[FairfieldLife] RE: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta
Barry sez: I will reply to this, because for once I agree with Judy. :-) WOW, I think we should celebrate this. Maybe a meeting is in place. Paris? http://www.hulkshare.com/nuchi/nuchi-ft-troy-ave-celebration-master ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, the Steinbot wrote: > > FWIW, I find this absolutely hilarious, all the way to the > very top (not just you guys), the most exalted scholarship > and experience and holiness--and it's the same damn > bickering and squabbling as on lowly, ignorant FFL. I will reply to this, because for once I agree with Judy. :-) I've told this story before, but it's apropos, so I'll tell it again. Back in the day, in Boulder, CO, a bunch of folks organized what they called "Holy Man Jams." They would invite supposed holy men -- ALL of them recog- nized (at least by their followers) as fully enlightened, many of them famous within the American spiritual community -- to appear onstage together and debate/ discuss things. ALL of these gathering devolved into petty ego arguments within minutes of them starting. It was a zoo. I mean, you had guys onstage (mainly guys, with only a few women, which was more a reflection of the times than sexism) -- some of them wearing white dhotis, some of them wearing the ochre robes of Buddhist monks, some in Western clerical garb, and some in "street clothes" -- yelling at each other at the top of their lungs over points of OPINION that each of them claimed they knew the "truth" about. Blows were occasionally exchanged. Really. I've seen the same thing over the years inside spiritual orgs, as the teacher-in-charge dissed other "competing" teachers and put them down. You *certainly* saw this with Maharishi. Bottom line seems to be just as Judy expressed it -- it's bickering all the way down. What, after all, is the real difference between a bunch of old women having petty ego-arguments over personalities on FFL, a bunch of similarly old men having petty ego-arguments on FFL about how much they "know" and how little the other person "knows," and these supposed "holy men?" Where there are people, there are egos. And egos "act out."
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Bullshit - Holier than Thou
Bagunnara, Ravi ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: I had to come out of lurkdom to thank you for this beautiful video dear Seraphita. I have long railed against Gandhi, Teresa and Dolly Lama and I totally enjoyed this video, it is a good summary of these three pseudo-spiritual icons. That Gandhi was sexually perverted and slept with girls was a well known fact to me in India and my generation had no fascination for Gandhi. So I was quite baffled by the adoration of Gandhi by liberals and I know I pissed off quite a few with my statements on Gandhi. I recently had a chance to read this article on the Independent - enjoy. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/thrill-of-the-chaste-the-truth-about-gandhis-sex-life-1937411.html http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/thrill-of-the-chaste-the-truth-about-gandhis-sex-life-1937411.html Ravi. HI RAVI, GREAT TO HEAR FROM YOU! On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:25 PM, mailto:s3raphita@...> wrote: Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi and the Dalai Lama get the Penn and Teller treatment in this hilarious and foul-mouthed rant. http://tinyurl.com/nv68blw http://tinyurl.com/nv68blw
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta
Ah, okay, it's quoted there a little lower.. but I had meant Marshy, the Ramana, and with 'they' the authors of the blog and Empty quoting it. Obviously, Michaels reference was to something else Barry wrote. I didn't get this (just get it now) :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Who's "they," iranitea? That post was from Barry. > > who did Marshy diss? > Nobody, Michael, they are just making it up. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: who did Marshy diss? On Thu, 10/17/13, TurquoiseB mailto:turquoiseb@...> wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, October 17, 2013, 6:08 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, the Steinbot wrote: > > FWIW, I find this absolutely hilarious, all the way to the > very top (not just you guys), the most exalted scholarship > and experience and holiness--and it's the same damn > bickering and squabbling as on lowly, ignorant FFL. I will reply to this, because for once I agree with Judy. :-) I've told this story before, but it's apropos, so I'll tell it again. Back in the day, in Boulder, CO, a bunch of folks organized what they called "Holy Man Jams." They would invite supposed holy men -- ALL of them recog- nized (at least by their followers) as fully enlightened, many of them famous within the American spiritual community -- to appear onstage together and debate/ discuss things. ALL of these gathering devolved into petty ego arguments within minutes of them starting. It was a zoo. I mean, you had guys onstage (mainly guys, with only a few women, which was more a reflection of the times than sexism) -- some of them wearing white dhotis, some of them wearing the ochre robes of Buddhist monks, some in Western clerical garb, and some in "street clothes" -- yelling at each other at the top of their lungs over points of OPINION that each of them claimed they knew the "truth" about. Blows were occasionally exchanged. Really. I've seen the same thing over the years inside spiritual orgs, as the teacher-in-charge dissed other "competing" teachers and put them down. You *certainly* saw this with Maharishi. Bottom line seems to be just as Judy expressed it -- it's bickering all the way down. What, after all, is the real difference between a bunch of old women having petty ego-arguments over personalities on FFL, a bunch of similarly old men having petty ego-arguments on FFL about how much they "know" and how little the other person "knows," and these supposed "holy men?" Where there are people, there are egos. And egos "act out."
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta
who did Marshy diss? Nobody, Michael, they are just making it up. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: who did Marshy diss? On Thu, 10/17/13, TurquoiseB mailto:turquoiseb@...> wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, October 17, 2013, 6:08 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, the Steinbot wrote: > > FWIW, I find this absolutely hilarious, all the way to the > very top (not just you guys), the most exalted scholarship > and experience and holiness--and it's the same damn > bickering and squabbling as on lowly, ignorant FFL. I will reply to this, because for once I agree with Judy. :-) I've told this story before, but it's apropos, so I'll tell it again. Back in the day, in Boulder, CO, a bunch of folks organized what they called "Holy Man Jams." They would invite supposed holy men -- ALL of them recog- nized (at least by their followers) as fully enlightened, many of them famous within the American spiritual community -- to appear onstage together and debate/ discuss things. ALL of these gathering devolved into petty ego arguments within minutes of them starting. It was a zoo. I mean, you had guys onstage (mainly guys, with only a few women, which was more a reflection of the times than sexism) -- some of them wearing white dhotis, some of them wearing the ochre robes of Buddhist monks, some in Western clerical garb, and some in "street clothes" -- yelling at each other at the top of their lungs over points of OPINION that each of them claimed they knew the "truth" about. Blows were occasionally exchanged. Really. I've seen the same thing over the years inside spiritual orgs, as the teacher-in-charge dissed other "competing" teachers and put them down. You *certainly* saw this with Maharishi. Bottom line seems to be just as Judy expressed it -- it's bickering all the way down. What, after all, is the real difference between a bunch of old women having petty ego-arguments over personalities on FFL, a bunch of similarly old men having petty ego-arguments on FFL about how much they "know" and how little the other person "knows," and these supposed "holy men?" Where there are people, there are egos. And egos "act out."
[FairfieldLife] RE: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta
Emptyji, I was away just for a few days, but I'm still busy in general, but I'm back now... I was actually not thinking of the first article in the blog, where Swartz is only mentioned, but I was more relating to this one http://chi-ting.blogspot.de/2010/11/heres-jimmy.html http://chi-ting.blogspot.de/2010/11/heres-jimmy.html called 'Here's Jimmy..' Jimmy rants about all the Neo-Advaitin Satsang scene, and if you read the article, you'll see that 'Kevin' (it's just a pseudonym of my friend to write satirical about things going on in Tiru, which has quite the scene with all the influx of Papaji disciples) actually agrees to a great part with Swartz, but , well you read it yourself. I read this article (I don't know the man really), and then clicked on the Swartz tag, and the first article, is actually about some kind of philosophic issue between Advaita and Buddhism, and was largely written by my friends girlfriend, who is the more intellectual one, and has experiences with both Hindu and Tibetan masters, and is also very familiar with the scene in Tiru, having had her master there. This article is something not really relating to our issue at all, as I said, I was in a hurry, and again, even the article I link to above is satirical, so you have to take it with a grain of salt. Regarding my use of the term 'enlightenment' - well it is in response to the article you posted and fully quoted, dumping Ganapati Muni - you see the argument here was, he didn't quite get enlightened, because he couldn't abandon his tantric world view, and somehow had only managed to infiltrate his philosophy into some books, still sold at the ashram, while the newer books were 'right' - at the same time dumping on Aurobindo! You just take the arguments as you need it. With regard to Non-Ramana-TB's, they miss N'lightenment, because they are distracted by wanting Siddhis or powers. With Ramana TB ashramites like Swartz though, big E is not an issue, cause there's is nor path at all, we are already that, just somebody has to tell you. This is what we call circular logic. If everything is so simple, and everything is just perfect as it is, why is there a need to talk about this at all? Why even satsangs to attend, books to read, there is no path, right? Now that's Neo-Advaita. Swartz typically is a Neo-Advaitin dressed up as a traditionalist. To me all the arguments you cite of him, are phony. What Swartz misses is, that in traditional Advaita, there are two types of knowledge, higher and lower. Traditionally, the lower knowledge is the Veda, the Higher is the Vedanta, the end of the Veda. Now you, and he juxtaposes yoga/meditation to Vedanta. Wrong, according to tradition you have to go through the lower knowledge, in olden times the vedic rituals, so that you are purified enough, to receive the higher knowledge, the Vedanta. In Shankaras times, only Brahmins were entitled to study the Vedanta, this is the reason why Maharishi never became a Swami, he wasn't a Brahmin. So, for the general people, as they are not allowed to even study the vedas, this lower, purificatory knowldege has been substituted by bhakti, tantra, and yoga. Then after that the higher knowledge comes, the mahavakhyas and all that. Even there are different levels in Kevala Advaita. In Ramanas method, people still meditate, they do atma vichara. That's not yet the highest really. Ramana also told many people that they still could do japa, if they can't do atma-vichara yet. If you ask a traditionalist like Dayananda, he will deny that Ramana had reached the highest level, because he didn't really learn the vedantic scriptures, like the Brahma Sutras, from an authorized teacher! Really! He, Dayananda would say, he, Ramana, just had a way of talking! You know, this typical 'Find out who is asking the question' this thought stopper, that all Neo-Advaitins use. Shankara didn't speak like this, if Shankara came to Ramana, and Shankara would try to refute some philosophical point of Ramana, Ramana would say, Who is asking the question? and that would be the end of all the commentaries on the Upanishads and the Brahma sutras. Regarding this other phony argument, that Ramana spoke only in the words of the Upanishads, while Aurobindo was rephrasing everything, even inventing his own language, I can only say two things: Number 1: If the Upanishadic teachers wouldn't have done the same at their time, we wouldn't have hundreds of Upanishads today, but we would have only one! If teachers are disallowed to express their knowledge in their own way, you would be left with a very stereotype, narrow teaching indeed. Number 2: Ramana may have cited the Upanishads with his every word, but he cherry-picked his quotes, just as Shankara did himself, explaining those passages away that didn't fit into his system, or simply ignoring them. For example the more devotional or yogic passages in
[FairfieldLife] Jeeva Samadhi
Just before this site disappears in the limbo of my browser history, I came across this page while searching for some place I had visited, this Thiruvottiyur, (never mind, somewhere north of Madras). This is quite an interesting collection of saints, and well, siddhas. NOT FOR EMPTY, don't look at it, it is not Ramana approved. You will even find an image of Guru Dev Brahmananda Saraswati, and some others. If you know more than 5 or 6 people on this list, you are good. I first thought it was a secret page of my Indian friend, who has seen many strange and unknown Indian saints and Avadhutas, so I can tell you, these people, as far as I can judge, are the real deal. No fake imposters there. http://soonyata.home.xs4all.nl/jeevasamadhi.htm http://soonyata.home.xs4all.nl/jeevasamadhi.htm
[FairfieldLife] RE: On Ramana, Yoga and Vedanta
Empty, I'm soon out of town, so no time now to give you a deserving answer. But since you like to pontificate with the voice of RAM aka James Swartz, I owe it to my close friend and Tiru resident Kevinanandaji, to expose you to his satirizing him. Here, take this, about your new found hero: http://chi-ting.blogspot.de/search/label/James%20Swartz%20%28Ram%29 http://chi-ting.blogspot.de/search/label/James%20Swartz%20%28Ram%29 (and don't take it too serious!) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Questioner: So you’re talking about Yoga and Vedanta to give some sort of context to his enlightement? Ram: Yes. Now that Ramana is getting fame it is rather sad to see all these Western people coming to Tiruvannamalai with absolutely no notion of the context of his enlightenment and his life, with no understanding of the depth of the Vedic tradition and burdened with amazing and ill-considered views of enlightenment based on their Ramana fantasies. Anyway, Ramana’s type of realization, because it did not occur at the feet of a guru in a traditional Vedantic classroom, is more in line with the tradition of Yoga, although most yogis do not become jnanis as Ramana did. His lifestyle too, sitting in meditation in a cave, is more typical of the yogic tradition than the Vedantic. The reason yogis do not usually become jnanis is because they have often been confused by the language of Yoga into thinking of enlightenment as a permanent experience of samadhi. So when the experience is ‘on’ they are not looking to understand anything, they are simply trying to make the state permanent, sahaja. The joke is that enlightenment is not an experience, nor is there any permanent experience. Furthermore, they do not realize that to make an experience permanent one would have to be a doer, an agent acting on the experience, maintaining it or controlling it or staying in it … which is a dualistic state, not enlightenment.
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Another Of My Usual
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Iranitea wrote: Ann wrote: > > Of course Barry claims I'm a Mean Girl which I take as a personal badge of > > honour coming > > from him. > You should do so, it certainly is. Actually it's just satirizing a certain > type of piling on > behavior. No need to take it absolutely serious. Especially since Barry himself does far more "piling on" than anyone else here.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Another Of My Usual
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: On Saturday, October 12, 2013 2:08:38 AM, iranitea wrote: Hi Ann. Thanks for all the three videos. I saw them all. Of course I know the joy of movement! What did you think? Come on, I have been walking on my hands half of my life, as a kid and also as an adult, I still do it! But IMHO these are two topics, getting vairagya through meditation, loving the bliss of meditation, and enjoying movement, like dancing for example, or any type of creative expression btw.. That first video I posted was a mistake but glad you liked them. And of course I never implied you didn't like to move but I had no idea you liked to walk on your hands - maybe that's what happens when you meditate too long - you can't tell your head from your tail! Lol, but you are wrong, I started walking on my hands when I was 8 years old. I started my own self-made meditation when I was 15, and TM when I was 16. I really like elephants, I was riding on one when I was in a wild life park in India, seeing tigers in the free wild life. I was lucky, we saw 11 tigers on one day, four of them from the elephant. One time I was walking in a procession at the Kumbha Mela, and suddenly had the feeling of a presence walking next to me. I looked and it was an elephant. He walked alone, and so conscious in the whole crowd, that you would never have the fear he would run you over. They are so controlled and gently! Elephants are beyond amazing. So smart, so herd oriented, so social and incredibly powerful in their presence. A real example of the sacredness possible in a being. You are very lucky to have been around them - touched them. You can also meet them in Indian temples. You have to give them a coin, so that they 'bless' you with their trunk. And while looking for a coin, they investigate the contents of your bag. It's not an either or. Great saints /meditators like Ramana Maharshi loved animals and had them all around them. Go to the Ramana Ashram in Tiruvanamallai, and you will see Samadhi shrines of his pet animals, a cow, a dog, a peacock. Anyway, the place is full of peacocks. Of course those who spend their lives meditating are not precluded from loving and enjoying anything on this planet including animals. I would think they might be more inclined to appreciate them if they are, in fact, touching on the deeper aspects of creation and themselves during all this meditating. If you couldn't come to adore and recognize the rest of the living, breathing world as precious and astounding as one's own existence then meditation is worthless. Actually this is very true, you become much more sensitive to any sensory input, in a very subtle way, when you do a lot of meditation, also when you live celibate. But thanks for sharing, Ann. I never get any feeling of ill will or aggressiveness from you, besides the fact, that we have different orientations and opinions, and I appreciate that. I'm sure, if we met outside of FFL, we just could be friends. I am glad to hear you say this. It is rarely my intention to appear aggressive or mean. I'll give a poke where a poke is due and I have never tolerated any unwarranted "abuse" against myself or others so other than that I'm a fairly nice person! Of course Barry claims I'm a Mean Girl which I take as a personal badge of honour coming from him. You should do so, it certainly is. Actually it's just satirizing a certain type of piling on behavior. No need to take it absolutely serious. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: For I ran a tea house: Now this is an example of the joy and exuberance of activity. That orangutan is CRAZY!! https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201359076552535&set=vb.1042328132&type=2&theater https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201359076552535&set=vb.1042328132&type=2&theater
[FairfieldLife] RE: Who?
Btw. Ramana Maharshi got his title / name by Ganapathy Shastri Muni, also called Nayana, a Shri Vidya practitioner from Andhra Pradesh. He was the first one to make Ramana known to a larger audience within India. After finding his guru in Ramana, he composed a 1000 versed poem, which was actually transmitted to him by Ramana, called Uma Sahasranam. The first book about Ramana he composed, in verse form, representing Q&A, was called Ramana Gita, still at Virupaksha times. http://the-wanderling.com/ganapati_muni.html Ganapathi Muni had disciples of his own, one was Kapali Shastry, another Shri Vidya practitioner and tantric. After Nayana died, Kapali Shastri switched from Ramana to the Aurobindo Ashram, becoming a disciple of Mirra Alfassa. He also had a disciple of his own, M.P. Pundit, who later became a personal secretary of Mirra Alfassa. He wrote many books correlating tantra to Sri Aurobindos philosophy. I mention this because of their Shri Vidya association, and because of the link Kapali Shastri presented between Aurobindo and Ramana, as he was still revisiting and speaking with Ramana after switching to Aurobindo. Also, one of the chapters in Ramana Gita are questions of Kapali pertaining to Shakti in the light of Ramanas teaching. I like this link between two worlds, the tantric Shakti world of Aurobindo, and the Kevala Advaita world of Ramana, represented by these persons. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Another prominent south-Indian (Tamil), who: Venkataraman was popular, good at sports, mischievous, and was very intelligent with an exceptional memory which enabled him to succeed in school without having to put in very much effort. He had a couple of unusual traits. When he slept, he went into such a deep state of unconsciousness that his friends could physically assault his body without waking him up. He also had an extraordinary amount of luck. In team games, whichever side he played for always won. This earned him the nickname 'Tanga-kai', which means 'golden hand'.[web 6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramana_Maharshi#cite_note-autogenerated2-26 When Venkataraman was about 11, his father sent him to live with his paternal uncle Subbaiyar in Dindigul because he wanted his sons to be educated in English so they would be eligible to enter government service, and only Tamil was taught at the village school in Tiruchuzhi. In 1891, when his uncle was transferred to Madurai http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madurai, Venkataraman and his elder brother Nagaswami moved with him. In Dindigul, Venkataraman attended a British School. In 1892, Venkataraman's father Sundaram Iyer suddenly fell seriously ill and unexpectedly died several days later at the age of 42.[15] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramana_Maharshi#cite_note-FOOTNOTEKrishna_BikshuYear_unknown-27 For some hours after his father's death he contemplated the matter of death, and how his father's body was still there, but the 'I' was gone from it.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Another Of My Usual
Hi Ann. Thanks for all the three videos. I saw them all. Of course I know the joy of movement! What did you think? Come on, I have been walking on my hands half of my life, as a kid and also as an adult, I still do it! But IMHO these are two topics, getting vairagya through meditation, loving the bliss of meditation, and enjoying movement, like dancing for example, or any type of creative expression btw.. I really like elephants, I was riding on one when I was in a wild life park in India, seeing tigers in the free wild life. I was lucky, we saw 11 tigers on one day, four of them from the elephant. One time I was walking in a procession at the Kumbha Mela, and suddenly had the feeling of a presence walking next to me. I looked and it was an elephant. He walked alone, and so conscious in the whole crowd, that you would never have the fear he would run you over. They are so controlled and gently! It's not an either or. Great saints /meditators like Ramana Maharshi loved animals and had them all around them. Go to the Ramana Ashram in Tiruvanamallai, and you will see Samadhi shrines of his pet animals, a cow, a dog, a peacock. Anyway, the place is full of peacocks. But thanks for sharing, Ann. I never get any feeling of ill will or aggressiveness from you, besides the fact, that we have different orientations and opinions, and I appreciate that. I'm sure, if we met outside of FFL, we just could be friends. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: For I ran a tea house: Now this is an example of the joy and exuberance of activity. That orangutan is CRAZY!! https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201359076552535&set=vb.1042328132&type=2&theater https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10201359076552535&set=vb.1042328132&type=2&theater
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM?
cendental as drifting off into some meditative state. I have done both and I'll take the open-eyes version. I ran a tea house says: What about marathon, I run almost marathons, a marathon takes minimum 4 hours, and you have to add extra rest you need afterwards, getting to the place etc. training it every week. Or what about iron man, can't they find passion to do something useful? Now you have totally missed my point. Of course marathon runners are smack dab in the middle of incredible and dynamic activity and it takes one to the extremes of physical endurance. I'm all for it. I was talking about those who choose to sit day after day for 7.5 hours meditating and disagreeing that they, as Share opines, are "spiritual warriors." I was talking about meditators not marathon runners. And finally I ran a tea house says: No, the argument, that people, who like to meditate long, do so because they lack other passions is bogus. Meditation is their passion. Well, it certainly is high on their list of of priorities. But how do you conclude that they also have other passions? If you are a dedicated meditator and choose to spend half of your waking hours doing that it would be an exceptional person indeed who could devote an equal amount of time to another passion. It is possible but not probable or common. You are not able to quieten your mind, that is why you have to preoccupy it with all kinds of senseless stuff, just be engaged, never get to look at yourself. My mind is incredibly quiet during activity. You have no idea how quiet it is or not.You don't know me and from what you say in your next sentences indicate you have never had any sort of connection with horses and the incredible power and silence they contain. Two strikes Teahouse. Riding horses is just a distraction, it doesn't get you anywhere, and it's not meditation either, the joy of it will not stay on. It is ongoing every time I smell their sweet smell, kiss their muzzles, feel them respond to the lightest touch of my seat or leg, feel them carry me willingly with their straining muscles and in turn don't resent the fact that they work for me. It is no distraction - it requires intense focus and one-pointedness that transcends thought at times. It becomes simply feel and instinct. When you couple two beings together think intercourse without the sex. And to have a partner in a 1500 pound animal who chooses to interact with you because they somehow want to is liberating if not humbling. And that is only the least of it. You will never know the Ananda of meditation, you have been on the spiritual path allegedly for years, have lived in Fairfield, had many encounter sessions with Robin, but you still don't know the bliss of meditation. I'll take the bliss of all the other things waking/walking life can offer, thanks. Your statement makes me think you have never experienced the bliss of deep, abiding activity with all of the richness that every sense can bring to you. Life is for living and you have to suck it in with everything you've got. I just happen to have the faculties to be able to squeeze a lot of juice out of my waking/walking state. You are welcome to your eyes closed blissiness. I've got food to taste, forests to smell, rainstorms to feel, the sound of hoofbeats to hear and emerging art to see. Great saints like Ramana Maharshi continued to meditate for 15 years in Virupaksha cave even after their enlightenment. And why did he do this? Because he could do it. Because he wanted to do it. That is my point: we will all do what we most desire to do, if we have that luxury. And as long as I have legs that can walk, a brain that works and senses that can perceive then I choose to stay on two legs, eyes wide open slipping and slithering down some brambly, deliciously treacherous wooded path rather than allowing my life to slip away in long hours of meditation. Many here will disagree with me, after all this is a meditator's forum, but there you have it. ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Iranitea tells Ann where it's at (according to him): (snip) No, the argument, that people, who like to meditate long, do so because they lack other passions is bogus. Meditation is their passion. You are not able to quieten your mind, that is why you have to preoccupy it with all kinds of senseless stuff, just be engaged, never get to look at yourself. Riding horses is just a distraction, it doesn't get you anywhere, and it's not meditation either, the joy of it will not stay on. You will never know the Ananda of meditation, you have been on the spiritual path allegedly for years, have lived in Fairfield, had many encounter sessions with Robin, but you still don't know the bliss of meditation. Great saints like Ramana Maharshi continued to meditat
[FairfieldLife] RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM?
Ann sez: No, no Share. These are not "spiritual warriors". These are people, like the rest of us, who do what is most desirable and fulfilling for themselves. If these meditators actually felt like they wanted to do something else for 7 hours a day they would do it. Now, these long-term, incessant meditators obviously have absolutely nothing else pressing in their lives to compel them to want to stand up and open their eyes. I feel sorry for them. You spend a long time dead (presumably in the dark with your eyes, or lack of eyes, closed seeing nothing). I have a theory and I'm stickin' to it: if these meditating individuals had a passion or real interests in their lives (or even a family) they would be up and at 'em and imbibing what this magnificent world has to offer. Do you not think someone in activity can be a "spiritual warrior"? And what is that anyway? If you say, they are people like the rest of us, I say yes they are. If you say, you feel sorry for them, I say I feel sorry for you feeling sorry for them. You say, they just sit for 7 1/2 hours in meditation, since they have nothing else to do, no passions etc? Do you really believe that? That means you cannot imagine, that a person actually enjoys meditation, and is absorbed for a long time. I mean, how long could you sit in meditation, honestly, before getting bored? 1 hour, 2 hours, 1/2 hour? What I mean to say is that a person doesn't meditate for so long, just because he has nothing else to do. Quite obviously persons who meditate so long enjoy it tremendously, and quite obviously they feel passionate about it, just as you maybe feel passionate about horses. What is there about horses anyway, do we still need them? Haven't we got cars, which bring us much safer and without getting wet to our destiny? Why waste all your time with horses, and what would happen, if everybody would just be preoccupied with horses all the time? Couldn't you just leave them alone? What about marathon, I run almost marathons, a marathon takes minimum 4 hours, and you have to add extra rest you need afterwards, getting to the place etc. training it every week. Or what about iron man, can't they find passion to do something useful? No, the argument, that people, who like to meditate long, do so because they lack other passions is bogus. Meditation is their passion. You are not able to quieten your mind, that is why you have to preoccupy it with all kinds of senseless stuff, just be engaged, never get to look at yourself. Riding horses is just a distraction, it doesn't get you anywhere, and it's not meditation either, the joy of it will not stay on. You will never know the Ananda of meditation, you have been on the spiritual path allegedly for years, have lived in Fairfield, had many encounter sessions with Robin, but you still don't know the bliss of meditation. Great saints like Ramana Maharshi continued to meditate for 15 years in Virupaksha cave even after their enlightenment. And why did he do this? Because he could do it. ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Uh oh, now I'm in trouble! Seraphita, I'm retired and I live in a small rural town. So I have time for all this. My power naps are like 10 minutes and only if I've had insomnia the night before, so not every day. My asanas don't take very long, nor does my pranayama. I prefer activity to sitting so my whole TMSP is about the minimum. But I am in awe of people who are doing TMSP for 7 1/2 hours per day. And have been doing so for 7 years! Spiritual warriors IMHO! No, no Share. These are not "spiritual warriors". These are people, like the rest of us, who do what is most desirable and fulfilling for themselves. If these meditators actually felt like they wanted to do something else for 7 hours a day they would do it. Now, these long-term, incessant meditators obviously have absolutely nothing else pressing in their lives to compel them to want to stand up and open their eyes. I feel sorry for them. You spend a long time dead (presumably in the dark with your eyes, or lack of eyes, closed seeing nothing). I have a theory and I'm stickin' to it: if these meditating individuals had a passion or real interests in their lives (or even a family) they would be up and at 'em and imbibing what this magnificent world has to offer. Do you not think someone in activity can be a "spiritual warrior"? And what is that anyway? From: "s3raphita@..." To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2013 10:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM? Re "I like power naps. But before I substitute TM with a nap, I'd want to see research that indicates that the nap was contributing to whole brain enlivening and coherence, not just to feeling refreshed.": Yes indeed. How do you find time to fit in two meditation sessions a day AND power naps
[FairfieldLife] RE: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
On 10/10/2013 9:41 AM, Michael Laurenson wrote: Hi Richard, I taught TM in the early 70s and been reading FFL posts for awhile. I've read that shyam, shyama are related to Krishna. Are these still considered Saraswati mantras? Warm regards, Michael Shyama is Kali, while Shyam is Krishna. ShyAmA-kAli has a somewhat tender aspect and is worshipped in the Hindu household http://www.angelfire.com/ma/ramakrishna/kali.html http://www.angelfire.com/ma/ramakrishna/kali.html ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: When MMY first started out in Kerala, according to 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas', he only used Ram (for the guys) and Shyam (for the gals), not unlike the ISKCON pundit boys who sing the maha mantra. It was only later in 1957 that MMY started using the five bijas and created the sixteen variants bijas to include the Saraswati bija which he got from SBS. According to MMY, the Shankaracharya tradition is the custodian of the bija mantras. This makes sense because the sixteen bijas are enumerated in the Sound Arya Lahari, compiled by the Adi Shankara, the main scripture of the Sri Vidya sect. Go figure. A yoga teacher can use any seed sounds they want toin spiritual practice, even make up new ones, as long as they are given out in a ritual initiation. Otherwise, they are just simple phonemes or quasi-phonemes with no apparent meaning. However, most Indians, and thus most TMers, only use bijas in a short sentence, such as with the word 'namah' at the end. You get one single bija mantra in TM and then you get the more advanced technique with the added words. So, you get the seed sound and then the fertilizer; you water the root and enjoy the fruit. All you have to do is start the mantra and then just baby sit your bija and watch it grow. It's that simple! On 10/10/2013 9:41 AM, Michael Laurenson wrote: Hi Richard, I taught TM in the early 70s and been reading FFL posts for awhile. I've read that shyam, shyama are related to Krishna. Are these still considered Saraswati mantras? Warm regards, Michael
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: When MMY first started out in Kerala, according to 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas', he only used Ram (for the guys) and Shyam (for the gals), not unlike the ISKCON pundit boys who sing the maha mantra. Sure about that? I found copies of the beacon light online, and there is no such reference in it. Rather, to the opposite, there is a report, that the persons mantra is selected according to their Ishta Devata, Also people are adviced to meditate for one hour, or if they don't experience Ananda, to just meditate long enough. There is no mention of the Ram mantra or the Shyam mantra there. On which page would that be? It was only later in 1957 that MMY started using the five bijas and created the sixteen variants bijas to include the Saraswati bija which he got from SBS. Again, where do you get this from? Can you name a source? In 1957 Maharishi was still in India, and AFAIK there was no other uniform method of selection there. According to MMY, the Shankaracharya tradition is the custodian of the bija mantras. This makes sense because the sixteen bijas are enumerated in the Sound Arya Lahari, compiled by the Adi Shankara, the main scripture of the Sri Vidya sect. Go figure. A yoga teacher can use any seed sounds they want toin spiritual practice, even make up new ones, as long as they are given out in a ritual initiation. Otherwise, they are just simple phonemes or quasi-phonemes with no apparent meaning. However, most Indians, and thus most TMers, only use bijas in a short sentence, such as with the word 'namah' at the end. You get one single bija mantra in TM and then you get the more advanced technique with the added words. So, you get the seed sound and then the fertilizer; you water the root and enjoy the fruit. All you have to do is start the mantra and then just baby sit your bija and watch it grow. It's that simple! On 10/10/2013 9:41 AM, Michael Laurenson wrote: Hi Richard, I taught TM in the early 70s and been reading FFL posts for awhile. I've read that shyam, shyama are related to Krishna. Are these still considered Saraswati mantras? Warm regards, Michael
[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
"Glorious glorious Miley Cyrus, I bow down to you, I bow down to you!" Barry, seeking a more modern template for this 'devotion', I'd call it role playing. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea wrote: > > "Gimme a Shri, gimme a Shri, gimme a Namah Namah Namah!" > > Barry, I had this extra experience of becoming TM teacher two times. The > first time I was only 20, and became only a student initiator, so I got only > mantras 1-9. 4 years later I became full initiator, had to rehearse all the > teaching material, and then got the full teacher initiation together with all > others, now getting mantras 10-16. This in itself was a revelation, for as we > got the student mantras 1-8, we got this extra mantra, 9, with which we could > initiate in exceptional cases elder persons, that is any age beyond what we > were usually allowed to teach. > > Now I learned that 9 was just the next mantra, assigned to the next age > range. While listening to Maharishi pronouncing and explaining this on tape, > you write this all down on a paper, and have three days to memorize them, and > then must destroy the paper. Hearing and learning the new mantras, I couldn't > get this song out of my head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnNzDzPzI44 > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnNzDzPzI44 I can certainly understand the humor you found in this situation. :-) In my post I was trying to find some in the WHOLE CONCEPT of these "fertilizer words" associated with TM "advanced techniques." Since we all know now (despite the efforts of obfuscators on this forum) what these "fertilizer words" MEAN, as well as the Hindu gods and goddesses that the original TM bija mantras are assoc- iated with, we can easily come up with a MEANING for this mantra. And I think that if people can "step back" from their TM indoctrination long enough, they might be able to find some humor in the situation as we have. Let me use an example to illustrate my point. Suppose you were seeking a boon or a favor from some famous person. But suppose that *in order to gain that person's favors* they required you to address them as (using a timely example): "Glorious glorious Miley Cyrus, I bow down to you, I bow down to you!" Doesn't quite "sit right," does it? I mean, who does this Miley Cyrus babe *think she is*, to expect to be addressed thusly? Even more, would you really *want* a favor or boon from some- one so petty and so ego-driven as to *expect* to be addressed that way and treated that way? Now do a simple word substitution, and see what TMers have *no problem* thinking many times a day (goddess chosen from the original mantra example being discussed) in their "advanced technique" practice: "Glorious glorious Saraswat1, I bow down to you, I bow down to you!" Oh, but you may say, "Hey! Foul! It's not fair to compare a *goddess* to Miley Cyrus." Isn't it? If you bristle at Miley Cyrus feeling as if she should be addressed that way to grant you a favor (say, an autograph), how is that so different than goddess Saraswati expecting to be addressed that way to grant you the favor of transcendence, or enlightenment? I think it's a Good Thing to "step back" from the conditioning every so often, and look at things from a different point of view, devoid of the "explanations" ("thought stoppers" you've been told about them in the past. Things are *funnier* that way, and we all need a little funny in our lives. :-) :-) :-) > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > Bhairitu wrote: > > > > Aing is the bija. The advanced technique is a long form mantra with > > extra samput added. > > So 'samput' is like a kind of spiritual cheerleader squad, to give > the bija team some extra ooomph? > > "Gimme a Shri, gimme a Shri, gimme a Namah Namah Namah!" > > Would we call them the Pushpam Girls? (initiator joke) > > :-) > > > On 10/09/2013 10:16 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > that's an interesting theory - I'd like to see the bird that has a > > > call of Shri Shri Aing Namah Namah!
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
Domash was a smart guy, I'm sure he has read the Garland of Letters like anyone else, it was even in the MERU library in the Sonnenberg as all other of Woodroffe's books. He wrote what he was allowed to write, and his was a devotional act, I don't blame him for that. I think he was a very thoughtful guy, but he knew exactly what he could afford to do, and what he couldn't. Coming to think of it, the movement should really install a team that researches the history of TM, how it developed, from the earliest sources. Something similar happened to Eckankar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckankar where the present leadership installed a committee to internally investigate the emergence and source of the teachings, after it became clear, that it's founder had plagiarized much material, and it was basically an offshot of Sant Mat and Radhasoami. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Or maybe because he didn't have a clue at all about what tantric traditions are. If he did he might have wound up booted from the movement. Gotta keep "the purity of the teaching" ya know. :-D On 10/09/2013 08:24 AM, Share Long wrote: Testing. Richard, maybe Domash didn't mention the tantric origins because Westerners can have such a narrow view of what tantra is. And that view does not include being a recluse! On Wednesday, October 9, 2013 10:18 AM, Richard J. Williams mailto:punditster@... wrote: It sounds to me like you wanted to believe there was pie up in the sky, but you failed to get any. Maybe you sucked as a baker or maybe you just couldn't sit still to do a simple kindergarden yoga pose. Go figure. Maybe you just conned yourself - at any rate, it must have been a powerful experience, since you're still talking about it after all these years. LoL! On 10/8/2013 12:26 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: you knew him better than I did, but nah, it wasn't revolutionary, just another con man using the best con man's trick in the world, i.e. the best cons are ones that contain some truth, or have something that is of some value. Let's not forget that the term con artist means confidence artist. A confidence trick is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence, in the classical sense of trust. In David Mamet's film House of Games, the main con artist gives a slightly different description of the "confidence game". He explains that, in a typical swindle, the con man gives the mark his own confidence, encouraging the mark to in turn trust him. The con artist thus poses as a trustworthy person seeking another trustworthy person. From: turquoiseb mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2013 8:16 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > what about it was revolutionary? He wasn't the only Indian guru > who came to the states and europe to promote his schtick you know. It was revolutionary in that he found a way to present a technique of meditation designed for beginners, as a mere starting point from which to explore more interesting techniques, as the "end point" of meditation itself. In other words, he presented a kindergarten level of meditation as "the best, most effective form of meditation on the planet," and convinced millions of people it was true. I'd call the chutzpah of that pretty revolutionary, wouldn't you? :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
"Gimme a Shri, gimme a Shri, gimme a Namah Namah Namah!" Barry, I had this extra experience of becoming TM teacher two times. The first time I was only 20, and became only a student initiator, so I got only mantras 1-9. 4 years later I became full initiator, had to rehearse all the teaching material, and then got the full teacher initiation together with all others, now getting mantras 10-16. This in itself was a revelation, for as we got the student mantras 1-8, we got this extra mantra, 9, with which we could initiate in exceptional cases elder persons, that is any age beyond what we were usually allowed to teach. Now I learned that 9 was just the next mantra, assigned to the next age range. While listening to Maharishi pronouncing and explaining this on tape, you write this all down on a paper, and have three days to memorize them, and then must destroy the paper. Hearing and learning the new mantras, I couldn't get this song out of my head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnNzDzPzI44 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnNzDzPzI44 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > Aing is the bija. The advanced technique is a long form mantra with > extra samput added. So 'samput' is like a kind of spiritual cheerleader squad, to give the bija team some extra ooomph? "Gimme a Shri, gimme a Shri, gimme a Namah Namah Namah!" Would we call them the Pushpam Girls? (initiator joke) :-) > On 10/09/2013 10:16 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > that's an interesting theory - I'd like to see the bird that has a > > call of Shri Shri Aing Namah Namah!
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
Any knowledge is a prison, not just TM knowledge. That's not just what Krishnamurti says, but Maharishi said this himself about the knowledge he was teaching. It's a conditioning of the mind. At my time, which was before the siddhis, there was much emphasis to get fertilizers asap. That's why you don't understand, how transcendence could get 'lively'. You do not need to understand the technicalities of Samput, but like for everything else, Maharishi had a substitute explanation for it, which was carefully explained at advanced meetings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: You have to be exceptionally resource challenged, these days, to consider the TM knowledge, a "prison". Also, TM, imo, is not for people who want to over intellectualize everything. It either works, or it doesn't, and knowing what samput is, ultimately makes no difference, wrt its effectiveness. For one thing, these so-called Advanced Techniques are not a prerequisite for any other program, like the TMSP. Never saw the need for one, myself. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Samput are the extra words added. For instance they may add extra bijas to Gayatri to make it more powerful. This, of course, is stuff that TM never students but information often explained in other traditions. Gotta step outside the "prison" to learn it. ;-) On 10/09/2013 12:29 PM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > Aing is the bija. The advanced technique is a long form mantra with > extra samput added. So 'samput' is like a kind of spiritual cheerleader squad, to give the bija team some extra ooomph? "Gimme a Shri, gimme a Shri, gimme a Namah Namah Namah!" Would we call them the Pushpam Girls? (initiator joke) :-) > On 10/09/2013 10:16 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > that's an interesting theory - I'd like to see the bird that has a > > call of Shri Shri Aing Namah Namah!
RE: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM?
Share, thanks for the answer. It also proves that you can read thoughts, because I was just about to ask Ann if this was an example of snarkiness. Btw., for all Neo-fans, I think I discovered another feature, I haven't seen any of you talking about yet. But if I click on those three little dots, which are hiding the comments, in my composer window, I will do that now, wait, and then click on send, it will stay open in the post. Is that so? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Now this comment from Judy is a perfect example of snarky IMO. Ann had criticized that people rounding for 7 1/2 hours were thus separated from their spouses. I responded reasonably noting that spouses who work away from home are also separated for 7 1/2 hours or so. On Wed, 10/9/13, judy stein mailto:authfriend@...> wrote: Subject: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2013, 8:37 AM Share wrote: > Ann, I think many spouses who work > outside the home are separated from each other from most of > the day. When you find out for sure, let us know, OK? This is an important insight.
[FairfieldLife] RE: The little trash can . . .
I don't want to be snarky again, so I'm not sure you are serious, but it does delete it for all - even non-FFlers (now that was snarky) - as you correctly observed, you can do that only with your own posts. If you can do that also for posts of others, please let me know, because I would be really interested in this function ;-) (Now Alex would add, that this deletion wouldn't work for those who receive the post by email, and also wouldn't work for the FFL mirror page in the mail-archive.) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: . . . that appears at the bottom of messages I've posted inviting me to delete same: does that just delete the message in my own viewing window or does it remove it for all FFLifers? I see I don't have the option of deleting other users' comments! Shame.
RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: So You Can All Relax Now
Oh is that so..? But I didn't mean to be snarky really - I just wanted to give you some technical information, If you already knew that - sorry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVVxXdOKrgo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVVxXdOKrgo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Dear I-ran-a-tea-house-but-don't-anymore I think Judy was picking up on your snarkiness and was mostly addressing that. It wasn't about the nitpicking details. On Wednesday, October 9, 2013 6:48:16 AM, iranitea wrote: Judy, this is a perfect example, of how going into nitpicking details, does nothing to make things more clear, but rather helps to lose sight of the whole. Why? Because everybody can see that the http:// is already inserted in the link window that opens. But it is also selected, so that when you paste a new URL into it, it will be overwritten. (You'd have to click somewhere in the window to de-select it, and then paste, and you get the double http). What I had said, is just a short way of saying, well you had the double http:// in your link. So I wonder why you write stuff like this? Did you miss, that this is there in the subtext of my statement already? Is it that you just want to be right? This may be a trivial issue, but this is how your arguments go 90% of the time. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Iranitea wrote: > It's because you inserted the http://http:// http://http// two times. > It's your mistake actually. Ann didn't insert http:// twice, actually. The Rich Text editor's clickable-link feature already has http:// in the window where you paste the URL. If the URL you want to insert already has http://, as is usually the case, you have to delete it (or delete the one in the window), or you'll end up with two in the URL when it appears in the message. > You can also just select a > url, and right click, 'open link in new tap' Tab, not "tap." (snip) ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Typical, I add > > a link and it clicks but takes you nowhere. You'll have > > to just do it the hard way: > > http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: So You Can All Relax Now
Judy, this is a perfect example, of how going into nitpicking details, does nothing to make things more clear, but rather helps to lose sight of the whole. Why? Because everybody can see that the http:// is already inserted in the link window that opens. But it is also selected, so that when you paste a new URL into it, it will be overwritten. (You'd have to click somewhere in the window to de-select it, and then paste, and you get the double http). What I had said, is just a short way of saying, well you had the double http:// in your link. So I wonder why you write stuff like this? Did you miss, that this is there in the subtext of my statement already? Is it that you just want to be right? This may be a trivial issue, but this is how your arguments go 90% of the time. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Iranitea wrote: > It's because you inserted the http://http:// http://http:// two times. > It's your mistake actually. Ann didn't insert http:// twice, actually. The Rich Text editor's clickable-link feature already has http:// in the window where you paste the URL. If the URL you want to insert already has http://, as is usually the case, you have to delete it (or delete the one in the window), or you'll end up with two in the URL when it appears in the message. > You can also just select a > url, and right click, 'open link in new tap' Tab, not "tap." (snip) ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Typical, I add > > a link and it clicks but takes you nowhere. You'll have > > to just do it the hard way: > > http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html > > > > http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html > >
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Iranitea wrote: > Judy: > "Shut up, Richard. I'm not disputing anything." > She's just such a sweetie, isn't she? (Yawn) But it's perfectly OK for Richard to accuse me of disputing facts and misleading folks when he knows I was doing no such thing. Right, iranitea? Yes you are misleading folks. Even though Richie got many details wrong, or formulated them in a strange and freaky way, (he is actually funny), he's got many of the fundamentals absolutely right, while you seem to be in big denial there. Your arguments, quoting collected papers, do nothing to elucidate the origin of TM. That is, Richard, though not being accurate, actually provides facts and important clues, he provides INFORMATION, while you provide none of that. The other's here, who criticize him, do so, because he provides infos THEY already know - but which are not talked about officially. To say, for example that he doesn't provide any reliable information is just misdirection on your part. And can you tell me: why doesn't the oh so scholarly article of Domash, provide any of the fundamental informations, that we are talking about here? Didn't he know, or didn't he want to speak about this? Because to say that the mantras are common place in India is not really in the interest of the movement, right? Richard wrote: > > It > > sure is looking like the authfriend > > is disputing the fact that Swami Karpatri was a member > > of the Sri > > Vidya sect. Now, why would she do that and mislead us > > about the > > SBS affiliations with Sri Vidya? Obviously if Swami > > Karpatri was a > > Sri Vidya he learned it from his guru SKS. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] RE: So You Can All Relax Now
It's because you inserted the http://http:// two times. It's your mistake actually. You can also just select a url, and right click, 'open link in new tap' , if you are too lazy to make it clickable in rich text editor. The problem here isn't really Neo, but people not knowing how to use a rich text editor. In pure ASCII editors, you don't have to make a url clickable, it goes automatic. (It used to be ASCII by default in the old format) Here your link again: http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Typical, I add a link and it clicks but takes you nowhere. You'll have to just do it the hard way: http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html BTW, I was given a preview of some new 'look' on neo today on my computer at work. It is quite different from the one we have all been using the last few weeks. It seems much better...but we'll see. ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: http://http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html http://http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Dozens+mental+disorders+exist/9011120/story.html
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] MMY and Siddha Tradtions
Just as a supplement here, pictures of the Shri Yantra Temple in Amarkantak, which is built as a 3 dimensional Shriyantra Mount Meru. It wasn't there yet at GD's time, in fact it was still being constructed when I was there, but it is reminiscent of the spirit of the place. There is of course a two dimensional Shri Yantra in the main temple which contains the source of the Narmada. There is another Shankaracharya temple, which displays the Dasa Mahavidyas, the 10 majors forms of the Divine Mother, which was initiated by the Shankaracharya of Dwaraka, Swaroopananda Saraswati http://jagadgurushankaracharya.org/, not our guy, but nevertheless a direct disciple of GD. So he would know about the worship of Devi's and yantras. http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photography-mystic-shri-yantra-temple-image11087077 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Richie wrote "Now, if the Adi Shankara wrote the Sounda, then he must have included the fifteen bijas contained within, would he not?" The crucial word here is IF, Richard, as scholars agree that he never wrote it. But there is no doubt of the fact that Shri Vidya found entry into the Dasanami sampradaya in South India, where Gurudevs teacher came from. IMHO it is more likely, that GD would utilize the mantra of Tripura Sundari rather than that of Sharada. This is what worshippers of the Shri Yantra usually do. I saw a beautiful Shri Yantra at the temple at the origin of the Narmada river in Amarkanthak, where GD spend about 30 years roaming the forests. Like all holy rivers, the Narmada is seen as a manifestation of the Goddess, and Paul Mason put a beautiful song of GD's voice praising the Narmada goddess. Also, not all Dasanami monks meditate on the bijas of Saraswathi, not twice a day, some do not meditate at all, and not all of TM mantras are bijas of Saraswathi, only those of the student age. The first mantras Maharishi taught in the west were in fact Ram mantras. Shree is typical Lakshmi, other mantras are of Durga and Kali or Krishna. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: So, it looks like Barry 2 is thinking the bija mantras have been around for ages. Does that men he thinks the bijas are eternal and came into the minds of the rishis spontaneously by the grace of Lord Shiva? Or, did the bija mantras have a human origin and were passed down from guru to chela in a long unbroken line leading back to the maha siddhas of the tantric tradtion? It has now been established that at least two of the most sacred bija-mantras, out of the fifteen, contained in the Sound Arya La Hari, are in fact, TM bija-mantras. Now, if the Adi Shankara wrote the Sounda, then he must have included the fifteen bijas contained within, would he not?" On 10/7/2013 6:13 PM, Bhairitu wrote: On 10/07/2013 01:02 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote: So, where did the meditation of SBS come from? Meditation is a technique that is common all over India, especially in the sect of the Sri Vidya. In that tradition they meditate on the bija mantra of Saraswati. It's the same bija mantra given out in TM initiation. It's the same technique - it's a meditation using a bija mantra of Saraswati. Let's review what we know about SBS. Rajaram Mishra, later to become Swami Bramhananda Saraswati, was born on Thursday, 21 December, 1868 in village Gana, which is close to the city of Ayodhya, in North India. Rajaram was enrolled at the Sanskrit Institute at Kashi at the age of eight and later became a student of Swami Krishnananda Saraswati of Utter Kashi. http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/parampara.html http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/parampara.html Are we agreed so far? So, we can assume that the SBS learned meditation from SKS who was initiated by his guru. All the gurus in the Saraswati lineage meditate on the bija of Saraswati. Their headquarters is at Sringeri. According to the Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, the meditation technique used in TM originated with the Vedic sage Naryana. It's the same meditation that is used by all the Shankaracharyas in that lineage. So, the TM bija mantras came from SBS, who was a member of the dasanami order of the Saraswati dandi sannyasins, founded by the Adi Shankara. The bijas used in TM have been around for ages. And they didn't have to come from anyone.
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Judy: "Shut up, Richard. I'm not disputing anything. " She's just such a sweetie, isn't she? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: It sure is looking like the authfriend is disputing the fact that Swami Karpatri was a member of the Sri Vidya sect. Now, why would she do that and mislead us about the SBS affiliations with Sri Vidya? Obviously if Swami Karpatri was a Sri Vidya he learned it from his guru SKS. Go figure. "He was also the great expert of Shree Vidya and probably all the present day experts in Varanasi have somehow or the other obtained Shree vidya from him or his pupils." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Karpatri http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Karpatri Why would MMY tell a fib about his tradition's lineage? So many questions - so few answers. The question is: why do some TMers meditate on the bija of Saraswati if MMY didn't get the bja from SBS? Would MMY just make it up or read it in a book? Is it just a coincidence that the bija of Saraswati is included in the fifteen bijas mentioned in the Sound Arya Lahari by the Adi Shankara? There is one undisputed fact: all the Saraswati dasanami's meditate on the bija mantra of Saraswati at least twice a day! Is there anyone here who would dispute this? On 10/7/2013 7:05 PM, s3raphita@... mailto:s3raphita@... wrote: Thanks for the link authfriend. I can see why MMY would approve that account! Richard's posts seem to confirm that Guru Dev most likely did have a Sri Yantra. I still think that the tale of Maharishi bumping off his master, stealing his jewelled Sri Yantra and then heading south to meet with Indian magicians who teach him how to unlock its secrets would make a great movie: Maharishi invokes asuras who promise him unlimited wealth and power - the CGI people are given free rein at this point. The asuras' acolyte (film-maker Kenneth Anger) is instructed to prepare the way amongst rock royalty like the Stones and the Beatles . . . and so it goes. Scorcese would lap this up. A while back I read Our Spiritual Heritage: An Informal History of the Masters of the Sankaracharya Tradition by Lynn Nappe (a former TM teacher) - the story of each of the masters of the Shankaracharya tradition. The entry for Guru Dev includes an overview of his meditation advice that is most certainly not TM. Lynne Nappe glosses this by saying Guru Dev's own technique was different but he wanted a simple variant suitable for the "housekeeper". I guess we're all housekeepers . . . housewives or househusbands. ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, mailto:noozguru@... wrote: On 10/07/2013 01:02 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote: So, where did the meditation of SBS come from? Meditation is a technique that is common all over India, especially in the sect of the Sri Vidya. In that tradition they meditate on the bija mantra of Saraswati. It's the same bija mantra given out in TM initiation. It's the same technique - it's a meditation using a bija mantra of Saraswati. Let's review what we know about SBS. Rajaram Mishra, later to become Swami Bramhananda Saraswati, was born on Thursday, 21 December, 1868 in village Gana, which is close to the city of Ayodhya, in North India. Rajaram was enrolled at the Sanskrit Institute at Kashi at the age of eight and later became a student of Swami Krishnananda Saraswati of Utter Kashi. http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/parampara.html http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/parampara.html Are we agreed so far? So, we can assume that the SBS learned meditation from SKS who was initiated by his guru. All the gurus in the Saraswati lineage meditate on the bija of Saraswati. Their headquarters is at Sringeri. According to the Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, the meditation technique used in TM originated with the Vedic sage Naryana. It's the same meditation that is used by all the Shankaracharyas in that lineage. So, the TM bija mantras came from SBS, who was a member of the dasanami order of the Saraswati dandi sannyasins, founded by the Adi Shankara. The bijas used in TM have been around for ages. And they didn't have to come from anyone. .
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] MMY and Siddha Tradtions
Richie wrote "Now, if the Adi Shankara wrote the Sounda, then he must have included the fifteen bijas contained within, would he not?" The crucial word here is IF, Richard, as scholars agree that he never wrote it. But there is no doubt of the fact that Shri Vidya found entry into the Dasanami sampradaya in South India, where Gurudevs teacher came from. IMHO it is more likely, that GD would utilize the mantra of Tripura Sundari rather than that of Sharada. This is what worshippers of the Shri Yantra usually do. I saw a beautiful Shri Yantra at the temple at the origin of the Narmada river in Amarkanthak, where GD spend about 30 years roaming the forests. Like all holy rivers, the Narmada is seen as a manifestation of the Goddess, and Paul Mason put a beautiful song of GD's voice praising the Narmada goddess. Also, not all Dasanami monks meditate on the bijas of Saraswathi, not twice a day, some do not meditate at all, and not all of TM mantras are bijas of Saraswathi, only those of the student age. The first mantras Maharishi taught in the west were in fact Ram mantras. Shree is typical Lakshmi, other mantras are of Durga and Kali or Krishna. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: So, it looks like Barry 2 is thinking the bija mantras have been around for ages. Does that men he thinks the bijas are eternal and came into the minds of the rishis spontaneously by the grace of Lord Shiva? Or, did the bija mantras have a human origin and were passed down from guru to chela in a long unbroken line leading back to the maha siddhas of the tantric tradtion? It has now been established that at least two of the most sacred bija-mantras, out of the fifteen, contained in the Sound Arya La Hari, are in fact, TM bija-mantras. Now, if the Adi Shankara wrote the Sounda, then he must have included the fifteen bijas contained within, would he not?" On 10/7/2013 6:13 PM, Bhairitu wrote: On 10/07/2013 01:02 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote: So, where did the meditation of SBS come from? Meditation is a technique that is common all over India, especially in the sect of the Sri Vidya. In that tradition they meditate on the bija mantra of Saraswati. It's the same bija mantra given out in TM initiation. It's the same technique - it's a meditation using a bija mantra of Saraswati. Let's review what we know about SBS. Rajaram Mishra, later to become Swami Bramhananda Saraswati, was born on Thursday, 21 December, 1868 in village Gana, which is close to the city of Ayodhya, in North India. Rajaram was enrolled at the Sanskrit Institute at Kashi at the age of eight and later became a student of Swami Krishnananda Saraswati of Utter Kashi. http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/parampara.html http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/parampara.html Are we agreed so far? So, we can assume that the SBS learned meditation from SKS who was initiated by his guru. All the gurus in the Saraswati lineage meditate on the bija of Saraswati. Their headquarters is at Sringeri. According to the Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, the meditation technique used in TM originated with the Vedic sage Naryana. It's the same meditation that is used by all the Shankaracharyas in that lineage. So, the TM bija mantras came from SBS, who was a member of the dasanami order of the Saraswati dandi sannyasins, founded by the Adi Shankara. The bijas used in TM have been around for ages. And they didn't have to come from anyone.
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
Well, Kindergarten isn't such a bad thing, when it comes to meditation. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > what about it was revolutionary? He wasn't the only Indian guru > who came to the states and europe to promote his schtick you know. It was revolutionary in that he found a way to present a technique of meditation designed for beginners, as a mere starting point from which to explore more interesting techniques, as the "end point" of meditation itself. In other words, he presented a kindergarten level of meditation as "the best, most effective form of meditation on the planet," and convinced millions of people it was true. I'd call the chutzpah of that pretty revolutionary, wouldn't you? :-) Some people here keep harping on the fact that TM was so elementary, "kindergarten" as you put it. Let's face it, how complicated can sitting down and meditating be - in any spiritual practice? I mean you put your butt on a flat surface and close your eyes. We're not talking splitting the atom with a razor blade blindfolded or running a marathon backwards. Now, granted, 20 mins. twice a day is pretty easy to stomach and certainly doesn't compare to the lifelong and continuous hours that many holy or spiritually-driven people devote themselves to year after year until they die (presumably of boredom). But the practice of TM itself is hardly "kindergarten".
[FairfieldLife] Religion for dogs
[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
TurquoiseB: "I'd call the chutzpah of that pretty revolutionary, wouldn't you?" It actually IS, and I do mean this in a rather positive way. The real innovation in TM is the packaging. It's in the language. None of the essential elements that constitute TM as a technique is new at all: the mantras are the well known Tantric mantras as used in the Shri Vidya for example. The element of effortlessness and spontaneity is there in a number of other meditation techniques as well, otherwise, where does the term Sahaja come from? But mostly those other traditions, who emphasize this spontaneity and effortlessness, rely on some kind of transmission like in Dzogchen or on shaktipath. The idea to go with the mind rather than against it, is essentially present in all tantric teachings. The idea of momentary transcendence is there in Kashmere Shaivism as the teaching of turya between two thoughts. What is innovative, is the packaging of it AS a singular meditation technique, stripped from religious language and connotations. Substituting religious language with more western scientific - (pseudo)- jargon. The language of a rediscovered lost ancient technique that is unique and effective for the householder is instead not innovative but typical sales pitch. Because 'effective for the householder' is true for all tantric teachings. What is innovative is, that Maharishi came from a monastic orthodox tradition, and utilized it's tantric elements to open it up to something entirely different. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > what about it was revolutionary? He wasn't the only Indian guru > who came to the states and europe to promote his schtick you know. It was revolutionary in that he found a way to present a technique of meditation designed for beginners, as a mere starting point from which to explore more interesting techniques, as the "end point" of meditation itself. In other words, he presented a kindergarten level of meditation as "the best, most effective form of meditation on the planet," and convinced millions of people it was true. I'd call the chutzpah of that pretty revolutionary, wouldn't you? :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: MMY and Siddha Tradtions
."..what Maharishi wanted known about the origins of Transcendental Meditation" Nicely and carefully phrased, Judy. That would be the streamlined party-line - any resemblance to truth is purely incidental. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Seraphita, if you're interested in what Maharishi wanted known about the origins of Transcendental Meditation (i.e., the specific technique he taught), see here (it's a 1993 post from the Usenet newsgroup alt.meditation.transcendental, now archived on Google Groups): http://tinyurl.com/34bras http://tinyurl.com/34bras The post contains the first half of the introductory essay by Larry Domash to the first volume of the Collected Papers (research studies on TM, published in 1975). The whole thing (that is, the whole first half) is of interest, but Domash gets to the nitty-gritty about the origins of TM in the paragraph beginning "As an unusually talented student..." if you want to skip the background. Rick Archer has said he was present when Domash read the essay to Maharishi for his approval, so we can be pretty sure it reflects the account Maharishi wanted told. (Whether it's 100 percent accurate is anyone's guess.) It doesn't exactly answer your question, but it seems clear that Maharishi didn't simply parrot the meditation instructions given by Guru Dev (or at least didn't want that to be the story). Seraphita wrote to Richard: So if I'm following your post correctly that means Guru Dev's own initiation into meditation was essentially an initiation into "transcendental meditation" (before it had that name obviously) - just like you and me! Would that have been just a beginner's technique which he would later have abandoned? And, if so, are there details of what his later practice was?