the kingdom upon his death, and of being betrayed as he slipped further and further into madness. Speaking of slipping further and further into madness, Rory seems to have dissapeared. On to Initiation 21 of his Cosmic Astral Jouney perhaps? All part of the rapidly-evolving Rorian tradition...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reincarnation?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 9, 2007, at 5:49 PM, geezerfreak wrote: Yep, it's almost Forrest Gumpian in nature. Almost everyone who describes past lives seems to have been somebody famous. Personally, I'm sure I was Forrest Gump in my latest past lifetime. Don't feel badly Sal. This is my first (and last) incarnation so that makes me pretty much of a savage. Helps when I make clumsy passes though. Oh excuse me for grazing your boob, its my first incarnation and I really don't know any better. This is a nice New Age touch for the traditional blues excuse for boorish behavior which is: If I mistreat you girl I sure don't mean no harm, cuz I'm just a country boy and I don't know right from wrong. Rory Goff, for instance, claims to have been Hitler's second in command. Cut the guy a break, Geez--he could have claimed he was Eva Braun. Now that's not an image anybody wants to deal with just after dinner. Past-life memories came floating up of following the highly charismatic Hitler; of being his second-in-command; of developing an elite flying cadre for him to bring about a new world order; of being promised the kingdom upon his death, and of being betrayed as he slipped further and further into madness. Speaking of slipping further and further into madness, Rory seems to have dissapeared. On to Initiation 21 of his Cosmic Astral Jouney perhaps? All part of the rapidly-evolving Rorian tradition...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Reincarnation as Organic Metaphor
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Reincarnation as Organic Metaphor To Every Thing There is a Season - Ecclesiastes 3. 1-8 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace. A pretty cyclical statement from the Bible, no? By David Spero http://www.davidspero.org The philosophical generosity that birthed the Vedic spirit is completely absent in today's world. Our world culture has become religiously self-righteous and utilitarian. The view that spiritual realization arises as a gift from nature, a flowering of various invisible, organic processes, has vanished. Judeo-Christian-Islamic theologies assert the existence of a God separate from nature. Accordingly, they tell us that the world was created for a two-fold purpose, first to glorify this transcendent, separate God, and second to redeem the human race in time and space. However, this view is dualistic in nature and ultimately incorrect, for nature does not exist in linear time. Nature's time is cyclical. An apple tree produces apples year after year without any ultimate purpose other than the joy of fruition. Nature's functioning is not teleological. Humans tend to hyper-intellectualize, projecting purposes onto other life forms. They freeze the fluidity of life into rational concepts. Judeo-Christian- Islamic dualistic theologies have devastatingly stained the spiritual fabric of our world. Reincarnation is a charming, sensuous metaphor for organic life in migration. Rebirth was not meant to create the impression of a linear march (of births) through time. Instead it pointed to the world as fertile soil in which human beings might flourish. The ancient Vedic rishis, or seers, were ardent lovers of nature even nature-worshippers. In the natural world they saw the reason for existence, filled as it was with spontaneous displays of overwhelming beauty. Skies, seas, mountains, fragrances of sweet flowers, were meant to lift the human spirit into supra-sensual ecstasies. Perceptual, emotional, and mental faculties were spiritually stimulated by natural phenomena. Knowledge and devotion were like strings on a guitar, fusing into the melodic rhythm of the total human being. Lila, the spirit of playfulness, the self-generating power seen in nature, was the universe's matrix, the ultimate reason for its existence. Evolution allows the soul's maturation through time, carried by the force of desire. Just as a flower requires sunlight to live and grow, human beings blossom through yearning. Desire is not a dirty word, as certain spiritual traditions insist. Desire's force serves the expansion of human consciousness as it matures and deepens into a painful hunger for God, culminating in moksha, spiritual liberation. Liberation or moksha is actually desire's fruition, not its negation. The yogas of karma, jnana, bhakti, and raja were the spiritual paths of action, discrimination, devotion, and meditation. They conveyed a theme of adapting any and every form of human activity into the Self or pure consciousness. These spiritual paths affirmed compassionately that any type of person could awaken from dualistic experience, and evolve from the waking state to unlimited Brahman consciousness. Samsara, often referred to as the wheel of birth and death, the field in which transmigration occurs, literally meant running together, or wandering. Samsara referred to living movement, like that of a meandering river. This non-mechanistic image starkly contradicts the guilt- ridden idea of rebirth as retribution. It nullifies the cold notion of physical embodiment as a mechanical exercise carried out by the indifferent principle of cause and effect. Judeo-Christian-Islamic monotheistic, utilitarian theologies seeped into the fabric of Hinduism over the centuries, tainting its immaculate, highly metaphorical, notion of rebirth. The rebirth process was carried out by the vasanas, infinitely subtle, wave-like energy patterns. Vasanas transmigrated from body to body, bridging incarnations. Curiously, the word vasana comes from the root VAS, which means to perfume. A human being perfumed from body to body. Vasanas,
