[FairfieldLife] Present For You
This is amazing http://www.alexsuskind.com/inf.php?Alexandra Hope u enjoy it too!
[FairfieldLife] Saving the World's Women
In the first paragraphs I don't see reference to population control, but I would hope that topic shows up later in the story. If girls were not having children at 14, we could maybe get a handle on food and environmental problems. SAVING THE WORLD'S WOMEN http://bit.ly/17KEZb How changing the lives of women and girls in the developing world can change everything The New York Times Sunday Magazine By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF and SHERYL WuDUNN Published: August 17, 2009 IN THE 19TH CENTURY, the paramount moral challenge was slavery. In the 20th century, it was totalitarianism. In this century, it is the brutality inflicted on so many women and girls around the globe: sex trafficking, acid attacks, bride burnings and mass rape. Yet if the injustices that women in poor countries suffer are of paramount importance, in an economic and geopolitical sense the opportunity they represent is even greater. Women hold up half the sky, in the words of a Chinese saying, yet that's mostly an aspiration: in a large slice of the world, girls are uneducated and women marginalized, and it's not an accident that those same countries are disproportionately mired in poverty and riven by fundamentalism and chaos. There's a growing recognition among everyone from the World Bank to the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff to aid organizations like CARE that focusing on women and girls is the most effective way to fight global poverty and extremism. That's why foreign aid is increasingly directed to women. The world is awakening to a powerful truth: Women and girls aren't the problem; they're the solution. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/magazine/23Women-t.html?hp
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrats Seem Set to Go It Alone on a Health Bill
Interesting that Dennis Kucinich is against the most popular bill. Here's Kucinich: The hotly-debated HR3200, the so-called health care reform bill, is nothing less than corporate welfare in the guise of social welfare and reform. It is a convoluted mess. The real debate which we should be having is not occurring. Removing the public option from a public bill paid for by public money is not in the public interest. What is left is a private option paid for with public money. Why should public money be spent on a private option which does not guarantee 100% coverage nor have any cost controls? A true public option would provide 30% savings immediately which would then cover the 1/3rd of the population who presently have no healthcare. http://bit.ly/42dkF Patrick again: Could it be the Republicans dislike HR3200 for the same reasons Kucinich condemns it? I'm not following the players closely enough to tell. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: Democrats Seem Set to Go It Alone on a Health Bill WASHINGTON Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority's cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks. Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans' purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month's Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair. Rahm Emanuel http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/rahm_emanu\ el/index.html?inline=nyt-per , the White House chief of staff, said the heated opposition was evidence that Republicans had made a political calculation to draw a line against any health care changes, the latest in a string of major administration proposals that Republicans have opposed. The Republican leadership, Mr. Emanuel said, has made a strategic decision that defeating President Obama http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_oba\ ma/index.html?inline=nyt-per 's health care proposal is more important for their political goals than solving the health insurance http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthto\ pics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier problems that Americans face every day. The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier. The party must still reconcile the views of moderate and conservative Democrats worried about the cost and scope of the legislation with those of more liberal lawmakers determined to win a government-run insurance option to compete with private insurers. On the other hand, such a change could alter the dynamic of talks surrounding health care legislation, and even change the substance of a final bill. With no need to negotiate with Republicans, Democrats might be better able to move more quickly, relying on their large majorities in both houses. Democratic senators might feel more empowered, for example, to define the authority of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives that are emerging as an alternative to a public insurance plan. Republicans have used the Congressional break to dig in hard against the overhaul outline drawn by Democrats. The Senate's No. 2 Republican, Jon Kyl http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/jon_kyl/in\ dex.html?inline=nyt-per of Arizona, is the latest to weigh in strongly, saying Tuesday that the public response lawmakers were seeing over the summer break should persuade Democrats to scrap their approach and start over. I think it is safe to say there are a huge number of big issues that people have, Mr. Kyl told reporters in a conference call from Arizona. There is no way that Republicans are going to support a trillion-dollar-plus bill. The White House has also interpreted critical comments by Senator Charles E. Grassley http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/charles_e_\ grassley/index.html?inline=nyt-per of Iowa, the top Republican negotiator in a crucial Finance Committee effort to reach a bipartisan compromise, as a sign that there is little hope of reaching a deal politically acceptable to both parties. Mr. Grassley, who is facing the possibility of a Republican primary challenge next year, has gotten an earful in traveling around his home state. At one gathering last week, in a city park in the central Iowa town of Adel, a man rose from the crowd and urged him to stand up and fight the Democratic plans. If he does not, the man yelled, we will vote you out! The White House, carefully following Mr. Grassley's activities, presumed he was no longer interested in negotiating with Democrats after he initially made no
[FairfieldLife] Re: Alternative to Transcendental Meditation
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 wrote: Give this to a real business school as a mass market project: Health food stores typically have alternative newspapers that list alternative and complementary health care services. I used to look at these lists regularly. I was looking to see what was being offered by way of meditation instruction. Nothing ever was. Nobody ever offered to teach people how to meditate. I got the impression nobody cared to learn meditation. Which makes Maharishi's achievement that much more remarkable, I guess. Interesting market positioning. Now comes, Marketing the alternative Transcendental Meditation. Give this to a real business school as a mass market project: Craft promotions to segments. The Saks 5th Ave package. Bloomingdales, Eddie Bauer, LLBean, From health and beauty to exploring the inner silence of nature. The Chicken Soup book version. The Walmart store packaged version. Bikers stop for meditation. The John Deere lawn tractor and meditation package. Hot Rods and meditation. Weavers and nitters meditate with the alternative to relieve eye-strain. Cut the national budget with The free meditation incentive package as parts of the stimulus or healthcare, or veterans service benefit plans. Of course, the TMorg already tried the high end Horchow version. Broaden it out now. Alternative Transcendental Meditation: A useful meditation for anyone, a packaging for everyone.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Women at Risk
The media buried this story? It's been given loads of time on repeat days on ABC's Good Morning America. Herbert's discussion of misogyny stops at our shores, but as I read his piece I couldn't help but think, The Taliban feel the way Sodini felt, too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: Hi Judy, You beat me to it. I was going to post Violet Sock's blog about this story which she says the media pretty much buried. Her take on it is that the dudes don't see it as a hate crime. I'm glad to see Bob Herbert write about it. http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/08/07/dudes-search-for-something-important-in-hate-crime-to-be-upset-about/ http://tinyurl.com/lcdlo2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: From the New York Times: August 8, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist Women at Risk By BOB HERBERT I actually look good. I dress good, am clean- shaven, bathe, touch of cologne yet 30 million women rejected me, wrote George Sodini in a blog that he kept while preparing for this week's shooting in a Pennsylvania gym in which he killed three women, wounded nine others and then killed himself. We've seen this tragic ritual so often that it has the feel of a formula. A guy is filled with a seething rage toward women and has easy access to guns. The result: mass slaughter We profess to being shocked at one or another of these outlandish crimes, but the shock wears off quickly in an environment in which the rape, murder and humiliation of females is not only a staple of the news, but an important cornerstone of the nation's entertainment. The mainstream culture is filled with the most gruesome forms of misogyny, and pornography is now a multibillion-dollar industry much of it controlled by mainstream U.S. corporations. One of the striking things about mass killings in the U.S. is how consistently we find that the killers were riddled with shame and sexual humiliation, which they inevitably blamed on women and girls. The answer to their feelings of inadequacy was to get their hands on a gun (or guns) and begin blowing people away Life in the United States is mind-bogglingly violent. But we should take particular notice of the staggering amounts of violence brought down on the nation's women and girls each and every day for no other reason than who they are. They are attacked because they are female We would become much more sane, much healthier, as a society if we could bring ourselves to acknowledge that misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem, and that the twisted way so many men feel about women, combined with the absurdly easy availability of guns, is a toxic mix of the most tragic proportions. Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/opinion/08herbert.html?_r=1 http://tinyurl.com/nazqyf
[FairfieldLife] Re: Wingnuts take a stand !
New York Times columnist David Brooks has cited research finding conservatives are more alert to potential threats. I would imagine that alertness to threat translates to fear in some individuals. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: The scientific study I would like to see done is to do a correlation of gun ownership with fear. Very simple study. Take large segments of the population. Ask them whether they own guns and if so how many. Then give those same people standardized psychological tests that pinpoint a fear index -- how much fear they live with on a daily basis. My bet -- based on the gun owners I've known -- is that there would be a one-to-one correlation. That is, Own a gun, live in fear. ( In reality, of course, it works the other way around -- Live in fear, feel the need to own a gun. ) The one statistic I'm pretty sure would show up in the study, however, is at the high end of gun ownership. Anyone who owns more than three guns would score off the charts on the fear index, nigh unto certifiable paranoia.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dharma Walk: Bodies, breasts, and Buddha-nature
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: On Jul 15, 2009, at 11:46 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Worse as far as I can tell is botox. If you happen to like either Mark Knopfler or Emmylou Harris, by all means check out the DVD they made of Live Roadrunning. It's marvelous, but the shocker is to see Emmylou talking in the interview sections of the DVD. She's always been a lovely woman, and her prematurely gray hair only made her look more attractive in my opinion, but she has *obviously* gone the botox route, so much so that it looks as if she is wearing a mask. Her face doesn't even MOVE when she speaks. It's icky and off-putting. I agree. I have a number of friends who use it, and it's pretty obvious up close, esp. if you're used to the persons previous range of facial expressions. Yet other friends have had skin peels of faces lifts. They never look quite the same. The good news is the first replacement epidermis material, Epicel, is now available, although at this time just for burn victims. Expect fairly soon to be able to replace your skin. Carticel is also approved and is in use for replacing your knee cartilage with cells cultured again from your own. In some cases it can completely restore original function. With Obama removing the Bush restrictions on stem cell lines, it's very likely such innovations will only accelerate. In A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking cops to being a fan of Star Trek. He observes that, despite all the gee-whiz technology displayed by the series, the Star Trek characters resemble people of today - to which Hawking says, I doubt it. He points out, quite in line with the observations above, that people will engineer themselves to look very different in the next few hundred years. Add to this prospect the likelihood of robotic sex partners, and it's enough to fuel all manner of science fiction plots.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Pitta question
Shemp, it's my understanding that ayurveda recognizes three types of sleep disorders: (1) trouble falling asleep, (2) waking in the dead of night and (3) waking a few hours before one would normally arise. It would appear you have traded one sleep disorder for another. The fact that ayurveda recognizes these different disorders suggests that it may yet hold a cure. Regardless of the route you take to getting a good night's rest, good luck in your investigations, and please report back. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: Chocolate usually has caffeine in it, doesn't it? The primary methylxanthine in cocoa seem to be theobromine: http://chemistry.about.com/library/weekly/aa090301a.htm In general it would not be a recommended way of fulfilling a bitter taste for pitta. And it wouldn't be a good food to eat before going to bed. But the experiment has shown promise and provided a clue. Shemp has to do his own digging or preferably find an ayurvedic practitioner or two. If he wants a MAPI practitioner then he can call them for one. When I called 15 years ago they gave me a list of practitioners and one was an MD. Turned out he had taken both the MAPI and Ayurvedic Institute courses for doctors. If I do vata balancing things then often I get a very thick deep sleep that lasts for about 4 hours. Then I wake up. Backing off the sleep is not so thick and lasts much longer. The key is to understanding how the three doshas relate to the metabolic rate particularly how we burn carbs: slowly, normally or too fast.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Xanax update
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: I used to have that problem of waking between 2 and 4 AM -- it's a Pitta disturbance; Mapi's Deep Rest will let you sleep through: http://pages.citebite.com/p1q5k7i0y1bxk Bob, do you / did you use caffeine in any form? Even a little chocolate during the day has me waking up between 2 a.m. and 4 a.m.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Regardless of whether you heard the program, you might enjoy reading a short excerpt from a book about The Family at the Fresh Air website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 We elect our leaders, he said. Jesus elects his. I'm a bit suspicious of this account because it's written in such a novelistic style, from such a subjective perspective. I'd rather not have quite so much interpretation--e.g., He stared back, holding Raf's gaze like it was a pretty thing he'd found on the ground. Well, maybe that *is* how he held Raf's gaze. Or maybe that description is a function of the writer's intention to portray the guy as negatively and scarily as he can. Are the quotations from the guy's spiel verbatim, or was the writer paraphrasing, with the same intention? It wouldn't surprise me that these people are genuinely scary. I wouldn't mind if the writer said explicitly that *he* found them scary. But I'd rather not be *programmed* by the writer to think they're scary. That excerpt just feels manipulative to me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. What does responsibly mean here? The fundie guy supposedly excuses the brutal excesses--including murder and gross sadism--of King David and Ghengis Khan on the basis that they were presumably God's toys, following a higher purpose. I have trouble seeing that as a parallel with MMY. I don't believe the fundie guy is excusing the excesses of King David and Ghengis Khan. He's saying God selects who's in charge, and if we want to change things for ordinary people, we need to work on those people whom God has placed in power, even if they're not nice people. Such was Maharishi's practice, as it has been the practice of foreign policy pragmatists throughout history. (I'm thinking of American leaders who shook hands with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.) In a related story, there's this op-ed from Roger Cohen in yesterday's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/opinion/02iht-edcohen.html From the column: 'Moussavi was supported by people who have lost faith,' [the conservative cleric] said. 'We [the Iranian power structure] believe legitimacy comes from God. They believe legitimacy comes from the people, from votes.'
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: Regardless of whether you heard the program, you might enjoy reading a short excerpt from a book about The Family at the Fresh Air website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 We elect our leaders, he said. Jesus elects his. I'm a bit suspicious of this account because it's written in such a novelistic style, from such a subjective perspective. I'd rather not have quite so much interpretation--e.g., He stared back, holding Raf's gaze like it was a pretty thing he'd found on the ground. Agreed. But such is New Journalism. By the way, the author is Jeff Sharlet, who founded the Killing the Buddha website: http://killingthebuddha.com/
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: snip Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. What does responsibly mean here? The fundie guy supposedly excuses the brutal excesses--including murder and gross sadism--of King David and Ghengis Khan on the basis that they were presumably God's toys, following a higher purpose. I have trouble seeing that as a parallel with MMY. I don't believe the fundie guy is excusing the excesses of King David and Ghengis Khan. He's saying God selects who's in charge, and if we want to change things for ordinary people, we need to work on those people whom God has placed in power, even if they're not nice people. I didn't get that he was saying the people (or rather, devout Christians) to make the leaders behave better, but I'll take your word for it. Such was Maharishi's practice, as it has been the practice of foreign policy pragmatists throughout history. (I'm thinking of American leaders who shook hands with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.) In a related story, there's this op-ed from Roger Cohen in yesterday's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/opinion/02iht-edcohen.html From the column: 'Moussavi was supported by people who have lost faith,' [the conservative cleric] said. 'We [the Iranian power structure] believe legitimacy comes from God. They believe legitimacy comes from the people, from votes.' See, here's where I get stuck. MMY always said leaders reflect the level of consciousness of the people, which doesn't seem to me compatible with the notion that leaders are chosen by God regardless of what the people want. I see what you mean. I've been conflating chosen by God with power gained by any unseen force, such as karma or collective consciousness. Still, I can't drop the notion that there are parallels between the articles above and Maharishi's policies. For one, he disdained the legitimacy of democracy (although that attitude probably arose out of impatience more than anything). And he praised leaders to the heavens in hopes of persuading them to do good by their people.
[FairfieldLife] The Family on Fresh Air
Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 Fresh Air from WHYY, July 1, 2009 · In the book The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power, author Jeff Sharlet examines the power wielded by the secret Christian group known as The Family or The Fellowship. Founded in 1935 in opposition to FDR's New Deal, the right-wing fundamentalist religious group organizes prayer meetings for Congressmen, as well as the annual National Prayer Breakfast. The group also has an alleged connection to a house in Washington, D.C. known as C Street, which serves as a prayer house and residence for politicians like Governor Mark Sanford, Senator John Ensign and Senator Tom Coburn. A religion expert and a journalist, Sharlet is a contributing editor for Harper's and Rolling Stone. He is editor of The Revealer, a review of religion and the press.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Family on Fresh Air
Regardless of whether you heard the program, you might enjoy reading a short excerpt from a book about The Family at the Fresh Air website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 We elect our leaders, he said. Jesus elects his. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgil...@... wrote: Did anyone listen to Fresh Air today? The first interview talks about a Christian group that believes people in power have been granted their power by God, and hence those people need to be cultivated to use their power responsibly. It's been described as trickle-down fundamentalism. I mention it here because the belief parallels what we used to hear from Maharishi. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324 Fresh Air from WHYY, July 1, 2009 · In the book The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power, author Jeff Sharlet examines the power wielded by the secret Christian group known as The Family or The Fellowship. Founded in 1935 in opposition to FDR's New Deal, the right-wing fundamentalist religious group organizes prayer meetings for Congressmen, as well as the annual National Prayer Breakfast. The group also has an alleged connection to a house in Washington, D.C. known as C Street, which serves as a prayer house and residence for politicians like Governor Mark Sanford, Senator John Ensign and Senator Tom Coburn. A religion expert and a journalist, Sharlet is a contributing editor for Harper's and Rolling Stone. He is editor of The Revealer, a review of religion and the press.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Another one bites the dust
Interesting observation. But I wonder: Could Sanford's actions be a considered move to court the adulterers bloc? Lots of voters there! ;-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: What's perhaps more interesting is the fact that the press rushes en masse to loudly proclaim his political career over because he cheated on his wife, but they didn't seem to consider his attempt to withhold benefits from the unemployed of South Carolina to be a threat to his career. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: Today, the Republican party suffers another casualty. Mark Sanford, an apparent dumbass, admitted to having an affair. Unlike most discovered adultery cases in politics, Sanford disappeared with no way for anyone to contact him for 5 days. You think this guy would have the sense to have his Lt. Governer, or at least SOMEONE close to him have his cell phone # and call him if anything comes up, right? I know adultery is something I won't do, but even I could've gotten away with this stunt with a little contingency planning. Of course, his wife supposedly already knew about this for 5 months, maybe longer. Article is below. I don't know how to hyperlink it, but if you cut, copy paste it'll take you to the article. This does make me feel kind of stupid. I remember stating in an earlier post that it's usually democrats that have more of a problem with this issue. Maybe they're just worse when it comes to getting caught(until now!). http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/6495525.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Photo of Mark Meredith
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/photos/album/408557067/pic/66809 0320/view?picmode=mode=tnorder=ordinalstart=21count=20dir=asc http://tinyurl.com/pxwbjh Thanks, Rick. We lost a clear head and a good writer.
[FairfieldLife] Global Good News?
Hey, is it a good thing that the Tamil Tigers have been defeated in Sri Lanka? I can't help but feel it's a good thing for the organization that raised suicide bombing to a high art to be eliminated, but I haven't followed the conflict.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Short. Angry. Hairy. Canadian.
A.O. Scott's review in the New York Times derived an opening punch line from Wolverine's Canadian origin also. http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/movies/01wolv.html?8dpc --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_re...@... wrote: How a ridiculous Canadian mutant conquered the world. http://www.slate.com/id/2217342/ http://www.slate.com/id/2217342/
[FairfieldLife] Re: First crop circle of the season!
Do we get crop circles in the United States? In all the time I was growing up in Iowa, I never heard of a crop circle. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: Just like the sound of the first cuckoo of spring the first crop circles are eagerly awaited by all. It looks like the fine weather has bought the Space Brothers here earlier than ever. Or is it a sign that global warming is affecting even the delicate psychic balance between Gaia and her unearthly manifestations? You decide: http://tinyurl.com/couzvq http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1171691/It-spring-The-years-crop-circles-spotted.html
[FairfieldLife] Who's a TM teacher? (Re: Free Web Event: McCartney/Lynch)
Comment inserted below... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer wrote: snip I haven't been following this thread, and Vaj has probably quoted this, but on my TTC (Estes Park, 1970) I clearly remember Maharishi quoting the Vedas as saying, Be easy to us with gentle effort. [I wrote:] Which (as I've pointed out before) is virtually meaningless without context (both of the quote itself and how MMY was using it). To claim that this quote in and of itself, without those contexts, constitutes an admission by MMY that TM involves effort is just off the wall. [Rick wrote:] The context was that MMY was saying that TM does involve a sort of effort, but that it is such a gentle effort that we don't use the term effort. Thought is effortless once it starts flowing, but if we're thinking about one thing and need to be thinking about another, (e.g., we're looking out the window and we should be listening to the lecture), some will is involved in shifting the attention back. We all know the analogy of the attention spontaneously shifting to the more pleasing melody, but it doesn't always work that way. The mind may prefer daydreaming to coming back to the mantra, but nonetheless, we apply gentle effort, an act of will, to come back to the mantra. This appears, then, to be a matter of exception handling, when we're aware we aren't attending to the mantra but don't want to go back to it. You say, If we're thinking about one thing and need to be thinking about another...some will is involved in shifting the attention back. But you left out a step: first we have to become aware that we're not thinking about what we should be thinking about. For that to happen, the previous train of thought has to come to an end for long enough for that recognition to arise. You can't have two different thoughts at the same time. Judy, about this statement that one cannot have two different thoughts simultaneously: Have you never had thoughts and mantra together? Or thoughts and sutras? Or, outside of meditation, thoughts of one thing while looking at another? It's an accepted part of TM practice that we have multiple thoughts all the time. There's an instruction for that situation in the checking notes. But TM teaching aside, it's a common experience, is it not? If you change your mind about that point, would it make a difference in what you wrote below? What MMY was addressing, it seems from what you say, was the thought, Oh, I'm not attending to the mantra. But I'd rather pick up this interesting train of thought again than go back to the mantra. If you choose not to go back to the mantra, then you've stopped meditating. If you don't want to continue meditating, then, yes, it may take a bit of effort to resist the inclination to stop. I don't think anyone would claim that resisting the desire to pick up the interesting train of thought rather than go back to the mantra involves a little gentle effort. But that's not--contrary to what Vaj has been claiming--an acknowledgment on MMY's part that TM isn't fundamentally effortless. It may not *always* work that way at the specific point at which you are to return to the mantra, but when it doesn't it's the exception, not the usual way it works (at least in my experience). In any case, the effortless notion applies primarily to how to entertain the mantra *when you're entertaining it*. Did you see where Vaj claimed it was wrong to allow the mantra to become fuzzy and vague, by the way?
[FairfieldLife] Who's a TM teacher? (Re: Free Web Event: McCartney/Lynch)
Thanks, Vaj. I've responded below. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: On Mar 29, 2009, at 9:56 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: The pundit kindly replied 'oh, but don't you know you can never have effortlessness except in nondual meditation?' He briefly explained the difference between meditation with an object and the advaita View of nondual contemplation. Quite embarrassing, but unquestionably true when understood. I don't get it. Have you elaborated on the above points elsewhere? If not, could you explain a little more here? Thanks. It is the inescapable nature of any meditation form with supports/ props--any, not just TM--that if there are supports, alambanas, i.e. an object of meditation and a meditator who meditates through some method on an object (breath, visualization, mantra), there will always be some (subtle) effort involved. In my experience, intention is different from effort, even subtle effort, just as desire is different from the work required to fulfill a desire. And all it takes for me to to be aware of a mantra or be present in the moment is the intention to do so. It would seem that consciousness, by its nature, does the actual work of redirecting itself to the mantra or to the moment. Perhaps this is where Maharishi's natural tendency of the mind to seek greater charm comes in. The mantra and the present moment both have their charm, and thus attract the attention.
[FairfieldLife] Who's a TM teacher? (Re: Free Web Event: McCartney/Lynch)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: The pundit kindly replied 'oh, but don't you know you can never have effortlessness except in nondual meditation?' He briefly explained the difference between meditation with an object and the advaita View of nondual contemplation. Quite embarrassing, but unquestionably true when understood. I don't get it. Have you elaborated on the above points elsewhere? If not, could you explain a little more here? Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Several Maharishi Graduates Busted For Growing Pot
Bob, how did you know that posted passage was quoting Lincoln? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Disgusting. This thread has devolved into where's the best Mexican food? I understand gallows humor, but I don't understand the caustic and haughty sniping at these poor kids who are now in a hell that cannot be imagined unless one has lived that reality too. These are our spiritual grandchildren -- they were raised in the FF village. This is not a time for whispered chuckles about these kids. Shame on anyone who's thinking these kids're going to get anything near to justice -- brevity cut No justice? Well, they'll proly get some due process of law. there is, even now, something of ill-omen, amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult to our intelligence, to deny. ** Say it, Abe! http://snipurl.com/cdqjz [books_google_com]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Morning in America
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: I am the eternal wrote: Reagan said that we need fewer families like the Simpsons and more like the one on Little House on the Prairie. The Simpsons didn't debut until after Reagan left office. They debuted as a Christmas show in December 1989. ;-) Nice fact check!
[FairfieldLife] Fwd: Re: [Fairfield_Community_Kiosk] Ringo will appear at the concert
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: I mean, this is a 63-year-old man promoting a concert that features an almost 67-year-old singer and an almost 69-year-old drummer. And the people getting all excited about it are in the same age range. I'm going and throwing my old lady panties on stage. All the while believing you're at a Tom Jones concert, eh Ruth? ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Ringing in the ears during meditation
The last few times I taught TM I got a question I had not prepared for during teacher training. People would ask, What's that ringing in my ears? I figured the sound had always been there, but the person had never been quiet enough to hear it. But then I read this in a recent New Yorker: Some people with normal hearing develop spontaneous tinnitus when placed in total silence; this is believed to be a response of the auditory cortex to the abnormal absence of all ambient sounds. - Jerome Groopman, That Buzzing Sound, The New Yorker, February 9 16, 2009 Anybody else here run across this experience?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Independent TM Teachers in the San Francisco Bay Area?
Rick, the friend of your friend wants to learn TM from Paul Brown. http://www.thequietpath.org/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer wrote: From a friend: A friend of mine is very interested in learning TM, though he cannot afford the current fee of $2500. Does anyone know of an independent TM teacher who can provide instruction for less, in the San Francisco Bay Area? It should still be the TM instruction, with puja, checking and all of that. Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Night advanced technique is back
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: The first advanced technique offered is the Night Technique. This technique makes sleep time more productive for developing higher states of consciousness. Can anyone here speak to this claim? Can you describe what you gained from practice of the Night Technique? Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi films
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, David Fiske wrote: I was sent the following e mail was unable to watch the first film on the 1960 course posted by an old friend Ulla Blucher. I wonder if these links (not all posted here) have already appeared on this site and whether any of you good folks have been more successful than I was. It downloaded for ages but I never could click on anything to see a film. I would appreciate any help. Thank you. ;ove, David Fiske Maharishi Films1969_Maharishi_in_India_Ma Andamayi_Blucher http://www.spiritualregeneration.org/Flash/1969_Maharishi_in_India.swf The link in question worked for me twice of the five times I tried it. When I did not get results right away, I clicked the back button my browser and clicked the link again. The absence of audio gave the film a long-ago-and-far-away quality. Do you know these people, David? Good luck!
[FairfieldLife] Re: abandoning thought
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: We have no idea as to whether TM successfully produces enlightenment or unity consciousness. Rick says there are dozens of Fairfielders claiming to be enlightened. Some post here. All either did TM for years, or still do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Myth of the Relaxation Response
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: with no control group you demonstrate nothing other than symptoms of ADHD were reduced, but you do not isolate the causal variable without a frigging control group. I've understood that the purpose of exploratory studies is to justify the next stage in research, a randomized controlled study. With that understanding, my beef with the TM research is *not* that it includes studies like the one you blast above, Peter, but that it has failed to deliver the more advanced research that needs to come next.
[FairfieldLife] Re: I find this ironic
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk wrote: Massachusetts is arguably the most liberal state in the union. After all, it has gay marriage and sends the likes of Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Barney Frank to Congress. That's why I find it ironic that it is the only state that I know of with a flat tax rate for income! Perhaps it's because I associate a flat tax with conservative/libertarian policy and progressive taxation with liberals...but don't you find it strange that they would have a flat tax? Interesting. I wasn't aware that Massachusetts had a flat tax, and I live just north in New Hampshire. I cannot contribute to the tax discussion, but as long as we're writing about ironies, get this one I heard from James Fallows on Fresh Air yesterday: China, a communist state, has no social safety net such as Medicare or Social Security. People are on their own in that regard!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Moral Reasoning for the unreasoning
Thanks for this. I like to read these first-hand experiences. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: [snip] With the massive ego that grows more each day and the realization that I know God, that I look out and see myself looking back at me, I think I can understand how Maharishi felt about right action and his ability to do no wrong. [snip]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gran Torino
Is this another one of those movies in which the mild-mannered hero is stirred to vanquish bad guys who are taking advantage of the meek?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Distractions
Back in the day, Maharishi wanted MIU graduates to be given a printout that showed their progress toward enlightenment. The idea was to run a baseline measurement upon entering the University to compare to a final assessment upon graduation. Apparently they ran into some problems with that idea - as with most of MMY's ideas, huh? If the school were more ecumenical, they could be a center for such research, teaming up with Buddhists and others interested in determining markers of awakening. That would have been kinda cool. From: Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net To: Patrick Gillam jpgil...@yahoo.com Sent: Monday, January 5, 2009 10:45:07 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Distractions On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:30 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: I'm with Hugo on this one. I thought it was Maharishi University's job to determine the physiological parameters of higher states of consciousness. And of course you're exactly right, that was one of the good things about MMY: opening up the field of meditation research by acknowledging these realities. We all have physical bodies last time I checked! The Two Truths, the relative and absolute, arise simultaneously and inseparably, so anyone trying to claim they're somehow beyond confirmation via some absolutist criteria should immediately be considered suspect. And the same goes with all the traditional criteria: they're there for a reason, and MMY did authentically enumerate some of them. It's interesting to me how offended the enlightened are when this is mentioned. I've seen a number of people be tested, myself included and it was extremely helpful for not falling into self-delusion and self-deception.
[FairfieldLife] Dome vs. home (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
So Doug, you're saying there are dome-eligible Fairfield 'rus who would rather meditate at home? I wonder if they reject the notion that group practice of the TM-Sidhi program creates good in society. It would be interesting if they believe in the efficacy of the TM-Sidhi program, but reject the Maharishi Effect. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 wrote: Relevant thread, canvassing around as to why folks are not in the dome meditating, most often say they `like' meditating at home instead of the domes. That then breaks down, to that there is too much sleeping in the domes which dulls the experience, or there are too many people bad from the old TM-movement and therefore the feeling is bad in there and 3) there is a comunalenment in the group that the administration by their chs keeping it from happening. Doug, what are you saying in Point 3 above? Mostly folks in the larger meditating community would rather meditate at home and have a better experience than going up on campus. [snip]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Distractions
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: the grace of enlightenment can only be known through a receptive consciousness. for those who DEMAND PROOF of personal enlightenment, they might as well be chasing a kite in a hundred mile an hour wind. This contradicts MMYs teachings on enlightenment completely. Namely, that it is another state of consciousness and can be measured like all the others. [snip] Your point needs elaboration, like did MMY say you could objectively 'measure' enlightenment, and if so, how? I'm with Hugo on this one. I thought it was Maharishi University's job to determine the physiological parameters of higher states of consciousness.
[FairfieldLife] Dome vs. home (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
I just wonder what beliefs people hold. There's a strong possibility that these people carry some cognitive dissonance, and I wonder how they reconcile it. What are the options? 1. My experience tells me my program is good, but my experiences don't corroborate that group- dynamics-of-consciousness thing. 2. I believe in the Maharishi Effect, but the hired meditators will cover for me. 3. I went out of my way to support the TM organization for many, many years because I believe in its goals, but I have nothing left to give. There are other possibilities, of course. Doug suggests that people are boycotting the domes because they have ethical objections to the organization, but that explanation doesn't sound persuasive to me. Hence my conjecture about what the real motives may be. P.S. A few years ago I was explaining the Maharishi Effect to a socially conscious friend who, when he grasped what I was saying, could not understand why people were not flocking to the domes to transform the nation and the world. He accepted my explanations about the difficulties of making money in a tiny town and making time for group program. Still, the sincerity of his response said, If you have the key to do so much good, how can you not use it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: So Doug, you're saying there are dome-eligible Fairfield 'rus who would rather meditate at home? What an absolutely shocking, shocking thought, Patrick. If this is what Doug really believes, clearly he is not in control of his thoughts anymore, and is in dire need of deprogramming. I mean, as any sane person here in FF knows, *everybody* is just begging in desperation to get into the domes, and the only reason, I REPEAT, the *only reason* someone doesn't go is because they've been banned. The idea that they could be perfectly happy meditating in their own homes is simply not believable, NOT BELIEVABLE, I say. I wonder if they reject the notion that group practice of the TM-Sidhi program creates good in society. I wonder too. If they do, the ingrates, it's obviously because their bodies have been overtaken by aliens, and we all know what aliens are up to--they are up to no good...NO GOOD, I say. Especially the ones who spend their evenings romping in the cornfields rather than settling down and bouncing on their asses... I mean, creating coherence. It would be interesting if they believe in the efficacy of the TM-Sidhi program, but reject the Maharishi Effect. Yes, employing any kind of critical thinking instead of imbibing the prescribed formula is certainly reason to take an interest in these people--an INTEREST, if you know what I mean. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Ethical behavior (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues wrote: Like flying, TM leading to better ethics is a hollow claim with plenty of counter evidence. I'm not saying that some really impulsive people don't benefit in being able to think before they act a bit more from the influence of meditation. But the movement is not filled with more ethical people than I see in an ordinary mix of well educated society and it has it full share of criminals who meditate regularly. As an old-time TM teacher once pointed out to me, it's really the science that tells you whether someone's claims are valid. Any organization can trot out reasonably attractive representatives who relate inspiring anecdotes about their program's benefits. Or in your examples above, Curtis, it's easy to find scoundrels in the saintliest organization. But a strictly designed, well-controlled study shows you whether the program works regardless of the Shining Example here and the Sorry Disappointment there. Are you acquainted with the Nidiches research on ethics and TM? Do you have an opinion about it?
[FairfieldLife] Dome vs. home (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: On Jan 5, 2009, at 3:13 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: No whip? No gun? No cattle prods? Sal OK, skip the Sidha dresses, you're going straight to black leather or midnight latex. Which is, of course, what all those conservative women were wearing underneath the Sidha dresses. I wonder! The New York Times' Maureen Dowd has written how women in Saudi Arabia will wear mad sexy lingerie under their burkas.
[FairfieldLife] Ethical behavior (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
Comment below. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues wrote: Excellent points Patrick. Are you acquainted with the Nidiches research on ethics and TM? Do you have an opinion about it? I don't really feel qualified to understand what the research does and does not prove. This is the nub of the issue, isn't it? I'm surprised at how paltry my education has been regarding what constitutes good science. Even in journalism graduate school, the required course on research - which should have concentrated on evaluating studies - failed to convey anything useful. Peter Sutphen's critiques in this forum have been good. And Vaj likes to take apart TM research. Maybe if we posted studies here, we could evaluate them. As I recall the Nidich research, it was well- replicated and had impressive p-values, but beyond that, I don't know how solid it is. What I do recall is that Maharishi School and Maharishi University students scored real well on a Kohlberg moral development test, outscoring students who tried to develop their moral compasses using methods Kohlberg developed. At least, that's how I recall it from the days when I was a proponent of such things. But I'll do a search, and thanks for advancing the discussion. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues wrote: Like flying, TM leading to better ethics is a hollow claim with plenty of counter evidence. I'm not saying that some really impulsive people don't benefit in being able to think before they act a bit more from the influence of meditation. But the movement is not filled with more ethical people than I see in an ordinary mix of well educated society and it has it full share of criminals who meditate regularly. As an old-time TM teacher once pointed out to me, it's really the science that tells you whether someone's claims are valid. Any organization can trot out reasonably attractive representatives who relate inspiring anecdotes about their program's benefits. Or in your examples above, Curtis, it's easy to find scoundrels in the saintliest organization. But a strictly designed, well-controlled study shows you whether the program works regardless of the Shining Example here and the Sorry Disappointment there. Are you acquainted with the Nidiches research on ethics and TM? Do you have an opinion about it?
[FairfieldLife] Dome vs. home (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 wrote: But yet an equally common denominator when you ask is that most folks do not do the whole blown TM-sidhi thing anymore as their practice, in or out of the dome. Very few do. A former MIU classmate of mine who has spent most of her life on Mother Divine told me about an interesting exchange Maharishi had with an Invicible America course participant a few years ago. The CP was going on about doing X minutes of this part of the program and Y minutes of that part, and Maharishi said, in effect, You don't have to cleave closely to those times. We instituted those times at the beginning, but we've been at it so long we can work out our own schedules now. I kid you not. That's how I understood the exchange, relayed second-hand as it was. I could have it wrong, of course, but the takeaway my friend and I had was that we could pretty much customize our programs with MMY's blessing. I wonder what kind of participation the Domes would get with a 30-minute program.
[FairfieldLife] Ethical behavior (was Re: spirituality spot found in brain)
Quick comments interleaved. Please do not mistake brevity for curtness. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: IIRC, Nidich is affiliated with the TMO and is a proponent of a cosmic level of moral development, beyond the Kohlberg states. Lots of theory here and not a lot of fact. Also, there is plenty of criticisms regarding Kohlberg and his states of moral development, which are based more on justice than compassion. I associate ethical behavior with doing what's right, which I associate with justice and fairness, not compassion. I wonder what kinds of tests people use to measure compassion? And, his states pertain only to moral reasoning, not to whether someone acts in a moral or ethical way or is in any respect a good person. This is the nut issue here. ^ I understand the gold standard of science to be the longitudinal study, which may not be possible in this instance. But failure to live up to that standard of research does not mean all other methods are invalid, does it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 wrote: Ah, thank you Ruth. I was wondering given the record. Improved 'moral reasoning' is solemnly pointed to by the Dr. in Hagelin's powerpoint present. Moral reasonging. It is a mouthful as he says it, but oddly there was not elaboration. Moral reasoning. Improved moral reasoning but a school and program with no ethical code or consideration. Not a we are this and not that to be found. No chart on moral behavior. No limit to what they will tolerate in ethical behavior. Very nuevo. The instruction is simple and, in my day, oft repeated: Do not do that which you know to be wrong. So the question would be, in interviewing someone who did something the rest of us find morally compromised, Did you simply not know such an act was wrong? Or did you know, yet do it anyway?
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
A preferred meditation program for someone who is truly evolved: Watch out, Barry - you're parroting Maharishi here. He says in his introduction to the Gita that right action *follows* enlightenment, rather the commonly held misconception that right action contributes to the development of enlightenment. (SCI Correlate: The Conversations with God books say the same thing. Neale Donald Walsch writes that the Old Testament's Ten Commandments were not intended to be prescriptive, but descriptive. For example, you can tell when people are close to God, because they do not kill, covet or bear false witness.) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: A preferred meditation program for someone who is truly evolved: 1. A few minutes of meditation morning and evening. 2. Spend the rest of the day doing nice things for others, as if they were more important than you are. 3. If #2 requires so much time that #1 isn't really feasible, skip #1. That's how all the people in human history who are revered by history as enlightened saints did it. The ones who spent most of their time doing for themselves are remembered as the selfish, self- important fucks they were, if they are remembered at all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What did you take with you from TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: We spend many posts here debating the legitimacy of the TM technique, the cult of TM and the scam. But from time to time I find myself relating to ideas that were first introduced to me during the time I was in the movement. [snip] Anyone else have some to share? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Gillam wrote: I've come to dismiss the TM-is-the-only-way rhetoric of Maharishi --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Did he ever say that, Patrick? The most effective way for householders is what I've always understood, not the only way. Fair enough, Judy. Thanks for the opportunity to elaborate. There's that famous videotape in which Maharishi explains what he means by the only way. He says TM is the only way to enlightenment in the same sense that flying is the only way to travel. A person could walk from New York to Los Angeles, he says, or drive a car, but a jet is the only way to go. Me and my compatriots on teacher training were heartened by that clever and seemingly modest explanation, for it made our position less absolutist. Of course you can get enlightened via other means! It'll just take longer. As Steven Wright said, everyplace is within walking distance if you have enough time. For purposes of unpacking the TM orthodoxy, though, let's consider two other claims. One - the Prime Directive of Maharishi's Revival - is his statement in his translation of the Bhagavad-Gita that Guru Dev revived vedic knowledge in its purity. Other paths to enlightenment have been corrupted, as knowledge is wont to become over time, but Maharishi's path, because it comes straight from Guru Dev, is pure. That position lay at the core of my pride in being a TM teacher and in most all disputes centered around the TM organization. Related to this position is a cultural phenomenon within the TM organization that I cannot pin to a specific instance, but I'm confident in stating nonetheless. There's a tendency for TM proponents to take enormous pride when some other spiritual teacher says Maharishi's is the Highest Knowledge. I would have to rely on others here to cite a specific instance of some other master paying homage to MMY, but I know I've encountered tales of such encomia. I've heard people say, I spoke with Swami Ooga-Booga when I was in Kerala, and he said Maharishi's is the Highest Knowledge. I would love love love for this statement to be true, for I'd love to have been involved in such a worthy enterprise. But I've done other things for my growth that have delivered as much or more than I've gotten from TM and TM teacher training and the TM-Sidhi program, so I've come to temper my attachment to the notion that TM is the Only Way. Also, as has been discussed around here in depth, that cultural position leads to a fair amount of dysfunction. Stein again: Except for that-- Gillam again: , but nothing I've encountered in the last 30 years has disturbed my acceptance of the vedic worldview he presented. Science of Creative Intelligence correlates are everywhere. Consciousness is primary and matter is secondary. Creation is structured in layers, from gross to subtle. Awareness becomes aware of itself, bifurcates into the knower and the known, loses awareness of itself, and returns to know itself anew. The whole megillah makes perfect sense to me, and dovetails with everything else I encounter, from physics to the three act structure of a story to A Course In Miracles. Stein again: --what you say is the same for me. I should add that this does *not* include much of what he said that didn't have to do with the nature and mechanics of consciousness, e.g., political and social type commentary; Amen. and I have some major quibbles about his support-of-nature teaching. But I'm pretty much sold on what you outline above, in that I haven't encountered anything so far that calls it into question. One of the major changes in my thinking as a result of his teaching and my experience with TM has been in how I regard religion and mysticism generally. I used to think that was all complete bunkum; I don't any longer. (I do still think a lot of religious dogma is bunkum, but that's mostly because it's taken literally when it should be understood as metaphor, the referents being, essentially, the principles of SCI, the nature and mechanics of consciousness.) Right. When I started thinking consciousness is the substrate of creation, everything became possible. If I come across as jaded, maybe it's because I've yet to achieve the success I thought would be mine.
[FairfieldLife] An ecumenical MUM?
This strikes me as interesting. Maharishi University's Sustainable Living Department is hosting an expert who represents a tradition other than the vedic tradition. He follows the Anthroposophical teachings of Rudolf Steiner. Typically, M.U.M. doesn't entertain experts from fields that compete with anything Maharishi promoted or taught, and Maharishi founded his own honey making operation. Bees and bee keeping are big topics in biodynamic farming, which this guest speaker practices. It's nice to see the University accepting teachings other than its own. Here's the announcement from Alumni Association Director Jennine Fellmer: Dear Alumni and University Friends, The Sustainable Living Dept is happy and proud to host Mr. Gunther Hauk, top expert on organic natural biodynamic beekeeping, on our M.U.M. campus. Mr. Hauk will teach a 3-day workshop to our SL students during block 5 and has graciously agreed to present his work and knowledge of organic natural biodynamic beekeeping to our M.U.M. and Fairfield community. Don't miss this opportunity! The presentation will be held this Tuesday, January 6th, 8:00 p.m. at our new Argiro Student Center in Dalby Hall. Admission is free. Email this info and invitation to your friends! For more info: www.spikenardfarm.org Best wishes for an enlightening and sustainable new year, Bee well, Alex Kachan, Sustainable Agriculture and Composting Coordinator akac...@mum.edu
[FairfieldLife] Re: What did you take with you from TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: We spend many posts here debating the legitimacy of the TM technique, the cult of TM and the scam. But from time to time I find myself relating to ideas that were first introduced to me during the time I was in the movement. [snip] Anyone else have some to share? I've come to dismiss the TM-is-the-only-way rhetoric of Maharishi, but nothing I've encountered in the last 30 years has disturbed my acceptance of the vedic worldview he presented. Science of Creative Intelligence correlates are everywhere. Consciousness is primary and matter is secondary. Creation is structured in layers, from gross to subtle. Awareness becomes aware of itself, bifurcates into the knower and the known, loses awareness of itself, and returns to know itself anew. The whole megillah makes perfect sense to me, and dovetails with everything else I encounter, from physics to the three act structure of a story to A Course In Miracles.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Dec 31, 2008, at 6:32 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: It's possible that most TMers are not in fact transcending in the full sense of that word and are merely experiencing thought-free states. [snip]transcending/transcendence/ transcendent are all English words, and thus divorced from the original Sanskrit definition/descriptions, you can make them mean whatever you want to and you can also assign whatever neurophysiological finding you want as well. Vaj (or anyone), are the original Sanskrit definitions and descriptions of transcendence? Maharishi's term for transcendental is bhava-tita: beyond causal being or beyond moods. A more popular term is para. MMY defines transcending in his yoga-sutra translation as nirodha (his words: yoga is bringing transcending to the activity of the mind. YS 1:2) IME many TM practitioners end up succumbing to torpor: thus all the reports of people sleeping in the dome. The Patanjali tradition warns of this as what happens rather than going beyond, para, one instead just settles down into a thought-free state he calls sthiti. Sthiti has some tamasic qualities and so it's easy to just lull into that state, which can feel, experientially like a bare one-pointedness, but easily devolves into torpor and then sleep. The reason why so many TMers fall asleep is simple: they've turned the marketing description effortless into a mood-making dogma: they're afraid to use any mindfulness and balanced attention because of it. When attention becomes to lax, one falls into the tamasic aspect of sthiti, and they fall asleep. The stress at the level of the nervous system excuse is BS. It's a well-known phenomenon. Vaj, this explanation sounds good to my intellect, but it doesn't jibe with my experience. When I do the TM-Sidhis, I'm using the mindfulness and balanced attention you call for immediately above, yet I still get drowsy when I do the practice in the afternoon. In my experience, sleepitations are a function of being genuinely tired, not because I'm caught in some torpor of thought-free awareness.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: It's possible that most TMers are not in fact transcending in the full sense of that word and are merely experiencing thought-free states. [snip]transcending/transcendence/ transcendent are all English words, and thus divorced from the original Sanskrit definition/descriptions, you can make them mean whatever you want to and you can also assign whatever neurophysiological finding you want as well. Vaj (or anyone), are the original Sanskrit definitions and descriptions of transcendence? How about svaruupapratiSThaa of citi-shakti? (puruSaartha-shuunyaanaaM guNaanaaM pratiprasavaH kaivalyaM *svaruupapratiSThaa vaa citi-shakter* iti.) What does this ^ translate to, cardemaister? Taimni translates it like this: /Kaivalya/ is the state (of Enlightenment) following the re-mergence of the /guNas/ because of their becoming devoid of the object of the /puruSa/. In this state the puruSa is established in his Real nature which is pure Consciousness. Finis [of Yoga-suutras]. Thanks. Maybe someday I'll be able to appreciate the subtleties of the terms above, but these days I define transcendence in a more boneheaded way: awareness aware of itself, as opposed to aware of thoughts or sense impressions. I remember Bevan talking about kaivalya once in 1979 or 1980 at MIU, but the subject was never pursued. Apparently people were not having sufficient experiences to justify a further investigation of the phenomenon.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Practice Groups of FF
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: This is the perfect object lesson in how the knowledge was lost. MMY knew it was inevitable. Sample the spiritual soup folks. Close your eyes to meditate and wonder, What spiritual practice should I do today? Mantra, silent, or chant? Felt sense of third eye, navel, or anus? Take your pick and while you're at it, imagine the bubble diagram refining your thoughts to the source of thought. TRY to keep the mind from jumping around like a monkey on crack, TRY to be in UNITY, and TRY to be innocent. Don't mind the confusion, it's all the SELF, RIGHT? Whatever floats your boat. Enjoy. This is the core topic of Maharishi's teachings, and the reason for the kerfuffle that is Fairfield Life, whether in its physical or cyberspace forms. If you accept Maharishi's position that knowledge gets lost and Guru Dev restored vedic wisdom in its purity, you pretty much have to be a TM absolutist. If you believe different people are suited to different paths, or that Maharishi made up an ineffective or even harmful meditation technique, then the MMY orthodoxy falls by the wayside. That's the fundamental argument around here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: On Jan 2, 2009, at 10:06 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: Thanks. Maybe someday I'll be able to appreciate the subtleties of the terms above, but these days I define transcendence in a more boneheaded way: awareness aware of itself, as opposed to aware of thoughts or sense impressions. And keep in mind, the aforementioned sthiti state is experientially identical to what you're describing. Of course I'm not able to experience what you're experiencing, so it's impossible to say, since I'm not omniscient. Yet. :-) But if I was sitting next to you, I'd be able to tell. One of the best determinants for actual transcendence is to test the startle reflex. It's the hardest reflex to eliminate through attentional means. How do you think you would react while transcending if say, a shot gun blast, was fired off right behind you? Would you flinch? I would indeed flinch. I do not pass into some transcendental zone when I do my program. I am very much awake and aware of what's going on around me. It's just that I'm also aware of awareness itself, along with everything else.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Jan 2, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: Maharishi's term for transcendental is bhava-tita: beyond causal being or beyond moods. A more popular term is para. MMY defines transcending in his yoga-sutra translation as nirodha (his words: yoga is bringing transcending to the activity of the mind. YS 1:2) IME many TM practitioners end up succumbing to torpor: thus all the reports of people sleeping in the dome. The Patanjali tradition warns of this as what happens rather than going beyond, para, one instead just settles down into a thought-free state he calls sthiti. Sthiti has some tamasic qualities and so it's easy to just lull into that state, which can feel, experientially like a bare one-pointedness, but easily devolves into torpor and then sleep. The reason why so many TMers fall asleep is simple: they've turned the marketing description effortless into a mood-making dogma: they're afraid to use any mindfulness and balanced attention because of it. When attention becomes to lax, one falls into the tamasic aspect of sthiti, and they fall asleep. The stress at the level of the nervous system excuse is BS. It's a well-known phenomenon. Vaj, this explanation sounds good to my intellect, but it doesn't jibe with my experience. When I do the TM-Sidhis, I'm using the mindfulness and balanced attention you call for immediately above, yet I still get drowsy when I do the practice in the afternoon. In my experience, sleepitations are a function of being genuinely tired, not because I'm caught in some torpor of thought-free awareness. Since you're using an appropriate balance of attention then you don't have an issue, unless of course as you say, you're actually tired. So actually it sounds like your experience DOES jive with what I'm describing. And I also suspect if you were on IA you wouldn't be falling asleep as you wouldn't be as tired from the workaday routine. In any event torpor is a common deficit in TM, just not for you, for whatever reason. Consider yourself lucky I guess. Well, I'm not really talking about TM above. I'm talking about the sidhis practice. The sidhis ask the practitioner to be aware of awareness itself, which is different from what you're describing in sthiti awareness. I'm inclined to go along with your claim that sthiti awareness would apply to TM because TM does not call for the meditator to be alert to what he's experiencing when the thoughts go away. When thoughts go away - which never happens for me, by the way - one would indeed be left with a sthiti state of awareness without thoughts. This thread is getting me to distinguish between awareness with no thoughts and being aware of awareness itself. I discern a difference.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues wrote: How do you think you would react while transcending if say, a shot gun blast, was fired off right behind you? Would you flinch? I would indeed flinch. Don't sweat it Pat, word is that Tat Walla Baba flinched too. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I can only assume Creme is referring to the space brothers, George Clinton and his Parliament-Funkadelic Thang. Otherwise it he would sound completely nuts. curtis, this is not the time to freak out. Take a deep breath, relax. And better still; have a checking by a disciple of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. As a former representative of MMY, I have to say that he would not be happy about calling a person qualified to administer the 30 points of checking a disciple.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: It's possible that most TMers are not in fact transcending in the full sense of that word and are merely experiencing thought-free states. [snip]transcending/transcendence/ transcendent are all English words, and thus divorced from the original Sanskrit definition/descriptions, you can make them mean whatever you want to and you can also assign whatever neurophysiological finding you want as well. Vaj (or anyone), are the original Sanskrit definitions and descriptions of transcendence? How about svaruupapratiSThaa of citi-shakti? (puruSaartha-shuunyaanaaM guNaanaaM pratiprasavaH kaivalyaM *svaruupapratiSThaa vaa citi-shakter* iti.) What does this ^ translate to, cardemaister?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: Ex teachers, Curtis, Turq, others, how much of the TTC was devoted to learning to teach? How hard is it to teach? It seems routine and easy to me. I spent every bit of my teacher training courses learning how to teach. We had to memorize most everything, which was hard for me. My TM teacher training took place in three phases: Phase 1 was where we learned to give introductory lectures and conduct the checking procedure. Phase 2 was a practicum in the field, where we presented intro lectures, checked people and administered programs such as seasonal celebrations at the TM Center. Phase 3 was where we learned how to conduct the six steps of teaching that follow the intro lecture: the prep lecture, the personal interview, the puja and instruction, and the three nights of follow-up meetings. Phase 3 took three months, with zero days off. My courses were structured in a no-man-left- behind fashion. Once I passed my tests and demonstrated my mastery of the material at hand, I became a tester for others and helped them pass their tests. Hence, I was always busy. We were all busy. We didn't have a lot of time in the day, either, because we were rounding much of the time. TM teacher training for me was a cross between military service and graduate school. Very intense. I grew a lot. I thought that trying to pass memorization tests while way up in rounds was insane. It seemed to amplify any nervousness one might have whereas testing down in rounds would have been much easier. It was sort of like trying to walk a tight rope while drunk. Maybe so, but everyone managed to pass his tests, thanks in part to the structure described above, whereby people who mastered the material then focused on helping their course mates master it in turn. Sounds like its own form of testing/training under induced stress. Lawson The unstressing did lead to behavior that was perhaps less graceful than desired. One day at lunch during my TTC Phase 3, a few of us were remarking on the clumsiness we were exhibiting, bumping into people and spilling our food. A man in my study group said he had simply resolved to stop behaving that way, and the resolution worked - no more clumsiness. I took my cue from Jeff (his name), and learned a valuable lesson: I could simply decide to behave in a certain way, and that resolution could carry forward into my behavior. No surprise, I suppose, if it's true that consciousness is the foundation of life, and intention gives direction to consciousness.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: On Dec 31, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: Ex teachers, Curtis, Turq, others, how much of the TTC was devoted to learning to teach? How hard is it to teach? It seems routine and easy to me. I spent every bit of my teacher training courses learning how to teach. We had to memorize most everything, which was hard for me. [snip] We didn't have a lot of time in the day, either, because we were rounding much of the time. And Patrick, everything you just described, if you took out most of the rounding as well as the brainwashing, could have been accomplished in about 2 weeks. Nothing like wasting huge amounts of time, while convincing gullible recruits it's good for them. Sal The rounding was the reason I attended teacher training, so I would have been loath to skip that. And the brainwashing, by which I assume you mean the time spent watching videotapes of Maharishi, was necessary to learn how to represent Maharishi, which is what TM teacher training is all about. It's funny - you use the term brainwashing, Sal, in its pejorative sense, but it's the reason I pursued TM teacher training - to have my nervous system cleansed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: Ex teachers, Curtis, Turq, others, how much of the TTC was devoted to learning to teach? How hard is it to teach? It seems routine and easy to me. I spent every bit of my teacher training courses learning how to teach. We had to memorize most everything, which was hard for me. My TM teacher training took place in three phases: Phase 1 was where we learned to give introductory lectures and conduct the checking procedure. Phase 2 was a practicum in the field, where we presented intro lectures, checked people and administered programs such as seasonal celebrations at the TM Center. Phase 3 was where we learned how to conduct the six steps of teaching that follow the intro lecture: the prep lecture, the personal interview, the puja and instruction, and the three nights of follow-up meetings. Phase 3 took three months, with zero days off. My courses were structured in a no-man-left- behind fashion. Once I passed my tests and demonstrated my mastery of the material at hand, I became a tester for others and helped them pass their tests. Hence, I was always busy. We were all busy. We didn't have a lot of time in the day, either, because we were rounding much of the time. TM teacher training for me was a cross between military service and graduate school. Very intense. I grew a lot.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: It's possible that most TMers are not in fact transcending in the full sense of that word and are merely experiencing thought-free states. [snip]transcending/transcendence/ transcendent are all English words, and thus divorced from the original Sanskrit definition/descriptions, you can make them mean whatever you want to and you can also assign whatever neurophysiological finding you want as well. Vaj (or anyone), are the original Sanskrit definitions and descriptions of transcendence?
[FairfieldLife] Re: An armed society is a polite society
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: Man shoots talker at movie, police say: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/27/movie.shooting/index.html I want to know the instant this guy starts a defense fund. Bout time we're starting to fight back. Slashing the tires of vehicles which take up two parking spaces and stomping on cell phones used in publicly overheard conversations should be next. An armed society is a polite society. I hate people when they're not polite. - lyric from Psycho Killer, by David Byrne, Chris Frantz and Tina Weymouth of Talking Heads
[FairfieldLife] Re: The test we've been waiting for (Barack the Magic Negro song)
There's a school of thought which holds that God and/or Creation are at the bidding of our individual desires. In short, They exist to serve. Neal Donald Walsch's Conversations with God books are of this school. The Magical Negro seems to be a personification of this worldview. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog wrote: Magic Negro Cartoon: ME all-powerful black god-like figure, YOU pathetic white underachiever mortal. Regardless, ME the servant, you the MASTA! http://tinyurl.com/82q9jx Examples Examples of magical negroes as published by social commentators include: * Uncle Remus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Remus (James Baskett http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Baskett ) in the film Song of the South http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_of_the_South (1946) [10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-9 * Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Poitier ) in the film The Defiant Ones http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Defiant_Ones (1958)[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-strangehorizons-1 * The magical negro is a recurring archetype Stephen King http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_King 's novels http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel as well as some adaptations of his work: * Dick Hallorann in The Shining http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shining_%28novel%29 (1977), and in both the 1980 film adaptation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shining_%28film%29 (Scatman Crothers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scatman_Crothers ) and the 1997 TV miniseries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shining_%28mini-series%29 (Melvin Van Peebles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melvin_Van_Peebles )[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-strangehorizons-1 * Mother Abagail in The Stand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stand (1978), and the 1994 TV adaptation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stand_%28TV_miniseries%29 (Ruby Dee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Dee )[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-strangehorizons-1 * John Coffey in The Green Mile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Green_Mile_%28book%29 (1996), and the 1999 film adaptation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Green_Mile_%28film%29 (Michael Clarke Duncan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Clarke_Duncan )[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-strangehorizons-1 [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-ejumpcut-4 * Moses the Clock Man (Bill Cobbs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cobbs ) in the film The Hudsucker Proxy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hudsucker_Proxy (1994) [11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-10 * Cash (Don Cheadle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Cheadle ) in the film The Family Man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family_Man (2000)[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-SpikeLee-2 [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-ejumpcut-4 * Bagger Vance (Will Smith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Smith ) in the film The Legend of Bagger Vance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Bagger_Vance (2000)[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-strangehorizons-1 [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-SpikeLee-2 [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-ejumpcut-4 [12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-11 * Gloria Dump (Cicely Tyson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicely_Tyson ) in the film Because of Winn-Dixie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Because_of_Winn-Dixie_%28film%29 (2005)[13] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-charlotteObs-12 * God (Morgan Freeman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Freeman ) in the film Bruce Almighty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Almighty /Evan Almighty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Almighty .[14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-13 * Eddie Scrap Iron Dupris (Morgan Freeman) in Million Dollar Baby http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Dollar_Baby [15] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-14 * Morpheus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morpheus_%28The_Matrix%29 (Laurence Fishburne http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Fishburne ) in The Matrix http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_series .[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-ejumpcut-4 * Lamont (Guy Torry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Torry ) in the film American History X http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_History_X .[16] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro#cite_note-15
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
ruthsimplicity wrote: Well Turq, right now I am interested in what they report. So what was it about TM that kept you meditating day after day? Anyone else want to chime in? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Much later I made the acquaintance of an Indian tantric who has taught much about mantra shastra as well as very advanced and powerful techniques. These techniques make TM rather lightweight in comparison. So I still meditate but with other techniques and siddhis. TM and the TM-Siddhi program are supposed to (1) establish a person in Being, and (2) cultivate the ability to maintain that awareness in activity. Bhairitu, Barry and anyone else who's thinking of leaping into this thread, do your post-TM techniques aspire toward the same ends? Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: what was it about TM that kept you meditating day after day? I meditated regularly because I got the usual benefits - rejuvenation, clarity, happiness. The Transcendental Meditation technique, despite claims that it is not a sleep substitute, is a terrific sleep substitute, so I meditated because I cheated on sleep, and needed the deep rest. In addition to these daily benefits, I aspired to self-actualization, which I believed TM would cultivate. I became less regular in my practice when these conclusions piled up: - My personal enlightenment - cosmic consciousness - is in thrall to collective consciousness, hence there's not much point in throwing too much individual time and energy against that goal. - Full enlightenment - unity - comes by grace and not by my actions. - When I sit with my eyes closed I prefer to let my awareness go to awareness itself (which I understand to be the whole point of meditation), and a mantra is just another thought that interferes with that practice. - I can replicate the practical benefits of meditation by being present in the moment. - I was frustrated at not being enlightened after 32 years of TM. I still do the TM-Siddhis, sans hopping, at points in the course of the week, but my program these days consists of eating intelligently, exercising and avoiding caffeine. When I do those things and get to bed on time I can sleep eight or nine hours a night, enjoying sweet dreams and productive days.
[FairfieldLife] Re: David OJ: Attorney's Letter re TM Religion
I read in this forum years ago that Maharishi resisted the rigorous structure of the SCI course. He wanted to ramble and extemporize, but his secretaries insisted on a disciplined series of lessons. Perhaps the tapes are boring because he's not inspired. Comments interleaved below. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: dhamiltony2k5 wrote: The man is dead not even a year, and they chuck his Science of Creative Intelligence? It IS rather astounding. I was one who thoroughly enjoyed the course, although I took in Humboldt, Ca. at the Cobb Mountain Academy, and had an awesome instructor. So perhaps that had a lot to do with it. ;-) More on this below. On the other hand, in the field, I taught it a time or two, and still enjoyed it. Then some time later, (within the last few years), I had occassion to see one of the tapes, and could not get through five minutes because of the dullness. Go Figure. My experience with SCI was that the teacher made the difference. I took the SCI course two evenings a week during a long summer in 1975. John Lediaev, a brilliant math professor at the University of Iowa, taught the first half of the course. The classes ran long and we stayed up way too late every class, but the course had some electricity. Then John bolted for the first six-month course, and his then-wife Lucy took over. Lucy stuck to the schedule, for which I was grateful, but the classes lost some punch. When I taught SCI in Iowa City a few years later, I stuck to the schedule and ran, I guess, a boring class. I still embrace the SCI worldview - you know; consciousness becomes aware of itself, starts vibrating, creates the world and comes back around to know itself. I find it to be a robust way to look at life. Has the TMO for sure abandoned the SCI course? Is it reworking the curriculum? I wonder.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Great Auto Bailout Circus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: snip It is not the job of the American taxpayer to bail out badly run businesses period! Badly run business should fail and go away. It amazes me that some people think the proposed Big Three bailout would be purely for the benefit of the car companies, Actually, Judy, the #1 road block to the bailout may have been because many people believe the benefit will benefit not so much the car companies but another demographic: the UAW and its members who are making (depending upon which report you read and which accounting method is being employed) about $80.00 an hour, which is about $40.00 an hour more than some of their competitors. Right. But nobody who is well-informed, of course, believes that. The $80/hour notion has been quite thoroughly debunked; and in any case workers' pay amounts to only a very small percentage of the companies' expenses (something like 4%). The United Auto Workers say labor costs make up 10 percent of a vehicle's expenses. They address that and other questions here, including hourly wages: http://www.uaw.org/auto/12_02_08auto1.cfm
[FairfieldLife] Re: An eyeful a day keeps the doctor away
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_2611/ai_n14504639 This, from the woman who posted a link to an article explaining why so much research is so much baloney? Ruth, I admire the way you avoid predictability. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: Now this is an exercise program I can stick with. Let me guess: You're writing from a cafe, where you're getting your workout.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: So maybe a better word for invincibility would be imperturbability then, one of the qualities of enlightened consciousness. Invincibility sounds too much like Superman to me (kryptonite aside :-)). I used to think there could be qualities of enlightened consciousness such as imperturbability, but having read so many reports of enlightened people being distinctly perturbed, I've abandoned the notion that enlightenment brings any particular style of behavior. Individuals still need to make choices about how to behave. We still need to govern ourselves, at least a little. That's my guess, anyhow. That's why I like this currently popular concept of presence. It at once suggests imperturbability, and prescribes what I need to do to attain that state of mind. That, and steer clear of kryptonite.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Going out with a song...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog wrote: Then compare it to What's Opera, Doc? http://tinyurl.com/3fj6c2 Thanks for this. I've been wanting to watch this classic for a while, but never thought to look online. Now to find the scene from Breaking Away when Daniel Stern's character admits that he finds Bugs Bunny to be attractive when Bugs dresses up like a woman...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
Thanks for the clarification, Steve. What you describe, though, doesn't seem like a pitfall inherent in a spiritual path. What you describe sounds like the ordinary hitches in everyday life. Sometimes we're strong, sometimes we're fragile. As for you being off in a competition of any kind, I've never seen it. Competition switches you on, and raises the voltage to boot. Total presence. Love you too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] When you're balanced, you handle anything thrown at you pretty well. But say you leave your watch at home, or you find out you're missing a button on your shirt. For me, these things have the potential to throw me off. It's much better than it used to be, put it's still something I deal with. Or say you're talking to someone, making a presentation, or important point, and you can't find the word you want. That can throw you off unless you can get past it. Now you may say, Steve, this is basic OC, dude, nothing more. Maybe so, but, when I am on, I feel pretty invinicible. Like I can cut through the crap pretty well, and have a positive influence on my environment. And I am well aware when I am on, and when I am not. Also shows up in my golf game, or ping pong game. :) Love ya. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
When Maharishi introduced the theme of invincibility to MIU in 1977, Larry Domash started looking for physical examples of how invincibility works - or is compromised. For example, Domash pointed out that a pinprick of a hole in a ship's hull could generate a crack along the length of the hull. Hence the need for invincibility, for without it, all of us are subject to such cracks in our lives. (Another example that comes to mind, one much closer to home, is when a pit in a windshield expands to become a crack that spans the windshield.) That rumination of Domash's is what I think of as I read your description of being thrown off balance by petty stuff. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I'm just not doing a good job of descibing it. I am just prone to letting little things throw me off balance. That's pretty much it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Steve. What you describe, though, doesn't seem like a pitfall inherent in a spiritual path. What you describe sounds like the ordinary hitches in everyday life. Sometimes we're strong, sometimes we're fragile. As for you being off in a competition of any kind, I've never seen it. Competition switches you on, and raises the voltage to boot. Total presence. Love you too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: [snip] When you're balanced, you handle anything thrown at you pretty well. But say you leave your watch at home, or you find out you're missing a button on your shirt. For me, these things have the potential to throw me off. It's much better than it used to be, put it's still something I deal with. Or say you're talking to someone, making a presentation, or important point, and you can't find the word you want. That can throw you off unless you can get past it. Now you may say, Steve, this is basic OC, dude, nothing more. Maybe so, but, when I am on, I feel pretty invinicible. Like I can cut through the crap pretty well, and have a positive influence on my environment. And I am well aware when I am on, and when I am not. Also shows up in my golf game, or ping pong game. :) Love ya. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
[FairfieldLife] Meditation = Hovering meme in political cartooning
In this animated cartoon by the Washington Post's Ann Telnaes, you can see the Meditation = Hovering meme enacted in the cause of political spoofing. Be patient - it takes a few seconds to unfold. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/cartoonsandvideos/telnaes/telnaes_main.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 or http://tinyurl.com/yt6rb9
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment
Steve, what pitfalls? I can see how spiritual growth might make a person subject to attack by entities that wish to leach that chi, but are you thinking of other threats? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- On Tue, 12/2/08, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: From: Vaj vajradhatu@ Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened Robin 3: The First Three Years of Enlightenment To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, December 2, 2008, 10:55 PM On Dec 2, 2008, at 10:49 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I think he writes well. It is claimed that his writings were written continuously, without a stop. I'm not sure if that's all of his writings or just some of the sutric ones. It is claimed that, when he would get tired, he would just switch hands and keep writing. Eventually he had a scribe who could take continuous dictation, without any need for edits. It sounds like he was often hypomanic like MMY. His writings, especially the later ones, have an obsessive, manic quality to them. He's desperately attempting to articulate something to himself to make sense of an increasingly chaotic internal world of paranoid schizophrenia. Probably has a lot to do with deficiencies in my personality, (touch of OC to name one), but I have always felt that the spiritual path if frought with pitfalls. And sometimes when you take a fall it can be difficult to right oneself. Like a moon shot - you get off half a degree, and its goodbye.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ego Wars: The Umpire Strikes Back
I'm reminded of the expression that it takes a thorn to remove a thorn. Yes, Maharishi's We're Number One! culture does cultivate the ego, but to the extent that it also cultivates enlightenment - liberation from the ego - by encouraging regular practice, then it's a case of a thorn removing a thorn. I thought this was a good subject for discussion and a good, if brief, discussion. Thanks, all! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: This was just a rap that occurred to me while walking my dogs this morning. But now it occurs to me, after having posted it, that how people reply to it will say a lot about how accurate a rap it was. Who will reply attempting to refute it and turn it into a formal debate? Who will relax and go for a drink at the Mos Eisley? Looking for a nibble to your post? Drawing your saber? I thought you fell down drunk at Mos and weren't interested in a response. Oh alright, if you insist. En Garde! Two funny things about this. First, Barry sets up debating and drinking at a bar as if they were mutually exclusive. But bar debates have a long tradition and honorable tradition; some of the very best debates take place in bars. Second, he sets up his thesis in such a way that if you disagree with it, you prove the thesis correct; the only way to refute it is to agree with it. Thus he's arranged things so that he gets to be right either way. snip But it goes back even further. This contentiousness that we see in Maharishi goes back to the founder of the holy tradition he claimed to be part of. Shankara was like this. He felt compelled to travel the length and breadth of India and challenge any other spiritual teacher who had a following to engage him in formal debate. If you look up Shankara on the Web, you'll find that his story is told by devotees as a long series of all these debates, and how he kicked ass in every one of them. Shankara passed this mindset down to his tradition. And Maharishi picked it up from him. And we picked it up from Maharishi. And a lot of us are still wearing the same old mindset, and acting out the same samskara, even if we no longer consider ourselves part of the TM tradition. Your entitled to your opinion about the relationship between teacher and student. Here's mine: The purpose of Shankara's tradition of debate was to remove doubt about the devotee's practice. Not only that, but such debates in Shankara's time were *themselves* a tradition; it wasn't just Shankara's predilection. Attending a philosophical debate between leading scholars was one of the entertainments of the time, a kind of intellectual spectator sport, like watching politicians debate on a TV talk show. (Obviously the quality has degenerated since Shankara's time. Folks were a lot smarter back then.) snip Many people on this forum seem to seek, more than anything else, *battle*. They like dueling. They actively seek out and attempt to provoke a formal debate, in which their ego can lay waste to the lesser ego of someone who dares to believe something different than they do. And so these debates occur. Barry needs to get out more. Debate is a feature of many such forums; it isn't peculiar to FFL or to those who have been involved in TM. Lots of people enjoy debating just for the intellectual exercise. It's a sport, but for the brain rather than the body. snip Get over it. There is no Umpire. No matter how rational or brilliant or eloquent an argument you make for what your ego believes and how it's right and your opponent's ego is wrong, neither God nor the Laws Of Nature are ever going to come running in with an official decision making your ego right. It's only Barry who seems to care whether there's an Umpire or not. The rest of us couldn't give a flying freak. We're just having fun. It's always going to be a tiny little ego trying to preserve its existence by considering its current View right and trying to make other Views wrong. News flash: It's human nature to want to be right. And Barry, of course, is no exception. Where he's exceptional is in his extreme fear of being *wrong*. That's why he doesn't enjoy debating. Projecting much? Do you believe no one should hold you to account, or have an opinion about what you say and therefore, you can say anything you want without consequences while you judge others and pretend you don't? Sounds like the demand of a spoiled child to me. A terrified spoiled child. I don't know who spoiled him, but they did a really good job of it. We're all gettin' pretty old around here, and IMO this acting out of
[FairfieldLife] Re: Saving Free Enterprise
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Similarly we have people in impoverished nations who believe they have to have lots of children so some will survive to take care of them in old age. Education and some retirement programs would solve the problem there. I recently heard the oceanographer Robert Ballard say that the way to manage overpopulation would be to empower women worldwide. He said the average age at which a female becomes a mother, worldwide, is 14. Let me say that again. Take the age at which all the mothers in the world first became mothers, and calculate the average age at which they bear their first child. Turns out that age is 14 years old. Ballard observed that if you could raise that age to 20-something, you could flatten the population curve pretty quickly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:41 PM, Peter wrote: ...theoretical discussions of how it works... It doesn't work. Nobody flys. There is no empirical phenomena to explain. How can you have a theoretical discussion about nothing? It's not about discussion Pete, it is about virally inseminating the web with the mind-virus that the Mahesh Effect is real. Wherever you search, that's the answer you come up with. Must be true. Or at very least the illusion appears true. And that's really all that matters. If you search for meditation and some health problem, what they want is for your search to bring up their name and their brand that they're selling. It must be true. Found it on the web. You''re not far off, I think. AN old friend of mine, a Unitarian-Universalist minister with no personal interest in TM, said he thought MMY wa trying to cause a paradigm shift in the world merely by talking up Yogic Flying so much. Lawson One thing the yogic flying meme has accomplished has been to reposition meditation in marketing terms. Before yogic flying, meditation had been equated with relaxation. After yogic flying, it was associated with hovering. You see it all the time in generic depictions of meditation: the person is sitting in a lotus position, hovering a few feet off the floor. These are images that have no association with Maharishi or the TM organization. For example: http://tinyurl.com/5ejwot Such a depiction suggests that meditation offers much more than mellowness, making it more desirable and justifying a higher instruction fee.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: On Nov 25, 2008, at 11:56 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: One thing the yogic flying meme has accomplished has been to reposition meditation in marketing terms. Before yogic flying, meditation had been equated with relaxation. After yogic flying, it was associated with hovering. You see it all the time in generic depictions of meditation: the person is sitting in a lotus position, hovering a few feet off the floor. These are images that have no association with Maharishi or the TM organization. For example: http://tinyurl.com/5ejwot Such a depiction suggests that meditation offers much more than mellowness, making it more desirable and justifying a higher instruction fee. The picture you linked to shows a standard motif used in Himalayan thankha or scroll paintings for enlightened beings, (accept of course for the guy they pasted in there :-)). You mean, it's standard practice to show someone levitating? Disregard the mountains and accouterments for the moment.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
Thom, I believe it's typical for newsgroup habitues to read only the posts of respected authors, passing over the writers who tend to disappoint. Is that reading style not practical for you for some reason? I can imagine many reasons why you may not want to read that way, but I'd rather read those reasons articulated by you, rather than generate them in my imagination. Thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tkrystofiak wrote: Vitriol, aggression, ridicule, backbiting, summary judgment, baiting, obsession, acting out.
[FairfieldLife] Questions for David Lynch: The Visionary
The New York Times Magazine Interview by DEBORAH SOLOMON Published: November 21, 2008 Full interview: http://tinyurl.com/5eymf2 Excerpts: Q: I hear you're starting an online series on transcendental meditation, based on your book Catching the Big Fish. Is the small screen a good format for discussing meditation? A: Any format is a good format for meditation. Every single person has within an ocean of pure vibrant consciousness. Every single human being can experience that infinite intelligence, infinite creativity, infinite happiness, infinite energy, infinite dynamic peace. Q: Tell us about your foundation. A: The David Lynch Foundation for Consciousness-Based Education and World Peace we raise money to give meditation to any student or school. There is a huge waiting list. Q: As a devotee of cultivated bliss, how do you explain the proclivity for twisted eroticism and dismembered body parts in your films? A: A filmmaker doesn't have to suffer to show suffering. You just have to understand it. You don't have to die to shoot a death scene. Full interview: http://tinyurl.com/5eymf2
[FairfieldLife] Re: Brother from another planet - some Ooga Booga on Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: My question is, Why do these people who talk for, channel, represent, or otherwise have aliens passing through them all write funny? It's like they all seem to use the same silly alphabet that Lou uses when channeling the Pleiaidians: ...he was asked âWho will be the next U.S. President?â He responded, âLincoln will once again occupy the White House.â He was then asked, âWho is Lincoln?â The response was, âObama.â If these guys/gals/things from space are so friggin' smart as to be able to talk to us real-time from a place that is so far away it takes *light* 440 of our years to get there, howcum they never learned to use our alphabet? They know stuff about our politicians that even the National Enquirer doesn't, they know about Obama's past lives, and about psychic and healing powers that even *he* doesn't know about, and yet they can spell for shit. Is it possible that all of this channeling we're seeing is the result of space retards talking through their counterparts here on Earth? They seem to have similar commands of English. It's a variation of the Charlie Chan phenomenon, isn't it? This, from a New York Times review: Chan, whose huge intellect mysteriously did not extend to an ability to master English articles (Joy in heart more desirable than bullet)... http://tinyurl.com/6yfdjl Deepak Chopra has remarked that people tend to perceive his Indian accent as denoting wisdom, even when his pronouncements may be quite mundane. Perhaps Chan and the Pleiadians are putting us on, grammatically, in order to reinforce their foreignness. One cannot be a prophet in one's own country, after all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
Funny. The Slate article I read today - http://www.slate.com/id/2204534/ - dealt with the fact that African-American voters were largely responsible for passing Proposition 8 because Blacks, more than European-Americans or Latinos, consider homosexuality to be a lifestyle choice, rather than inborn and immutable, and hence are less likely to accept it. From the article: The NBJC [the pro-gay National Black Justice Coalition] report notes that blacks are 'more likely than other groups to believe that homosexuality is wrong, that sexual orientation is a choice, and that sexual orientation can be changed.' Polls confirm this. So that's another take on Prop 8. As for preserving sex roles, I can go along with that premise, too, because I belive the Matriarchy is not only rising, but is the root cause of most of the social upheaval we see today, domestically and internationally. Sorry I can't back that up with statistics or good stories - it's just an opinion my wife and I share. Power is flowing to women, and it's freaking people out. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante wrote: The funny thing about the prop 8 passage is that the Mormon Church was so heavily promoting it, despite the Church's history of polygamy. It's a whole cultural and religious, and political package that is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. I just read a really interesting essay on Slate.com by Richard Thompson Ford, a law professor, about Prop 8's passage. He says he doesn't think it passed because of homophobia but rather because the folks (or many, or most of them) who voted for it wanted to preserve traditional male/female social roles. This would make sense in the Mormon context; polygamy--many wives, one husband--does preserve the social roles of men and women (and it does have a long tradition behind it, even if it never took hold in Western society). He notes that a majority in California are in favor of civil unions and other rights for gay people and don't seem to have much trouble accepting homosexuality per se. He writes: After all, traditional marriage isn't just analogous to sex discrimination--it *is* sex discrimination: Only men may marry women, and only women may marry men. Same-sex marriage would transform an institution that currently defines two distinctive sex roles--husband and wife--by replacing those different halves with one sex-neutral role--spouse. Sure, we could call two married men 'husbands' and two married women 'wives,' but the specific role for each sex that now defines marriage would be lost. Widespread opposition to same-sex marriage might reflect a desire to hang on to these distinctive sex roles rather than vicious anti-gay bigotry. I know some gay and lesbian couples do define each other as husband and wife; I don't know what the percentage is. But that doesn't make much difference in this context. He continues: By wistfully invoking the analogy to racism, same- sex marriage proponents risk misreading a large (and potentially movable) group of voters who care about sex difference more than about sexual orientation. I'm not sure how potentially movable these people are, but if it isn't homophobia that led them to vote for Prop 8, it really does suggest that those who want to legalize same-sex marriage need to take a different approach to promoting that goal. He writes: The combination of widespread opposition to same-sex marriage and equally widespread support for other gay rights is easier to understand. Gay rights in employment and civil unions don't require the elimination of longstanding and culturally potent sex roles. Same-sex marriage does. And while a lot of people reject the narrow and repressive sex roles of the past, many others long for the kind of meaningful gender identities that traditional marriage seems to offer. You might say that this shouldn't matter to anyone who's secure in his masculinity (or in her femininity). Fair enough, but what if you aren't secure? The sex roles of the moment are contested and in flux. And amid the uncertainty and anxiety, most people still think they matter. Even the feminist movement hasn't really tried to eliminate distinctive sex roles instead, it has struggled with how to make them more egalitarian and less constricting None of this justifies the opposition to same- sex marriage. But it does help to explain it. I wish voters had overcome their identity crises and supported gay marriage. But many same-sex marriage advocates have been talking past the people they need to convince: the large, moderate opposition that voted for sex difference, not homophobia. Dropping the oversimplified analogy between racism and homophobia would help same-sex marriage supporters make their case more effectively
[FairfieldLife] Re: Tuesday: The father of Repugnican dirty tricks on IPTV
I heard the documentary's director interviewed on the radio last weekend. Here are the blurb, URL and transcript: The Dirty South Lee Atwater became one of the most complicated and successful Republican political operatives in history by employing a triple threat; spin when you can, change the subject when you can't and if all else fails mine the voters' resentment, and fear, usually of blacks. Stefan Forbes, director of Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story, explains the dark legacy of Atwater's Southern strategy. http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2008/11/07/07 BOB GARFIELD: This is On the Media. I'm Bob Garfield. BROOKE GLADSTONE: And I'm Brooke Gladstone. In the history of U.S. politics, it's hard to find a more complicated and influential powerbroker than Lee Atwater. A son of South Carolina, he played blues guitar and politics from an early age and rose to become the wunderkind campaign strategist for such notables as Strom Thurmond, Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush, who eventually made Atwater head of the Republican National Committee. His formula was simple spin when you can, change the subject when you can't, and if all else fails, mine the voters' resentment and fear, especially of black people. Stefan Forbes is the director of a new documentary, Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story. He says Atwater played brilliantly on the smoldering rage of many Southern whites towards the secular, the elite and the intellectual, people who looked down on them. Atwater played that tune so well, he even made it work for the WASPY, wealthy, Northern George Herbert Walker Bush. STEFAN FORBES: And he realized that they could take the party of the rich, of corporations, and turn it into the party of the working man. And he did it brilliantly, by putting Bush Sr. into a cowboy hat, into cowboy boots with a big Texas flag on the side and having him eat pork rinds. He singlehandedly pretty much [LAUGHS] created the Bush dynasty, was a mentor to Karl Rove and taught W. how to campaign. Even from his grave he's been winning elections for the Republican Party. BROOKE GLADSTONE: He singlehandedly created George Herbert Walker Bush. How did he get to him, to begin with? STEFAN FORBES: It's an amazing story. Back in 1972, they have an obscure guy [LAUGHS] running for chairman of the College Republicans from Utah. His name's Karl Rove. Atwater's his campaign manager, and they lose. But Atwater won't accept defeat. They start throwing out ballots, challenging people's right to vote. It gets thrown all the way up the chain to the chairman of the Republican Party, George H. W. Bush, who sees these two hard-knuckled young operatives and gives them the election. And right there, Karl Rove learns from Lee Atwater how to win an election. BROOKE GLADSTONE: And Rove worked with Atwater on Vice-President Bush's 1988 campaign against Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis. At that point, Bush was knee deep in the Iran Contra scandal. He was lagging in the polls. And then Atwater changed the subject with two political ads. The first targeted a Massachusetts prison furlough program, by highlighting a black convict that we all still remember, named Willie Horton. STEFAN FORBES: It's incredible. Back in '88, in that campaign, Ronald Reagan has literally sold arms to terrorists and lied about it on national TV. Atwater was able to change the subject. He found a fairly irrelevant convict that was out on parole, Willie Horton, and made him the focus of that entire campaign. And his own party laughed at him. [CLIP]: ANNOUNCER: His revolving-door prison policy gave weekend furloughs to first degree murderers not eligible for parole. While out, many committed other crimes, like kidnapping and rape. [END CLIP] STEFAN FORBES: Atwater was able to change the subject because he realized that the media is often like a school of fish. They're so anxious to chase the story and the prevailing narrative, that an operative like Atwater is able to use them as an echo chamber. You put something out there that's sticky, you know, the face of this scowling killer, and it can really swamp the whole dialogue on television. BROOKE GLADSTONE: So that first ad peddled fear. The second notorious ad of that campaign also relied on imagery, some frankly silly footage of Dukakis riding in a tank, to peddle a lie. [CLIP]: [SOUNDS OF TANK AND AIRCRAFT IN BACKGROUND] ANNOUNCER: Michael Dukakis has opposed virtually every defense system we developed. He opposed new aircraft carriers. He opposed anti-satellite weapons. He opposed four missile systems, including the Pershing II missile deployment. Dukakis opposed the Stealth Bomber and a ground emergency warning system - [END CLIP] STEFAN FORBES: Perception is reality. He was a governor. He hadn't voted on any of those weapon systems. But Atwater realized you find a powerful, sticky image that the media can't resist, of this guy looking goofy in a tank helmet, and that will dwarf the
[FairfieldLife] Jesus memes (was Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk wrote: I was able to procure a digital copy for your consideration: [[Jesus+Hard.jpg]] I was unable to view this ^ image on the web interface of Yahoo! Groups, so I googled it and found a trove of Jesus imagery. With apologies to John and the rest of the disciples, I offer this link to all who believe Jesus can take a joke: http://tinyurl.com/5944dx
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John wrote: the fact remains that Proposition 8 passed. If you really want to fight this out, you can sue the state of California in the courts. I believe it will eventually be resolved in the US Supreme Court in favor of Constitutional equal right for everyone. The process has already begun. There was a time when bigots like you were also against inter-racial marriage. I'd be curious to see a breakdown of civil rights that have been protected via votes and civil rights that have been protected via court orders. For example, it took a combination of Constitutional amendments and legislation to give African-Americans the vote. Women got the vote via Constitutional amendment alone. What about sex ordinances - states used to have all sorts of laws proscribing sex practices. Did those go away via legislation, or were they found unconstitutional? And inter-racial marriage - that must have been found Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)[1], was a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court declared Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute, the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, unconstitutional, thereby overturning Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia That's one example. Thanks! For all the time we in this forum spend poking holes in Maharishi's teachings, I've yet to abandon his theory of there being such a thing as collective consciousness. (It helps that Jung, Campbell and others promote the same idea.) Because I believe in collective consciousness, I believe this nascent movement to make gay marriage legal is an expression of the life force that arises from consciousness. (That, as opposed to gay marriage being an evil force that's attacking the purity of life the way heat is drawn to cold, which is another (less propounded) teaching of MMY.) Proposition 8 passed in California. Gay marriage is illegal there, and in what - 49 other states? So obviously collective consciousness is not ripe for gay marriage. But I have to think gay marriage is a generation away from being accepted. Maybe two generations. It won't go away. Sometimes collective consciousness expresses itself via legislation, sometimes via Constitutional amendments (which are voted upon by the public), and sometimes via court decisions. I imagine it's more likely that gay marriage will be legalized via court decisions before it's legalized via votes. Conservatives hate it when courts decree social changes. They've wanted such things as equal rights for minorities and freedom of choice for pregnant women to be granted, if they are to be granted at all, by popular vote, rather than by court decree. I can see their point. But I also see an irony here. Conservatives tend to be more authority-oriented than progressives. That is, conservatives have been found to be more inclined than others to give orders or take orders, one or the other. Yet when it comes to social change, they resent taking orders from courts. I guess this is where higher authorities come in, such as church teachings and their own revulsion at the thought of butt sex. When I read James Dickey's Deliverance and saw the movie, I didn't question that the queer hillbillies deserved to die for sexually assaulting the suburban canoers. In the movie, when it appeared that Jon Voight's character was going to have to take that cracker's dick in his mouth, I was repulsed as much as I could possibly be. I was relieved and triumphant when Burt Reynold's character killed the rapist by firing two arrows into his chest. But now, in my more mellow middle age, I think, What would Jesus do? I believe Jesus would suck the cracker's dick, and spare his life.
[FairfieldLife] Book recommendation: The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid
Iowans, American Baby Boomers and Bill Bryson fans will want to read or listen to his memoir, The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid. He writes about growing up on Des Moines in the 1950s and early '60s. In addition to the other humorists to which he's compared below - Garrison Keillor and Dave Barry among them - I have to add James Thurber. It's good stuff. I'm listening to him read the book. His accent is a mix of the hard R's of the Midwest with the soft vowels he picked up upon living in England for 20 years. The two accents curdle, like pouring lemon juice into milk, and the effect adds to the humor. Humor also arises from juxtaposing outrageous exaggerations with British understatement. Here's the blurb from the publisher's website: http://tinyurl.com/4w6o8m Bill Bryson was born in the middle of the American century1951in the middle of the United StatesDes Moines, Iowain the middle of the largest generation in American historythe baby boomers. As one of the best and funniest writers alive, he is perfectly positioned to mine his memories of a totally all-American childhood for 24-carat memoir gold. Like millions of his generational peers, Bill Bryson grew up with a rich fantasy life as a superhero. In his case, he ran around his house and neighborhood with an old football jersey with a thunderbolt on it and a towel about his neck that served as his cape, leaping tall buildings in a single bound and vanquishing awful evildoers (and morons)in his headas The Thunderbolt Kid. Using this persona as a springboard, Bill Bryson re-creates the life of his family and his native city in the 1950s in all its transcendent normalitya life at once completely familiar to us all and as far away and unreachable as another galaxy. It was, he reminds us, a happy time, when automobiles and televisions and appliances (not to mention nuclear weapons) grew larger and more numerous with each passing year, and DDT, cigarettes, and the fallout from atmospheric testing were considered harmless or even good for you. He brings us into the life of his loving but eccentric family, including affectionate portraits of his father, a gifted sportswriter for the local paper and dedicated practitioner of isometric exercises, and OF his mother, whose job as the home furnishing editor for the same paper left her little time for practicing the domestic arts at home. The many readers of Bill Bryson's earlier classic, A Walk in the Woods, will greet the reappearance in these pages of the immortal Stephen Katz, seen hijacking literally boxcar loads of beer. He is joined in the Bryson gallery of immortal characters by the demonically clever Willoughby brothers, who apply their scientific skills and can-do attitude to gleefully destructive ends. Warm and laugh-out-loud funny, and full of his inimitable, pitch-perfect observations, The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid is as wondrous a book as Bill Bryson has ever written. It will enchant anyone who has ever been young. Praise Bill Bryson's laugh-out-loud pilgrimage through his Fifties childhood in heartland America is a national treasure. It's full of insights, wit, and wicked adolescent fantasies. Tom Brokaw Bryson is unparalleled in his ability to cut a culture off at the knees in a way that is so humorous and so affectionate that those being ridiculed are laughing too hard to take offense. The Wall Street Journal A cross between de Tocqueville and Dave Barry, Bryson writes about America in a way that's both trenchantly observant and pound-on-the-floor, snort-root-beer-out-of-your-nose funny. San Franciso Examiner Bill Bryson could write an essay about dryer lint or fever reducers and still make us laugh out loud. Chicago Sun-Times Bryson is great company a lumbering, droll, neatnik intellectual who comes off as equal parts Garrison Keillor, Michael Kinsley, and Dave Barry. http://tinyurl.com/4w6o8m
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam wrote: snip When I read James Dickey's Deliverance and saw the movie, I didn't question that the queer hillbillies deserved to die for sexually assaulting the suburban canoers. Minor quibble, FWIW (I didn't read the book, but I did see the movie): I'm not sure the hillbillies were queer. Male-on-male rape has a very long history as a means of dominance, a way to humiliate and subjugate males over whom one has power by reducing them to the status of women. Happens in prisons all the time. Yes, there are homosexual relationships, but in many cases it's just a matter of dominance of one straight man by another. The men of Sodom who threatened Lot's visitors with rape weren't homosexual either. They wanted to teach the visitors a lesson, that they couldn't just stroll in and demand hospitality from the Sodomites. I don't think that changes your WWJD conclusion any, but I just thought I'd mention it... !! Of course. Rape is violence, not sexual desire, no matter who's being raped. D'oh. I had never considered this angle. I've never had the impulse. I've never gotten a woody at the prospect of dominating another man. But this must be the dynamic at play when one man dismisses another by saying, You can suck my dick. I had heard of men bitching up in prison, but understood it to be an adaption to the absence of women, not an exercise of dominance. But both things could happen in prison, couldn't they? - rape as dominance, and bitching up as an outlet for sexual and emotional desire. I wonder if gay sex makes so many hetero men squeamish because they associate it with aggression. For all my talk of being pro-gay- marriage, I get uncomfortable when hit upon by a man. Sure, some women are uncomfortable too, but many take it in stride or even enjoy the attention. http://tinyurl.com/6kw6tg
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues wrote: Oh, yeah, and I agree with Turq that you have been laying down some very interesting writing. Well, thank you very kindly indeed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: When I read James Dickey's Deliverance and saw the movie, I didn't question that the queer hillbillies deserved to die for sexually assaulting the suburban canoers. In the movie, when it appeared that Jon Voight's character was going to have to take that cracker's dick in his mouth, I was repulsed as much as I could possibly be. I was relieved and triumphant when Burt Reynold's character killed the rapist by firing two arrows into his chest. But now, in my more mellow middle age, I think, What would Jesus do? I believe Jesus would suck the cracker's dick, and spare his life. Although well written as a whole, your last sentence is misguided to say the least. You could be right. Jesus may have opted for the alternative - to take a shotgun blast to the head. Gethsemane notwithstanding, He was a good sport about allowing himself to be sacrificed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John wrote: the fact remains that Proposition 8 passed. If you really want to fight this out, you can sue the state of California in the courts. I believe it will eventually be resolved in the US Supreme Court in favor of Constitutional equal right for everyone. The process has already begun. There was a time when bigots like you were also against inter-racial marriage. Conservatives tend to get upset when courts determine the legality of acts the conservatives don't like, but then again, conservatives have historically been on the losing side of civil rights issues. I'd be curious to see a breakdown of civil rights that have been protected via votes and civil rights that have been protected via court orders. For example, it took a combination of Constitutional amendments and legislation to give African-Americans the vote. Women got the vote via Constitutional amendment alone. What about sex ordinances - states used to have all sorts of laws proscribing sex practices. Did those go away via legislation, or were they found unconstitutional? And inter-racial marriage - that must have been found unconstitutional too, right?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dog training and its relationship to FFL
Allow me to reinforce Barry's suggestion with this amusing and relevant article that was very popular in the New York Times not long ago: http://tinyurl.com/6d6cjb What Shamu Taught Me About a Happy Marriage By AMY SUTHERLAND Published: June 25, 2006 AS I wash dishes at the kitchen sink, my husband paces behind me, irritated. Have you seen my keys? he snarls, then huffs out a loud sigh and stomps from the room with our dog, Dixie, at his heels, anxious over her favorite human's upset. In the past I would have been right behind Dixie. I would have turned off the faucet and joined the hunt while trying to soothe my husband with bromides like, Don't worry, they'll turn up. But that only made him angrier, and a simple case of missing keys soon would become a full-blown angst-ridden drama starring the two of us and our poor nervous dog. Now, I focus on the wet dish in my hands. I don't turn around. I don't say a word. I'm using a technique I learned from a dolphin trainer. Read the rest at http://tinyurl.com/6d6cjb . It's a classic! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Recently a friend who was visiting from Paris stayed at my house, and accompanied me when I was walking my dogs. Since she trains dogs for a living, when she offered some useful criticism, I paid attention. And *attention* was the nature of the advice she gave me. She pointed out that I tended to pay the most atten- tion to the dogs when they were doing something wrong (what she called Bad dog! syndrome), whereas I often didn't pay as much attention to them and stoke them when they were doing something right. I've been paying...uh... attention to her advice ever since, and it has made a remarkable difference in the overall comportment of my furry friends. So I might pass along the same advice to readers of FFL who find themselves troubled by the Troll Factor. What are trolls *after*? What are they *looking for*? Duh. Attention. And when you give it to them by overreacting to one of their posts that are calculated *to* elicit an overreac- tion response, you are in effect REINFORCING that bad dog behavior. They poke and prod, you react, they get the attention they were looking for. Therefore they repeat the behavior. Another approach, for those who feel that those amongst us that they have decided are trolls, but who still feel that there might be someone in there to communicate with, is to reply to them ONLY when they do something right, something that deserves to be reinforced. If, instead of being insulting, they actually post some- thing of value, something that strikes a resonance with you, reply and attempt to pursue that thread, *in the spirit in which it was started*. The minute that the troll tries to turn things nasty or personally insulting, end your participation in the thread, and don't reply to them again until they post something else of a positive nature. Heck, it's worth a try. Nothing else has worked.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
I don't consider myself very adept at perceiving the underlying motivations of people, but the arguments against gay marriage are so transparently Ick Factor-motivated that I'm surprised the arguments are not laughed off as just that - a bias against sex that makes them squeamish. I guess most heterosexuals get an ick response at the thought of gay sex, so they go along with specious reasoning like that John articulates below. It reminds me of the tortured arguments of the Dred Scott decisions of the 1850s, when all but one of the Justices went to extreme lengths to justify their decision that Africans were not fully human. It's funny to read queers' responses to thoughts of straight sex. They get creeped out just thinking about stuff we heterosexuals love. I think it was Pauline Kael who observed that there are no generally agreed-upon classics in the realm of porno movies - no Casablancas or It Happened One Nights - because sex is too personal and idiosyncratic for a wide swath of society to agree on what turns them on. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: snip IMO, Proposition 8 is trying to address the religious belief of citizens relating to the institution of marriage. The government has no business addressing the religious beliefs of citizens. That's what churches are for. Allowing same-sex marriages does not mean requiring churches to perform them (although a lot of the promotion for Prop. 8 pretended it would in order to scare people into voting for it). They are attempting to define the essential fabric of society, and that is the family. That starts with the man and the woman who can create children for the continuation of mankind and the American way of life. As I've already pointed out, not all straight marriages create children; and gay couples are perfectly able to *nurture* children for the continuation of [hu]mankind and the American [as well as any other] way of life] just as well as straight couples. Proposition 8 is a repudiation of the concept that marriage is solely for sexual indulgence and sensual gratification. For gays, this is essentially the basis of their union Absolute, total bullshit. Both gays and straights can and do have all the sexual indulgence they want whether they're married or not, so obviously that isn't why they want to get married. Gay people fall in love just like straight people do. They want to marry to make a formal commitment to each other. Sex is no more (and no less) the basis of their unions than it is for straight people. Support for Prop. 8 is grounded in bigotry, and it fosters discrimination. Not allowing gays to marry brands them as second-class citizens--and this is exactly what Prop. 8 proponents want to accomplish. Shame on them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A prediction on the heels of the apparent win of Prop 8
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: I think it was Pauline Kael who observed that there are no generally agreed-upon classics in the realm of porno movies - no Casablancas or It Happened One Nights - because sex is too personal and idiosyncratic for a wide swath of society to agree on what turns them on. That is definitely an interesting insight. Thanks for passing it along. Glad you like it. Don't quote it as Kael's, though. Coulda been some other New Yorker movie reviewer.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dog training and its relationship to FFL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: On Nov 6, 2008, at 9:46 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: What Shamu Taught Me About a Happy Marriage By AMY SUTHERLAND I thought Shamu was the killer-whale from Sea World. So it is! Did you follow the link to the article? It's brief and funny. http://tinyurl.com/6d6cjb
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mr. UnElectable just won...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Nobody likes machine politics, but I'll take the Clinton machine over the Obama machine any day. The latter is already corrupt after less than two years. How so, Judy? How is the Obama organization corrupt? Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mr. UnElectable just won...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Maybe the office itself will change him; maybe the faith the voters have invested in him will compel him to rise above his own limitations. His restrained, solemn, almost withdrawn demeanor during his victory speech suggested to me that he was coming to grips with what had just happened in a new way and beginning to feel the full extent of the awsome, terrifying responsibility that has settled on his shoulders. His demeanor seemed in keeping with his personality, and with his desire not to alienate the other side, as well as the awesome task ahead. But your remarks makes me think of a teaching by an MIU classmate whose latest book is called Extreme Leadership. Steve Farber worked with Tom Peters before opening his own management consultancy and public speaking practice. His latest book has a secton on the importance of the OS!M, which is the moment when you realize that you've undertaken something so awesome and extreme that you can hardly believe what you've done. Steve gives the example of tobogganing or luging down a steep, icy slope. You slip over the crest and start your descent, and at that moment, you think, Oh shit! That's the Oh Shit! Moment, or OS!M for short. Steve's point is that extreme leadership demands these OS!Ms. He writes about them here: http://www.stevefarber.com/read/#pursue That expression on Obama's face last night - that acceptance speech that George Stephanopoulos said was the most subdued he'd ever seen - may have been influenced by his own OS!M. I've never wished anybody well so hard in my life. I know what you mean.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Short, fun op-ed in the NY Times
--- Sal Sunshine wrote: On Oct 29, 2008, at 7:54 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote: FLY ME TO THE DEITY By TUNKU VARADARAJAN FLY ME TO THE MOON By FRANK SINATRA Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars... Sal Fly Me to the Moon (In Other Words) was written by Bart Howard. Peggy Lee and Frank Sinatra had hits with it. That's why it's associated with Sinatra. http://tinyurl.com/58owqu
[FairfieldLife] Short, fun op-ed in the NY Times
anyone who has been to India will have noted also its modernity of tradition. ... the ability of devout Hindus ... to see no disharmony between ancient Vedic beliefs and contemporary scientific practice. http://tinyurl.com/6gepgg FLY ME TO THE DEITY By TUNKU VARADARAJAN Published: October 28, 2008 AN unmanned spacecraft from India that most worldly and yet otherworldly of nations is on its way to the moon. For the first time since man and his rockets began trespassing on outer space, a vessel has gone up from a country whose people actually regard the moon as a god. The Chandrayaan (or moon craft) is the closest India has got to the moon since the epic Hindu sage, Narada, tried to reach it on a ladder of considerable (but insufficient) length as my grandmother's bedtime version of events would have it. So think of this as a modern Indian pilgrimage to the moon. As it happens, a week before the launching, millions of Hindu women embarked on a customary daylong fast, broken at night on the first sighting of the moon's reflection in a bowl of oil. (This fast is done to ensure a husband's welfare.) But reverence for the moon is not confined to traditional Indian housewives: The Web site of the Indian Space Research Organization the body that launched the Chandrayaan includes a verse from the Rig Veda, a sacred Hindu text that dates back some 4,000 years: O Moon! We should be able to know you through our intellect,/ You enlighten us through the right path. One is tempted, in all this, to dwell on the seeming contradiction between religion and science, between reason and superstition. And yet, anyone who has been to India will have noted also its modernity of tradition. The phrase, borrowed from the political scientists Lloyd and Susanne Rudolph, might explain the ability of devout Hindus many of them, no doubt, rocket scientists to see no disharmony between ancient Vedic beliefs and contemporary scientific practice. The Hindu astrological system is predicated on lunar movements: so the moon is a big deal in astrology-obsessed India. That said, the genius of modern Hinduism lies in its comfort with, and imperviousness to, science. A friend tells me of an episode from his childhood in Varanasi, the sacred Hindu city. Days after Apollo 11 landed on the moon, a model of the lunar module was placed in a courtyard of the most venerable temple in the city. The Hindu faithful were hailing man-on-the-moon; there was no suggestion that the Americans had committed sacrilege. (Here, I might add with a caveat against exaggeration that science sometimes struggles to co-exist with faith in the United States in ways that would disconcert many Indians.) Of course, the Chandrayaan is also a grand political gesture space exploration in the service of national pride. This kind of excursion may provoke yawns at NASA, but judging from round-the-clock local coverage it has received, the mission has clearly inflamed the imagination and ambition of Indians. Yes, even moon-worshipping ones. Tunku Varadarajan, a professor of business at New York University and a research fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, is the opinion editor at Forbes.com. http://tinyurl.com/6gepgg
[FairfieldLife] Re: political humor
Hi, Paul! The URL was lacking hyphens. Should be this: http://minimovie.com/film-128454-Dancing-with-the-political-stars or http://tinyurl.com/3pa5ax Kind of biased toward the Democrats, if you ask me! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, paultrunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: These are funny regardless which side of the fence you are on. Even if you are sitting on the fence. palinaspresident.com (make sure you scroll over the light switch among the other items) http://minimovie.com/film-128454-Dancing With the Political Stars
[FairfieldLife] Re: Iowans: Vote early or not?
I would vote early if I lived in a metropolitan area. I'd be more confident my vote would be counted. But here in the sticks, I love going to our little 19-century meetinghouse, seeing all the familiar people, completing my paper ballot in pencil, and dropping it in the ballot box under the watchful eye of our town moderator. Then I buy some baked goods being sold to raise funds for our local artillery company. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lafayette_Artillery_Company It's a real Jimmy-Stewart-in-New-England experience that I dearly love. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I vote Yes to early voting! I voted on Friday. I had vacillated for some time over this decision, and admit to feeling a bit worried when I went in. However, the process left me feeling reassured, and glad to have banked my vote. When filling out the affidavit envelope, I was unsure about what to put down for middle name - Jo or J. or just leave blank, since I sometimes do one or the other of these. And of course, we've all heard of states who will throw out your ballot if the way you sign in to vote differs from your DMV signature, etc. So I asked Cindy McCan (former children's librarian at FF Public Library), who was running the election operation in the Courthouse lobby. She explained that she would use the last name, birth date, and ID no. (your choice of drivers' license or last 4 digits of SSN) to check for a match on her computer, and if there were any problem she would tell me. Otherwise, I could rest easy my ballot had been accepted and would not be challenged. This is definitely better than mailing in a ballot, in case you should make a mistake in how you fill out or package the 3 envelopes (inner secrecy envelope goes inside affidavit envelope, which then goes inside the outer postal service envelope). All early vote ballots are treated as absentee ballots and will be opened and counted on Nov. 4. I observed the Jefferson County Absentee Ballot committee at work in 2006, and was very impressed with their diligence and efficiency. Susan Rubis, Rebecca Reynolds, and 3 Republican senior citizens were on the committee. Another advantage to early voting is that once you have voted, that fact is recorded in the VAN (voter action network) made available to the campaigns. SO they will stop calling you as part of their GOTV effort. Perhaps best, once you've voted, you are free to spend all of Election Day doing something else, like poll-watching or phoning or whatever to help make the day a success. So my advice is, go ahead and vote early! Fairfield Times and Places: Court House 8AM to 4:30 PM Mon to Fri MUM Campus: Tues Oct 21, 9:30 AM to 3:30 PM Argiro Student Center Fairfield High School: Tues Oct 14, 9 AM to 3 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: URGENT MESSAGE FROM RAJA HAGELIN
I don't think there's much question that there's a phase transition in effect. The question seems to be, What effect do the TM organization's super radiance and pundit ceremonies have on that transition? I can hardly fault people for running under the mountain with their sticks. http://www.artoflegendindia.com/details/PAAD026 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Invincible America [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://invincibleamerica.org/ An Open Letter to the Yogic Flyers of the Nation from the Raja of Invincible America October 12, 2008 Dear Fellow Yogic Flyers, As everyone surely knows, America-and our entire, deeply interconnected world family-are in the midst of an historic global phase transition. The financial markets-and the entire world economy-are in upheaval. The press often asks me about the cause of the stock market meltdown, despite our consistently high numbers in the Domes-given that we had taken credit for the record market highs just one year ago. The rise of coherence has fueled a long-overdue purification in national life
[FairfieldLife] Re: Nine Days and the economic transformation
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: I asked a TM teacher why they never stuck to anything and just went along with it all and he said that MMY could sense natural law changing and could adjust the plans accordingly. In the mid-1990s I asked a Purusha member why we were placing in the Post-Dispatch one of those full-page, us-talking-to- ourselves newspaper ads about quantum physics and consciousness. He shrugged and said, It's just ghee on the fire, as if to say, It appears to be a waste, but it's supposed to do some good, so I do it. I thought that was a pretty good attitude. It also showed why I would never have been happy on Purusha.
