RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: RE: Pope Francis technique

2013-10-14 Thread judy stein
Buck wrote:

 Dear Turq;  to give credit where credit is due, actually Centering Prayer
 was drawn from the range of Christian and Eastern mystics but to be
 more honest and accurate was distilled from Transcendental Meditation
 in the 1970's by the three monks and their brethren at St. Joseph's
 Abbey in Spencer Massachusetts.
 I know, I was there and watched them rip Transcendental Meditation [TM]
 off for their own purposes.

 -Buck in the Dome 
I'll confirm that the assumption among TMers that these three clerics' version
of Centering Prayer was based on TM was current back in the late 1970s. It
isn't something Buck made up. Photocopies of the chapter entitled TM and
Centering Prayer from Pennington's 1977 book Daily We Touch Him were
routinely passed around among TMers.

Moreover, if Barry had any curiosity at all, or any desire to get his facts 
he would have checked out the PDF that Xeno uploaded. It would be extremely
difficult for anyone familiar with TM instruction to read those two pages on 
to do Centering Prayer and claim that it had nothing to do with TM. It's
obvious that the clerics did indeed rip off the instructions for TM, just as 
says above.

The mechanics of the techniques are virtually identical. The only two 
differences are (1) that TM uses a teacher-assigned Sanskrit mantra, whereas
Centering Prayer uses a self-chosen sacred word from the Christian tradition;
and (2) that the explicit context of Centering Prayer is Christian, whereas 
TM's is
either secular, religious/nondenominational, or Hindu, depending on one's

--The Corrector

Barry wrote:
  I think we all know that The Corrector will probably rip Buck a new asshole 
  running this tired and intentionally misleading routine again, but just on 
  the off
  chance that she doesn't, I will. The bolded section in brackets above comes
  only from Buck's fevered imagination. Anyone who reads the rest of the
  descriptions on that page knows that it has nothing to do with TM. 
  Buck's as bad as Willytex at making shit up and presenting it as fact.  

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Ahhh

2013-10-13 Thread judy stein
Michael wrote:
 Ha ha! Yes - that is my exact experience every day, especially
 when I was reviling feste and nabby et al in the past.

Well, I thought it might have been an experience you had once
upon a time, not necessarily permanent.

 Actually it is from Gopi Krishna - the guy who claimed to have
 had dramatic kundalini experiences.

Ah, yes, thanks. Read his books decades ago.

  Where's this from, Michael? (Or is this your own experience?)

   Michael wrote:

   From a unit of consciousness dominated by ego, to which I was habituated
   from childhood, I had expanded all at once to a glowing conscious circle,
   growing larger and larger until a maximum was reached, the I remaining
   as it was, but instead of a confining unit, now itself encompassed by a
   shining conscious globe of vast dimensions. 
   From a tiny glow the awareness in me became a large radiating pool of
   Light, the I immersed in it yet fully cognizant of the radiantly 
   blissful volume
   of consciousness all around, both near and far. There was ego 
   consciousness as well as a vastly extended field of awareness, existing 
   by side, both distinct, yet one.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM?

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
 Iranitea wrote:

 And to Judy: she doesn't know me at all, the life that I
 am leading, she just tries to take an easy shot at me.

And Ann is smarter than you are too.

If you were as intelligent as Ann, it would have occurred to you
that you, Ann, and I know each other only from what we write.
That's the sense in which...

  ...Ann is far more interesting, vital, and
  in touch with herself and with life than you are,
  Go figure.

And it isn't exactly  as if you're in a position to criticize anybody
else for taking cheap shots.

But what I wrote isn't a cheap shot in any case;, it's an observation
comparing how you come across in your posts versus how Ann comes
across in her posts. Sorry you don't like it.

Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Pricing TM to Teach [more] Meditators

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
Share wrote:
 Buck, it's not my experience that ALL rich
 people care less, nor that all poor people care more.

I suspect you're the only person here who thought this is what Buck
was saying.

 I think such generalizations cause more polarizing which is
 not IMO what is needed!

You didn't bother to read the NYTimes column he cited, did you?

There's all kinds of research on this; it isn't just an idle generalization.

I mean, we could always just stick our heads in the sand and pretend
this empathy gap doesn't exist. But if we don't ackowledge that it
exists, it'll just keep getting worse.

Re: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Pricing TM to Teach [more] Meditators

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
Share wrote:
 Buck, I'm objecting to the word ALL because
 I've known rich people who do care and poor people who

LOL. You're the only person who used the word you're
objecting to, Share.

 And yes, I've read this article and recognize
 that there are the tendencies.

Which are, of course, what Buck was referring to.

Re: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Pricing TM to Teach [more] Meditators

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
Share wrote:

 To me a headline Rich
 People Could Care Less implies all rich people. It's
 kind of sneaky spin, creating a harmful meme.

Only to airheads like you, Share. Seriously, you've lived on this
earth for 65 years and never noticed that you have to read at
least some of an article or essay beyond the headline--which
is typically just a few words--to know what it's about?

Oh, wait, you said you DID read the article. So you know there
was no such implication.

 Are the rich
 people on FFL uncaring and lacking in empathy? I don't
 think so.

Non sequitur. Remember, you're the only person who thought
Buck was saying all rich people are uncaring--and he wasn't
saying that, nor was anybody else. You've just made this up--
sneaky spin and harmful meme and all--in your head; it has
no relationship to reality.

You wanted to say something Important and Thoughtful, and
as you so often do, you just babbled out the first thing that
came to your mind without thinking it through. As a result,
you said something Obvious and Dumb.

Re: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Pricing TM to Teach [more] Meditators

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
Share bleated:
 Judy, airhead or not,
 I'm grateful to be me with all my strengths and flaws
 rather than you with all your strengths and flaws.

Well, of course you are. You'd last about ten minutes
if you were me, because I don't hide from reality.

Re: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Pricing TM to Teach [more] Meditators

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
Share feebles:
 Judy, if I were you,
 with your various imbalances and delusions, I'm sure I
 wouldn't want to last even as long as 10


[FairfieldLife] ATT: Bharitu

2013-10-11 Thread judy stein
Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult

(Reuters) - Switzerland will hold a vote on whether to introduce a basic income 
for all adults, in a further sign of growing public activism over pay 
inequality since the financial crisis.

A grassroots committee is calling for all adults in Switzerland to receive an 
unconditional income of 2,500 Swiss francs ($2,800) per month from the state, 
with the aim of providing a financial safety net for the population.

Organizers submitted more than the 100,000 signatures needed to call a 
referendum on Friday and tipped a truckload of 8 million five-rappen coins 
outside the parliament building in Berne, one for each person living in 

Under Swiss law, citizens can organize popular initiatives that allow the 
channeling of public anger into direct political action. The country usually 
holds several referenda a year.

In March, Swiss voters backed some of the world's strictest controls on 
executive pay, forcing public companies to give shareholders a binding vote on 

A separate proposal to limit monthly executive pay to no more than what the 
company's lowest-paid staff earn in a year, the so-called 1:12 initiative, 
faces a popular vote on November 24.

The initiative's organizing committee said the basic income could partly be 
financed through money from social insurance systems in Switzerland.

The timing of the vote has yet to be announced, pending official guidance from 
the government.

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: MMY and Siddha Tradtions

2013-10-09 Thread judy stein

Iranitea wrote:
 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?

Richard wrote:
  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.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: So You Can All Relax Now

2013-10-09 Thread judy stein
 Iranitea wrote:
 It's because you inserted the 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.

 awoelflebater@... wrote:
  Typical, I add
  a link and it clicks but takes you nowhere. You'll have
  to just do it the hard way:

RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM?

2013-10-09 Thread judy stein
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.

RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: MMY and Siddha Tradtions

2013-10-09 Thread judy stein
Iranitea wrote:

 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. 
Oh, really? In denial of what? Be specific, please.

 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

Nor, as you know, was that my intention. My intention was to
provide the account Maharishi apparently (per Rick) approved.
And there was no argument involved, as you know; I wasn't
disputing anything, as I said. I haven't a clue whether Swami
Karpatri was a member of the Sri Vidya sect or not and couldn't
care less. I wasn't responding to Richard's post, I was telling
Seraphita about something I thought would interest her (and
according to her, it did).

Moreover, as you know, I was explicit that I was making no
claims for the accuracy of Domash's account. I said, 
Whether it's 100 percent accurate is anyone's guess.

Like Barry, you seem to have trouble distinguishing between
Maharishi sez X and What Maharishi sez is true.

 The other's here, who criticize  him, do so,
 because he provides infos THEY already know - but which are
 not talked about officially.

Who criticizes Richard on that basis?

 To say, for example that he
 doesn't provide any reliable information is just
 misdirection on your part.

As you know, that is not what I said. What I said was: I
wouldn't take Richard's posts to confirm anything. A lot of
what he posts here (as you know) is *deliberately misleading*
or *outright false* (such as his accusations against me that
you are making an ass of yourself trying to defend). He may
post some good information here from time to time, but given
his trollish and deceptive habits, I don't take his word for

 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?

I'm flattered you think I'm capable of reading Domash's mind of
40-some years ago. But really, all I can do is speculate:

He was writing primarily for scientists (the intended 
readership of the Collected Papers volumes), so he may not have
thought lore about the history and provenance of mantras or
other fundamental informations (hint: information is always
singular in English) discussed here was really very pertinent in
that context. That the mantras are common place in India isn't
much of a revelation, nor does it make any difference to how
they're used in TM.

Just in general, the purpose of the essay was not to address
every negative criticism that's ever been made about TM, 
especially criticisms of its marketing approach (which is
where the mantras being common place in India would come in).

I did make the point to Seraphita, as you know, that Domash 
didn't exactly make clear Guru Dev's role in the formulation
and teaching of TM, and that it seemed likely to me that he
didn't have a thing to do with either, contrary to the TM
party line.

Once again, iranitea, your compulsion to get me has blinded
you to what I've actually said in my posts. Your rather
desperate attempts to pour me into a True Believer mold just
make you look foolish and weak.

RE: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: The power nap: an alternative to TM?

2013-10-09 Thread judy stein
Share wrote:
 Judy, unlike you who simply asserts
 your opinions as facts, I say I think to designate that in
 this day and age of many working at home, my statement is
 qualified in that I don't know all the statistics involved.

Nope, sorry, you specified spouses who work *outside the home*:
I think many spouses who work outside the home are separated
from each other from [sic] most of the day. That isn't even an
opinion; it's a truism, verging on a tautology.

And your I think qualification didn't have a thing to do with
not knowing the statistics. Many was sufficiently vague to cover
any uncertainty about numbers.

  It was the I
  think that cracked me up, as if you might not be quite
  sure about such a trivial and obvious fact. False
  humility on your part, in other words. You do it a lot;
  it's a function of the general inauthenticity of your
  FFL persona.

As is your attempt here to dishonestly extricate yourself from
what I pointed out.

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] See you around....

2013-09-02 Thread judy stein

On Mon, 9/2/13, wrote:

 Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] See you around
 Date: Monday, September 2, 2013, 9:36 AM
 This new site is a real bother, I have to admit. I became
 rather fond of the old format and could play around with it
 easily. Now I am reduced to responding by email and still
 don't know how to post pictures. Or place my comments to
 other posts within the original post I am responding to.
 Thus, all my posts appear at the top of the page (horrors).
 It just ain't the same.

I wrote:

Why can't you put your comments within the post you're responding to? I think I 
just did exactly that (but I won't know until I see this on the Web site).
 --- In, wrote:
 Heck with the site Salyavin, email works
 well.  The site is out of your
 Isn't it great you have
 a job?  
 From: salyavin808
  Sent: Sunday,
 September 1, 2013 11:40 PM
 [FairfieldLife] See you around

   I am completely fucking fed up with this bollocks
 new site and cannot be bothered to work out a simple way of
 getting it to do what I
 want. Maybe when I get a week off
 I'll be able to explain something to Judy so she will
 understand and not use it as an excuse to accuse me of not
 understanding something she doesn't want to explain
 herself and instead use whithering sarcasm to try and kid
 herself she's making a valid point. You
 aren't! Life is too short or
 rather my lunch break is

Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: FFL Picture Is Missing in the Title Page

2013-08-30 Thread judy stein
Even more reason for you not to try to be helpful.

On Fri, 8/30/13, Share Long wrote:

 Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: FFL Picture Is Missing in 
the Title Page
 Date: Friday, August 30, 2013, 2:33 PM
 Yes, I
 realized he was replying to you Judy. I was just offering
 feedback in case it might be of use. Since I've not been
 neo'd yet, I don't know what's going on even
 more than usual!

  Sent: Friday,
 August 30, 2013 1:24 PM
  Subject: RE:
 RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife]
  RE: FFL Picture Is Missing in the Title Page

   Alex was replying to me, not to you, Share, so
 you wouldn't have gotten it as a *private* email anyway.
 He wanted to know if it was going to go to *me* privately (I
 had asked him how to send a private email)--but it
 didn't, it went to the entire group.  
 --- In,
 sharelong60@... wrote:
 Alex, it didn't come to my email inbox, but it came
 to Message View. Shoot, I don't even know it that's
 helpful info!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Obama and al-Qaeda

2013-08-29 Thread judy stein
Actually twerk is not in the Oxford English Dictionary; that's been 
misreported. It's in
the Oxford Dictionaries Online. This is from the press release announcing the
additions of twerk, selfie, and a few other new terms:

It is important to note that the new words mentioned above have been added to 
Oxford Dictionaries Online, not 
the Oxford English Dictionary. Why is this?

• The dictionary content in ODO focuses on current English and includes modern 
meanings and uses of words
• The OED, on the other hand, is a historical dictionary and it forms a record 
of all the core words and meanings
in English over more than 1,000 years, from Old English to the present day, 
including many obsolete and historical
terms. Words are never removed from the OED.

On Thu, 8/29/13, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote:

 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Obama and al-Qaeda
 Date: Thursday, August 29, 2013, 5:26 PM
 --- In,
 Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:
  Ugh, that twerking word, Richard! No name and form
 value IMHO! It sounds like a combo of tweeting and jerking!
 Well, I do not like the word 'enthuse'. But twerk is now in
 the Oxford English Dictionary (which can be accessed for
 about $30 a month online) so there are enough instances of
 use to justify it as being a part of the English language.
 As with everything else, language changes vastly over time.
 Twerking is a dance move that involves a person, usually a
 woman, shaking her hips in an up-and-down bouncing motion,
 causing the dancer to shake, wobble and jiggle. This
 motion, when incorporated into dance moves, is also referred
 to as sissing (sexual intercourse simulation). When done
 by men it's usually directed at a particular person, often
 female, to indicate a disrespectful assessment of her
 reputation. According to the Oxford Dictionary Online to
 twerk is to dance to popular music in a sexually
 provocative manner involving thrusting hip movements and a
 low, squatting stance. Twerking carries both gendered and
 racialized connotations.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists more hated, distrusted than Muslims, homosexuals

2009-09-20 Thread Judy Stein
--- In, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote:

 --- In, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
  I'd question anyone's judgment who would actually WANT to 
  work for someone like you, Shremp.
 Not to pile on unnecessarily (but I 
 can't help it), I have to add the phrase, 
 ...especially on commission.
 Am I the only person here who suspects that
 a great deal of Shemp's angst and anger 
 lately is due to working on commission 
 in an economy that literally trickles 
 down on the very God Of Capitalism he

I haven't noticed any more angst and anger in
Shemp's posts lately than before, all the way
back to alt.m.t. Look at how he replied to the
do.rkflex's nitwit insult on which Barry has

He did share with us awhile ago that he was
having some emotional difficulties, but they
don't seem to have leaked into his posts on
other topics.

Am I the only person here who suspects that
Barry's thoroughly gratuitous and irrelevant
attack on Shemp here is due to frustration at
his lack of success in the fights he just
picked with Shemp over TM and atheism?

[FairfieldLife] Re: The TM Rishikesh ashram, the original Peace Palace, was funded by...

2009-09-20 Thread Judy Stein
--- In, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote:
 On Sep 20, 2009, at 12:04 AM, ShempMcGurk wrote:
   Might not be true, but it does make one wonder why so
   much death surrounds this particular guru like the
   angel of death is his friend...
  so much death? Criminy, Guru Dev died in his 80s;
  Maharishi was 91.
  I got news for you, Vajina, people die
 But usually not because of their guru Shemp!

Guru Dev and Maharishi died because of their guru??

[FairfieldLife] Re: Howard Dean confident bill with Public Option will pass

2009-09-20 Thread Judy Stein
--- In, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote:
 Today on ABC's This Week Obama denied making people pay
 a penalty if they don't buy mandated health insurance is
 a tax on the middle class, dissed those who can't afford
 insurance as a burden on those who can afford it

In fairness, he said those who CAN afford health
insurance--or would be able to under the reform
provisions--but choose not to are the burden. See
the portion of the This Week transcript posted as
an update.

 and dissed supporters of the public option calling them

This was also updated after a review of the video:

[Update II: After watching the NBC MTP video, Obama's
statement about getting beyond ideology was general;
it was NOT make in specific reference to the public

[FairfieldLife] Re: Glenn Beck's ideas are really not that original

2009-09-20 Thread Judy Stein
--- In, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote:

 --- In, seekliberation seekliberation@ 
   According to a thoroughly documented book on Kennedy [JFK and the 
   Unspeakable], he was in the process of -ending- any military involvement 
   in Viet Nam when he was murdered.
  Too bad Lyndon Johnson took over.  I guess he and Kennedy didn't exactly 
  see eye to eye.   
 From the book review:

The do.rkflex meant to write, From one of 66 reader
reviews on Amazon. There are no editorial reviews
from established publications, although the book has
been out since April, which tells you something.

Here's an excerpt from another reader review:

Of course there were many powerful individuals and
organizations who stood to benefit from harder stance
on the perceived communist threat of the time, but is
there evidence to suggest that Kennedy was removed
from office by a conspiracy that originated in the
highest level of office. James Douglass thinks so - 
and why wouldn't he? He places JFK on a pedestal,
lures the reader in to share his sentimentality on
what might have been and in doing so cleverly dupes
the reader into believing that such a great man could
surely not have been killed by some deranged 24 year
old nut case called Lee Harvey Oswald.

The reviewer goes on at some length to demolish a good
bit of the author's thorough documentation.

Another negative review, from a strong Warren
Commission skeptic, states, No critical mind familiar
with the assassination literature could possibly regard
this book as a contribution. This reviewer also calls
a hunk of the thorough documentation into serious

And one of the commenters on the review the do.rkflex
quotes observes:

The last four or five Kennedy assassination books I've
read respectively, comprehensively, and painstakingly
proved that the CIA did it, Castro did it, the Mob did
it, French drug dealers and right-wingers did it, etc.
One book even proved pretty convincingly that the last
shot was accidentally fired by a Secret Service agent.
Oh, yet another had extraordinary evidence linking
Oswald and Ruby to covert bio-weapons research and the
creation of the AIDS virus.

I haven't read the book and don't have an opinion one
way or the other (although I'm also a Warren Commission
skeptic). I just wanted to point out the absurdity--and
deliberate attempt to mislead--of the do.rkflex quoting
from an Amazon reader review of the book and calling it
THE review, as if it were definitive, as if there could
be no other opinions.