--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote:
MMY's own meta-explanation for why he even bothers to
present a theory is because
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TorquiseB writes snipped:
I *am* in total control of the things I do to
facilitate my realization of enlightenment. But
I am not silly enough to believe that's all there
is to it -- Do X and Y
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In
--- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Flanegin writes snipped:
OK- I am just trying to understand my experience in terms of the
Jean Klein quotation. So it sounds like the third event of mine
that
I described is per the JK
@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 2:02 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nisargadatta quote
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig
Even though it is present at every moment, if you
just LET GO. As I said before, perfectly seriously,
the whole thing is really kinda funny once you get
past self and learn to laugh at it. Good luck with
that, y'hear.
One of the best things about Buddhism that you find in lots of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
whoever opens himself to the 1000 eyed Lord (to the expanded vision
of
unbounded awareness), gains inner and outer purity.
I like that! I think of it sometimes as the mind of God- same mind
blowing perspective.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even though it is present at every moment, if you
just LET GO. As I said before, perfectly seriously,
the whole thing is really kinda funny once you get
past self and learn to laugh at it. Good luck with
that,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote:
snip
And they will not change just because someone has thoughts of
enlightenment, or because they have sidhis. This ability to
let go, relax, and be
sublimation,
she has a large following among carpet munchers. :-)
- Original Message -
From: Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nisargadatta quote
Well, thanks for sharing. Do
There was nothing -- repeat, *nothing* -- in what
I wrote that suggested or even hinted at determinism.
Point is, Barry, back then you were arguing
*against* the idea that there was nothing one
could do to become enlightened, and mocking it.
Now you're arguing *for* it, and mocking the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
snip
You really *do* see the fact that
we have different ideas than you have -- an expressing
them -- as somehow abusing you.
I kinda doubt
And it is the yagyas or however it is spelled
In my understanding yagya is the spelling that best
reflects the modern (Northern?)Indian pronunciation;
I think yajña is the official linguistic spelling,
but I guess nobody nowadays pronounces that word
exactly like that (would be perhaps
On Dec 11, 2006, at 3:16 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
snip
You really *do* see the fact that
we have different ideas than you have -- an expressing
them --
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
snip
You really *do* see the fact that
we have different ideas than you have
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Largely as an experiment, a good number of months ago decided to
mention that TM was a dualistic method of meditation. The idea was
not to characterize that as negative nor to cast it as positive. The
initial intent was
On Dec 11, 2006, at 6:47 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Some people had a huge amount of attachment to this idea. Some
came out of the woodwork to hurl insults or to defend TM.
Interestingly some of the most knowledgeable people on the list
simply said nothing.
Not knowing whether I am remotely
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Since you went on to explicitly identify me
as one of the folks you're talking about here:
I've found a similar reaction when other basic, never-
to-be-challenged assumptions (that is, never to be
challenged within
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
snip
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@
wrote:
Jim, I think what comes across in Vaj's post are superior
knowledge ? and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote:
My point is simply: you have no idea why people didn't get to
enlightenment in 5-7 years.
Absolutely true. But neither does Maharishi. But I'd
be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 3:16 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
snip
You really *do* see the fact
--- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Flanegin writes snipped:
Where then would the reference to the shift from identification
with
my limited relative self, to the identification with my unlimited
infinite self occur, with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Largely as an experiment, a good number of months ago decided to
mention that TM was a dualistic method of meditation. The idea was
not to characterize that as negative nor to cast it as positive.
The initial intent
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote:
Jim, I think what comes across in Vaj's post are superior knowledge
? and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote:
My point is simply: you have no idea why people didn't get to
enlightenment in 5-7 years.
Absolutely true. But neither does Maharishi. But I'd
be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I *am* in total control of the things I do to
facilitate my realization of enlightenment. But
I am not silly enough to believe that's all there
is to it -- Do X and Y will appear. There are
other factors that are
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@
wrote:
Jim, I think what comes across in Vaj's post are superior
knowledge
? and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 3:16 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
snip
You really *do* see the fact
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Largely as an experiment, a good number of months ago decided to
mention that TM was a dualistic method of meditation. The idea was
not to characterize that as negative nor to cast it as positive. The
initial intent
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
Largely as an experiment, a good number of months ago decided to
mention that TM was a dualistic method of meditation. The idea was
not to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 6:47 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Some people had a huge amount of attachment to this idea. Some
came out of the woodwork to hurl insults or to defend TM.
Interestingly some of the most knowledgeable
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And it is the yagyas or however it is spelled
In my understanding yagya is the spelling that best
reflects the modern (Northern?)Indian pronunciation;
I think yajña is the official linguistic spelling,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 6:47 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
snip
Not knowing whether I am remotely knowledgeable or not,
but knowing that I didn't bother to weigh in on this
experiment at the time, I'll do so now. :-) I agree
with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
He explained, in some detail then that TM was actually a dualistic
approach from tantra and was definitely not Advaita. It was very
clear at the time that he was simply speaking the plain truth. As I
later heard this
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:55 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Again, for the record, but not assuming for even
a moment that it'll do any good, what you refer
to above as abuse I regularly dish out to TMers
is your attempt to negatively propagandize what
I say. Here's how it really goes -- I make some
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
Much of what he [Vaj] says in that regard
is incorrect.
Like
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
It certainly applies to you. You did it just above.
You took a statement of Vaj's that is clearly literally
correct and claimed that it was
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the one side of it you're
just an Ordinary Joe with an OPINION. On the other side
(the one you're on currently), you're a fanatic.
Let's go a step further, and admit that all you have said is neither
incorrect nor
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:55 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Again, for the record, but not assuming for even
a moment that it'll do any good, what you refer
to above as abuse I regularly dish out to TMers
is your attempt to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
On the one side of it you're
just an Ordinary Joe with an OPINION. On the other side
(the one you're on currently), you're a fanatic.
Let's go a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
On the one side of it you're
just an Ordinary Joe with an OPINION. On the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:55 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Again, for the record, but not assuming for even
a moment that it'll do any good, what you refer
to above as abuse I regularly dish out to TMers
is your attempt to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:55 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Again, for the record, but not assuming for even
a moment that it'll do any good, what you refer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:55 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Again, for the record,
Just to finish this up...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
There was nothing -- repeat, *nothing* -- in what
I wrote that suggested or even hinted at determinism.
Point
Jim, still pissed off while claiming he's not:
I'm beginning to think that since they both now grow their
spiritual roots in the medium of a failed tradition (Tibetan
Buddhism), *all* traditions are then seen as failed.
Not at all. I can't speak for Vaj, but I view *all*
spiritual
On Dec 11, 2006, at 12:35 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
On the one side of it you're
just an Ordinary Joe with an OPINION. On the other side
(the one
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WHY? It seems to me that you are saying, I cannot
conceive of a universe in which some things are out
of my control in which realization is not available
to me at any time. Right?
Because Judy will probably go
Translation of Barry's post:
I'm too intellectually lazy to bother not to
contradict myself, so when I get caught at it,
I'll just declare that consistency is an
intellectual limitation.
Barry, nobody is fooled by this. *You* wouldn't
be fooled by it if somebody else tried to use
it as an
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jim, still pissed off while claiming he's not:
You are fantasizing...just jerking your chain again, being over the
top...I change personas rather easily. I have a *lot* of air in my
personality (sometimes fire). You?
Let's go a step further, and admit that all you have said
is neither incorrect nor correct, and all that Vaj has
stated is neither incorrect or correct, and that it is
ALL opinion. Even the socalled traditions hold merely
opinions. That to say TM is a false path is opinion.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Translation of Barry's post:
I'm too intellectually lazy to bother not to
contradict myself, so when I get caught at it,
I'll just declare that consistency is an
intellectual limitation.
Barry, nobody is fooled by
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 12:35 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
On the one side of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is factually my opinion. lol!
It is *merely* your opinion.
My opinion remains that you derive your spiritual growth from a
failed tradition. The jury is still out on TM- maybe it fails, maybe
it doesn't, but
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let's go a step further, and admit that all you have said
is neither incorrect nor correct, and all that Vaj has
stated is neither incorrect or correct, and that it is
ALL opinion. Even the socalled
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
It is factually my opinion. lol!
It is *merely* your opinion.
My opinion remains that you derive your spiritual growth from a
failed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
Translation of Barry's post:
I'm too intellectually lazy to bother not to
contradict myself, so when I get caught at it,
I'll just declare that
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 12:35 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
snip
Let's go a step further, and admit that all you have
said is neither incorrect nor correct,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
I said only that I can live with it as Jim's OPINION.
That is clearly what it is, unless he's doing a Willytex
and saying shit he *doesn'*
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Hint: You won't even be able to find *Maharishi* saying
this. It's something you made up, and have now decided
is fact.
I mean, dude...what you are doing is taking something
that *Maharishi* believes and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
Translation of Barry's post:
I'm too intellectually lazy to bother not to
On Dec 11, 2006, at 2:40 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
I wouldn't fall for it so easily B. The current situation was
predicted not only centuries ago, but also decades before the
current
invasion. The on-coming invasion was reiterated in the early
1900's,
but the Tibetans, realizing it would
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
I said only that I can live with it as Jim's OPINION.
That is clearly
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 2:40 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
I wouldn't fall for it so easily B. The current situation was
predicted not only centuries ago, but also decades before the
current
invasion. The on-coming invasion
llundrub wrote:
She couldn't eat my pussy ;)
Which one?
On Dec 11, 2006, at 12:35 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
On the one side of it you're
just an Ordinary Joe with an OPINION. On the other side
(the one
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 12:35 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
On the one side of it
jstein wrote:
Ah...when in doubt, revert to the old maid
repressed sexuality fantasies again.
You, Barry, and Berkhart takes this forum to a whole 'nother level.
On Dec 11, 2006, at 4:13 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
I wouldn't fall for it so easily B. The current situation was
predicted not only centuries ago, but also decades before the
current
invasion. The on-coming invasion was reiterated in the early
1900's,
but the Tibetans, realizing it would
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It did
not
die--it spread like wildfire.
On Dec 11, 2006, at 4:13 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
Actually, it didn't. There are about two million adherents to
Buddhism in the US, so we can conclude that just a small
fraction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jstein wrote:
Ah...when in doubt, revert to the old maid
repressed sexuality fantasies again.
You, Barry, and Berkhart takes this forum to a whole 'nother level.
Actually *Barry* wrote that, in
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:30 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It did
not
die--it spread like wildfire.
On Dec 11, 2006, at 4:13 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
Actually, it didn't. There are about two million adherents to
Buddhism in the US,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jstein wrote:
Ah...when in doubt, revert to the old maid
repressed sexuality fantasies again.
You, Barry, and Berkhart takes this forum to a whole 'nother level.
U mean, Burn Kirkhard?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:30 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
snip There's 300,000 people in Kalmykia, that's less than Las
Vegas!-
Hardly representative of a western country with a large
percentage
of Buddhists!
Indeed it is
TorquiseB writes snipped:
I *am* in total control of the things I do to
facilitate my realization of enlightenment. But
I am not silly enough to believe that's all there
is to it -- Do X and Y will appear. There are
other factors that are not in my control, and
they coexist quite peacefully with
Jim Flanegin writes snipped:
OK- I am just trying to understand my experience in terms of the
Jean Klein quotation. So it sounds like the third event of mine that
I described is per the JK quotation, a silent and implied one,
characterized as the ultimate clarity.
Tom T:
Yes and that is also
TorquiseB writes snipped:
Uh...not exactly. I think it's *you* (Jim Flanegin) who needs to go
back and read the words attributed to Gangaji. While
what you say about getting it is true, what I saw
as implied in her statement was the phenomenon I have
seen so many times, TMers taking *longer* TO
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
During residence courses and the large group courses I used to
experience
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My point is simply: you have no idea why people didn't get to
enlightenment in 5-7 years.
Absolutely true. But neither does Maharishi. But I'd
be willing to say, based on my experience and that of
hundreds of other
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, llundrub llundrub@ wrote:
Jim, I think what comes across in Vaj's post are superior knowledge
? and that's one thing that will irk everybody again and again.
snip
That
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlist@ wrote:
TorquiseB writes snipped:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 8, 2006, at 4:54 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Yup. And that of dozens of my friends and hundreds
of people within the traditions I have studied.
They have actually *had* the experience of realization,
unlike some
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Torquise B srites snipped:
No purification is required to experience realization.
Jim Flanegin writes snipped from longer piece:
Right. The experience of Realization can be had by anyone,
any
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and
samakhya darshanas, but expect to somehow, miraculously jump paths
and Views. Yoga darshana and samkhya darshana both have the same
result: turiyatita (CC).
Hmm... tad-vairaagyaad api doSa-biija-kSaye *kaivalyam*
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
But you are in direct contradiction to his teaching. You are
presenting both a false Path and a false View. One is tempted to
assume therfore that your View is false Gary.
One has to lose the false mind,
On Dec 9, 2006, at 12:27 AM, qntmpkt wrote:
---Thanks, to back track a few months to Vaj's erronous and distorted
notion that TM is dualist, to repeat another contributor's reply:
that what's dualist or otherwise depends on the Consciousness of the
aspirant, rather than the technique.
It's
On Dec 9, 2006, at 4:25 AM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and
samakhya darshanas, but expect to somehow, miraculously jump paths
and Views. Yoga darshana and samkhya darshana both have the same
result: turiyatita (CC).
Hmm...
More cosmic heroin addicts?
That would sum me up fairly well.
: [FairfieldLife] Re: Nisargadatta quote
---On a conceptual basis, yes...Dzogchen takes place somehow beyond
all progressions, and (as Vaj so astutely pointed out); doesn't
involve the transmission of Shakti (unlike Muktananda's Shaktipat).
But on a practical basis, (as Vaj so unastutely failed
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Dec 8, 2006, at 4:54 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Yup. And that of dozens of my friends and hundreds
of people within the traditions I have studied.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 9, 2006, at 4:25 AM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
and
samakhya darshanas, but expect to somehow, miraculously jump paths
and Views. Yoga darshana and
On Dec 9, 2006, at 10:23 AM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 9, 2006, at 4:25 AM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
and
samakhya darshanas, but expect to somehow, miraculously
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis
tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlist@ wrote:
Torquise B srites snipped:
No purification is required to experience realization.
Jim Flanegin
llundrub wrote:
TM is not different from Dzogchen.
So, you're saying that Dzogchen is non-different from TM.
When one past thought has ceased and a future thought
has not yet arisen, in that gap, in between, there's
a conciousness of the present moment; fresh, unaltered
by even a hair's
Vaj writes snipped:
Yes, precisely: in the darshana of yoga, kaivalyam is CC (as Alistair
Shearer points out in his official TMer YS translation)
Tom T;
Please explain,chapter and verse from the shearer version, to back up
this statement please. Be specific.
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
