[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. I'm just thinkin' out loud, trying to figure things out, rappin' about subjects that seem interesting to me. And y'know...the fascinating thing is that for the last few days, while Judy was away *getting* all rejuvenated and refreshed, no one here seems to have gotten upset at my musings and at my attempts to figure things out in my writing. No one accused me of trying to exalt myself. Could it possibly be because I *wasn't*? Could the real story be that Judy sees things that way, and sees this phenomenon in other people (mainly me) because she's projecting what *she* does onto someone else? Again, I have no answers here, and no declarations of truth; I'm just thinkin' out loud. But what I *am* thinkin' is that a person who spends almost ALL of her posts correcting others, and pointing out where they are WRONG, DAMMIT, and then going on from there to point out all the terrible things that *being* WRONG indicates about their character just *might* be doing a bit of exalting herself. I understand. Judy seems to have the classic inferiority complex that manifests itself in posing as being superior. She chose a profession in which she gets to pose as the expert and correct other people's writing all day, every day. And then, to relax, she comes here and corrects other people's writing all night, every night. The bottom line of this lifestyle is that everyone else is consistently WRONG, and Judy is consistently RIGHT. Cool, I guess, if that's the kind of fantasy that gets you off and gets you over your feelings of insecurity and non-worth. But it doesn't really float my boat. So I think I'll continue to just think out loud here, with NO declarations that my words have anything to DO with truth. They're just opinion, and pretty second-rate opinion at that. I'd steer clear of them if I were you. If you're lookin' for someone to tell you how to live and what to think, I'd go for someone who seems to enjoy doing that sorta stuff. If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: snip The problems with believing in the stories, as you say, is that you can start taking them personally and then feel personally diminished when someone doesn't buy into them. And everyone chafes when they're made to feel small. First the war of the stories, and ultimately (maybe), actual war. Great last line, tremendous insight! Doesn't that just say it all? I live in an area that has seen the War of the Stories for centuries now. First it was the pagan stories vs. the Roman stories, and then the Roman Church's stories vs. the Cathars' stories, and then the Catholic stories vs. the Prot- estant stories. And of course it didn't take long for the war stories to become actual war. Even though I've poked a little fun at the Byron Katie thing lately, I do have to say that if folks in all of these times had done the work on their stories to determine if they were really true or not, they probably wouldn't have had to do the work on each other with knives and spears and swords and torture chambers and burning at the stake. And here we have yet another example of Barry's apparently limitless capacity for unintended irony. His flurry of posts this weekend geared to instructing us all in How to Be Really Spiritual Like Barry are all based on elaborate stories of his own devising in which he has apparently come to believe, but which bear almost no relationship to reality, particularly those about what goes on on FFL. It seems never to have occurred to him to do the work on his own many stories to determine if they are really true or not. Just for instance, from another post of Barry's in this latest batch of rants: It just explains so *much* about TM and the TM experience and Fairfield Life and a few of the folks who hang out here to me. Those of us who don't necessarily believe that TM is the best say so, and the shit hits the fan. A few
[FairfieldLife] Yoga tested as back pain therapy
Millions of UK people suffer from chronic low back pain, and existing treatments have only a limited effect. A team of academics, yoga teachers and practitioners have joined forces to find out if a 12-week course of yoga can make a difference. The Arthritis Research Campaign-backed project will assess moves from the two most popular types of yoga. These are lyengar yoga and hatha yoga, favoured by the British Wheel of Yoga. More than 260 people between the ages of 18 and 65 who have had back pain in the past 18 months will be recruited for the trial. Recent, small studies in the US have shown that yoga can be helpful for back pain sufferers. But David Torgerson, director of the University of York Clinical trials Unit, and Jennifer Klaber Moffett, deputy director of the Institute of Rehabilitation at the University of Hull, believe a bigger study is needed to unequivocally establish the benefits. Professor Torgerson said: Yoga offers a combination of physical exercise with mental focus that may make it a suitable therapy for the treatment of low back pain. If the trial shows yoga to be effective then this low-cost treatment will have a considerable impact in the quality of life of patients with back pain. Yoga develops flexibility and muscular endurance by allowing the muscles to be stretched and strengthened. Patients will be recruited from GP surgeries from September and the 12-week classes, to be held in north and central London, York, Manchester and Cornwall, will begin in November. The classes will be run by 10 experienced yoga teachers who have all received specialist training. Half the participants will take part in yoga classes, and the other half will receive the usual care. They will be assessed at the end of the classes, then six months and a year later to see if there are any longer-term benefits. The yoga classes will be carefully structured for people who are complete novices and will not involve any difficult poses. They will be graduated over the 12-week period, starting off gently and becoming more demanding, with a combination of stretches, bends, lying sitting, standing and relaxing poses. Patients will also be encouraged to practise daily at home. Anna Semlyen, a yoga teacher who is helping to run the classes, said: Regular yoga increases the benefits, and we would hope that at the end of the 12 weeks people would carry on. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6725967.stm - Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post TMO View of Meaning in Life
Ok, I'll bite. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a recent conversation, someone mentioned Frankl's book -- Mans Search for Meaning -- which i read some time ago -- but when I was wrapped up in a TMO world view. I began reflecting on it. Frankl, as I refreshed my memory on a website, said there is not abstract meaning of life, but only meaning in the context of moment, in any given action -- and having the freedom to define that moment (that is the freedom to view any circumstance in ones on view -- in a positive view.) Thats my quick take -- I am sure some of that is mangled. But it conveys the essence of it pretty well, IMO. I guess it goes without saying that I tend to agree with him. I was wondering what others think. Perhaps there will be some cute, some dismissive responses. No problem -- particularly if there are some well considered views offered up. Would the more well-considered views make the thread more meaningful? :-) Some tangental questions: Meaningfulness vs purposefulness -- can something be purposeful but not meaningful? Absolutely. IMO, of course. I'm not a big person for searching for meaning in life. I'm not convinced life has any meaning at all. And y'know...I don't miss it. :-) The TMO -- the purpose of life is expansion of happiness. Fine. But is there meaning in happiness -- and its expansion? That's what some choose to believe. Me, I don't. If the seeming *purpose* of life is expansion, that does NOT imply to me that that's the *meaning* of life. It's just what seems to be happening, not *why* it's happening. Maybe there ISN'T a *why*. Socrates asked what is the good life -- a life well spent. is that the same as meaningfulness? Not in my opinion. That's more like life as purpose- fulness. We're back to the conversation with Dana Sawyer that Rick posted here recently. There are all sorts of inner revelations and perceptions of the meaning of life that one could have subject- ively. We hear them every day on this forum. But the real bottom line for Dana -- and for me -- is, Do these subjective experiences of 'higher' states of consciousness actually seem to change the person's everyday behavior in a way that most people watching them from the outside -- objectively -- would agree is beneficial for humanity? If not, then what worth do these subjective experiences actually HAVE? Meaningfulness vs. purposefulness. One can have cool revelations all day, but if one never puts them to any purpose for the benefit of others, what meaning have they really *found*, eh? SSRS said a couple of things that stuck with me. Paraphrasing Don't take life too seriously. It all doesn't matter Sort of a nihilistic approach -- but in a good way :) I don't see it as nihilistic in any way. More accurate than anything else. The only people who might get uptight at the suggestion that life might have NO meaning at all are those who are heavily attached to their lives *having* meaning. From my point of view, a lot of people really seem to NEED their lives to have meaning. So they glom onto whatever meaning seems most appropriate to them. Cool, I guess. Me, I'm fairly comfortable with my life having no meaning at all, just being a dance from here to here, from Then (another form of now) to Now (the latest and greatest form of now). H. Now that I think of it, dance may be the proper metaphor for what I'm feeling as I type this, thinking out loud. Think Snoopy in the Peanuts comic strip, doing his Dance To Spring, twirling away, waving his hands (uh...paws) flung in the air, clearly enjoying his life so much that it bursts out of him in spon- taneous and joyful dance. Does Snoopy's dance MEAN anything? Is it symbolic of something? Does it have layers and layers of meaning attached to it? Is it part of God's plan? Or is it just dance? I'm not convinced that the dance of life has meaning. But it sure does have purpose. The purpose of Snoopy's dance was to make millions of readers smile with the remembrance that someone *can* dance like that. If one or two of them did, inspired by Snoopy's example, then Charles Schultz's life had purpose. But that doesn't necessarily give it meaning.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Him: No, I don't have time to clarify my position right now but you might remember that I don't doubt the notion of continuous witnessing (in fact, I've had very long stretches of it) nor even of celestial vision/ god consciousness (though it is defined and described variously); it's just that direct experiences has taught me that these experiences are not very valuable. I don't call these states enlightenment, thought they DO fit the Hindu model of what the term (in it's various forms: bodhi, jivanmukta, brahmavidya, etc.) means. This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and UC being transitory states. Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is very clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional state.
[FairfieldLife] WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
As another exercise in thinking out loud, here's another installment in my musings on writing about spirituality. I'm a language freak. Not in the same sense as Card, but I really get off on language, its nuances, and the ways in which the *ways* in which people write often says more about who they are and what they believe than *what* they choose to say. In other words, it's often not the *content* of what a person says that communicates, it's *how* they choose to say it. Take some phrases and acronyms that sometimes appear in people's writing about spirituality and spiritual concepts here on FFL. One of them is IMO -- in my opinion. That one, and the use of it, speaks volumes to me. It's someone making an effort -- going out of their way -- to point out that the things they're saying ARE opinion. Not fact, not truth, or Truth -- just opinion. Compare and contrast to those who write in proclamations. Anyone who has spent any time around the TMO should be fairly familiar with proclamations -- they're the lingua franca of that spiritual organization. They're not just suggestions of how things could be; they're declarations of How Things Are. No judgments here, no better or worse, just an attempt to call people's attention to the difference in styles. You can make your own determinations as to *which* style appeals to you more. Take another phrase that very *rarely* appears here, I could be wrong. Curtis uses this phrase a lot, and a few others do as well. I always savor and appreciate it when I see it, and find it refreshing, often *because of* its rarity. Other folks don't tend to use this phrase very much, IMO :-) because it often doesn't occur to them that they *could* be wrong, or that there could be another equally valid way of seeing the situation. They're right, and they know it. Again, this view of people and why they write the way they do is not a declaration of fact, just my perception of writing as it is often done on FFL, and as such, *opinion*. It could very well be *wrong* opinion -- I've been wrong before, and most likely will be again, and this could be another example of it. And again, *you* get to decide which style of presentation you like better. Take a third example of language style and usage, the tendency to argue strongly for your position being right and someone else's postion being wrong. I know it may come as a shock to some here, but IMO that's not the only way to have a discussion. Curtis often goes out of his way to present his ideas as just another way of seeing the situation, just another point of view. So do new.morning and Rick and Marek and Edg. I *rarely* see any of them get heavily involved in head-to-head arguments about who is right about a subject and who is wrong. Again, I'm not saying one of these writing *styles* is better than the other; I'm just pointing out the difference, for those who are as fascinated by language and its usage as I am. I'm pretty sure that if I *did* make a judgment here, and declare or proclaim that one of these writing styles *was* better than the other, or that one of them *was* more right than another, that someone would reply angrily, rebutting my proclamation and attempting to turn it into a head-to-head argument, and attempting to win that argument. And I find that more than a little boring, so I'm just going to content myself with pointing out the differences I see *between* these styles of writing, and allowing people to make their own judgments about which they prefer, or whether they have a preference at all. Whatever they decide is fine with me.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
Thanks for your thoughtful and poignant post New Morn: On Jul 30, 2007, at 10:07 PM, new.morning wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I have found as long as I am claiming C.C., G.C., or U.C., and Brahman has not yet claimed me, I am not fully liberated, and am still attached or bound to experience. Along these same lines, when you were asking about how we fall into ignorance, I find that consciousness *constantly* collapses into the particle, to experience the effect of our causative and innocent thought as a created being, to enter into the world of our own making. If the consciousness *believes* the particle-experience, or is caught in a given belief, it identifies with the concreteness of the effect and forgets the subtle simplicity of its own cause; it finds the bindu to be binding, and experiences the ignorance of the particle, or more accurately the particle's ignorance of the freedom of ourself, of That-Self. When we remember Oh, yes, this particle-experience is not me; it is only one infinitesimal particle in the emptiful, Indefinable, Ungraspable That-Self, then Brahman remembers itself, and acts as the Cosmic Consciousness of the particle -- and so on, as described earlier :-) With all due respect, and I mean that earnestly, and I am not presenting an argument -- but rather simply making some observations. In college, I took a course titled Altered States of Consciousness taught by Charles Tart -- who had written the definitive text on the topic at that time -- and was on the map as a key, if not the key researcher in such. He once commented that he had friends who took lots of very pure acid every weekend -- and had experiences described along the way Rory descibes his. And we all nodded -- having had firneds or peers along the same lines-- many of us coming of age before LSD was made illegal -- and some vials of very pure stuff was widely available. But he lamented, that these friends did not seem to benefit any from such experiences --as real as they seemed to be. They did not change behaviors, they did not produce deep new insights in their fields, they did not become more compassionate or reflecting any sort of moral or ethical growth. Tying to Danas post, he ask cogently, the same sorts of questions / observations of Dr Tart (Charlie to many on campus). Jim may be eternally free -- Rory plays with his particles, Tom has his hardrive loaded every morning by the cosmic computer. All of which is good and fine. But there is nothing either in their descriptions of their states, or their manifest behavior, insights, cognitive and logical capabilities etc that appeal much to me, inspire me to do anything to move in the direction of their attainments. Nor does it fit my evolving view of a meaningful life. See my adjacent post. These are some great points. I can't help but point out that this is one reason why it is important to have a spiritual guide or friend with enough experience to explain meditative experiences and so students don't look at them as some overly important events or states. The most important thing one can do in even the most profound meditative experiences is to remain in equanimity. A profound meditative experience, unless you are using experiences generated for some specific purposes, should be no different than any other experience in life. Otherwise you block yourself IMO. Essentially meditative experiences are a form of purification, but once they are attached to, made into stories, etc. they cease to have that function.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post TMO View of Meaning in Life
snip SSRS said a couple of things that stuck with me. Paraphrasing Don't take life too seriously. It all doesn't matter Sort of a nihilistic approach -- but in a good way :) Also Don't Strive! Just drop it Thus perhaps leading to a conclusion that there is not meaning in life -- life is hollow and empty. Meaning is only in THAT. (or Dat) FYI - A somewhat useful summary page about the different ways to understand the meaning of life question is available by searching on either meaning or meaning of life on Wiki. SSRS even gets a quote displayed on the wiki page. empty
[FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
Meditators predict Dow 17,000, near U.S. utopia By Ayesha Rascoe Mon Jul 30, 9:20 AM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks had a tough week with the Dow Jones Industrial Average suffering its worst one-week point drop in five years, but a group of meditators promise their good vibrations will send the index past 17,000 within a year. ADVERTISEMENT A group called the Invincible America Assembly made that claim and more on Friday, insisting they have America's prosperity under control and their positive vibes will bring fewer hurricanes and better U.S.-North Korean relations. Through group transcendental meditation the assembly -- which has 1,800 people meditating daily in Iowa since it was formed in July 2006 -- releases harmonious waves which benefit all aspects of U.S. life, spokesman Bob Roth told Reuters. And the group's leader, John Hagelin, said when that number reaches 2,500 within the next 12 months, America will see a major drop in crime and the virtual elimination of all major social and political woes. Asked what it would take to achieve world peace, Hagelin said such a utopia would need 8,000 meditators. The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. It operates two facilities in Iowa, where followers practice several hours of transcendental meditation each day. This is not praying for peace, this is not sending out positive thoughts for peace, Roth said. This is diving deep into one's own consciousness. Hagelin compared the Assembly's use of transcendental meditation to the invention of electricity and other advances. We have control over things we didn't have control over before. That's the progress of science, Hagelin said. And while most people may be skeptical of the ability of meditation to bring such change, Roth said the Assembly was not going to try to change people's opinions. We're not trying to convince anyone of anything, Roth said. We're just doing it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/07 6:42:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is starting to show? ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
On Jul 30, 2007, at 11:34 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Vaj, first of all, though Maharishi was snubbing tradition in his willingness to leave the yamas and niyamas of Patanjali out of his teachings and techniques, it was that revolutionary aspect of his teaching that brought even the idea of meditation into the Western world and made it part of popular Western culture. It's also inherent in MMY's insight about the technique itself. Insight? Oh puhleeze. If transcendence is indeed effortless, You must have missed the previous conversations on how effortlessness is defined in the Patanjali system. If there is support (Skt.: Alambana), there is effort. it's easy to see how, as MMY claims, the steps on Patanjali's eight-fold path became reversed, with transcendence held to be the effect of mastery of the yamas and niyamas rather than the cause. Yes and maybe if we read the Lord's Prayer backwards we'll find Jesus quicker. Jaundiced-eyed Judy reports: the world is yellow. If that insight about effortlessness, and the understanding of how to teach it, is lost, But it's clearly evident that it never was lost. Reams of commentaries provide textual testimony that it was indeed never lost. Oral traditions agrees. However, having reviewed the comments and finding their conclusions experientially sound, it's clear Mahesh was either 'making it up as he went along' or simply distorting tradition all along. I bet the fact that he claimed he was restoring the purity of the tradition actually fooled you. then transcendence becomes *difficult*, and if it's difficult, practitioners need all the help they can get. This must be what mastery of the yamas and niyamas is for, goes the reasoning: to make it less difficult to transcend. Given his very different understanding, of course MMY would not have taught mastery of the yamas and niyamas as a prerequisite to samadhi, even to the most religiously devoted Hindu practitioners; it would have been counterproductive, in his view. He wasn't snubbing the yamas and niyamas, he was putting them in what he believed to be their proper context. If the prerequisites of samadhi are not met, even if you round a thousand years, you will never attain samadhi. Given that we have no reliable scientific data on any TMer EVER showing signs of samadhi (ability to enter for desired length of time, increased pain threshold, high-amplitude coherence, etc.) Mahesh's distortion of tradition could be the cause. In fact, that's what some researchers are claiming.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 30, 2007, at 11:34 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: snip Vaj, first of all, though Maharishi was snubbing tradition in his willingness to leave the yamas and niyamas of Patanjali out of his teachings and techniques, it was that revolutionary aspect of his teaching that brought even the idea of meditation into the Western world and made it part of popular Western culture. It's also inherent in MMY's insight about the technique itself. Insight? Oh puhleeze. If transcendence is indeed effortless, You must have missed the previous conversations on how effortlessness is defined in the Patanjali system. If there is support (Skt.: Alambana), there is effort. it's easy to see how, as MMY claims, the steps on Patanjali's eight-fold path became reversed, with transcendence held to be the effect of mastery of the yamas and niyamas rather than the cause. Yes and maybe if we read the Lord's Prayer backwards we'll find Jesus quicker. Jaundiced-eyed Judy reports: the world is yellow. If that insight about effortlessness, and the understanding of how to teach it, is lost, But it's clearly evident that it never was lost. Reams of commentaries provide textual testimony that it was indeed never lost. Oral traditions agrees. However, having reviewed the comments and finding their conclusions experientially sound, it's clear Mahesh was either 'making it up as he went along' or simply distorting tradition all along. I bet the fact that he claimed he was restoring the purity of the tradition actually fooled you. then transcendence becomes *difficult*, and if it's difficult, practitioners need all the help they can get. This must be what mastery of the yamas and niyamas is for, goes the reasoning: to make it less difficult to transcend. Given his very different understanding, of course MMY would not have taught mastery of the yamas and niyamas as a prerequisite to samadhi, even to the most religiously devoted Hindu practitioners; it would have been counterproductive, in his view. He wasn't snubbing the yamas and niyamas, he was putting them in what he believed to be their proper context. If the prerequisites of samadhi are not met, even if you round a thousand years, you will never attain samadhi. Given that we have no reliable scientific data on any TMer EVER showing signs of samadhi (ability to enter for desired length of time, increased pain threshold, high-amplitude coherence, etc.) Mahesh's distortion of tradition could be the cause. In fact, that's what some researchers are claiming. Perhaps that's why Maharishi puts so much attention constantly, on Guru Dev,... Perhaps it was being in the presence of Guru Dev was the ultimate technique to Be Enlighened... I can't imagine a more powerful technique., Being w/ someone who had spent practically his whole life; In silence, in the remote forests of India. At the same time... In Europe, millions were dying in a living hell. In Japan, suicidal/homocidal missions, brought on Atom bomb; While Italy strived to reagain it's part percieved glory In another part of the world: Maharishi and Guru Dev were together learning and radiating peace love, and still do Robert.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/31/07 6:42:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is starting to show? And why not: According to the effect, everything would be effected. If everything is ONe, And everything is hooked together,, By an unseen force; Then why not? Robert.
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Him: No, I don't have time to clarify my position right now but you might remember that I don't doubt the notion of continuous witnessing (in fact, I've had very long stretches of it) nor even of celestial vision/ god consciousness (though it is defined and described variously); it's just that direct experiences has taught me that these experiences are not very valuable. I don't call these states enlightenment, thought they DO fit the Hindu model of what the term (in it's various forms: bodhi, jivanmukta, brahmavidya, etc.) means. This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and UC being transitory states. Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is very clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional state. You must be misintepreting that. Its a very subtle difference between Brahman and UC. Each could be mistaken for the other. I'll trust my experience over a tradition any day.:-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
On Jul 31, 2007, at 9:59 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is very clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional state. You must be misintepreting that. Its a very subtle difference between Brahman and UC. Each could be mistaken for the other. I'll trust my experience over a tradition any day.:-) Then feel free to stop using the continuous tradition's lingo for your own experiences. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. Which is, it seems, why you make stuff up all the time. Such as, for example, putting in quotes, as if they were words I had used, setting them straight. You made that up entirely out of your own head. I'm just thinkin' out loud, trying to figure things out, rappin' about subjects that seem interesting to me. And y'know...the fascinating thing is that for the last few days, while Judy was away *getting* all rejuvenated and refreshed, no one here seems to have gotten upset at my musings and at my attempts to figure things out in my writing. No one accused me of trying to exalt myself. Could it possibly be because I *wasn't*? Nope. Could the real story be that Judy sees things that way, and sees this phenomenon in other people (mainly me) because she's projecting what *she* does onto someone else? Nope. If it were, I'd be seeing it in a lot more people than just you and Vaj. Again, I have no answers here, and no declarations of truth; I'm just thinkin' out loud. But what I *am* thinkin' is that a person who spends almost ALL of her posts correcting others, and pointing out where they are WRONG, DAMMIT, and then going on from there to point out all the terrible things that *being* WRONG indicates about their character just *might* be doing a bit of exalting herself. Nope. I just believe that discussion is more fruitful and opinion more reliable when the facts cited are actually facts rather than nonfacts. Everybody, including me, gets their facts wrong from time to time. That's a reflection on character only when they've been lazy about checking first, or when they're deliberately misrepresenting the facts. I understand. Judy seems to have the classic inferiority complex that manifests itself in posing as being superior. She chose a profession in which she gets to pose as the expert and correct other people's writing all day, every day. And then, to relax, she comes here and corrects other people's writing all night, every night. The bottom line of this lifestyle is that everyone else is consistently WRONG, and Judy is consistently RIGHT. Nope, everything you said in this paragraph is wrong, including the last sentence. Cool, I guess, if that's the kind of fantasy that gets you off and gets you over your feelings of insecurity and non-worth. But it doesn't really float my boat. Right, you make things up to exalt yourself in the interests of getting over your feelings of insecurity and non-worth. How's that workin' for you, Barry? So I think I'll continue to just think out loud here, with NO declarations that my words have anything to DO with truth. They're just opinion, and pretty second-rate opinion at that. That last is the single accurate statement you've made in this entire post. I'd steer clear of them if I were you. If you're lookin' for someone to tell you how to live and what to think, I'd go for someone who seems to enjoy doing that sorta stuff. If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... Editorial comment: If you're going to drop your g's in an attempt to make yourself seem folksy and down to earth, you'd do a lot better to be consistent about it, at least within a paragraph (preferably within the entire post). Dropping g's in written material calls attention to itself anyway, but dropping them inconsistently makes it painfully obvious that you're doing it deliberately--but sloppily--for effect, rather than its being a genuine feature of your style. Best of all would be not to drop them at all, because all it really does is make you appear self-conscious and generally phony. Any editor would tell you that.
[FairfieldLife] Greenland getting colder, not warmer
Latest Scientific Studies Refute Fears of Greenland Melt Posted By Marc Morano [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9:39 AM ET Ilulissat, Greenland The July 27-29 2007 U.S. Senate trip to Greenland to investigate fears of a glacier meltdown revealed an Arctic land where current climatic conditions are neither alarming nor linked to a rise in man-made carbon dioxide emissions, according to many of the latest peer-reviewed scientific findings. Recent research has found that Greenland has been warming since the 1880's, but since 1955, temperature averages at Greenland stations have been colder than the period between 1881-1955. A recent study concluded Greenland was as warm or warmer in the 1930's and 40's and the rate of warming from 1920-1930 was about 50% higher than the warming from 1995-2005. One 2005 study found Greenland gaining ice in the interior higher elevations and thinning ice at the lower elevations. In addition, the often media promoted fears of Greenland's ice completely melting and a subsequent catastrophic sea level rise are directly at odds with the latest scientific studies. These studies suggest that the biggest perceived threat to Greenland's glaciers may be contained in unproven computer models predicting a future catastrophic melt. As a representative of Environment Public Works Committee Ranking Member, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), I made the trek to the Arctic Circle with the Senate delegation (LINK) to the land the Vikings once farmed during the Medieval Warm Period. Senators and their staff viewed majestic giant glaciers and icebergs in the Kangia Ice Fjord and in Disko Bay via helicopter, boat and on foot, during the three day 24 hours of daylight trip which began in the Arctic city of Kangerlussuaq, Greenland. In an informational handout, participants of the Senate trip to Greenland were shown a depiction of coastal flooding that illustrated what would happen if most of the ice on Greenland was to melt and sea levels rose nearly 20 feet. The handout on Greenland was written by UN scientist Dr. Richard B. Alley, who is also a professor of Geosciences at Penn State University and traveled with the Senate delegation. Dr. Alley noted that the illustration of coastal flooding was not a forecast or a prediction, but merely an illustration of what could happen. Dr. Alley's handout stated in part, We don't think Greenland could melt completely in less than many centuries, but it might get warm enough this century to start complete melting. During the trip, a Danish scientist and Danish government officials appealed to the U.S. government to act now to address global warming and used the prospect of Greenland melt fears as a wake up call for such action. But the very latest research reveals massive Greenland melt fears are not sustainable. According to a survey of some of the latest peer-reviewed scientific reports, current Greenland temperatures are neither alarming nor linked to a rise in man-made carbon dioxide emissions. Sampling of Recent Scientific Studies: 1) A 2006 study by Danish researchers from Aarhus University found that Greenland's glaciers have been shrinking for the past century, suggesting that the ice melt is not a recent phenomenon caused by global warming. (LINK) Glaciologist Jacob Clement Yde explained that the study was the most comprehensive ever conducted on the movements of Greenland's glaciers, according to an August 21, 2006 article in Agence France-Presse. Seventy percent of the glaciers have been shrinking regularly since the end of the 1880's, Yde explained. [EPW Blog note: 80% of man-made CO2 emissions occurred after 1940. (LINK) ] Niels Tvis Knudsen of Aarhus University co- authored the paper. 2) A 2006 study by a team of scientists led by Petr Chylek of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Space and Remote Sensing Sciences found the rate of warming in 1920-1930 was about 50% higher than that in 1995-2005, suggesting carbon dioxide `could not be the cause' of warming. (LINK) We find that the current Greenland warming is not unprecedented in recent Greenland history. Temperature increases in the two warming periods (1920-1930 and 1995-2005) are of similar magnitude, however the rate of warming in 1920-1930 was about 50% higher than that in 1995-2005, the abstract of the study read. The peer-reviewed study, which was published in the June 13, 2006 Geophysical Research Letters, found that after a warm 2003 on the southeastern coast of Greenland, the years 2004 and 2005 were closer to normal being well below temperatures reached in the 1930's and 1940's. The study further continued, Almost all post-1955 temperature averages at Greenland stations are lower (colder climate) than the (1881-1955) temperature average. In addition, the Chylek led study explained, Although there has been a considerable temperature increase during the last decade (1995 to 2005) a similar increase
[FairfieldLife] Re: S-land TM centers back cuz of new PM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The trigger for Maharishi to reopen his organisation in Britain came when he heard a review of the policies of the new Prime Minister, Mr Gordon Brown, and his Government. These included the fact that one of the first measures introduced by Mr Brown was to initiate a change of Parliamentary procedures so that the Commons has a formal say on the deployment of Armed Forces abroad, so that the Prime Minister could not unilaterally take the country to war. Pointless - a fatuous exercise in window dressing. If Maharishi's advisers knew their stuff, they would have told him that there WAS a full debate on going to war in Parliament, and Blair went ahead because he won the vote on this debate which is listed here: http://tinyurl.com/334vo3 Uns.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/07 8:29:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is starting to show? And why not: According to the effect, everything would be effected. If everything is ONe, And everything is hooked together,, By an unseen force; Then why not? Robert. Well, why didn't they? ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As another exercise in thinking out loud, here's another installment in my musings on writing about spirituality. I'm a language freak. Not in the same sense as Card, but I really get off on language, its nuances, and the ways in which the *ways* in which people write often says more about who they are and what they believe than *what* they choose to say. In other words, it's often not the *content* of what a person says that communicates, it's *how* they choose to say it. Take some phrases and acronyms that sometimes appear in people's writing about spirituality and spiritual concepts here on FFL. One of them is IMO -- in my opinion. That one, and the use of it, speaks volumes to me. It's someone making an effort -- going out of their way -- to point out that the things they're saying ARE opinion. Not fact, not truth, or Truth -- just opinion. Compare and contrast to those who write in proclamations. Anyone who has spent any time around the TMO should be fairly familiar with proclamations -- they're the lingua franca of that spiritual organization. They're not just suggestions of how things could be; they're declarations of How Things Are. No judgments here, no better or worse, just an attempt to call people's attention to the difference in styles. You can make your own determinations as to *which* style appeals to you more. Take another phrase that very *rarely* appears here, I could be wrong. Curtis uses this phrase a lot, and a few others do as well. I always savor and appreciate it when I see it, and find it refreshing, often *because of* its rarity. Other folks don't tend to use this phrase very much, IMO :-) because it often doesn't occur to them that they *could* be wrong, or that there could be another equally valid way of seeing the situation. They're right, and they know it. Again, this view of people and why they write the way they do is not a declaration of fact, just my perception of writing as it is often done on FFL, and as such, *opinion*. It could very well be *wrong* opinion -- I've been wrong before, and most likely will be again, and this could be another example of it. And again, *you* get to decide which style of presentation you like better. I love a good quote and I heard a good quote along the lines of people have the strongest opinions about the things they are least sure of but didn't want to post it without finding who said it, I didn't but found these gems instead. http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/opinions/ Well, I thought they were good, but as usual I'm always happy to be wrong ;-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Disfavor for Bush Hits Rare Heights
In a message dated 7/30/07 10:01:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That 60 vote majority came back to bite the Dems in the ass, didn't it? You mean, are the Republicans such hypocrites as to use the filibuster after condemning it and threatening to ban it to keep the Democrats from using it when they were in the minority? Goes without saying. It seems there's no hypocrisy that's beyond the Republicans. As you almost certainly know, the Republicans are on their way to *tripling* the average number of filibusters in the preceding several decades: Ah, but Judy, they didn't ban it, did they? And of course you know the difference in how the Republicans used the filibuster and the Democrats used it. The Republicans used it to protect the power of the Presidency put forth in the constitution, to select federal judges, establish foreign policy and to act as Commander in Chief. The Democrats have used the filibuster to stall and delay and now want to dictate foreign policy from the Congressional level as well as interfere in the duties of the Commander in Chief. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You must have missed the previous conversations on how effortlessness is defined in the Patanjali system. If there is support (Skt.: Alambana), there is effort. MMY does not claim that TM does not take effort per-se, he calls it an 'effortless effort', yes effort is required! Additionally we innocently 'favor' the mantra!! Not just passive monotony. This is MMY's interpretation of Dharana/concentration. snip If the prerequisites of samadhi are not met, even if you round a thousand years, you will never attain samadhi. They go hand in hand, I agree with you, meditation *helps* you to master the Yama and Niyama's. You can't be a Saint and a Sinner at the same time! As MMY says in the Gita, With the continuous practice of all these limbs, or means, simultaneously, the state of Yoga grows *simultaneously* in all eight spheres of life, eventually to become permanent. page 363.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. Which is, it seems, why you make stuff up all the time. Such as, for example, putting in quotes, as if they were words I had used, setting them straight. You made that up entirely out of your own head. Someday, Judy, *as* someone who corrects other people's writing for a living, you might figure out that a very common usage of quotation marks, in the absence of italics, is *as* italics, as a way of highlighting words and phrases. Only the truly paranoid would see them as an attempt to quote *them* every time they're used. :-) snip to If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... Editorial comment: If you're going to drop your g's in an attempt to make yourself seem folksy and down to earth, you'd do a lot better to be consistent about it, at least within a paragraph (preferably within the entire post). Have you ever noticed that, when I say something that gets your goat and flusters you, you always drop into editor mode and try to criticize my writing? While I appreciate the advice, I'll stick to my own style, thanks. It's mine, as are my ideas. When you can say that about your own writing, get back to me. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and UC being transitory states. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yet this is just new age speculation. Au contraire, mon frere -- it is my direct experience :-) Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tradition itself is very clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional state. If there is an I who is in U.C., it is very definitely a transitional state, with more (or less) to follow! :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After all, Maharishi is a kshatriya and you know those ksatriyas can't practice ahimsa and keep their dharma too. Of course they can, the world of Relativity contains NO absolutes, the dharma of protecting Righteousness and destroying evil is higher than the principle of Ahimsa,(non-violence)...you silly boy!~ Although sin is still incurred it's modified by intent. You think God is stupid? Therefore (as Dr. Pete says) it is just a different context for each of the two opposite teachings. If Krishna says stand up and fight! and Yoga Sutras say no harm to anyone, for any reason, in any situation, at any time then what's a poor guru to do? According to Vaj, Mahesh Varma decided to make up a technique to fool people into forgeting who they were. He got them to meditate with a technique that caused their minds to go blank (laya/naypa). When they came out of that momentaryly sleep-like state and felt more rested he called it samadhi. Sounds empty to me.pure bliss is hardly 'blank' as you put it, how do you explain the bliss I've felt during TM?
[FairfieldLife] Re: WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love a good quote and I heard a good quote along the lines of people have the strongest opinions about the things they are least sure of but didn't want to post it without finding who said it, I didn't but found these gems instead. http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/opinions/ Well, I thought they were good, but as usual I'm always happy to be wrong ;-) Yes, thanks, nice quotes. I was thinking perhaps the degree of vigor, passion, absolutism (absolute certainty), and steadfastness of ones opinions are directly proportional to the degree to which the idea, concept or fact is a central part of ones identity. The identity will fight ferocously when its under attack. Or when there are not fall back elements to identity. That is, if identity is composed of 20 intertwined factor, and one loses one, no big deal. The other 19 re-adapt. But if identity is wrapped up in 1 or 2 or 3 main things, and one of those is under attack -- and there is threat of loss, then its a huge deal. Like when the TMO-world view IS (was) ones primary identity. When under attack, we all fought back hard. Or with arrogance or dismissiveness -- those miserable, unevolved sleeping elephants. Or if identity is being, an indivisible, infinitely flexible, always shinning, then there is no potential for loss. Same thing if identity cannot be found. On Turks points, I notice some (all of us at times) write as if IMO is strongly implied and inherent in what we write, but others read it as absolutist statements overflowing with arrogance. IMO, Its clumsy to repeatedly write IMO, but sometimes its necessary. Just as the silly smiley face. If one needs to explain a joke, its not much of a jok in my view. A joke is what catches you by surprise. There is no surprise if there is a big smilely face saying You are probably too dense t oget this joke, so I will highlight it for you. But then again, people so often miss the (intended) humor. Or the humor was so veiled by obscure references -- or it was just poor humor-- that smilely faces are often necessary. Smilely faces to soften thrusts of vindictive or crass sentiments is another story. - A quick aside i noticed in one of my (now corrected) typos. Notice how close the typo for All of us, All ofus, is so close to All dofus.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When they came out of that momentarily sleep-like state and felt more rested he called it samadhi. I don't think he ever called it Samadhi!! He has suggested however it was Pure Consciousness (albeit the same), some day it will be. However for most TM'ers it's more of a state called 'jada' Samadhi, 'blacking out'..spiritually useless but physically necessary! Theory does not always concur with practice; doesn't mean the theory is faulty.
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and UC being transitory states. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Yet this is just new age speculation. Au contraire, mon frere -- it is my direct experience :-) Yet Jim in a post yesterday dismissed the analogy of acid induced states of being as not valid because they were not permanent. Thats not a gotcha quote. But a continuing crack of wonderment at the cosmic egg of your View. And while some may trot out the tired (IMO) saw of you just can't handle paradox -- I remind you of my view that mundane parodoxes are often not profound -- and are certainly not true by the fact that they contradictory statements. Sometimes, most of the time, contrdictory statements are just what they are.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You think God is stupid? Well bliss is stupid according to seer sri pete. And since God is bliss, you do the math.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
Barry, I love you infinitely, and IMO/IME virtually everything Judy tells you is true -- she must love you infinitely more than I do, to show that much patience and compassion with you; you are *supremely* fortunate to have merited and attracted her concentrated attention for as long as you have. I hope you are not squandering this opportunity of infinite Grace! :-) *L*L*L* --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. I'm just thinkin' out loud, trying to figure things out, rappin' about subjects that seem interesting to me. And y'know...the fascinating thing is that for the last few days, while Judy was away *getting* all rejuvenated and refreshed, no one here seems to have gotten upset at my musings and at my attempts to figure things out in my writing. No one accused me of trying to exalt myself. Could it possibly be because I *wasn't*? Could the real story be that Judy sees things that way, and sees this phenomenon in other people (mainly me) because she's projecting what *she* does onto someone else? Again, I have no answers here, and no declarations of truth; I'm just thinkin' out loud. But what I *am* thinkin' is that a person who spends almost ALL of her posts correcting others, and pointing out where they are WRONG, DAMMIT, and then going on from there to point out all the terrible things that *being* WRONG indicates about their character just *might* be doing a bit of exalting herself. I understand. Judy seems to have the classic inferiority complex that manifests itself in posing as being superior. She chose a profession in which she gets to pose as the expert and correct other people's writing all day, every day. And then, to relax, she comes here and corrects other people's writing all night, every night. The bottom line of this lifestyle is that everyone else is consistently WRONG, and Judy is consistently RIGHT. Cool, I guess, if that's the kind of fantasy that gets you off and gets you over your feelings of insecurity and non-worth. But it doesn't really float my boat. So I think I'll continue to just think out loud here, with NO declarations that my words have anything to DO with truth. They're just opinion, and pretty second-rate opinion at that. I'd steer clear of them if I were you. If you're lookin' for someone to tell you how to live and what to think, I'd go for someone who seems to enjoy doing that sorta stuff. If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: snip The problems with believing in the stories, as you say, is that you can start taking them personally and then feel personally diminished when someone doesn't buy into them. And everyone chafes when they're made to feel small. First the war of the stories, and ultimately (maybe), actual war. Great last line, tremendous insight! Doesn't that just say it all? I live in an area that has seen the War of the Stories for centuries now. First it was the pagan stories vs. the Roman stories, and then the Roman Church's stories vs. the Cathars' stories, and then the Catholic stories vs. the Prot- estant stories. And of course it didn't take long for the war stories to become actual war. Even though I've poked a little fun at the Byron Katie thing lately, I do have to say that if folks in all of these times had done the work on their stories to determine if they were really true or not, they probably wouldn't have had to do the work on each other with knives and spears and swords and torture chambers and burning at the stake. And here we have yet another example of Barry's apparently limitless capacity for unintended irony. His flurry of posts this weekend geared to instructing us all in How to Be Really Spiritual Like Barry are all based on elaborate stories of his own devising in which he has apparently
[FairfieldLife] Re: WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: I love a good quote and I heard a good quote along the lines of people have the strongest opinions about the things they are least sure of but didn't want to post it without finding who said it, I didn't but found these gems instead. http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/opinions/ Well, I thought they were good, but as usual I'm always happy to be wrong ;-) Yes, thanks, nice quotes. I was thinking perhaps the degree of vigor, passion, absolutism (absolute certainty), and steadfastness of ones opinions are directly proportional to the degree to which the idea, concept or fact is a central part of ones identity. Bingo, although I would phrase it, ...to the degree to which they cannot *distinguish* the idea, concept, or fact *from* their identity. When someone gets their buttons so pushed by someone challenging an *idea* that they believe is true, pushed enough to react as if someone has attacked *them* personally, that person IMO can't tell the difference between his or her ideas and who he or she *is*. And that's fairly sad in my estimation. The identity will fight ferocously when its under attack. Or when it *believes* that it's under attack. Even if the only thing being challenged is one of its ideas. Or when there are not fall back elements to identity. Bingo. As long as one is convinced that one is a self, and is unaware on a daily basis of Self, then there is no real fallback postion. IMO, the stronger a person reacts -- *especially* if they do so with anger -- to one of his or her *ideas* being challenged, the further way from realization of Self that person probably is. That is, if identity is composed of 20 intertwined factor, and one loses one, no big deal. The other 19 re-adapt. But if identity is wrapped up in 1 or 2 or 3 main things, and one of those is under attack -- and there is threat of loss, then its a huge deal. Bingo again. You have just described the mindstate of the spiritual True Believer. Or if identity is being, an indivisible, infinitely flexible, always shinning, then there is no potential for loss. Same thing if identity cannot be found. I think I agree here, even though I'm not completely sure what shinning is. Is it fun? Maybe I should try it. :-) On Turks points, I notice some (all of us at times) write as if IMO is strongly implied and inherent in what we write, but others read it as absolutist statements overflowing with arrogance. IMO, Its clumsy to repeatedly write IMO, but sometimes its necessary. And it seems to be *more* necessary when someone has made a thirteen-year career for herself of claiming that almost everything you write is a pronouncement aimed at exalting yourself. :-) Just as the silly smiley face. If one needs to explain a joke, its not much of a jok in my view. Does a jok have something to do with shinning? I loved hugheshugo's quotes. Because Judy's gotten her buttons pushed again and reverted to If nothing else works, criticize Barry's writing mode, here are a few of my favorites on editors: The relationship of editor to author is knife to throat. -- unknown A good many young writers make the mistake of enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope, big enough for the manuscript to come back in. This is too much of a temptation to the editor. -- Ring Lardner LUMINARY, n. One who throws light upon a subject; as an editor by not writing about it. -- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary An editor should have a pimp for a brother, so he'd have someone to look up to. -- Gene Fowler
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote: This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and UC being transitory states. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: Yet this is just new age speculation. Rory wrote: Au contraire, mon frere -- it is my direct experience :-) New wrote: Yet Jim in a post yesterday dismissed the analogy of acid induced states of being as not valid because they were not permanent. I think that was me, actually. IME, ignorance, C.C., G.C., U.C. -- any state of consciousness is transitory, because it's claimed by a particle still believing itself to be in the Universe, subject to space and time and experience; only That which is the culmination of U.C., Brahman recognizing itSelf, is permanent, because it has always been here, just as it is, and the I-particle eventually gets tired of superimposing difference, distinction, intellect, upon That and surrenders into the utter perfection of what is, what has always been, what will always be. New: Thats not a gotcha quote. But a continuing crack of wonderment at the cosmic egg of your View. And while some may trot out the tired (IMO) saw of you just can't handle paradox -- I remind you of my view that mundane parodoxes are often not profound -- and are certainly not true by the fact that they contradictory statements. Sometimes, most of the time, contrdictory statements are just what they are. I must be missing something, New, because I don't even see a contradiction here, let alone a paradox! Could you elaborate? *L*L*L*
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 31, 2007, at 9:59 AM, jim_flanegin wrote: Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is very clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional state. You must be misintepreting that. Its a very subtle difference between Brahman and UC. Each could be mistaken for the other. I'll trust my experience over a tradition any day.:-) Then feel free to stop using the continuous tradition's lingo for your own experiences. :-) I use the term UC as explained by MMY. I haven't yet heard him say whether or not the state was meant to be permanent. My experience is that it isn't.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: I love a good quote and I heard a good quote along the lines of people have the strongest opinions about the things they are least sure of but didn't want to post it without finding who said it, I didn't but found these gems instead. http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/opinions/ Well, I thought they were good, but as usual I'm always happy to be wrong ;-) Yes, thanks, nice quotes. I was thinking perhaps the degree of vigor, passion, absolutism (absolute certainty), and steadfastness of ones opinions are directly proportional to the degree to which the idea, concept or fact is a central part of ones identity. The identity will fight ferocously when its under attack. Or when there are not fall back elements to identity. That is, if identity is composed of 20 intertwined factor, and one loses one, no big deal. The other 19 re-adapt. But if identity is wrapped up in 1 or 2 or 3 main things, and one of those is under attack -- and there is threat of loss, then its a huge deal. Yep, quite right and it's called cognitive dissonance, a fear that our view of the way things are is wrong and I think the severity of it will depend on how much else you have in your life to fall back on. See the calls for Jihad about the Danish cartoons for a good recent example of how disturbing it can get. Best not to have all your eggs in one basket. I like to think I've cultivated a sense of being that is immune to it by knowing that all statements about reality aren't reality, just models of it, thus whatever other people think of my views I remain unaffected, unless they seem to be more right than I am in which case I'll switch sides without affecting any core ideals. Or if identity is being, an indivisible, infinitely flexible, always shining, then there is no potential for loss. That's the one! Just as the silly smiley face. If one needs to explain a joke, its not much of a joke in my view. A joke is what catches you by surprise. There is no surprise if there is a big smilely face saying You are probably too dense to get this joke, so I will highlight it for you. That's how I always assume people are ;-) (there, see how that would read without the smiley)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
So the dollar is going to fall even further? Most people could have guessed that. Are they going to take credit for the fall of the dollar too? That's why the DJIA is so high. It takes more dollars for the stocks because the dollar is worth less. Too bad these people aren't enlightened or at least knowledgeable about economics. Robert Gimbel wrote: Meditators predict Dow 17,000, near U.S. utopia By Ayesha Rascoe Mon Jul 30, 9:20 AM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks had a tough week with the Dow Jones Industrial Average suffering its worst one-week point drop in five years, but a group of meditators promise their good vibrations will send the index past 17,000 within a year. ADVERTISEMENT A group called the Invincible America Assembly made that claim and more on Friday, insisting they have America's prosperity under control and their positive vibes will bring fewer hurricanes and better U.S.-North Korean relations. Through group transcendental meditation the assembly -- which has 1,800 people meditating daily in Iowa since it was formed in July 2006 -- releases harmonious waves which benefit all aspects of U.S. life, spokesman Bob Roth told Reuters. And the group's leader, John Hagelin, said when that number reaches 2,500 within the next 12 months, America will see a major drop in crime and the virtual elimination of all major social and political woes. Asked what it would take to achieve world peace, Hagelin said such a utopia would need 8,000 meditators. The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. It operates two facilities in Iowa, where followers practice several hours of transcendental meditation each day. This is not praying for peace, this is not sending out positive thoughts for peace, Roth said. This is diving deep into one's own consciousness. Hagelin compared the Assembly's use of transcendental meditation to the invention of electricity and other advances. We have control over things we didn't have control over before. That's the progress of science, Hagelin said. And while most people may be skeptical of the ability of meditation to bring such change, Roth said the Assembly was not going to try to change people's opinions. We're not trying to convince anyone of anything, Roth said. We're just doing it.
[FairfieldLife] Song for Barry and Judy
Sung to the tune of the Beatles' It won't be long. Every day, when everybody has fun Here I am, planning another put-down I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you. When you go, everyone is so nice Lots of smiles, flowers, sugar and spice I'll cross my tts and I'll dot my is 'cause I know if I don't You won't be nice, you won't be nice! Every night, I just simply can't stop Planning put-downs you won't be able to top. I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you. Every day, we'll go on as before Through the years, until both of us are no more. I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/31/07 6:42:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is starting to show? ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour What surge success? I suspect you're referring to Bush's dumbass war? There is no success there. Keep smokin' the ganga.
[FairfieldLife] Knocked off ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Joined this group for only a week and got knocked off/locked out! And I only called Krishnamurti a buffoon once! :-)
[FairfieldLife] Meditation Entrepegurus Mass Produced Meditators
Buddhist style Two BuddhistGeeks.com talks on the S.N. Goenka style of Vipassana bootcamp: http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2007/07/16/buddhist-geeks-28- entrepregurus-and-the-meditation-factory/ http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2007/07/23/buddhist-geeks-29-mass- producing-meditators/
[FairfieldLife] Knocked off ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Message appearing on group website.. You have been banned from this group by the group moderator (Yahoo! ID banned: wgm4u). You may not join the group J-Krishnamurti_andLife. These folks don't wanna hear nothing contrary to their Krishnamurti, no wonder they only have 3 membersha, ha!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/2007 12:27:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the Maharishi effect but the kinds of stories on the news these last few days is not a reflection of coherence. I'm a participant in the America Invincible course since I am a resident of Fairfield and do my program everyday-twice a day over the last 29 years. The story of a doctors family being murdered in Connecticut a couple of days ago- my home state that I grew up in- shows we are going to need a much larger group. I think MMY should be thinking of having at least 1,000 in every state of America. That would be 50,000 people. John Hagelin, Bevan and MMY are dreaming if they think all of the negativity is going to go away with just 2,500 sidhas. John Hagelin needs a reality adjustment and I am predicting as a visionary that the adjustment will manifest within the next six months. I'm not saying the TMO will change. I'm just saying their will be an adjustment. If the TMO changed it would be in accordance with infinite flexibility which is a characteristic of the Unified Field Theory. John Haglin can become the master scientist of this century but he needs to practice what he preaches. His conservative approach has isolated thousands of meditators and Sidha's. He lacks infinite flexibility. My advise- less starch in the shirt and a more relaxed approach to guidelines for America Invincibility Lsoma. So the dollar is going to fall even further? Most people could have guessed that. Are they going to take credit for the fall of the dollar too? That's why the DJIA is so high. It takes more dollars for the stocks because the dollar is worth less. Too bad these people aren't enlightened or at least knowledgeable about economics. Robert Gimbel wrote: Meditators predict Dow 17,000, near U.S. utopia By Ayesha Rascoe Mon Jul 30, 9:20 AM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks had a tough week with the Dow Jones Industrial Average suffering its worst one-week point drop in five years, but a group of meditators promise their good vibrations will send the index past 17,000 within a year. ADVERTISEMENT A group called the Invincible America Assembly made that claim and more on Friday, insisting they have America's prosperity under control and their positive vibes will bring fewer hurricanes and better U.S.-North Korean relations. Through group transcendental meditation the assembly -- which has 1,800 people meditating daily in Iowa since it was formed in July 2006 -- releases harmonious waves which benefit all aspects of U.S. life, spokesman Bob Roth told Reuters. And the group's leader, John Hagelin, said when that number reaches 2,500 within the next 12 months, America will see a major drop in crime and the virtual elimination of all major social and political woes. Asked what it would take to achieve world peace, Hagelin said such a utopia would need 8,000 meditators. The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. It operates two facilities in Iowa, where followers practice several hours of transcendental meditation each day. This is not praying for peace, this is not sending out positive thoughts for peace, Roth said. This is diving deep into one's own consciousness. Hagelin compared the Assembly's use of transcendental meditation to the invention of electricity and other advances. We have control over things we didn't have control over before. That's the progress of science, Hagelin said. And while most people may be skeptical of the ability of meditation to bring such change, Roth said the Assembly was not going to try to change people's opinions. We're not trying to convince anyone of anything, Roth said. We're just doing it. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/07 11:43:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is
starting to show?
WBR*WBR*WBR**
_http://discover.http://discovehttp://disco_
(http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour)
What surge success? I suspect you're referring to Bush's dumbass
war? There is no success there. Keep smokin' the ganga.
Try reading the news some time.
** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Greenland getting colder, not warmer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Latest Scientific Studies Refute Fears of Greenland Melt Posted By Marc Morano [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9:39 AM ET Ha Ha Ha ... Couldn't find anyone more biased could you Shemp? From 1992-96, Marc Morano was a reporter and producer for Rush Limbaugh's television show. According to his CNSNews bio He holds the distinction of being the first journalist in history to have his video camera seized by the Clinton White House while on assignment. 22 November, 2002 Wrote an article entitled Greens Praise ExxonMobil for Efforts to Save Tiger, which highlighted ExxonMobil's donations to tiger conservation efforts. http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1126 Marc Morano is communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Morano commenced work with the committe under [radical global warming denier] Senator James Inhofe, who was majority chairman of the committee until January 2007. In December 2006 Morano launched a blog on the committee's website that largely promotes the views of climate change sceptics. Morano is a former journalist with Cybercast News Service (owned by the conservative Media Research Center). CNS and Morano were the first source in May 2004 of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth claims against John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election [1] and in January 2006 of similar smears against Vietnam war veteran John Murtha. Morano was previously known as Rush Limbaugh's 'Man in Washington,' as reporter and producer for the Rush Limbaugh Television Show, as well as a former correspondent and producer for American Investigator, the nationally syndicated TV newsmagazine. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Marc_Morano
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. Which is, it seems, why you make stuff up all the time. Such as, for example, putting in quotes, as if they were words I had used, setting them straight. You made that up entirely out of your own head. Someday, Judy, *as* someone who corrects other people's writing for a living, you might figure out that a very common usage of quotation marks, in the absence of italics, is *as* italics, as a way of highlighting words and phrases. Bull, and you know it. Quote marks are *not* a common or even an accepted substitute for italics. What you and many others use is asterisks, as you just did above. Only the truly paranoid would see them as an attempt to quote *them* every time they're used. :-) Nope. You've been using quote marks around your own words in an attempt to imply they're someone else's as long as I've known you. It's just one of your many dishonest tricks. snip to Restoring part of what you couldn't respond to: I understand. Judy seems to have the classic inferiority complex that manifests itself in posing as being superior. She chose a profession in which she gets to pose as the expert and correct other people's writing all day, every day. And then, to relax, she comes here and corrects other people's writing all night, every night. The bottom line of this lifestyle is that everyone else is consistently WRONG, and Judy is consistently RIGHT. Nope, everything you said in this paragraph is wrong, including the last sentence. Cool, I guess, if that's the kind of fantasy that gets you off and gets you over your feelings of insecurity and non-worth. But it doesn't really float my boat. Right, you make things up to exalt yourself in the interests of getting over your feelings of insecurity and non-worth. How's that workin' for you, Barry? So I think I'll continue to just think out loud here, with NO declarations that my words have anything to DO with truth. They're just opinion, and pretty second-rate opinion at that. That last is the single accurate statement you've made in this entire post. If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... Editorial comment: If you're going to drop your g's in an attempt to make yourself seem folksy and down to earth, you'd do a lot better to be consistent about it, at least within a paragraph (preferably within the entire post). Have you ever noticed that, when I say something that gets your goat and flusters you, you always drop into editor mode and try to criticize my writing? In fact, as you know, I criticize your writing very rarely. And it's your fantasy that you get my goat and fluster me. Only someone for whom I have respect could do that. While I appreciate the advice, I'll stick to my own style, thanks. It's mine, as are my ideas. When you can say that about your own writing, get back to me. :-) I can, and I do. But if I couldn't do any better than you in both those areas, I'd give up. Your style is self-conscious and phony--See Barry Write-- and your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, as well as typically based on your own fantasies. As I've said many times before, you're a phony.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. Which is, it seems, why you make stuff up all the time. Such as, for example, putting in quotes, as if they were words I had used, setting them straight. You made that up entirely out of your own head. Someday, Judy, *as* someone who corrects other people's writing for a living, you might figure out that a very common usage of quotation marks, in the absence of italics, is *as* italics, as a way of highlighting words and phrases. Only the truly paranoid would see them as an attempt to quote *them* every time they're used. :-) snip to If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... Editorial comment: If you're going to drop your g's in an attempt to make yourself seem folksy and down to earth, you'd do a lot better to be consistent about it, at least within a paragraph (preferably within the entire post). Have you ever noticed that, when I say something that gets your goat and flusters you, you always drop into editor mode and try to criticize my writing? While I appreciate the advice, I'll stick to my own style, thanks. It's mine, as are my ideas. When you can say that about your own writing, get back to me. :-) Maybe you really should change your name to Mahananda as you had mentioned, to reflect on that horrendous whopper of an ego you carry, Barry. You're a bright fellow, don't you ever consider how embarrassingly transparent you are?
[FairfieldLife] Sri Sri Ravi Shankar on TV
He is on CNN discussing his trip to Iraq and how he doesn't fear death. It is probably on a loop and will be seen again today or tonight. Move over Jessie Jackson, there is a new spiritual peace keeper in town.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/31/07 11:43:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is starting to show? What surge success? I suspect you're referring to Bush's dumbass war? There is no success there. Keep smokin' the ganga. Try reading the news some time. snicker The point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Disfavor for Bush Hits Rare Heights
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/30/07 10:01:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That 60 vote majority came back to bite the Dems in the ass, didn't it? You mean, are the Republicans such hypocrites as to use the filibuster after condemning it and threatening to ban it to keep the Democrats from using it when they were in the minority? Goes without saying. It seems there's no hypocrisy that's beyond the Republicans. As you almost certainly know, the Republicans are on their way to *tripling* the average number of filibusters in the preceding several decades: Ah, but Judy, they didn't ban it, did they? And of course you know the difference in how the Republicans used the filibuster and the Democrats used it. The Republicans used it to protect the power of the Presidency put forth in the constitution, to select federal judges, establish foreign policy and to act as Commander in Chief. The Democrats have used the filibuster to stall and delay and now want to dictate foreign policy from the Congressional level as well as interfere in the duties of the Commander in Chief. MDixon, you have Kool-Aid poisoning. What a ludicrous litany.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Ah, Judy's back from another long, relaxing, rejuvenating weekend away :-), firing off nine posts in a row, each distinguished by...uh, wait for it...I know it'll come as a surprise...her correcting someone on this forum and setting them straight about how the world really is and what the truth about things really is. :-) Me, I just think out loud. They're just thoughts. Opinions. And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. Which is, it seems, why you make stuff up all the time. Such as, for example, putting in quotes, as if they were words I had used, setting them straight. You made that up entirely out of your own head. Someday, Judy, *as* someone who corrects other people's writing for a living, you might figure out that a very common usage of quotation marks, in the absence of italics, is *as* italics, as a way of highlighting words and phrases. Bull, and you know it. Quote marks are *not* a common or even an accepted substitute for italics. What you and many others use is asterisks, as you just did above. No, I use asterisks as a substitute for bolding. Only the truly paranoid would see them as an attempt to quote *them* every time they're used. :-) Nope. You've been using quote marks around your own words in an attempt to imply they're someone else's as long as I've known you. It's just one of your many dishonest tricks. Now let me get this straight. :-) Let's present my version of things here, and then yours, and allow people on this forum to decide for themselves what's goin' down, Ok? My version is that I used quote marks similarly to the way the Mark Myers holds up two fingers of each hand and makes quote marks in the air as he's playing Dr. Evil, saying something he obviously wants to emphasize in a silly way. So I would have made quote marks in the air and put them around setting them straight to point out how *ludicrous* that idea was, the idea that you actually *could* set people straight. See, I did the quote marks thing again. *Your* version is that I put quotes around the phrase setting them straight as part of an evil, horrible plot to convince people here on FFL that you had actually used that phrase. Did I get that right? I'm just checkin' to make sure, because last I checked the use of that phrase wasn't considered either illegal or, for that matter, terribly embarrassing. So which is it, Jude -- my version or your version? I can psychically hear a few people in the Fairfield Life audience just panting to hear which you think is more believable. :-) snip to If you're lookin' for a philosophy and a lifestyle to adopt, and someone else's path to follow, rather than mine, I'd suggest that you go with Judy's. She seems to enjoy presenting it here, as if it's RIGHT, and it may well be just the ticket to help you become as happy and as fulfilled as she is. I mean, look at what it's done for her... Editorial comment: If you're going to drop your g's in an attempt to make yourself seem folksy and down to earth, you'd do a lot better to be consistent about it, at least within a paragraph (preferably within the entire post). Have you ever noticed that, when I say something that gets your goat and flusters you, you always drop into editor mode and try to criticize my writing? In fact, as you know, I criticize your writing very rarely. And it's your fantasy that you get my goat and fluster me. Only someone for whom I have respect could do that. Uh-huh. That's why you said that I intentionally tried to slander and defame you by claiming that I tried to convince people here that you said the horrible phrase setting them straight. *That* claim is certainly indicative of someone who's not the *least* bit not-goat-gotten. :-) Judy, I wait with 'bated breath for your reply. I just can't *wait* for you to stick to your story and claim that me putting setting them straight inside quotes was part of my evil, twisted, lying plot to slander you and discredit you here on FFL. If a smart person wanted to convince people here that their goat hadn't been gotten, they'd find a saner story. But you won't will you? The way I see it, you either stick to your claim and look crazy as a loon, or you admit that you kinda overreacted in a paranoid fashion, and write it off to something I said that got your goat. There's no shame in the latter, Judy, and from my point of view it lessens your credibility here a lot less than being a paranoid
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 7/31/07 11:43:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is
starting to show?
WBR*WBR*WBR**
_http://discover.http://discovehttp://disco_
(http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour)
What surge success? I suspect you're referring to Bush's dumbass
war? There is no success there. Keep smokin' the ganga.
Try reading the news some time.
** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Trying reading something other than the right-wing Murdoch and military
industrial complex press er... propaganda sometime.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
I've never thought that butt bouncing has that much of an effect. Making more meditators might but you're not going to have that a $3500 a pop. But people don't seem much interested in learning meditation even at $200 a pop these days. Maybe it's just a sign of a tamo guna cycle which means there will be a sattwa guna cycle coming up sometime. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/31/2007 12:27:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the Maharishi effect but the kinds of stories on the news these last few days is not a reflection of coherence. I'm a participant in the America Invincible course since I am a resident of Fairfield and do my program everyday-twice a day over the last 29 years. The story of a doctors family being murdered in Connecticut a couple of days ago- my home state that I grew up in- shows we are going to need a much larger group. I think MMY should be thinking of having at least 1,000 in every state of America. That would be 50,000 people. John Hagelin, Bevan and MMY are dreaming if they think all of the negativity is going to go away with just 2,500 sidhas. John Hagelin needs a reality adjustment and I am predicting as a visionary that the adjustment will manifest within the next six months. I'm not saying the TMO will change. I'm just saying their will be an adjustment. If the TMO changed it would be in accordance with infinite flexibility which is a characteristic of the Unified Field Theory. John Haglin can become the master scientist of this century but he needs to practice what he preaches. His conservative approach has isolated thousands of meditators and Sidha's. He lacks infinite flexibility. My advise- less starch in the shirt and a more relaxed approach to guidelines for America Invincibility Lsoma. So the dollar is going to fall even further? Most people could have guessed that. Are they going to take credit for the fall of the dollar too? That's why the DJIA is so high. It takes more dollars for the stocks because the dollar is worth less. Too bad these people aren't enlightened or at least knowledgeable about economics. Robert Gimbel wrote: Meditators predict Dow 17,000, near U.S. utopia By Ayesha Rascoe Mon Jul 30, 9:20 AM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks had a tough week with the Dow Jones Industrial Average suffering its worst one-week point drop in five years, but a group of meditators promise their good vibrations will send the index past 17,000 within a year. ADVERTISEMENT A group called the Invincible America Assembly made that claim and more on Friday, insisting they have America's prosperity under control and their positive vibes will bring fewer hurricanes and better U.S.-North Korean relations. Through group transcendental meditation the assembly -- which has 1,800 people meditating daily in Iowa since it was formed in July 2006 -- releases harmonious waves which benefit all aspects of U.S. life, spokesman Bob Roth told Reuters. And the group's leader, John Hagelin, said when that number reaches 2,500 within the next 12 months, America will see a major drop in crime and the virtual elimination of all major social and political woes. Asked what it would take to achieve world peace, Hagelin said such a utopia would need 8,000 meditators. The group takes credit for, among other things: the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high of 14,022 last week, unemployment rates falling to a six-year low at 4.5 percent, and North Korea shutting down its nuclear reactor. It operates two facilities in Iowa, where followers practice several hours of transcendental meditation each day. This is not praying for peace, this is not sending out positive thoughts for peace, Roth said. This is diving deep into one's own consciousness. Hagelin compared the Assembly's use of transcendental meditation to the invention of electricity and other advances. We have control over things we didn't have control over before. That's the progress of science, Hagelin said. And while most people may be skeptical of the ability of meditation to bring such change, Roth said the Assembly was not going to try to change people's opinions. We're not trying to convince anyone of anything, Roth said. We're just doing it. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
TurquoiseB wrote: As another exercise in thinking out loud, here's another installment in my musings on writing about spirituality. I'm a language freak. Not in the same sense as Card, but I really get off on language, its nuances, and the ways in which the *ways* in which people write often says more about who they are and what they believe than *what* they choose to say. In other words, it's often not the *content* of what a person says that communicates, it's *how* they choose to say it. Take some phrases and acronyms that sometimes appear in people's writing about spirituality and spiritual concepts here on FFL. One of them is IMO -- in my opinion. That one, and the use of it, speaks volumes to me. It's someone making an effort -- going out of their way -- to point out that the things they're saying ARE opinion. Not fact, not truth, or Truth -- just opinion. Compare and contrast to those who write in proclamations. Anyone who has spent any time around the TMO should be fairly familiar with proclamations -- they're the lingua franca of that spiritual organization. They're not just suggestions of how things could be; they're declarations of How Things Are. No judgments here, no better or worse, just an attempt to call people's attention to the difference in styles. You can make your own determinations as to *which* style appeals to you more. Take another phrase that very *rarely* appears here, I could be wrong. Curtis uses this phrase a lot, and a few others do as well. I always savor and appreciate it when I see it, and find it refreshing, often *because of* its rarity. Other folks don't tend to use this phrase very much, IMO :-) because it often doesn't occur to them that they *could* be wrong, or that there could be another equally valid way of seeing the situation. They're right, and they know it. Again, this view of people and why they write the way they do is not a declaration of fact, just my perception of writing as it is often done on FFL, and as such, *opinion*. It could very well be *wrong* opinion -- I've been wrong before, and most likely will be again, and this could be another example of it. And again, *you* get to decide which style of presentation you like better. Take a third example of language style and usage, the tendency to argue strongly for your position being right and someone else's postion being wrong. I know it may come as a shock to some here, but IMO that's not the only way to have a discussion. Curtis often goes out of his way to present his ideas as just another way of seeing the situation, just another point of view. So do new.morning and Rick and Marek and Edg. I *rarely* see any of them get heavily involved in head-to-head arguments about who is right about a subject and who is wrong. Again, I'm not saying one of these writing *styles* is better than the other; I'm just pointing out the difference, for those who are as fascinated by language and its usage as I am. I'm pretty sure that if I *did* make a judgment here, and declare or proclaim that one of these writing styles *was* better than the other, or that one of them *was* more right than another, that someone would reply angrily, rebutting my proclamation and attempting to turn it into a head-to-head argument, and attempting to win that argument. And I find that more than a little boring, so I'm just going to content myself with pointing out the differences I see *between* these styles of writing, and allowing people to make their own judgments about which they prefer, or whether they have a preference at all. Whatever they decide is fine with me. I don't think people on an email list such as FFL are necessarily into it being an exposition of their writing skills. That is not the purpose after all of an email list. The purpose is really just chit-chat. Who wants to waste a lot of time crafting text that most people will skip over if it is too long anyway? It takes more craft to say something well in one word or a sentence than a 10 paragraph rant. So I wouldn't judge anyone's writing skills by what they write on an email list. That seems to be a hang-up you have and project. I know you love to write but I am reminded of a friend who has a blog and proclaimed that he was starting it to force himself to improve his writing skills. Well he has more or less failed because in an effort to try to write something on a regular basis and of course he is already falling down on that regular basis concept is often writing a bunch of nothing.
[FairfieldLife] Dr. Mercola's Video Warnings
Dr. Mercola is pretty bold and blunt in his warnings about conventional medicine. Check out this video and a bunch more. http://youtube.com/watch?v=FPI7zdGdqo4 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/current.aspx http://youtube.com/results?search_query=mercolasearch= - CU. Lloyd - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip And, as I've said *many times* here, I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. I don't even *believe* in such a thing as TRUTH. Which is, it seems, why you make stuff up all the time. Such as, for example, putting in quotes, as if they were words I had used, setting them straight. You made that up entirely out of your own head. Someday, Judy, *as* someone who corrects other people's writing for a living, you might figure out that a very common usage of quotation marks, in the absence of italics, is *as* italics, as a way of highlighting words and phrases. Bull, and you know it. Quote marks are *not* a common or even an accepted substitute for italics. What you and many others use is asterisks, as you just did above. No, I use asterisks as a substitute for bolding. No, you don't. As a published writer, you're well aware that bold is almost never used in text; it's used almost exclusively for headings. Italics are what are used to emphasize a word or phrase in text, and that's how you and most others use asterisks. Only the truly paranoid would see them as an attempt to quote *them* every time they're used. :-) Nope. You've been using quote marks around your own words in an attempt to imply they're someone else's as long as I've known you. It's just one of your many dishonest tricks. Now let me get this straight. :-) Let's present my version of things here, and then yours, and allow people on this forum to decide for themselves what's goin' down, Ok? My version is that I used quote marks similarly to the way the Mark Myers holds up two fingers of each hand and makes quote marks in the air as he's playing Dr. Evil, saying something he obviously wants to emphasize in a silly way. Those are called scare quotes (quotation marks used to express especially skepticism or derision concerning the use of the enclosed word or phrase, per my dictionary). That's quite different from emphasis, for which italics are used. But you wouldn't be using scare quotes for your own words, obviously. What you do is use quotes in such a way as to suggest you're quoting somebody else's words when they're actually *your* words. So I would have made quote marks in the air and put them around setting them straight to point out how *ludicrous* that idea was, the idea that you actually *could* set people straight. Except, of course, that those are your own words, not mine. *Your* version is that I put quotes around the phrase setting them straight as part of an evil, horrible plot to convince people here on FFL that you had actually used that phrase. No, it's just your standard casual dishonesty, an attempt to load your argument when you're aware it's weak. Did I get that right? I'm just checkin' to make sure, because last I checked the use of that phrase wasn't considered either illegal or, for that matter, terribly embarrassing. Which is why you'd put scare quotes around it, right, because it's a perfectly ordinary phrase? Oopsie! My point was that you regularly put words in the mouths of your enemies. It's part of your whole fantasy trip, your compulsion to make stuff up instead of sticking to what goes on in the real world. snip Have you ever noticed that, when I say something that gets your goat and flusters you, you always drop into editor mode and try to criticize my writing? In fact, as you know, I criticize your writing very rarely. And it's your fantasy that you get my goat and fluster me. Only someone for whom I have respect could do that. Uh-huh. That's why you said (Notice Barry's careful evasion of the correction of his misstatement about my criticisms of his writing.) that I intentionally tried to slander and defame you by claiming that I tried to convince people here that you said the horrible phrase setting them straight. As noted, I was giving an example of your tendency to casual dishonesty. I didn't think it rose to the level of slander, but apparently you did. I know it makes you feel better to think that I call attention to your phoniness, hypocrisy, and dishonesty because you've somehow gotten my goat, rather than because I think you're a phony, dishonest hypocrite who needs to be publicly scorned and laughed at. But the latter is the case. As noted, I have to have some respect for a person before they can get my goat. *That* claim is certainly indicative of someone who's not the *least* bit not-goat-gotten. :-) Oops, double negative there. Getting a little flustered, are you? Judy, I wait with 'bated breath for your reply. No apostrophe needed there, Bar'. I just can't *wait* for you to stick to your story and claim that me
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/2007 3:04:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , [EMAIL PROTECTED], MDi In a message dated 7/31/07 11:43:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What?! They don't want to take credit for the success the surge is starting to show? What surge success? I suspect you're referring to Bush's dumbass war? There is no success there. Keep smokin' the ganga. Try reading the news some time. snicker The point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. We have already done a few surges over the last 4 years and some. September and October look like the interesting months in evaluating yet another surge. I'm sure Bush is thinking of something else to save his party. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Dr. Mercola's Video Warnings
Excellent video and so true of our sad health-for-profit system of the US. We need change and revolution NOW! lloyd kinder wrote: Dr. Mercola is pretty bold and blunt in his warnings about conventional medicine. Check out this video and a bunch more. http://youtube.com/watch?v=FPI7zdGdqo4 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/current.aspx http://youtube.com/results?search_query=mercolasearch= - CU. Lloyd - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
[FairfieldLife] Re: WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip When someone gets their buttons so pushed by someone challenging an *idea* that they believe is true, pushed enough to react as if someone has attacked *them* personally, that person IMO can't tell the difference between his or her ideas and who he or she *is*. And that's fairly sad in my estimation. It's also a complete fantasy, not something that actually happens in the real world. It's a mantra that Barry has adopted to give him a basis for dumping on people who a provide vigorous defense for ideas he's disparaged. His attacks on other people's ideas are usually so lame that when they're defended, he doesn't have any substantive response--hence the need for an all-purpose putdown to substitute for such a response.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 30, 2007, at 11:34 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: snip Vaj, first of all, though Maharishi was snubbing tradition in his willingness to leave the yamas and niyamas of Patanjali out of his teachings and techniques, it was that revolutionary aspect of his teaching that brought even the idea of meditation into the Western world and made it part of popular Western culture. It's also inherent in MMY's insight about the technique itself. Insight? Oh puhleeze. If transcendence is indeed effortless, You must have missed the previous conversations on how effortlessness is defined in the Patanjali system. You mean, your *interpretation* of same. In any case, what I'm talking about here is what MMY believes, not what you believe. If there is support (Skt.: Alambana), there is effort. it's easy to see how, as MMY claims, the steps on Patanjali's eight-fold path became reversed, with transcendence held to be the effect of mastery of the yamas and niyamas rather than the cause. Yes and maybe if we read the Lord's Prayer backwards we'll find Jesus quicker. Jaundiced-eyed Judy reports: the world is yellow. Lame-o. If that insight about effortlessness, and the understanding of how to teach it, is lost, But it's clearly evident that it never was lost. Reams of commentaries provide textual testimony that it was indeed never lost. Oral traditions agrees. It was lost in the implementation. However, having reviewed the comments and finding their conclusions experientially sound, Who having reviewed them? Your syntax is falling apart. it's clear Mahesh was either 'making it up as he went along' or simply distorting tradition all along. I bet the fact that he claimed he was restoring the purity of the tradition actually fooled you. That's what he believes, and it makes sense to me, intellectually and experientially. then transcendence becomes *difficult*, and if it's difficult, practitioners need all the help they can get. This must be what mastery of the yamas and niyamas is for, goes the reasoning: to make it less difficult to transcend. Given his very different understanding, of course MMY would not have taught mastery of the yamas and niyamas as a prerequisite to samadhi, even to the most religiously devoted Hindu practitioners; it would have been counterproductive, in his view. He wasn't snubbing the yamas and niyamas, he was putting them in what he believed to be their proper context. If the prerequisites of samadhi are not met, even if you round a thousand years, you will never attain samadhi. However, according to MMY, as you know, there are no prerequisites of samadhi, other than not exerting effort to attain it. Given that we have no reliable scientific data on any TMer EVER showing signs of samadhi Signs of samadhi *as defined by Vaj*. Note that Vaj failed to address any of my points. (ability to enter for desired length of time, increased pain threshold, high-amplitude coherence, etc.) Mahesh's distortion of tradition could be the cause. In fact, that's what some researchers are claiming.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Greenland getting colder, not warmer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Latest Scientific Studies Refute Fears of Greenland Melt Posted By Marc Morano Marc_Morano@ 9:39 AM ET Ha Ha Ha ... Couldn't find anyone more biased could you Shemp? Whether I could or couldn't doesn't change the reality of whether Greenland is getting colder.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Vedic Concepts 4 forces of Physics'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 30, 2007, at 11:22 PM, authfriend wrote: snip This is such an obvious straw man that it's hard to believe it was inadvertent; and if it was, it demonstrates significant ignorance of what TM's claims actually *are*. It's not the only such problem with this study, but it's so egregious that it suggests the researchers really did not do their homework. ROFLOL! Boy, did you get that backwards! No, actually, I didn't, but thanks for asking. snip Second, you fail to mention that the article you refer to found that *all* the available research on meditation was of poor quality, not just that on TM. Not all, just the ones included in the research on health claims and meditation. All the hundreds of studies they evaluated. Obviously they can't find that research they haven't evaluated is of poor quality. Nice attempt at misdirection, though. It's not misdirection, it's in Appendix E, why and which studies were excluded. Says Vaj, attempting to obscure his first attempt at misdirection with another one. No, just to emphasize (once again) that your claim that *all* the available research on meditation was of poor quality, not just that on TM. is in error. Except that it does nothing of the kind, of course. As I said, it's just a clumsy attempt at misdirection from the point I was making. No, it's called a clarification. No, it's misdirection. Read what I said to start with that you were supposedly responding to. The trend in modern and more recent research is to produce higher quality studies because of improvement in study design. It's an unavoidable fact that the people who have done the most research have seen little improvement statistically speaking in their studies. Non sequitur. as we are already starting to now get studies which flat out state that TM research is biased (from the Journal of Hypertension on TM blood pressure claims): Actually, what you go on to quote does *not* flat out state that TM research is baised. It says the studies they looked at were *potentially* biased (and we'd need to look at the authors' affiliations to see whether they were potentially biased as well, like the authors of the Handbook chapter). And of course no bias was ever shown from the neuroscientists of The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Non sequitur. You misstated what the authors said. It's just something you repeat as if you say it enough times, someone will actually believe this lie and attempt at misinformation. In other words: pure desperation. Hilarious. I referred to potential bias on their part, just as the other authors used that term with regard to the TM studies. Are they desperate too? I don't think sojust objective. Vaj falling into deep incoherence now, as he always does when he encounters a strong challenge. A strong challenge? ROFLOL, you're just desperate as usual. Funny, since I'm the one who's making sense, and you're the one who's incoherent. snip You, on the other hand, made the false claim that these authors said flat out that TM research is biased. They did not use those words You falsely attributed those words to the authors, Vaj. They said the TM research was POTENTIALLY biased. How kind! Unfortunately the researchers did not know what many on this list already know Nobody here knows whether the studies were biased. But that isn't the point. The point is that you deliberately misrepresented what the researchers said. snip PS: Could you try to be more timely in your post responses. It's amazing in all this time you weren't able to come up with anything better than this! There's very little to come up with in response to your posts, Vaj; they're very nearly substance-free. I came back to this one because of the hilarious blooper John Knapp made on his blog about this study and the challenges to it, which I also posted about yesterday (to no response from you).
[FairfieldLife] Re: WYAIHYW -- What You Are Is How You Write
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As another exercise in thinking out loud, here's another installment in my musings on writing about spirituality. I'm a language freak. Not in the same sense as Card, but I really get off on language, its nuances, and the ways in which the *ways* in which people write often says more about who they are and what they believe than *what* they choose to say. In other words, it's often not the *content* of what a person says that communicates, it's *how* they choose to say it. I've pointed out several times that your interest is solely in how your words look/sound, not in what you're actually saying. What you say is usually shallow, illogical, and inaccurate, but you've spent a lot of time and effort making the *words* look impressive. That's all that counts for you. Here you've confirmed exactly what I've been saying. No judgments here, no better or worse, just an attempt to call people's attention to the difference in styles. You can make your own determinations as to *which* style appeals to you more. And this is crap. You pay lip service to not making a judgment, but judgment clearly runs through everything you say. For example: Take another phrase that very *rarely* appears here, I could be wrong. Curtis uses this phrase a lot, and a few others do as well. I always savor and appreciate it when I see it, and find it refreshing, often *because of* its rarity. Other folks don't tend to use this phrase very much, IMO :-) because it often doesn't occur to them that they *could* be wrong, or that there could be another equally valid way of seeing the situation. They're right, and they know it. If you don't want to be thought of as judging, you'll have to do a lot better at keeping the judgment out of your posts.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post TMO View of Meaning in Life
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I'm not a big person for searching for meaning in life. I'm not convinced life has any meaning at all. FWIW, this is one point on which I agree with Barry. I don't even think the phrase meaning of life has any meaning.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: You think God is stupid? Well bliss is stupid according to seer sri pete. And since God is bliss, you do the math. Well, to be stupid is good for yoga, someone I know says.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Greenland getting colder, not warmer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Latest Scientific Studies Refute Fears of Greenland Melt Posted By Marc Morano Marc_Morano@ 9:39 AM ET Ha Ha Ha ... Couldn't find anyone more biased could you Shemp? Whether I could or couldn't doesn't change the reality of whether Greenland is getting colder. The overwhelming evidence that I've seen just about all over the MSM and the internet indicates that it's warming dramatically. You're clearly coming from ideology and not fact.
[FairfieldLife] 'Guru Dev- Maharishi- Pure Consciousness- Sleep- Samadhi'
My understanding of what Guru Dev taught; According to what I have read about him and his teachings; Is primarily to seek first the things of the soul, instead of the things of the body, or the material world. At a time when humanity was on the brink of total insanity, Maharishi and Guru Dev were studying these things, with the lucky human, who happened to be in India, in those days, long ago and far away,. Now, when Maharishi came to the West, he made up, as he went along, translating into English(In the same way as Apostle Paul, translated from Arabic to Greek)... Anyway, he had the most basis thing accomplished, when he undertook his 'calling'. That is: Brahman Consciousness; Unity Consciousness; Stabilized Samadhi, a walking, talking, loving- Samadhi machine- Packaging for the Americans, especially, instant enlightenment. He gave them extra 'powers', as American's are into power, very much so...' Then low and behold, Maharishi became dissappointed, when people were sleeping instead of witnessing, dull instead of intense and sharp. He underestimated the thickness of the Maya in the West. He had never heard of 'Red Necks', Country Music, and Stun Guns... Never had he heard of 'crack', ant--depressents, coke, scag, skunk, roos, Monica Lewinski(well ya git the idea) Anyway, little Mahrishi did the best he could, like 'The Little Train That Could'; Working day nite, since the 50's... Way, Before, many of ya'alll' were borned from yourn Mama's womb. Robert.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sri Sri Ravi Shankar on TV
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He is on CNN discussing his trip to Iraq and how he doesn't fear death. It is probably on a loop and will be seen again today or tonight. Move over Jessie Jackson, there is a new spiritual peace keeper in town. A lot of people don't fear death. That is not so special. But a lot of young foolish people like him forget that he may not be killed in Iraq, he could be taken hostage and tortured over many months. Does he fear that? He is a very naive man. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Kunzang Dechen Lingpa Rinpoche
...and pics of the Zangdokpalri Temple. http://www.zangdokpalri.org/photosintro/intro10.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yet Jim in a post yesterday dismissed the analogy of acid induced states of being as not valid because they were not permanent. Though it was Rory who said that, I did want to add that the quid pro quo regarding drug induced or enhanced spiritual experiences is that the experiences *are* produced by the drug, and so whatever the drug adds to the body and mind in order to produce an effect, must necessarily be depleted afterwards, so there is a net zero effect. The most commonly known of these depletion results is the alcohol induced hangover. This see-sawing of the physiology makes it impossible, as your friends noted, to induce permanent spiritual change solely through drug use, no matter how insightful the drug induced experiences might be.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Song for Barry and Judy
Nice. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sung to the tune of the Beatles' It won't be long. Every day, when everybody has fun Here I am, planning another put-down I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you. When you go, everyone is so nice Lots of smiles, flowers, sugar and spice I'll cross my tts and I'll dot my is 'cause I know if I don't You won't be nice, you won't be nice! Every night, I just simply can't stop Planning put-downs you won't be able to top. I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you. Every day, we'll go on as before Through the years, until both of us are no more. I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: You think God is stupid? Well bliss is stupid according to seer sri pete. And since God is bliss, you do the math. Well, to be stupid is good for yoga, someone I know says. Hi, I think innocent is much better for yoga.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
---except for the natural drugs (neurotransmitters) produced by your own body, some of them similar to the drug DMT. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Yet Jim in a post yesterday dismissed the analogy of acid induced states of being as not valid because they were not permanent. Though it was Rory who said that, I did want to add that the quid pro quo regarding drug induced or enhanced spiritual experiences is that the experiences *are* produced by the drug, and so whatever the drug adds to the body and mind in order to produce an effect, must necessarily be depleted afterwards, so there is a net zero effect. The most commonly known of these depletion results is the alcohol induced hangover. This see-sawing of the physiology makes it impossible, as your friends noted, to induce permanent spiritual change solely through drug use, no matter how insightful the drug induced experiences might be.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Song for Barry and Judy: Onward TM Soldiers
---Onward TM Soldiers: Onward, TM soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of The Mahareeshee going on before. King Nader, the royal Master, leads against the foe; Forward into battle see His banners go! Refrain: Onward, TM soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of Bevan going on before. At the sign of triumph Satan's host doth flee; On then, TM soldiers, on to victory! Hell's foundations quiver at the shout of praise; Brothers lift your voices, loud your anthems raise. Like a mighty army moves the church of Brahman; Brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod. We are not divided, all one body we, One in hope and doctrine, one in charity. Crowns and thrones may perish, kingdoms rise and wane, But the church of the Holy Rajas constant will remain. Gates of hell can never 'gainst that church prevail; We have Bevan's own promise, and that cannot fail. Onward then, ye people, join our happy throng, Blend with ours your voices in the triumph song. Glory, laud, and honor unto MMY the King, This through countless ages men and angels sing Nice. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: Sung to the tune of the Beatles' It won't be long. Every day, when everybody has fun Here I am, planning another put-down I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you. When you go, everyone is so nice Lots of smiles, flowers, sugar and spice I'll cross my tts and I'll dot my is 'cause I know if I don't You won't be nice, you won't be nice! Every night, I just simply can't stop Planning put-downs you won't be able to top. I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you. Every day, we'll go on as before Through the years, until both of us are no more. I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong, yeah (yeah, yeah!) I could be wrong...but I'm more right than you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: conversation with Dana Sawyer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hyperbolicgeometry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---except for the natural drugs (neurotransmitters) produced by your own body, some of them similar to the drug DMT. Probably a matter of quantity in those cases.:-)
[FairfieldLife] 'The Fear of Death...'
Whom amongst you, is near feared of death, the final frontier? Dr. Martin Luther King, said, 'That if you have nothing worth dieing for, than what is the point of living? Do you have something in your soul, worth dieing for? Some calling, as if the Creator is calling you forth, to do something, that only you can fulfill. And then you developed faith, that the Creator will protect you, the Maintainer will guide you, and the destroyer will remove obstacles before they turn toxic and dull. So, march on To Glory, Maharishi's soldiers, diligently maintaining the balance on the earth plane, and helping the rid the earth of false Maya, and the underlying fear. We look fear straight in the face: and it crumbles before our eyes- IN the light of the Samadhi within, within the light there is no sadness, only Joy... Robert. - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/07 2:04:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it. Nope didn't miss a thing. No political compromises yet but 60 pieces of legislation passed. Killings, executions and bombings are down. Sunnis are turning on Al Qaeda and working with Coalition forces for a change. The Democrats have a lot invested in the failure of the surge. If it works they look very bad. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 7/31/07 3:13:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Try reading the news some time.
WBR*WBR*WBR**
_http://discover.http://discovehttp://disco_
(http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour)
Trying reading something other than the right-wing Murdoch and military
industrial complex press er... propaganda sometime.
Ummm, this was in the New York Times.
** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/31/07 2:04:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it. Nope didn't miss a thing. No political compromises yet but 60 pieces of legislation passed. Killings, executions and bombings are down. Sunnis are turning on Al Qaeda and working with Coalition forces for a change. The Democrats have a lot invested in the failure of the surge. If it works they look very bad. It is such a cynical view from both sides to use the death of men, women and children as a political pawn to score points. really sickening and cold-hearted. Whether the surge works or not, I just want this damned war to be over soon, and for us as a country to recognize that it has solved nothing.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 7/31/07 2:04:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it. Nope didn't miss a thing. No political compromises yet but 60 pieces of legislation passed. Killings, executions and bombings are down. Sunnis are turning on Al Qaeda and working with Coalition forces for a change. Scrape harder: Iraq's Parliament headed into a monthlong summer recess on Monday, halting work despite calls from the United States and the prime minister for lawmakers to shorten their break to push through important legislation. The decision to take off the month of August almost surely eliminates hopes that the 275-member Council of Representatives will pass laws sought by American officials as evidence that the country is making progress toward stability Their scheduled return is less than two weeks before Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker and Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of United States forces in Iraq, are to submit a report on benchmarks set by Congress to measure Iraq's political progress. There is widespread pessimism that feuding politicians will thrash out such complex issues before the report to Congress, which is considered crucial to maintaining support for the war But political analysts said two of the most crucial pieces of legislation relevant to Congressional benchmarks the proposed oil law and the one on former Baathists have not even been sent to Parliament for debate, because of a deadlock within the ruling coalition's main parties. Shatha al-Mussawi, a lawmaker from the Shiite-led coalition, said there was no reason for Parliament to remain in session because it has nothing to vote on http://tinyurl.com/37q4uw Poverty, hunger and public health continue to worsen in Iraq, according to a report released Monday by Oxfam International, which says that more aid is needed from abroad and calls on the Iraqi government to decentralize the distribution of food and medical supplies. The report, based on a compendium of research from the United Nations, the Iraqi government and nonprofit organizations Oxfam works with or finances, offers little original data. But it provides one of the most comprehensive pictures to date of the human crisis within Iraq and what it describes as a slow-motion response from Iraq's government, the United States, the United Nations and the European Union. The report states that roughly four million Iraqis, many of them children, are in dire need of food aid; that 70 percent of the country lacks access to adequate water supplies, up from 50 percent in 2003; and that 90 percent of the country's hospitals lack basic medical and surgical supplies. One survey cited in the report, completed in May by the Iraqi Ministry of Planning, found that 43 percent of Iraqis live in absolute poverty, earning less than $1 a day. Unemployment and hunger are particularly acute among the estimated two million people displaced internally from their homes by violence, many of whom are jobless, homeless and largely left on their own http://tinyurl.com/34jcgg The Democrats have a lot invested in the failure of the surge. If it works they look very bad. You really are despicable.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
In a message dated 8/1/2007 12:06:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com) , [EMAIL PROTECTED], MDi In a message dated 7/31/07 2:04:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it. Nope didn't miss a thing. No political compromises yet but 60 pieces of legislation passed. Killings, executions and bombings are down. Sunnis are turning on Al Qaeda and working with Coalition forces for a change. The Democrats have a lot invested in the failure of the surge. If it works they look very bad. It is such a cynical view from both sides to use the death of men, women and children as a political pawn to score points. really sickening and cold-hearted. Whether the surge works or not, I just want this damned war to be over soon, and for us as a country to recognize that it has solved nothing.:-) I couldn't agree more with the above paragraph. Could you imagine our children going to school in the morning hoping they come home alive by the end of the day. Americans have no idea just how bad it is. Something has got to give by the end of the Fall season in Iraq or we need to get out of there el pronto. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditators predict Dow 17,000...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/31/07 2:04:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jstein@ writes: point of the surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to make some political progress. Parliament has just adjourned for the month of August, having accomplished ZILCH. That was in the news, MDixon. I guess you must have missed it. Nope didn't miss a thing. No political compromises yet but 60 pieces of legislation passed. Killings, executions and bombings are down. Sunnis are turning on Al Qaeda and working with Coalition forces for a change. The Democrats have a lot invested in the failure of the surge. If it works they look very bad. It is such a cynical view from both sides to use the death of men, women and children as a political pawn to score points. really sickening and cold-hearted. Whether the surge works or not, I just want this damned war to be over soon, and for us as a country to recognize that it has solved nothing.:-) *Nobody* is invested in failure in Iraq. Of all the right's calumnies, that is perhaps the most unspeakably vile. It's the old stab in the back strategy, dragged out and dressed up in an effort to excuse the failures that have already occurred.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Disfavor for Bush Hits Rare Heights
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/30/07 10:01:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jstein@ writes: That 60 vote majority came back to bite the Dems in the ass, didn't it? You mean, are the Republicans such hypocrites as to use the filibuster after condemning it and threatening to ban it to keep the Democrats from using it when they were in the minority? Goes without saying. It seems there's no hypocrisy that's beyond the Republicans. As you almost certainly know, the Republicans are on their way to *tripling* the average number of filibusters in the preceding several decades: Ah, but Judy, they didn't ban it, did they? And of course you know the difference in how the Republicans used the filibuster and the Democrats used it. The Republicans used it to protect the power of the Presidency put forth in the constitution, to select federal judges, establish foreign policy and to act as Commander in Chief. The Democrats have used the filibuster to stall and delay and now want to dictate foreign policy from the Congressional level as well as interfere in the duties of the Commander in Chief. MDixon, you have Kool-Aid poisoning. What a ludicrous litany. Here's just some of what the Republicans have obstructed: raising the minimum wage; ethics reform; immigration reform; Medicare prescription drug reform; electronic campaign funding disclosure; funding for renewable energy; funding for the intelligence community; appointing conferees on the 9/11 Commission recommendations. The strategy of being obstructionist can work or failSo far it's working for us.--Republican Whip Senator Trent Lott, April 7, 2007 http://democrats.senate.gov/journal/entry.cfm?id=277868 And here's a little cherry to top off this pile of stinking garbage, from Politico's blog The Crypt: Stevens threatens to block ethics bill Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, whose home back in Alaska was raided by federal investigators Monday in a wide-ranging corruption investigation, has threatened to place a hold on the Democratic- drafted ethics legislation just passed by the House and expected on the Senate floor by week's end. The senator told a closed session of fellow Republicans today, including Vice President Dick Cheney, that he was upset that the measure would interfere with his travel to and from Alaska and vowed to block it. And Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), confirming Steven's threat, said bluntly: There could be a lot of holds on this bill. http://tinyurl.com/2xygjw
[FairfieldLife] Re: Disfavor for Bush Hits Rare Heights
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 7/30/07 10:01:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jstein@ writes: That 60 vote majority came back to bite the Dems in the ass, didn't it? You mean, are the Republicans such hypocrites as to use the filibuster after condemning it and threatening to ban it to keep the Democrats from using it when they were in the minority? Goes without saying. It seems there's no hypocrisy that's beyond the Republicans. As you almost certainly know, the Republicans are on their way to *tripling* the average number of filibusters in the preceding several decades: Ah, but Judy, they didn't ban it, did they? And of course you know the difference in how the Republicans used the filibuster and the Democrats used it. The Republicans used it to protect the power of the Presidency put forth in the constitution, to select federal judges, establish foreign policy and to act as Commander in Chief. The Democrats have used the filibuster to stall and delay and now want to dictate foreign policy from the Congressional level as well as interfere in the duties of the Commander in Chief. MDixon, you have Kool-Aid poisoning. What a ludicrous litany. Here's just some of what the Republicans have obstructed: raising the minimum wage; ethics reform; immigration reform; Medicare prescription drug reform; electronic campaign funding disclosure; funding for renewable energy; funding for the intelligence community; appointing conferees on the 9/11 Commission recommendations. The strategy of being obstructionist can work or failSo far it's working for us.--Republican Whip Senator Trent Lott, April 7, 2007 http://democrats.senate.gov/journal/entry.cfm?id=277868
