[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
What would it take, Buck, to get you and some of the other informants to 'snip' before you post? At least you are a 'top-poster'. Thanks for that! Do any of you informants know how to use the 'preview' button? It's not complicated. Go figure. Buck: > These are some of the best meditator essays > written about Fairfield life. They deserve to > be brought to the top and read again in the whole > discussion of TM or Fairfield after Maharishi. > > http://www.krystofiak.com/talk.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
what makes you think I failed, dummy? Because I am not trying to claim special relationship with a master (so-called) who never shows up like your mentor Benjy? From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 7:01 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > I am not trying to be unkind here, but you guys just don't get it. Dear MJ, you have no idea how grateful we all are having a failed channeler in our midst to explain everything to us !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > I am not trying to be unkind here, but you guys just don't get it. > Dear MJ, you have no idea how grateful we all are for having a failed channeler in our midst who can explain everything to us !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > I am not trying to be unkind here, but you guys just don't get it. Dear MJ, you have no idea how grateful we all are having a failed channeler in our midst to explain everything to us !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Forty years of doing the same thing I marvel all the time how unlike my meditation today is from yesterday or from 39 years ago. Are you sure you're "doing" TM? L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > I could not care less about what Barry's, or your, intent may be. Forty years > is an awfully long time to be doing the same thing, and expecting a different > result. That is commonly referred to as insanity. That is why I made the > statement I did about happily living on a different continent from him. I > don't dig his shit, though you seem to enjoy doing so. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from > > the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et > > al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: "doctordumbass@" > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > Â > > Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, > > still remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now > > being marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those > > in the TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, > > etc, etc. > > > > Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who > > actually practice it! > > > > Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't > > done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I > > have ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or > > had a conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER > > MET someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do > > with the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. > > > > As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. > > :-) > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > > > involved with the TM organization, > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I still find this tape charming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRSvW9Ml9DQ L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > If I had known about a "no Saints" policy before learning TM, honestly, > > that type of control would have steered me far away from learning TM, > > absolutely. > > That's nothing, if I'd seen a tape of Marshy before learning > I wouldn't have bothered. > > There is a reason they keep stuff like this back, they don't > want to scare people off. At the academy I worked at they had > special weekend courses for newbies with normal food and easy > going tapes with no chanting etc. The whole thing was designed > to get you into the belief system bit by bit. > > > > Hindsight, when I was innocent to some of these ridicules requirements, > > such as that, I would appreciated hearing from others what is going to be > > "expected," of one to use and do a "stress reduction," technique, and pay > > for it on top of that! > > > > Nothing is wrong with teaching and sharing and a fair exchange of goods for > > services. > > It is all the stupid requirements that make it look like a cult. > > It *is* a cult. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Michael's and Nabby's Hard on gave me the chance to see Buck's plightful speech, below. "Fugitive meditators," are being created, and see above, it extends there also. We need unity. The domes were meant to hold thousands of Sidhas together at the same time, sitting meditating, with our eyes closed, with the occasional peek at the shuffling pillow or foot across the way. Still, stillness of stagnant air, is what the DOMES were not built for. Numbers of Sidhas currently in the DOMES, are like the teeth in a jack-o-lantern these days! Fill this void with the hard evidence! (Ann, this was not meant to be naughty, it only sounds like it.) Drop Dad's belt and bring back the Saints! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > > would that be like the "hard on" you have for Maharishi several times a > day? > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > ha ha ha ha ha! Buck finally got a rise out of Nabby!!! > > > > > > > > > > > > From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:26 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > Â > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > The large threat here to the work of the Meissner Effect in the > Domes is not saints but the administrative *prohibition* around sitting > with them. That TM anti-saint policy has made hypocrites of everyone, > even of Guru Dev who consuls people specifically "to seek the company of > saints, mahatmas and wise people." It is time to repeal the TM > Anti-saint policies. Just git rid of those gnarly old TM sentiments and > policy and just stop using it as punishment to create fugitive > meditators. That policy has been the ruination of our Dome numbers here > the way it has worked on the community. For the affect that there could > have been had all these years had there been a properly numbered > Meissner Effect except for the enforcement of the TM anti-saint policies > has been a crime against humanity. > > > > Buck please have a checking > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
would that be like the "hard on" you have for Maharishi several times a day? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > ha ha ha ha ha! Buck finally got a rise out of Nabby!!! > > > > > > From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:26 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: > > > > > > The large threat here to the work of the Meissner Effect in the Domes is not saints but the administrative *prohibition* around sitting with them. That TM anti-saint policy has made hypocrites of everyone, even of Guru Dev who consuls people specifically "to seek the company of saints, mahatmas and wise people." It is time to repeal the TM Anti-saint policies. Just git rid of those gnarly old TM sentiments and policy and just stop using it as punishment to create fugitive meditators. That policy has been the ruination of our Dome numbers here the way it has worked on the community. For the affect that there could have been had all these years had there been a properly numbered Meissner Effect except for the enforcement of the TM anti-saint policies has been a crime against humanity. > > Buck please have a checking >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
ha ha ha ha ha! Buck finally got a rise out of Nabby!!! From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:26 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > The large threat here to the work of the Meissner Effect in the Domes is not > saints but the administrative *prohibition* around sitting with them. That TM > anti-saint policy has made hypocrites of everyone, even of Guru Dev who > consuls people specifically "to seek the company of saints, mahatmas and wise > people." It is time to repeal the TM Anti-saint policies. Just git rid of > those gnarly old TM sentiments and policy and just stop using it as > punishment to create fugitive meditators. That policy has been the ruination > of our Dome numbers here the way it has worked on the community. For the > affect that there could have been had all these years had there been a > properly numbered Meissner Effect except for the enforcement of the TM > anti-saint policies has been a crime against humanity. Buck please have a checking
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > The large threat here to the work of the Meissner Effect in the Domes is not > saints but the administrative *prohibition* around sitting with them. That TM > anti-saint policy has made hypocrites of everyone, even of Guru Dev who > consuls people specifically "to seek the company of saints, mahatmas and wise > people." It is time to repeal the TM Anti-saint policies. Just git rid of > those gnarly old TM sentiments and policy and just stop using it as > punishment to create fugitive meditators. That policy has been the ruination > of our Dome numbers here the way it has worked on the community. For the > affect that there could have been had all these years had there been a > properly numbered Meissner Effect except for the enforcement of the TM > anti-saint policies has been a crime against humanity. Buck please have a checking
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > Translation: I'm going to snip the bitch's humiliating demolition of all the crap I made up about Robin that I was so proud of and make up an even bigger load of crap about *her*. That'll show everybody I don't give a shit that she makes me look like a fool, right? Right?? > > Plus which, from the very beginning of Robin's tenure > > on FFL, Barry has been eaten alive by jealousy because > > Robin has gotten so much more attention than Barry has. > > Methinks the lady doth project too much. :-) > > That's what SHE is here on FFL. And she's so limited > in her thinking that she believes that's why others > are here, too. > > We ARE talking, after all, about the person that the > Posting Limits were invented FOR. One of the reasons > she's so obsessed with me is that I was the one who > first brought up her tendency to write literally > *hundreds* of posts, flooding this forum with post > after post after post after post after post, week > after week after week, month after month after month, > trying desperately to be *the* focus of attention > through sheer numbers and sheer volume of vitriol. > > Rick caught a clue from my comments (and those of > many others, including many who had left the forum > because of her) and took that obsessive-compulsive, > attention-seeking, stuck-at-home-with-nothing-else- > to-do advantage away from her. He limited her to the > same amount of posts that everyone else gets to make. > She's been on an insane crusade to "get Barry" ever > since, even more than she was before. > > Being deprived of her primary -- and very possibly > *only* -- mechanism for getting attention was the > biggest defeat she ever suffered, and Judy Stein > doth not suffer defeat lightly. > > That's one way of looking at the situation. There > are others. Maybe she just argues compulsively > and stalks her enemies because that's all she CAN > do, and the attention-seeking is way of hiding her > inability to write anything creative or original. > Who really knows. > > All I know is that after all these years it's > still fun to dash off a post that I know in advance > will push her over the edge and inspire her to pour > out more vitriol than usual. Last night's short > mention of Robin worked like a charm in that regard. :-) >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
> > you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us > > do, who actually practice it! > > nablusoss: > How can a person who left something, anything, more > than 40 (!) years ago keep obsessing and still claim > to be sane ? > It's has a lot to do with being lonely. There's nothing quite so lonely as an expat, especially for someone experiencing a lot of cognitive dissonance. LoL! There you are, sitting there, looking like a nerd or a geek, with your black T-shirt on and your Toshiba open on your lap, and nobody talks to you because you don't even understand their language, much less to follow your thought patterns on a spiritual path. So, some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to. It's that simple. Just think, you're making Barry and MJ feel better just by responding to them. But, why do most of MJ's posts begin and end on one single line and all begin with RE: Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > Plus which, from the very beginning of Robin's tenure > > on FFL, Barry has been eaten alive by jealousy because > > Robin has gotten so much more attention than Barry has. > > Methinks the lady doth project too much. :-) > > That's what SHE is here on FFL. And she's so limited > in her thinking that she believes that's why others > are here, too. This reminds me of second grade when one's most witty comeback to some verbal slight would be, "I know you are but what am I?" over and over again. > > We ARE talking, after all, about the person that the > Posting Limits were invented FOR. One of the reasons > she's so obsessed with me is that I was the one who > first brought up her tendency to write literally > *hundreds* of posts, flooding this forum with post > after post after post after post after post, week > after week after week, month after month after month, > trying desperately to be *the* focus of attention > through sheer numbers and sheer volume of vitriol. I don't know Barry, when anyone posts old links to 'historical conversations' between you and others, not only here but on other forums, there appears to be a wake of vitriol, hurled insults, plenty of libel related to purported demented psychological conditions of not only yourself but those you comment about. The flotsam and jetsam of unpleasantries litter the ether like the garbage spewn into space by so many space missions and dead satellites. You can certainly hold your head high when it comes to owning up to your share of internet detritus. > > Rick caught a clue from my comments (and those of > many others, including many who had left the forum > because of her) and took that obsessive-compulsive, > attention-seeking, stuck-at-home-with-nothing-else- > to-do advantage away from her. He limited her to the > same amount of posts that everyone else gets to make. > She's been on an insane crusade to "get Barry" ever > since, even more than she was before. Yes, yes, Barry, it has been and always will be about you - don't worry. > > Being deprived of her primary -- and very possibly > *only* -- mechanism for getting attention was the > biggest defeat she ever suffered, and Judy Stein > doth not suffer defeat lightly. I know you see typing on the internet as a do or die, win or lose proposition but for many others it is an entertaining (and at best a stimulating) opportunity to explore ideas and learn more about the human race. It is hardly a place akin to some great battlefield where lives are surrendered to some deep spiritual ideal or where one has the potential to emerge victorious or end up receiving a Green Beret (although, given where you live, a beret, green or otherwise, might make you appear jaunty and oh so French). > > That's one way of looking at the situation. There > are others. Maybe she just argues compulsively > and stalks her enemies because that's all she CAN > do, and the attention-seeking is way of hiding her > inability to write anything creative or original. > Who really knows. Who knows and who cares other than you? But as you seem to have made this your life's mission to think endlessly and write for years and years about this you go boy. Just let me know when you have come up with the definitive answer. > > All I know is that after all these years it's > still fun to dash off a post that I know in advance > will push her over the edge and inspire her to pour > out more vitriol than usual. Last night's short > mention of Robin worked like a charm in that regard. :-) Well then, you are both, evidently, happy. You have been rewarded, you are content, she responded exactly how you wanted her to (although I don't see it) and it gave you another opportunity to repeat yourself for the umpteenth time. What I don't get is why you complain about her - she appears to be your reason for living. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the > > > > > > > > > > > minds of those too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what > > > > > > > > > > > it was, a scam, you are in danger of losing nothing and > > > > > > > > > > > the extremism you speak of has existed for decades - it > > > > > > > > > > > ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to > > > > > > > > > > maintain the state of hostility and hatred between the two > > > > > > > > > > positions, but logic says that there should be a change of > > > > > > > > > > direction in order to turn a new page in this unstable > > > > > > > > > > relationship and minimize the state of hostility and > > > > > > > > > > mistrust between the two positions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > > > > > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > > > > > > Second, there is value in sticking with a single path and not > > > > > > > > > "diluting" it with other ways and creating a mishmash of > > > > > > > > > approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would suffer if the public > > > > > > > > > noticed that TM'ers were still looking for help to solve > > > > > > > > > their own issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, a > > > > > > > > > belief that TM was the best way and pretty much the only way > > > > > > > > > to enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, > > > > > > > > except clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold > > > > > > > > them as articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a > > > > > > > > problem with a few ultra-preservationist meditators in the > > > > > > > > middle of everything holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the > > > > > > > > Dome meditation hostage with their own faith about things. > > > > > > > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, > > > > > > > > > things are different in this day and age it is a fact that > > > > > > > > > people will easily be able to look at other methods to > > > > > > > > > meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. To assume that once a > > > > > > > > > person learns TM they will never be curious about another > > > > > > > > > program or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the > > > > > > > > > assumption that they should be excluded from the good graces > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > I'm just happy for you Judy. This subject lets you > engage in all your favorite activities - bashing Barry, > bashing Xexo, bashing Share, bashing me, mind reading, > and most of all, defending (IYO) the ultimate > hero, R.W. Carlsen. > > You've been waiting a couple weeks for this kind of > action. You've seen her photo. It's the only kind of action she's likely ever to get. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > Plus which, from the very beginning of Robin's tenure > on FFL, Barry has been eaten alive by jealousy because > Robin has gotten so much more attention than Barry has. Methinks the lady doth project too much. :-) That's what SHE is here on FFL. And she's so limited in her thinking that she believes that's why others are here, too. We ARE talking, after all, about the person that the Posting Limits were invented FOR. One of the reasons she's so obsessed with me is that I was the one who first brought up her tendency to write literally *hundreds* of posts, flooding this forum with post after post after post after post after post, week after week after week, month after month after month, trying desperately to be *the* focus of attention through sheer numbers and sheer volume of vitriol. Rick caught a clue from my comments (and those of many others, including many who had left the forum because of her) and took that obsessive-compulsive, attention-seeking, stuck-at-home-with-nothing-else- to-do advantage away from her. He limited her to the same amount of posts that everyone else gets to make. She's been on an insane crusade to "get Barry" ever since, even more than she was before. Being deprived of her primary -- and very possibly *only* -- mechanism for getting attention was the biggest defeat she ever suffered, and Judy Stein doth not suffer defeat lightly. That's one way of looking at the situation. There are others. Maybe she just argues compulsively and stalks her enemies because that's all she CAN do, and the attention-seeking is way of hiding her inability to write anything creative or original. Who really knows. All I know is that after all these years it's still fun to dash off a post that I know in advance will push her over the edge and inspire her to pour out more vitriol than usual. Last night's short mention of Robin worked like a charm in that regard. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
l Jackson > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the > > > > > > > > > > minds of those too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it > > > > > > > > > > was, a scam, you are in danger of losing nothing and the > > > > > > > > > > extremism you speak of has existed for decades - it ain't > > > > > > > > > > gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to > > > > > > > > > maintain the state of hostility and hatred between the two > > > > > > > > > positions, but logic says that there should be a change of > > > > > > > > > direction in order to turn a new page in this unstable > > > > > > > > > relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust > > > > > > > > > between the two positions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > > > > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > > > > > Second, there is value in sticking with a single path and not > > > > > > > > "diluting" it with other ways and creating a mishmash of > > > > > > > > approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would suffer if the public > > > > > > > > noticed that TM'ers were still looking for help to solve their > > > > > > > > own issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, a belief that > > > > > > > > TM was the best way and pretty much the only way to > > > > > > > > enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, > > > > > > > except clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold > > > > > > > them as articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a > > > > > > > problem with a few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle > > > > > > > of everything holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome > > > > > > > meditation hostage with their own faith about things. > > > > > > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, > > > > > > > > things are different in this day and age it is a fact that > > > > > > > > people will easily be able to look at other methods to > > > > > > > > meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. To assume that once a > > > > > > > > person learns TM they will never be curious about another > > > > > > > > program or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the > > > > > > > > assumption that they should be excluded from the good graces of > > > > > > > > the TMO if they do widen their horizons.The TMO has to make a > > > > > > > > decision soon: to continue to strictly follow MMY"s policy from > > > > > > > > about 1970, or to soften up and realize how different our world > > > > > > > > is now and how infantalizing the old policy is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that > > > > > > > > deals with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the > > > > > > > > Domes are only for the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who > > > > > > > > agree to do this are welcome. Welcome back. > > > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Shh! Shh! Share. You wouldn't want Judy to win the Master of Inadvertent Irony Award for maybe the tenth week in a row. Or maybe now, we can call it the *plonking* Award. (-: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > And has Judy never once badmouthed Curtis or Vaj or SalSunshine when they are not reading the traffic? > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@... > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:00 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > > Of course, if we want to be ethical and not badmouth > someone behind his back, it doesn't matter that we > *think* he's reading the traffic. We don't do it unless > we *know* he is, as I indicated to Share. But neither > Share nor Steve is ethical enough or smart enough to > understand this. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > Share, > > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that Robin reads every > > post on this site. Probably in Starbucks right now reading this. > > "Hey Robin, what it is? What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > > Como sa va. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in > > fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to > > defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not > > writing posts in response? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@ > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > Ã > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts > > > > > > *plonk* > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I'm just happy for you Judy. This subject lets you engage in all your favorite activities - bashing Barry, bashing Xexo, bashing Share, bashing me, mind reading, and most of all, defending (IYO) the ultimate hero, R.W. Carlsen. You've been waiting a couple weeks for this kind of action. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > Of course, if we want to be ethical and not badmouth > someone behind his back, it doesn't matter that we > *think* he's reading the traffic. We don't do it unless > we *know* he is, as I indicated to Share. But neither > Share nor Steve is ethical enough or smart enough to > understand this. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > Share, > > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that Robin reads every > > post on this site. Probably in Starbucks right now reading this. > > "Hey Robin, what it is? What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > > Como sa va. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in > > fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to > > defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not > > writing posts in response? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@ > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > Â > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts > > > > > > *plonk* > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
well, I wish you were right. but right now it's 2 goals-0 Bruins, end of the second period. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "card" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > > > > I'm afraid Mr. Rask wont be able to save the Bruins > even once more... :´/ >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to > > > > > > > > maintain the state of hostility and hatred between the two > > > > > > > > positions, but logic says that there should be a change of > > > > > > > > direction in order to turn a new page in this unstable > > > > > > > > relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust > > > > > > > > between the two positions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and lesser > > > > > > > and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there > > > > > > > is value in sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it > > > > > > > with other ways and creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the > > > > > > > TMO and MMY would suffer if the public noticed that TM'ers were > > > > > > > still looking for help to solve their own issues or to find a > > > > > > > better Master. Fourth, a belief that TM was the best way and > > > > > > > pretty much the only way to enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except > > > > > > clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as > > > > > > articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with > > > > > > a few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything > > > > > > holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage > > > > > > with their own faith about things. > > > > > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things > > > > > > > are different in this day and age it is a fact that people will > > > > > > > easily be able to look at other methods to meditate, calm > > > > > > > themselves, or evolve. To assume that once a person learns TM > > > > > > > they will never be curious about another program or teacher or > > > > > > > saint is ludicrous. And so is the assumption that they should be > > > > > > > excluded from the good graces of the TMO if they do widen their > > > > > > > horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to > > > > > > > strictly follow MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and > > > > > > > realize how different our world is now and how infantalizing the > > > > > > > old policy is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that > > > > > > > deals with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes > > > > > > > are only for the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do > > > > > > > this are welcome. Welcome back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only > > > > > > > waiting for the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in > > > > > > > mediation let us hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in > > > > > > > a large group meditation before then. > > > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your > > > > > > > > > > Taliban-like leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and > > > > > > &g
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > > > Share, > > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that > > Robin reads every post on this site. Probably in > > Starbucks right now reading this. > > That's a non-bet. Just look how fast he "came > back" last time when he noticed that Curtis was > here. Love it, love it, love it. Barry unerringly shoots himself in both feet. If you were Barry, wouldn't you want to check the dates in question before you made such an assertion? Curtis had been here for *three weeks* before Robin came back, having made a total of 94 posts during that period. > He reads everything posted here just on the off > chance someone will say something about *him*. > That's just what people suffering from Narcissist > Personality Disorder DO. And wouldn't you want to check the post that brought Robin back before you suggested it said something about Robin? Robin's first post was in response to particularly nasty comments of Barry's on a post of feste's, which had nothing whatsoever to do with Robin. Nor did it have anything to do with Curtis. It was *Curtis* who decided to engage Robin now that *Robin* was back. Curtis immediately leaped to defend Barry. That's how that exchange started. Notice, by the way, that Barry can't make up his mind whether it was Curtis who lured Robin back, or a post in which someone mentioned Robin. Between the time Robin left at the end of December and when he came back to lambaste Barry, there had been probably around 150 posts mentioning Robin--including two from Curtis badmouthing him, the first one the day after Curtis returned, the second a week later. Yet it was another two weeks before Robin showed up to take Barry apart for his post to feste. Barry isn't *lying*. It's just that he's so used to living in his imagination that he genuinely thinks it's reality. Plus which, from the very beginning of Robin's tenure on FFL, Barry has been eaten alive by jealousy because Robin has gotten so much more attention than Barry has.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > I'm sorry, I am having trouble hearing you, because your head is so far up > Barry's ass...Speak up! HaHa :-) > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > then why keep blathering on about his obsession?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > Share, > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that > Robin reads every post on this site. Probably in > Starbucks right now reading this. That's a non-bet. Just look how fast he "came back" last time when he noticed that Curtis was here. He reads everything posted here just on the off chance someone will say something about *him*. That's just what people suffering from Narcissist Personality Disorder DO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "card" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > > > *And you can't talk two languages *at the same time* without talking > > gibberish, now can you. > > > > Yes, ich kann! I bin a sprecher von zwei languages. > > Licht thickens und der Crow macht wing zu den rooky Wood. > Good Sachen von the Tag fangen droop and drowse an! > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBzJF_-cBA
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
and its not obsessing for for you to post over and over about Benjy Creme and his bullshit predictions and the crop circles and all the "proof" that exists that they are made by aliens? its obsessing if the POV disagrees with yours and functioning like Gabriel blowing his Horn if it agrees with your POV From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 2:14 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > From: "doctordumbass@..." > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, still > remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now being > marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those in the > TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, etc, > etc. > > Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who actually > practice it! > > Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't > done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I have > ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or had a > conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER MET > someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do with > the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. > > As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. > :-) This, the Turqs obsession with the TMO, has been pointed out again and again for years now. How can a person who left something, anything, more than 40 (!) years ago keep obsessing and still claim to be sane ? In my book it's simply not possible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "card" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > > > *And you can't talk two languages *at the same time* without talking > > gibberish, now can you. > > > > Yes, ich kann! I bin a sprecher von zwei languages. > > Licht thickens und der Crow macht wing zu den rooky Wood. > Good Sachen von the Tag fangen droop and drowse an! I think that's just one language Card. Or google translate is better than I thought!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > *And you can't talk two languages *at the same time* without talking > gibberish, now can you. > Yes, ich kann! I bin a sprecher von zwei languages. Licht thickens und der Crow macht wing zu den rooky Wood. Good Sachen von the Tag fangen droop and drowse an!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > And has Judy never once badmouthed Curtis or Vaj or SalSunshine > when they are not reading the traffic? Yes, I'm sure I've slipped up a couple of times when I wasn't *sure* they were reading the traffic, no doubt about it. That doesn't mean it's OK to do it. But note that Share has it wrong above. As I said, she's not ethical enough or smart enough to understand the principle. > > From: authfriend > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:00 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > > Of course, if we want to be ethical and not badmouth > someone behind his back, it doesn't matter that we > *think* he's reading the traffic. We don't do it unless > we *know* he is, as I indicated to Share. But neither > Share nor Steve is ethical enough or smart enough to > understand this. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > > > Share, > > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that Robin reads every > > post on this site. Probably in Starbucks right now reading this. > > "Hey Robin, what it is? What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > > Como sa va. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in > > fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to > > defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not > > writing posts in response? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@ > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > Ã > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts > > > > > > *plonk* > > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
And has Judy never once badmouthed Curtis or Vaj or SalSunshine when they are not reading the traffic? From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:00 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies Of course, if we want to be ethical and not badmouth someone behind his back, it doesn't matter that we *think* he's reading the traffic. We don't do it unless we *know* he is, as I indicated to Share. But neither Share nor Steve is ethical enough or smart enough to understand this. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > Share, > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that Robin reads every > post on this site. Probably in Starbucks right now reading this. > "Hey Robin, what it is? What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > Como sa va. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in > fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to > defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not > writing posts in response? > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@ > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > Â > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts > > > > *plonk* > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Of course, if we want to be ethical and not badmouth someone behind his back, it doesn't matter that we *think* he's reading the traffic. We don't do it unless we *know* he is, as I indicated to Share. But neither Share nor Steve is ethical enough or smart enough to understand this. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > Share, > If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that Robin reads every > post on this site. Probably in Starbucks right now reading this. > "Hey Robin, what it is? What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > Como sa va. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in > fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to > defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not > writing posts in response? > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@ > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > Â > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts > > > > *plonk* > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I'm sorry, I am having trouble hearing you, because your head is so far up Barry's ass...Speak up! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > then why keep blathering on about his obsession? > > > > > > From: "doctordumbass@..." > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 12:41 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > I could not care less about what Barry's, or your, intent may be. Forty years > is an awfully long time to be doing the same thing, and expecting a different > result. That is commonly referred to as insanity. That is why I made the > statement I did about happily living on a different continent from him. I > don't dig his shit, though you seem to enjoy doing so. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from > > the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et > > al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. > > > > > > > > > > ____________ > > From: "doctordumbass@" > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > ÃÂ > > Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, > > still remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now > > being marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those > > in the TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, > > etc, etc. > > > > Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who > > actually practice it! > > > > Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't > > done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I > > have ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or > > had a conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER > > MET someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do > > with the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. > > > > As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. > > :-) > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > > > involved with the TM organization, > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the > > > > > > not some saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO > > > > > > people as a bunch of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also > > > > > > responsible for how Maharishi's policies are to be be maintained, > > > > > > or modified. > > > > > > > > > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to > > > > > > freewheel about the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was > > > > > > pretty specific about how TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > > > > > > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any > > > > > > organization, though I also recognize the significant > > > > > > responsibility those in the TMO feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome > > > > > > policies, by writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > > > > > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > > > > > > > > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > > > > > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > > > > > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > > > > > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > > > > > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused > > > > > consciousness into the purity of the domes. > > > > > > > > > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > > > > > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > > > > > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > > > > > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > > > > > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > > > > > standards just to please you? > > > > > > > > > > > > because the money is dwindling? > > > > because the fulfillment is to create heaven on earth? > > > > Looks like a good reasons to me! > > > > Has not there been trouble with a large continued donation, recently? > > > > Donating a 100 million can start chiseling at the accounting books of > > > > billionaires? > > > > > > If they care more about money than fulfilling Marshy's wishes > > > then they will. > > > > > > Remember, their definition of heaven on earth is the establishment > > > of a vedic civilisation (or what their idea of one is) and that > > > will only happen with everyone on the programme. This is how they > > > think. Well, not think, it's what they were trained to do. It's > > > going to be the deepest thing in Bevans life. Not just his job but > > > his whole raison d'etre. > > > > > > > > > > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > > > > > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > > > > > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > > > > > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > > > > > just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat > > > > > you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at > > > > > once. Which never works. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Life is a one way street and all that encompasses this journey and > > > > brings happiness to the self and those who you wish around you, this is > > > > all the same direction! > > > > > > Tell them that. As I point out they are happy for you to do > > > whatever you want. Somewhere else. > > > > > > > > > > Like saying one should only speak English and not learn Japanese, > > > > French, Italian, Hindi?because it MIGHT confuse a child learning? > > > > Math and dance do not coexist? > > > > Painting and Poetry are two different mediums of expression, so stick > > > > to only one? > > > > > > Poor analogy. If you were to try speaking English and Japanese at > > > the same time you would encounter serious confusion. Which is a good > > > analogy of what the TMO think will happen if you mix stuff up in > > > the dome - it won't be as effective as just speaking one language. > > > > > Ah, no. Tell that to my friends who are multilingual and learned at the > > same time. Tell that to Rosetta Stone. What common languages all share, > > helps the knower with the knowing of the known and that is
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
yeah, we see how well that went with Marshy ALIVE and having been given hundreds of millions of dollars to create the 10,000 pundit group - oh wait I forgot, he, Girish and the Srivastavas boys needed new Bentlys so they had to spend the money on themselves instead of for the pundit group From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 2:08 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > The fact is that the larger community built the Domes to meditate in. The > community should not have to build another set of Domes because a few people > have locked the community out. That [build another] thinking is wrong and in > fact they need to change their thinking for there to be a proper ME again in > the Domes. If they cannot return a proper ME now, right now, then it is > time for regime change if they can not rescind the TM Anti-saint policies > that use the Domes in extortion. Something has to change for the benefit of > a proper ME . > -Buck "The fact is" that the americans are not able to uphold the ME. Just look at the numbers. My suggestion; move the whole operation to India the sooner the better.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
while I do agree that it is the TMO's prerogative to put whatever bullshit policies inplace they desire, it is typical of them to MAKE the policies bullshit, for example ASSUMING that a visit to another so-called saint MEANS that the perpetrator will ABSOLUTELY be doing something other than TMSP - its also because asses like Bevan and Doug Brix love to lord it over others so they can pretend they are some sort of demi-god like they thought Marshy was. From: salyavin808 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 1:05 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not > > > > > some saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people > > > > > as a bunch of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for > > > > > how Maharishi's policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > > > > > > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel > > > > > about the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific > > > > > about how TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > > > > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any > > > > > organization, though I also recognize the significant > > > > > responsibility those in the TMO feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > > > > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome > > > > > policies, by writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > > > > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > > > > > > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > > > > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > > > > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > > > > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > > > > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused > > > > consciousness into the purity of the domes. > > > > > > > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > > > > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > > > > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > > > > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > > > > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > > > > standards just to please you? > > > > > > > > > because the money is dwindling? > > > because the fulfillment is to create heaven on earth? > > > Looks like a good reasons to me! > > > Has not there been trouble with a large continued donation, recently? > > > Donating a 100 million can start chiseling at the accounting books of > > > billionaires? > > > > If they care more about money than fulfilling Marshy's wishes > > then they will. > > > > Remember, their definition of heaven on earth is the establishment > > of a vedic civilisation (or what their idea of one is) and that > > will only happen with everyone on the programme. This is how they > > think. Well, not think, it's what they were trained to do. It's > > going to be the deepest thing in Bevans life. Not just his job but > > his whole raison d'etre. > > > > > > > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > > > > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > > > > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > > > > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > > > > just don
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
> As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds > > > > > > > > > of those too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a > > > > > > > > > scam, you are in danger of losing nothing and the extremism > > > > > > > > > you speak of has existed for decades - it ain't gonna change > > > > > > > > > now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to > > > > > > > > maintain the state of hostility and hatred between the two > > > > > > > > positions, but logic says that there should be a change of > > > > > > > > direction in order to turn a new page in this unstable > > > > > > > > relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust > > > > > > > > between the two positions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and lesser > > > > > > > and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there > > > > > > > is value in sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it > > > > > > > with other ways and creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the > > > > > > > TMO and MMY would suffer if the public noticed that TM'ers were > > > > > > > still looking for help to solve their own issues or to find a > > > > > > > better Master. Fourth, a belief that TM was the best way and > > > > > > > pretty much the only way to enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except > > > > > > clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as > > > > > > articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with > > > > > > a few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything > > > > > > holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage > > > > > > with their own faith about things. > > > > > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things > > > > > > > are different in this day and age it is a fact that people will > > > > > > > easily be able to look at other methods to meditate, calm > > > > > > > themselves, or evolve. To assume that once a person learns TM > > > > > > > they will never be curious about another program or teacher or > > > > > > > saint is ludicrous. And so is the assumption that they should be > > > > > > > excluded from the good graces of the TMO if they do widen their > > > > > > > horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to > > > > > > > strictly follow MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and > > > > > > > realize how different our world is now and how infantalizing the > > > > > > > old policy is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that > > > > > > > deals with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes > > > > > > > are only for the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do > > > > > > > this are welcome. Welcome back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only > > > > > > > waiting for the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in > > > > > > > mediation let us hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in > > > > > > > a large group meditation before then. > > > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > &g
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? > I'm afraid Mr. Rask wont be able to save the Bruins even once more... :´/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
> From: "doctordumbass@..." > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, still > remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now being > marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those in the > TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, etc, > etc. > > Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who actually > practice it! > > Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't > done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I have > ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or had a > conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER MET > someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do with > the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. > > As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. > :-) This, the Turqs obsession with the TMO, has been pointed out again and again for years now. How can a person who left something, anything, more than 40 (!) years ago keep obsessing and still claim to be sane ? In my book it's simply not possible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > The fact is that the larger community built the Domes to meditate in. The > community should not have to build another set of Domes because a few people > have locked the community out. That [build another] thinking is wrong and in > fact they need to change their thinking for there to be a proper ME again in > the Domes. If they cannot return a proper ME now, right now, then it is > time for regime change if they can not rescind the TM Anti-saint policies > that use the Domes in extortion. Something has to change for the benefit of > a proper ME . > -Buck "The fact is" that the americans are not able to uphold the ME. Just look at the numbers. My suggestion; move the whole operation to India the sooner the better.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Umm bring me up to speed on that - at the time the Domes were built, I was a starry eyed TM True Believer who wanted to be a TM teacher and was busy running the race to Inner Space by chasing the Citizen Sidha track. I always assumed that the Domes were built at the expense of the Movement (which ultimately now that I think of it means it was built with money that Marshy and Company vacuumed out of people's pockets) - did the Movement do a solicitation to raise funds for the Domes projects, or were you referring to the fact that it was all "volunteer" staff that did the actual labor of building? From: Buck To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 12:58 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > Dr. that is true but that just does not exactly match reality here. Doc., > from a distance you would think so. But you don't live here. However, there > is a much larger meditating community here that has long been spurned and > disenfranchised from the Domes by a very few extremists in the middle who > have their own faith-based ideology that has held the group meditation of the > community hostage. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen wrote: > > > > Well, if you really want to resolve this you simply build your own dome or > > flying hall. A master never releases his slave. The slave decides to no > > longer be a slave. To think that the TMO is ever going to change its > > position is a waste of time. Those people are simply lost in their own > > minds. If they ever experienced the fruit of TM/TMSP they would be free. > > But they very clearly don't , so they continue to rule in their fiefdom of > > thought. > > > > The fact is that the larger community built the Domes to meditate in. The community should not have to build another set of Domes because a few people have locked the community out. That [build another] thinking is wrong and in fact they need to change their thinking for there to be a proper ME again in the Domes. If they cannot return a proper ME now, right now, then it is time for regime change if they can not rescind the TM Anti-saint policies that use the Domes in extortion. Something has to change for the benefit of a proper ME . -Buck > > In order to reach a just solution to the anti-saint policies of TM and the > > Dome meditation ME that is accepted by all parties, goodwill can play the > > role of mediator between the TM.government and its meditator community in > > opposition that is working hard to achieve a democracy and good governance. > > I do hope for the best ME we can facilitate. > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > The gravest threat to the Maharishi Effect here and its protection of > > > America in its support of Natural Law is our tyrannic TM anti-saint > > > policy over meditators in the Domes. It is time to repeal the anti-saint > > > policy for all our safety. > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, using the Dome badge as punishment in fealty test over people > > > > while hoping to git a large and proper Meissner Effect out of the Domes > > > > is insurmountably impossible without a change in the leadership and/or > > > > the TM-anti-saint guidelines. A large change is needed right now from > > > > within TM. > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds > > > > > > > > of those too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a > > > > > > > > scam, you are in danger of losing nothing and the extremism you > > > > > > > > speak of has existed for decades - it ain't gonna change now, > > > > > > > > Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > &
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not > > > > > some saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people > > > > > as a bunch of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for > > > > > how Maharishi's policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > > > > > > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel > > > > > about the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific > > > > > about how TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > > > > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any > > > > > organization, though I also recognize the significant > > > > > responsibility those in the TMO feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > > > > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome > > > > > policies, by writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > > > > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > > > > > > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > > > > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > > > > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > > > > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > > > > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused > > > > consciousness into the purity of the domes. > > > > > > > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > > > > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > > > > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > > > > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > > > > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > > > > standards just to please you? > > > > > > > > > because the money is dwindling? > > > because the fulfillment is to create heaven on earth? > > > Looks like a good reasons to me! > > > Has not there been trouble with a large continued donation, recently? > > > Donating a 100 million can start chiseling at the accounting books of > > > billionaires? > > > > If they care more about money than fulfilling Marshy's wishes > > then they will. > > > > Remember, their definition of heaven on earth is the establishment > > of a vedic civilisation (or what their idea of one is) and that > > will only happen with everyone on the programme. This is how they > > think. Well, not think, it's what they were trained to do. It's > > going to be the deepest thing in Bevans life. Not just his job but > > his whole raison d'etre. > > > > > > > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > > > > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > > > > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > > > > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > > > > just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat > > > > you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at > > > > once. Which never works. > > > > > > > > > > Life is a one way street and all that encompasses this journey and brings > > > happiness to the self and those who you wish around you, this is all the > > > same direction! > > > > Tell them that. As I point out they are happy for you to do > > whatever you want. Somewhere else. > > > > > > > Like saying one should only speak English and not learn Japanese, French, > > > Italian, Hindi?because it MIGHT confuse a child learning? > > > Math and dance do not coexist? > > > Painting and Poetry are two different mediums of expression, so stick to > > > only one? > > > > Poor analogy. If you were to try speaking English and Japanese at > > the same time you would encounter serious confusion. Which is a good > > analogy of what the TMO think will happen if you mix stuff up in > > the dome - it won't be as effective as just speaking one language. > > > Ah, no. Tell that to my friends who are multilingual and learned at the same > time. Tell that to Rosetta Stone. What common languages all share, helps the > knower with the knowing of the known and that is the reason Latin was useful > in High Schools at one time to help understand where these words share common > meanings. > I can learn better with more than one of anything in front of me! > Explain that? ha OK, it didn't work, the learning two languages analogy* was a metaphor for *mixing* medit
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
method. The > > > > > > assumption here was that TMers were in many cases unable to discern > > > > > > the difference between the Real Deal and lesser and possibly > > > > > > harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there is value in > > > > > > sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it with other ways > > > > > > and creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would > > > > > > suffer if the public noticed that TM'ers were still looking for > > > > > > help to solve their own issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, > > > > > > a belief that TM was the best way and pretty much the only way to > > > > > > enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except > > > > > clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as > > > > > articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with a > > > > > few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything > > > > > holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage with > > > > > their own faith about things. > > > > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > > > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things > > > > > > are different in this day and age it is a fact that people will > > > > > > easily be able to look at other methods to meditate, calm > > > > > > themselves, or evolve. To assume that once a person learns TM they > > > > > > will never be curious about another program or teacher or saint is > > > > > > ludicrous. And so is the assumption that they should be excluded > > > > > > from the good graces of the TMO if they do widen their horizons.The > > > > > > TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to strictly follow > > > > > > MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and realize how > > > > > > different our world is now and how infantalizing the old policy is. > > > > > > > > > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that > > > > > > deals with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes > > > > > > are only for the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do > > > > > > this are welcome. Welcome back. > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting > > > > > > for the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation > > > > > > let us hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in a large > > > > > > group meditation before then. > > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your > > > > > > > > > Taliban-like leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and > > > > > > > > > that YEARS of TM, TMSP, rounding, and being around Marshy has > > > > > > > > > led them to this pass - draw - my suggestion is get out > > > > > > > > > before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and money. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the > > > > > > > > Country of Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains > > > > > > > > me greatly. We have suffered many blows as a result of > > > > > > > > extremism. > > > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint > > > > > > > > > Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > &g
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
then why keep blathering on about his obsession? From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 12:41 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies I could not care less about what Barry's, or your, intent may be. Forty years is an awfully long time to be doing the same thing, and expecting a different result. That is commonly referred to as insanity. That is why I made the statement I did about happily living on a different continent from him. I don't dig his shit, though you seem to enjoy doing so. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from > the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et > al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. > > > > > > From: "doctordumbass@..." > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, still > remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now being > marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those in the > TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, etc, > etc. > > Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who actually > practice it! > > Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't > done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I have > ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or had a > conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER MET > someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do with > the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. > > As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. > :-) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > > involved with the TM organization, >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from > > the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et > > al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. > > Nope, that's the last thing he'd hope for, because then he > wouldn't have anybody to dump on. > Sure he would - the world is nothing, if not an endless series of targets to him, mirroring an increasingly unhappy personality.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I could not care less about what Barry's, or your, intent may be. Forty years is an awfully long time to be doing the same thing, and expecting a different result. That is commonly referred to as insanity. That is why I made the statement I did about happily living on a different continent from him. I don't dig his shit, though you seem to enjoy doing so. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from > the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et > al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. > > > > > > From: "doctordumbass@..." > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, still > remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now being > marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those in the > TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, etc, > etc. > > Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who actually > practice it! > > Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't > done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I have > ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or had a > conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER MET > someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do with > the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. > > As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. > :-) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > > involved with the TM organization, >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Share, If I were an odds maker, I'd put the odds at 90% that Robin reads every post on this site. Probably in Starbucks right now reading this. "Hey Robin, what it is? What's your take on the Hawks/Bruins final? Como sa va. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not writing posts in response? > > > > > > From: authfriend authfriend@... > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts > > *plonk* >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Judy, you can plonk all you want Thank you. *plonk*
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not > > > > some saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as > > > > a bunch of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how > > > > Maharishi's policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > > > > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel > > > > about the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific > > > > about how TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, > > > > though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the > > > > TMO feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, > > > > by writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > > > > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > > > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > > > > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > > > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > > > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > > > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > > > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused consciousness > > > into the purity of the domes. > > > > > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > > > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > > > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > > > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > > > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > > > standards just to please you? > > > > > > because the money is dwindling? > > because the fulfillment is to create heaven on earth? > > Looks like a good reasons to me! > > Has not there been trouble with a large continued donation, recently? > > Donating a 100 million can start chiseling at the accounting books of > > billionaires? > > If they care more about money than fulfilling Marshy's wishes > then they will. > > Remember, their definition of heaven on earth is the establishment > of a vedic civilisation (or what their idea of one is) and that > will only happen with everyone on the programme. This is how they > think. Well, not think, it's what they were trained to do. It's > going to be the deepest thing in Bevans life. Not just his job but > his whole raison d'etre. > > > > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > > > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > > > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > > > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > > > just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat > > > you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at > > > once. Which never works. > > > > > > > Life is a one way street and all that encompasses this journey and brings > > happiness to the self and those who you wish around you, this is all the > > same direction! > > Tell them that. As I point out they are happy for you to do > whatever you want. Somewhere else. > > > > Like saying one should only speak English and not learn Japanese, French, > > Italian, Hindi?because it MIGHT confuse a child learning? > > Math and dance do not coexist? > > Painting and Poetry are two different mediums of expression, so stick to > > only one? > > Poor analogy. If you were to try speaking English and Japanese at > the same time you would encounter serious confusion. Which is a good > analogy of what the TMO think will happen if you mix stuff up in > the dome - it won't be as effective as just speaking one language. > Ah, no. Tell that to my friends who are multilingual and learned at the same time. Tell that to Rosetta Stone. What common languages all share, helps the knower with the knowing of the known and that is the reason Latin was useful in High Schools at one time to help understand where these words share common meanings. I can learn better with more than one of anything in front of me! Explain that? ha
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Judy, you can plonk all you want, but can you prove that Robin is in fact, as you originally said in your criticism of Susan, not around to defend himself? Meaning not reading posts though obviously he is not writing posts in response? From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts *plonk*
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
r hold them as > > > > articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with a > > > > few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything > > > > holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage with > > > > their own faith about things. > > > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things are > > > > > different in this day and age it is a fact that people will easily > > > > > be able to look at other methods to meditate, calm themselves, or > > > > > evolve. To assume that once a person learns TM they will never be > > > > > curious about another program or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And > > > > > so is the assumption that they should be excluded from the good > > > > > graces of the TMO if they do widen their horizons.The TMO has to make > > > > > a decision soon: to continue to strictly follow MMY"s policy from > > > > > about 1970, or to soften up and realize how different our world is > > > > > now and how infantalizing the old policy is. > > > > > > > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that deals > > > > > with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only > > > > > for the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are > > > > > welcome. Welcome back. > > > > > > > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting > > > > > for the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let > > > > > us hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in a large group > > > > > meditation before then. > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your > > > > > > > > Taliban-like leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and > > > > > > > > that YEARS of TM, TMSP, rounding, and being around Marshy has > > > > > > > > led them to this pass - draw - my suggestion is get out before > > > > > > > > you waste anymore time, effort, energy and money. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country > > > > > > > of Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me > > > > > > > greatly. We have suffered many blows as a result of extremism. > > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Â > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save > > > > > > > > the TM movement. A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only > > > > > > > > to sustain a meditation group for the Dome meditation numbers. > > > > > > > > A meditation without fear. The TM movement's anti-saint > > > > > > > > policies have long bred hypocrisy and contempt for the movement > > > > > > > > and its leadership inside and outside the meditating community. > > > > > > > > We need only look at the decades long slide in numbers > > > > > > > > meditating or the Dome meditation numbers. They are down and > > > > > > > > it is an uphill fight to get numbers back against the > > > > > > > > hard-heads on top. Simply to save the Dome numbers meditating > > > > > > > > there needs to come along a flat out repeal movement against > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from > the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et > al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. Nope, that's the last thing he'd hope for, because then he wouldn't have anybody to dump on.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts *plonk*
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I think Barry is hoping beyond hope that you who practice will wake up from the dream and act like you got some sense like me and Barry and Curtis, et al. Even Barry as much sense as he seems to have might have a forlorn hope. From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:16 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, still remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now being marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those in the TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, etc, etc. Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who actually practice it! Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I have ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or had a conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER MET someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > involved with the TM organization,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Judy, given that others sometimes read posts but don't write posts, it is reasonable to question your assertion that Robin is not around to defend himself. Especially since, as you say, people would appreciate the chance to respond to criticism. Surely if * they * are so concerned about criticism, then * they * would at least archive on their name occasionally to see if there is any! Your criticism of Susan remains invalid because you have not proven that Robin is not around to defend himself. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:01 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Judy, you said to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to > defend himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. > My question to Judy remains: do we know for a fact that Robin > does not read FFL posts? And my answer to Share remains: We do not NEED to know that for a fact. If we're ethical, we simply make that assumption and refrain from badmouthing a person who is not posting unless or until the person shows up. Your elaborate rationalizations are not to the point and do not reflect well on you. Obviously there is a wide range of how people connect with FFL known both directly and indirectly. Directly includes: some post regularly; some post sporadically; some take long breaks from posting. Indirectly: when they return, some announce that they've been reading posts but not replying for one reason or another; some announce that they've not been reading posts for one reason or another; some say nothing about this. > > The ethical issues in all this are that you accused Susan of doing something > which you do not prove is happening because you do not prove that Robin is > not around to defend himself. And you have twisted two points that I made. > > > If indeed Robin would appreciate the chance to respond to criticism, as you > suggest below, then surely he WOULD be reading FFL, or at least occasionally > archiving on his name if he was concerned about possible criticisms of him. > > > > > > From: authfriend > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:17 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > >  > Judy to Share about her criticism of my criticism of > Susan: > > LOL. > > I'm sure Susan is grateful for your oh-so-insightful > analysis. It's entirely understandable why you would > want to defend the idea that it's perfectly OK to > talk about someone behind their back, as it were. > > I could be wrong, but I think most people feel that > the ethical thing to do is to assume a person who is > not posting is also not reading, and that they would > appreciate the chance to respond to criticism. > > I seriously doubt Robin has been banned from FFL. > Perhaps Alex could tell us. Such a friendly > suggestion, Share. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your > > criticism of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not > > around only in the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all > > we know, he may be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either > > case, it is his choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin > > is unwillingly not around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. > > Is he incapacitated in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you > > know for a fact that Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your > > criticism would be valid. And worth respecting. > > > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:02 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > >  > > Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin > > was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to > > know what he was about. You even let yourself be > > convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his > > teaching, when that simply was not the case. > > > > You went along with what *they* told you even though > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > If I had known about a "no Saints" policy before learning TM, honestly, that > type of control would have steered me far away from learning TM, absolutely. That's nothing, if I'd seen a tape of Marshy before learning I wouldn't have bothered. There is a reason they keep stuff like this back, they don't want to scare people off. At the academy I worked at they had special weekend courses for newbies with normal food and easy going tapes with no chanting etc. The whole thing was designed to get you into the belief system bit by bit. > Hindsight, when I was innocent to some of these ridicules requirements, such > as that, I would appreciated hearing from others what is going to be > "expected," of one to use and do a "stress reduction," technique, and pay for > it on top of that! > > Nothing is wrong with teaching and sharing and a fair exchange of goods for > services. > It is all the stupid requirements that make it look like a cult. It *is* a cult.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not > > > some saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as a > > > bunch of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how > > > Maharishi's policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel > > > about the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific > > > about how TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, > > > though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the TMO > > > feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, by > > > writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused consciousness > > into the purity of the domes. > > > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > > standards just to please you? > > > because the money is dwindling? > because the fulfillment is to create heaven on earth? > Looks like a good reasons to me! > Has not there been trouble with a large continued donation, recently? > Donating a 100 million can start chiseling at the accounting books of > billionaires? If they care more about money than fulfilling Marshy's wishes then they will. Remember, their definition of heaven on earth is the establishment of a vedic civilisation (or what their idea of one is) and that will only happen with everyone on the programme. This is how they think. Well, not think, it's what they were trained to do. It's going to be the deepest thing in Bevans life. Not just his job but his whole raison d'etre. > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > > just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat > > you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at > > once. Which never works. > > > > Life is a one way street and all that encompasses this journey and brings > happiness to the self and those who you wish around you, this is all the same > direction! Tell them that. As I point out they are happy for you to do whatever you want. Somewhere else. > Like saying one should only speak English and not learn Japanese, French, > Italian, Hindi?because it MIGHT confuse a child learning? > Math and dance do not coexist? > Painting and Poetry are two different mediums of expression, so stick to only > one? Poor analogy. If you were to try speaking English and Japanese at the same time you would encounter serious confusion. Which is a good analogy of what the TMO think will happen if you mix stuff up in the dome - it won't be as effective as just speaking one language.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Judy, you said to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to > defend himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. > My question to Judy remains: do we know for a fact that Robin > does not read FFL posts? And my answer to Share remains: We do not NEED to know that for a fact. If we're ethical, we simply make that assumption and refrain from badmouthing a person who is not posting unless or until the person shows up. Your elaborate rationalizations are not to the point and do not reflect well on you. Obviously there is a wide range of how people connect with FFL known both directly and indirectly. Directly includes: some post regularly; some post sporadically; some take long breaks from posting. Indirectly: when they return, some announce that they've been reading posts but not replying for one reason or another; some announce that they've not been reading posts for one reason or another; some say nothing about this. > > The ethical issues in all this are that you accused Susan of doing something > which you do not prove is happening because you do not prove that Robin is > not around to defend himself. And you have twisted two points that I made. > > > If indeed Robin would appreciate the chance to respond to criticism, as you > suggest below, then surely he WOULD be reading FFL, or at least occasionally > archiving on his name if he was concerned about possible criticisms of him. > > > > > > From: authfriend > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:17 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > >  > Judy to Share about her criticism of my criticism of > Susan: > > LOL. > > I'm sure Susan is grateful for your oh-so-insightful > analysis. It's entirely understandable why you would > want to defend the idea that it's perfectly OK to > talk about someone behind their back, as it were. > > I could be wrong, but I think most people feel that > the ethical thing to do is to assume a person who is > not posting is also not reading, and that they would > appreciate the chance to respond to criticism. > > I seriously doubt Robin has been banned from FFL. > Perhaps Alex could tell us. Such a friendly > suggestion, Share. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your > > criticism of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not > > around only in the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all > > we know, he may be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either > > case, it is his choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin > > is unwillingly not around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. > > Is he incapacitated in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you > > know for a fact that Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your > > criticism would be valid. And worth respecting. > > > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: authfriend > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:02 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > à> > Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin > > was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to > > know what he was about. You even let yourself be > > convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his > > teaching, when that simply was not the case. > > > > You went along with what *they* told you even though > > they were "protecting" you in the way you yourself have > > been eloquently objecting to recently. > > > > Robin was sui generis and should not be used as an > > "example" in this context. That would be a travesty, > > for the reasons I've outlined. There are plenty of > > others you could have used as examples instead. > > > > You made it clear while Robin was here that you didn't > > trust him because you had trouble following what he > > wrote, and now you're badmouthing him when he's not > > around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for > > which I have much respect. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Actually, yes, I've always found Robin completely believable. Never have seen anything in his posts that made me suspect he might be dishonest. And as some here will recognize, my antennae for dishonesty are very sensitive. (One of the things that made Barry so nervous about Robin was that Barry had such difficulty discerning when Robin was being ironic.) Robin's posts are not my only sources of information about what happened when he was in Fairfield, BTW. As far as defending oneself is concerned, I explained my stance on the ethics of badmouthing a person behind their back to Share. That isn't something Barry is capable of understanding, I'm afraid. But then neither is Share. Why Barry would think any of the "facts" he mentions (not all of them are, in fact, facts) should have anything to do with what I said to Susan about Robin will have to remain a mystery. They look more like a random collection of badly aimed potshots than relevant comments. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > involved with the TM organization, wouldn't know what > happened or didn't happen in Fairfield on a bet, has > never met *either* Maharishi or Robin, and her opinion > of Robin is based almost *entirely* on what *he* has > posted here. Funny how she has a tendency to find > those who rag on and obsess on the same people she > does believable, eh? That must be her standard for > trustworthiness. :-) > > Plus, there is another thing she seems to take for > granted that others here do not. She assumes that Robin > would either want to or need to "defend himself" against > people stating views of him contrary to his own. He > might (another reason she's his groupie, because that > makes him just like her), but many people Just Don't > Give A Shit. > > WHO could possibly care, after all, what pissants like > Judy and her minions think of them? They're pissants, > and the opinions of pissants Simply Don't Matter. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your > > criticism of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not > > around only in the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all > > we know, he may be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either > > case, it is his choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin > > is unwillingly not around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. > > Is he incapacitated in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you > > know for a fact that Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your > > criticism would be valid. And worth respecting. > > > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Yep, I have not yet found an organization that is a democracy. I used to describe business structures as benevolent dictatorships, which they are. Despite the oft stated "open door" policy in many organizations, the only thing "open door" about walking into the boss's office and laying out your complaints, is the one waiting for you, out of the company, once you have finished your expressions of concern. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not some > > saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as a bunch > > of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how Maharishi's > > policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel about > > the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific about how > > TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, > > though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the TMO > > feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, by > > writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused consciousness > into the purity of the domes. > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > standards just to please you? > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat > you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at > once. Which never works. > > The TMO is a dictatorship, it isn't a democracy as it's considered > that you are too unenlightened to make good decisions about things like this, > *especially* when rounding. The idea is that Marshy has done all the thinking > and made all the decisions for you so you can relax and get on with your > evolution in peace. Easy huh? >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Judy, you said to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. My question to Judy remains: do we know for a fact that Robin does not read FFL posts? Obviously there is a wide range of how people connect with FFL known both directly and indirectly. Directly includes: some post regularly; some post sporadically; some take long breaks from posting. Indirectly: when they return, some announce that they've been reading posts but not replying for one reason or another; some announce that they've not been reading posts for one reason or another; some say nothing about this. The ethical issues in all this are that you accused Susan of doing something which you do not prove is happening because you do not prove that Robin is not around to defend himself. And you have twisted two points that I made. If indeed Robin would appreciate the chance to respond to criticism, as you suggest below, then surely he WOULD be reading FFL, or at least occasionally archiving on his name if he was concerned about possible criticisms of him. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:17 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies Judy to Share about her criticism of my criticism of Susan: LOL. I'm sure Susan is grateful for your oh-so-insightful analysis. It's entirely understandable why you would want to defend the idea that it's perfectly OK to talk about someone behind their back, as it were. I could be wrong, but I think most people feel that the ethical thing to do is to assume a person who is not posting is also not reading, and that they would appreciate the chance to respond to criticism. I seriously doubt Robin has been banned from FFL. Perhaps Alex could tell us. Such a friendly suggestion, Share. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your criticism > of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not around only in > the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all we know, he may > be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either case, it is his > choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin is unwillingly not > around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. Is he incapacitated > in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you know for a fact that > Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your criticism would be valid. > And worth respecting. > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. > > > > > > From: authfriend > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:02 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin > was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to > know what he was about. You even let yourself be > convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his > teaching, when that simply was not the case. > > You went along with what *they* told you even though > they were "protecting" you in the way you yourself have > been eloquently objecting to recently. > > Robin was sui generis and should not be used as an > "example" in this context. That would be a travesty, > for the reasons I've outlined. There are plenty of > others you could have used as examples instead. > > You made it clear while Robin was here that you didn't > trust him because you had trouble following what he > wrote, and now you're badmouthing him when he's not > around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for > which I have much respect.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Graciously and joyfully, I am not a slave to anything. However, I don't think the issue is as black and white as you, and many others, are making it. There remains a legitimate need to continue with Maharishi's programs, and decisions must be made on how to do that. I am glad I was not attracted to the big frog, small pond scenario, that glues many in any organization to its power, and equally happy that I am not responsible for making such decisions. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen wrote: > > The antisaint policy is based in power and control as far as the TMO is > concerned. If you want to be a slave to it and defer your thought process to > the metaphysics of fear, then by all means go ahead!. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: > > > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not some > > saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as a bunch > > of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how Maharishi's > > policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel about > > the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific about how > > TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, > > though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the TMO > > feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, by > > writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > > > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas > will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. > > They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined > by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are > onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy > to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put > up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused consciousness > into the purity of the domes. > > Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, > you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's > house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are > already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what > Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's > standards just to please you? because the money is dwindling? because the fulfillment is to create heaven on earth? Looks like a good reasons to me! Has not there been trouble with a large continued donation, recently? Donating a 100 million can start chiseling at the accounting books of billionaires? > > In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale > you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement > states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for > people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, > just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat > you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at > once. Which never works. > Life is a one way street and all that encompasses this journey and brings happiness to the self and those who you wish around you, this is all the same direction! Like saying one should only speak English and not learn Japanese, French, Italian, Hindi?because it MIGHT confuse a child learning? Math and dance do not coexist? Painting and Poetry are two different mediums of expression, so stick to only one? Cigarettes and coffee and bunches of donuts and saints do not mix? Hari Krishnas and Parmahansa Yogananda and the Marshy are not to be gathered together in thought, unless one is a wealthy donor, muscian, movie star, politician? Bhahahaha! > The TMO is a dictatorship, it isn't a democracy as it's considered > that you are too unenlightened to make good decisions about things like this, > *especially* when rounding. The idea is that Marshy has done all the thinking > and made all the decisions for you so you can relax and get on with your > evolution in peace. Easy huh? >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Peter, you make it sound like it's an either or choice when in actuality many people in FF live their own lives AND ALSO participate in group program. I also want to mention that several spiritual teachers currently talk about the value of gathering together or satsang or group sadhana of whatever that might consist. From: Peter Sutphen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:06 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies People are done with group practices. After 30 to 40 years of it you want to live your own life. From: feste37 ; To: ; Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies Sent: Mon, Jun 17, 2013 1:32:37 PM That was tried for a while. There was an alternative flying hall set up in the Tetra building for those who didn't want to go to the dome or were not allowed in. They used to fly at the same time as in the dome, less than a half a mile away. It lasted for a while but I don't think it's still going on. The "problem" with dome numbers is not so much with people who have been banned, but the fact that a large number of eligible people simply no longer want to go. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen wrote: > > Well, if you really want to resolve this you simply build your own dome or > flying hall. A master never releases his slave. The slave decides to no > longer be a slave. To think that the TMO is ever going to change its position > is a waste of time. Those people are simply lost in their own minds. If they > ever experienced the fruit of TM/TMSP they would be free. But they very > clearly don't , so they continue to rule in their fiefdom of thought. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not some > saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as a bunch of > power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how Maharishi's > policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel about > the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific about how TM > and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, > though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the TMO feel, > to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, by > writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > It will accomplish the opposite. Any TM gov reading these pleas will conclude you are a bunch of whining, ungrateful, unstressers. They will think that all that Marshy did for you is being undermined by a bunch of selfish, daydreamers who don't know when they are onto a good thing. The *best* thing. And worse that you are happy to insist that everybody who sticks to programme rules has to put up with you bringing in new techniques or your own confused consciousness into the purity of the domes. Get real guys. You either want to be in the TMO or you don't, you can't make your own rules up about what goes on in Marshy's house, especially if it's going to annoy other people who are already inside. Bevan and co are the devoted protectors of what Marshy taught them, why should they drop their and the guru's standards just to please you? In the UK, if you want to join the community in Skelmersdale you have to watch a tape where the head of the UK movement states as clearly as possible that they are quite happy for people to experiment with other techniques or see other teachers, just don't do it there. I agree with it, decide which boat you are in or you'll end up trying to go in two directions at once. Which never works. The TMO is a dictatorship, it isn't a democracy as it's considered that you are too unenlightened to make good decisions about things like this, *especially* when rounding. The idea is that Marshy has done all the thinking and made all the decisions for you so you can relax and get on with your evolution in peace. Easy huh?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Judy to Share about her criticism of my criticism of Susan: LOL. I'm sure Susan is grateful for your oh-so-insightful analysis. It's entirely understandable why you would want to defend the idea that it's perfectly OK to talk about someone behind their back, as it were. I could be wrong, but I think most people feel that the ethical thing to do is to assume a person who is not posting is also not reading, and that they would appreciate the chance to respond to criticism. I seriously doubt Robin has been banned from FFL. Perhaps Alex could tell us. Such a friendly suggestion, Share. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your criticism > of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not around only in > the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all we know, he may > be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either case, it is his > choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin is unwillingly not > around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. Is he incapacitated > in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you know for a fact that > Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your criticism would be valid. > And worth respecting. > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. > > > > > > From: authfriend > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:02 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin > was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to > know what he was about. You even let yourself be > convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his > teaching, when that simply was not the case. > > You went along with what *they* told you even though > they were "protecting" you in the way you yourself have > been eloquently objecting to recently. > > Robin was sui generis and should not be used as an > "example" in this context. That would be a travesty, > for the reasons I've outlined. There are plenty of > others you could have used as examples instead. > > You made it clear while Robin was here that you didn't > trust him because you had trouble following what he > wrote, and now you're badmouthing him when he's not > around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for > which I have much respect.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
The antisaint policy is based in power and control as far as the TMO is concerned. If you want to be a slave to it and defer your thought process to the metaphysics of fear, then by all means go ahead!.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
People are done with group practices. After 30 to 40 years of it you want to live your own life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
If I had known about a "no Saints" policy before learning TM, honestly, that type of control would have steered me far away from learning TM, absolutely. Hindsight, when I was innocent to some of these ridicules requirements, such as that, I would appreciated hearing from others what is going to be "expected," of one to use and do a "stress reduction," technique, and pay for it on top of that! Nothing is wrong with teaching and sharing and a fair exchange of goods for services. It is all the stupid requirements that make it look like a cult. Just teach the technique and stop trying to use the word, "unstressing," for everyone who does not kowtow to what was not up front in the first place. Requirements for further participation in other or extended or advanced programs, for stress reduction (using a mantra that is not to be attached to) is insane. I like to meditate, just get off my back on what I am doing wrong (if there is such a thing.) if one wishes to gather a lifetime of concept and reality to knowledge meant to help someone evolutionary as proof something is working! "Do not mind." "He/she is just unstressing." "Oh, no you can't do this or you can't do that, blah, blah, blah." For if not the best reason to overlook such ridicules policies, I have met a lot of really great people who wish to pursue the betterment of their well being as I wish to continue to do for the rest of my life. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not some > saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as a bunch of > power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how Maharishi's > policies are to be be maintained, or modified. > > The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel about > the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific about how TM > and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. > > Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, > though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the TMO feel, > to uphold Maharishi's legacy. > > I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, by > writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen wrote: > > > > Well, if you really want to resolve this you simply build your own dome or > > flying hall. A master never releases his slave. The slave decides to no > > longer be a slave. To think that the TMO is ever going to change its > > position is a waste of time. Those people are simply lost in their own > > minds. If they ever experienced the fruit of TM/TMSP they would be free. > > But they very clearly don't , so they continue to rule in their fiefdom of > > thought. > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > Are y ou saying that he [Robin] never gave advice on how to > modify TM-Sidhis practice to his followers, who then showed > up to practice with everyone else? I believe if you read my posts on this, Lawson, you'll find that I didn't say anything as specific as that. Please don't put words in my mouth. But whatever Robin did, he fully expected that Maharishi would approve, right up until the moment the recording of Maharishi's responses to the questions Robin had posed to him was played in court. I used the terms "anomaly" and "sui generis" to describe Robin's activities in Fairfield for a reason. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > [...] > > I'm not "sugar coating" it, I'm saying Robin and his group > > were an anomaly that simply doesn't fit neatly into your > > classification of reasons why Maharishi "forbid looking > > elsewhere." Robin wasn't "elsewhere" in that sense; to the > > contrary. He was "out there," definitely, but he was devoted > > heart and soul to Maharishi and his teaching.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I don't know, and you don't either, what the rationale behind the not some saints policy, is. As much as we enjoy seeing these TMO people as a bunch of power hungry bureaucrats, they are also responsible for how Maharishi's policies are to be be maintained, or modified. The TMO is anything but a charismatic organization, left to freewheel about the vague sayings of its founder. Maharishi was pretty specific about how TM and the TMSP are taught, and practiced. Obviously some are going to abuse their power, as in any organization, though I also recognize the significant responsibility those in the TMO feel, to uphold Maharishi's legacy. I do agree with you that trying to effect change in the Dome policies, by writing posts to FFL, will not accomplish much. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen wrote: > > Well, if you really want to resolve this you simply build your own dome or > flying hall. A master never releases his slave. The slave decides to no > longer be a slave. To think that the TMO is ever going to change its position > is a waste of time. Those people are simply lost in their own minds. If they > ever experienced the fruit of TM/TMSP they would be free. But they very > clearly don't , so they continue to rule in their fiefdom of thought. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
That was tried for a while. There was an alternative flying hall set up in the Tetra building for those who didn't want to go to the dome or were not allowed in. They used to fly at the same time as in the dome, less than a half a mile away. It lasted for a while but I don't think it's still going on. The "problem" with dome numbers is not so much with people who have been banned, but the fact that a large number of eligible people simply no longer want to go. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen wrote: > > Well, if you really want to resolve this you simply build your own dome or > flying hall. A master never releases his slave. The slave decides to no > longer be a slave. To think that the TMO is ever going to change its position > is a waste of time. Those people are simply lost in their own minds. If they > ever experienced the fruit of TM/TMSP they would be free. But they very > clearly don't , so they continue to rule in their fiefdom of thought. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Well, if you really want to resolve this you simply build your own dome or flying hall. A master never releases his slave. The slave decides to no longer be a slave. To think that the TMO is ever going to change its position is a waste of time. Those people are simply lost in their own minds. If they ever experienced the fruit of TM/TMSP they would be free. But they very clearly don't , so they continue to rule in their fiefdom of thought.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
turquoiseb: > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > involved with the TM organization, > This would be a plus, if what you've posted so far, is true about the 'brainwashing' of cult leaders. It has already been established that you were a leader in at least two major cults over a period of 24 yrs. Apparently you've been a TB for some time, but now you're in cognitive dissonance, even denial. It helps some people to have someone to talk to - you should be thankful to Judy that she would take the time to try and help you with your problems. > wouldn't know what > happened or didn't happen in Fairfield on a bet, > How much would you be willing to wager? You've never been to Fairfield either - Judy could have spies there, reporting back to her on a daily basis. There are at least four Fairfield informants on this list, not counting the founder, Rick, who seems to know everyone and everything that's going on. >From what I've read, nobody from the rank and file know what's going on inside the TMO, including the residents of Fairfield. > has > never met *either* Maharishi or Robin, and her opinion > of Robin is based almost *entirely* on what *he* has > posted here. Funny how she has a tendency to find > those who rag on and obsess on the same people she > does believable, eh? That must be her standard for > trustworthiness. :-) > So, it's all about Judy. > Plus, there is another thing she seems to take for > granted that others here do not. She assumes that Robin > would either want to or need to "defend himself" against > people stating views of him contrary to his own. He > might (another reason she's his groupie, because that > makes him just like her), but many people Just Don't > Give A Shit. > You're the only one, so far, that cares what happens to Judy and Robin. LoL! > WHO could possibly care, after all, what pissants like > Judy and her minions think of them? They're pissants, > and the opinions of pissants Simply Don't Matter. > So, Judy is now the leader of the internet TMers, which is what you want to be. Go figure. Share Long: > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your > > criticism of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not > > around only in the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all > > we know, he may be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either > > case, it is his choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin > > is unwillingly not around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. > > Is he incapacitated in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you > > know for a fact that Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your > > criticism would be valid. And worth respecting. > > > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Actually much more pathetic to have QUIT TM OVER 40 YEARS AGO, and yet, still remain obsessed with who does it, and for how long, and how it is now being marketed, and who Maharishi was, or wasn't, and your opinion on those in the TM Org, and how the sidhis work, and what they do or do not do, etc, etc, etc. Fuck dude, you spend a lot more time on TM, than most of us do, who actually practice it! Its a really odd thing, this addiction of yours, to something you haven't done for most of your life. You are unique in that way. Among anyone I have ever known, or met, or taught in class, or spoke with on a plane, or had a conversation with at a party, or at work, or written to, I have NEVER MET someone with an obsession like yours, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the object of their obsession. I have never seen this behavior before. As a result, I am really glad you live on a different continent, than I do. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been > involved with the TM organization,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Not to *mention* the fact that Judy has *never* been involved with the TM organization, wouldn't know what happened or didn't happen in Fairfield on a bet, has never met *either* Maharishi or Robin, and her opinion of Robin is based almost *entirely* on what *he* has posted here. Funny how she has a tendency to find those who rag on and obsess on the same people she does believable, eh? That must be her standard for trustworthiness. :-) Plus, there is another thing she seems to take for granted that others here do not. She assumes that Robin would either want to or need to "defend himself" against people stating views of him contrary to his own. He might (another reason she's his groupie, because that makes him just like her), but many people Just Don't Give A Shit. WHO could possibly care, after all, what pissants like Judy and her minions think of them? They're pissants, and the opinions of pissants Simply Don't Matter. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your criticism > of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not around only in > the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all we know, he may > be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either case, it is his > choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin is unwillingly not > around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. Is he incapacitated > in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you know for a fact that > Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your criticism would be valid. > And worth respecting. > > Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend > himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > Are y ou saying that he [Robin] never gave advice on how to modify TM-Sidhis > practice to his followers, who then showed up to practice with everyone else? If that's the case we have another very good reason to keep the badge-and access rules as they are. Buck, are you reading this :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Share to Judy about her criticism of Susan: Judy I don't think your criticism of Susan is valid because for all anyone knows, Robin is not around only in the sense that he currently is not posting. However, for all we know, he may be around in the sense that he reads FFL posts. In either case, it is his choice. Additionally your criticism is valid only if Robin is unwillingly not around to defend himself and if Susan knows about this. Is he incapacitated in some way? Has he been banned from FFL? And do you know for a fact that Susan knows either for a fact? In that case, your criticism would be valid. And worth respecting. Judy to Susan: now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to know what he was about. You even let yourself be convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his teaching, when that simply was not the case. You went along with what *they* told you even though they were "protecting" you in the way you yourself have been eloquently objecting to recently. Robin was sui generis and should not be used as an "example" in this context. That would be a travesty, for the reasons I've outlined. There are plenty of others you could have used as examples instead. You made it clear while Robin was here that you didn't trust him because you had trouble following what he wrote, and now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > (snip) > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > > > > > (Carlsen.) > > > > > > > > Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with > > > > Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an > > > > example. > > > > > > > > Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most > > > > important thing to know in this context is that according > > > > to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, > > > > Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU > > > > with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, > > > > and a big public mess was the result. > > > > > > > > Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to > > > > Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he > > > > was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his > > > > group were TM initiators) but never interfered. > > > > > > > > Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of > > > > the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted > > > > to "protect" TMers from. > > > > > > > I disagree. I was around exactly when Robin was in full cry > > > and while I never went to hear him (and would not have bothered > > > to being at the time a fairly loyal Tm teacher) I heard from > > > others I trusted how odd the whole thing was. Whatever we have > > > heard that MMY supposedly told Bevan, there is more to the > > > story. > > > > Well, when you find out what more there was, do let us > > know. I'm just telling you what Peter said here that > > Bevan told him, and Peter is pretty reliable. Perhaps you > > can straighten it out with him. > > > > And as I mentioned, there's also the fact that while > > Maharishi kept tabs on Robin and his group of TM > > initiators
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Are y ou saying that he [Robin] never gave advice on how to modify TM-Sidhis practice to his followers, who then showed up to practice with everyone else? LM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: [...] > I'm not "sugar coating" it, I'm saying Robin and his group > were an anomaly that simply doesn't fit neatly into your > classification of reasons why Maharishi "forbid looking > elsewhere." Robin wasn't "elsewhere" in that sense; to the > contrary. He was "out there," definitely, but he was devoted > heart and soul to Maharishi and his teaching. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" wrote: > > > I am not worthy! Haha :-) > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > The answers are several; > > > > A - I have no idea > > > > B - 7thray is nearly as crazy as you and I don't generally pay > attention to his stuff > > > > C - I might not have answered for the same reason you never answer the > question of do you think Benjy Creme should be allowed to do > presentations at the Domes? Should people who have been to see Benjy and > listened to his bullshit about Maitreya be allowed to come into the > Domes since you think the Aryan Purity Policy is such a good Dome idea? Relax MJ, you worry too much. Get back on medication and all will be fine.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies& anti Gay policy as well is it still present?
One of FF's most flamingly obvious gay guys is on the IA course, so if they really are trying to rid the domes of Teh Ghey, they're doing a piss poor job of it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wleed3 wrote: > > Anti Gay policy was also at MIU & its use to denay dome entrance its still > present is it not? > > > > In a message dated 06/16/13 17:49:23 Eastern Daylight Time, dhamiltony2k5@... > writes: >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies& anti Gay policy as well is it still present?
Anti Gay policy was also at MIU & its use to denay dome entrance its still present is it not? In a message dated 06/16/13 17:49:23 Eastern Daylight Time, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com writes:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
ld be to just scrap the whole department that deals > > > > with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only for > > > > the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are welcome. > > > > Welcome back. > > > > > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for > > > > the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us > > > > hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in a large group > > > > meditation before then. > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your > > > > > > > Taliban-like leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and that > > > > > > > YEARS of TM, TMSP, rounding, and being around Marshy has led them > > > > > > > to this pass - draw - my suggestion is get out before you waste > > > > > > > anymore time, effort, energy and money. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country > > > > > > of Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. > > > > > > We have suffered many blows as a result of extremism. > > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Â > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save the > > > > > > > TM movement. A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only to > > > > > > > sustain a meditation group for the Dome meditation numbers. A > > > > > > > meditation without fear. The TM movement's anti-saint policies > > > > > > > have long bred hypocrisy and contempt for the movement and its > > > > > > > leadership inside and outside the meditating community. We need > > > > > > > only look at the decades long slide in numbers meditating or the > > > > > > > Dome meditation numbers. They are down and it is an uphill fight > > > > > > > to get numbers back against the hard-heads on top. Simply to > > > > > > > save the Dome numbers meditating there needs to come along a flat > > > > > > > out repeal movement against these Dome policies. The Dome > > > > > > > policies and guidelines have clearly failed to sustain our > > > > > > > numbers and it is time and has become our larger responsibility > > > > > > > to change those guidelines with repeal. The Taliban-like leaders > > > > > > > of the movement with their anti-saint policies have made for a TM > > > > > > > movement of > > > > > > > corruption, liars and hypocrites. More than reforming, the time > > > > > > > is come for the repeal of the anti-saint polices to save the Dome > > > > > > > meditating program; Repeal now the anti-saint guidelines to save > > > > > > > the Dome numbers. The saints are returning soon again. It is a > > > > > > > fact of life. Repeal the TM-Anti-Saint policies now to save the > > > > > > > Domes before it is too late.. The time has come to make your > > > > > > > voice heard and join the Anti-Saint repeal movement for all our > > > > > > > benefit." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repealing TM's anti-saint policies it seems has terribly strong > > > > > > > > parallels to the context of the 18th Amendment 'Repeal > > > > > > > > Movement' in the 20th Century. Take a look at this short piece > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
The gravest threat to the Maharishi Effect here and its protection of America in its support of Natural Law is our tyrannic TM anti-saint policy over meditators in the Domes. It is time to repeal the anti-saint policy for all our safety. > > Yep, using the Dome badge as punishment in fealty test over people while > hoping to git a large and proper Meissner Effect out of the Domes is > insurmountably impossible without a change in the leadership and/or the > TM-anti-saint guidelines. A large change is needed right now from within TM. > > -Buck > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of > > > > > those too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you > > > > > are in danger of losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has > > > > > existed for decades - it ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to maintain the > > > > state of hostility and hatred between the two positions, but logic says > > > > that there should be a change of direction in order to turn a new page > > > > in this unstable relationship and minimize the state of hostility and > > > > mistrust between the two positions. > > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking elsewhere: > > > First, to protect people from getting sidetracked from the TM path and > > > onto a flashier but less evolutionary method. The assumption here was > > > that TMers were in many cases unable to discern the difference between > > > the Real Deal and lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, > > > etc). Second, there is value in sticking with a single path and not > > > "diluting" it with other ways and creating a mishmash of approaches. > > > Third, the TMO and MMY would suffer if the public noticed that TM'ers > > > were still looking for help to solve their own issues or to find a better > > > Master. Fourth, a belief that TM was the best way and pretty much the > > > only way to enlightenment. > > > > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except clearly > > the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as articles of faith > > like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with a few > > ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything holding the > > Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage with their own faith > > about things. > > -Buck in the Dome > > > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things are > > > different in this day and age it is a fact that people will easily be > > > able to look at other methods to meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. > > > To assume that once a person learns TM they will never be curious about > > > another program or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the > > > assumption that they should be excluded from the good graces of the TMO > > > if they do widen their horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to > > > continue to strictly follow MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up > > > and realize how different our world is now and how infantalizing the old > > > policy is. > > > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that deals > > > with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only for > > > the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are welcome. > > > Welcome back. > > > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for > > > the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us hope > > > for a communal peace and reconciliation in a large group meditation > > > before then. > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLif
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
I am not worthy! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > The answers are several; > > A - I have no idea > > B - 7thray is nearly as crazy as you and I don't generally pay attention to his stuff > > C - I might not have answered for the same reason you never answer the question of do you think Benjy Creme should be allowed to do presentations at the Domes? Should people who have been to see Benjy and listened to his bullshit about Maitreya be allowed to come into the Domes since you think the Aryan Purity Policy is such a good Dome idea? > > > > > > From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 12:24 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Â > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@ wrote: > > > > The Meissner effect is an expulsion of a magnetic field from a superconductor during its transition to the superconducting state. > > > > that don't have shit to do with a Hindu devotional practice done to receive the favor of various Goddesses > > Instead of making more new and wild claims, why don't you answer the question put to you by Steve : > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > Unbelievable how ignorant people can be. > > and how many hours of "channeling" do you have under your belt? >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Beautifully written, Auth. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin > was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to > know what he was about. You even let yourself be > convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his > teaching, when that simply was not the case. > > You went along with what *they* told you even though > they were "protecting" you in the way you yourself have > been eloquently objecting to recently. > > Robin was sui generis and should not be used as an > "example" in this context. That would be a travesty, > for the reasons I've outlined. There are plenty of > others you could have used as examples instead. > > You made it clear while Robin was here that you didn't > trust him because you had trouble following what he > wrote, and now you're badmouthing him when he's not > around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for > which I have much respect. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > (snip) > > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > > > > > > > (Carlsen.) > > > > > > > > > > Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with > > > > > Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an > > > > > example. > > > > > > > > > > Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most > > > > > important thing to know in this context is that according > > > > > to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, > > > > > Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU > > > > > with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, > > > > > and a big public mess was the result. > > > > > > > > > > Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to > > > > > Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he > > > > > was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his > > > > > group were TM initiators) but never interfered. > > > > > > > > > > Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of > > > > > the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted > > > > > to "protect" TMers from. > > > > > > > > > I disagree. I was around exactly when Robin was in full cry > > > > and while I never went to hear him (and would not have bothered > > > > to being at the time a fairly loyal Tm teacher) I heard from > > > > others I trusted how odd the whole thing was. Whatever we have > > > > heard that MMY supposedly told Bevan, there is more to the > > > > story. > > > > > > Well, when you find out what more there was, do let us > > > know. I'm just telling you what Peter said here that > > > Bevan told him, and Peter is pretty reliable. Perhaps you > > > can straighten it out with him. > > > > > > And as I mentioned, there's also the fact that while > > > Maharishi kept tabs on Robin and his group of TM > > > initiators in Canada, Maharishi never interfered, so it > > > appears Maharishi didn't think any "protection" was > > > required. > > > > The fact that MMY did not interfere says nothing about whether he felt > > Robin's followers needed "protecting." > > > > > > > It was not benign from what I heard from friends at that very > > > > time. People OTP or even somewhat devoted to MMY did NOT go > > > > and see or follow Robin. (Whether it is good to be OTP is a > > > > whole other discussion). Robin and his group were not > > > > considered at all to be devoted to MMY. > > > > > > That may be, but those doing the considering were simply > > > uninformed (or misinformed) on that point. Even after > > > Maharishi had to disown Robin in the court case Bevan > > > instigated, and Robin and his group had to leave town, > > > Robin remained loyal to Maharishi for at least a couple > > > of years (not sure of the exact time frame). > > > > > > What's so ironic about your stance is that Robin came > > > to MIU with the *very same beef* you and others have with > > > its unreasonable rigidity and blacklisting and > > > gatekeeping. He felt MIU was stifling and even distorting > > > Maharishi's teaching. There's a case to be made that > > > Robin was way ahead of the game, having recognized > > > earlier than most others that MIU was shooting itself in > > > the foot. > > > > > > (In fact, one might even make a case that Maharishi > > > thought
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Susan, I can only repeat: You did not know what Robin was about, because the MIU biggies did not want you to know what he was about. You even let yourself be convinced that he wasn't devoted to Maharishi and his teaching, when that simply was not the case. You went along with what *they* told you even though they were "protecting" you in the way you yourself have been eloquently objecting to recently. Robin was sui generis and should not be used as an "example" in this context. That would be a travesty, for the reasons I've outlined. There are plenty of others you could have used as examples instead. You made it clear while Robin was here that you didn't trust him because you had trouble following what he wrote, and now you're badmouthing him when he's not around to defend himself. That is not a behavior for which I have much respect. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > (snip) > > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > > > > > (Carlsen.) > > > > > > > > Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with > > > > Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an > > > > example. > > > > > > > > Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most > > > > important thing to know in this context is that according > > > > to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, > > > > Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU > > > > with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, > > > > and a big public mess was the result. > > > > > > > > Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to > > > > Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he > > > > was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his > > > > group were TM initiators) but never interfered. > > > > > > > > Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of > > > > the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted > > > > to "protect" TMers from. > > > > > > > I disagree. I was around exactly when Robin was in full cry > > > and while I never went to hear him (and would not have bothered > > > to being at the time a fairly loyal Tm teacher) I heard from > > > others I trusted how odd the whole thing was. Whatever we have > > > heard that MMY supposedly told Bevan, there is more to the > > > story. > > > > Well, when you find out what more there was, do let us > > know. I'm just telling you what Peter said here that > > Bevan told him, and Peter is pretty reliable. Perhaps you > > can straighten it out with him. > > > > And as I mentioned, there's also the fact that while > > Maharishi kept tabs on Robin and his group of TM > > initiators in Canada, Maharishi never interfered, so it > > appears Maharishi didn't think any "protection" was > > required. > > The fact that MMY did not interfere says nothing about whether he felt > Robin's followers needed "protecting." > > > > > It was not benign from what I heard from friends at that very > > > time. People OTP or even somewhat devoted to MMY did NOT go > > > and see or follow Robin. (Whether it is good to be OTP is a > > > whole other discussion). Robin and his group were not > > > considered at all to be devoted to MMY. > > > > That may be, but those doing the considering were simply > > uninformed (or misinformed) on that point. Even after > > Maharishi had to disown Robin in the court case Bevan > > instigated, and Robin and his group had to leave town, > > Robin remained loyal to Maharishi for at least a couple > > of years (not sure of the exact time frame). > > > > What's so ironic about your stance is that Robin came > > to MIU with the *very same beef* you and others have with > > its unreasonable rigidity and blacklisting and > > gatekeeping. He felt MIU was stifling and even distorting > > Maharishi's teaching. There's a case to be made that > > Robin was way ahead of the game, having recognized > > earlier than most others that MIU was shooting itself in > > the foot. > > > > (In fact, one might even make a case that Maharishi > > thought the powers-that-be at MIU needed to be shaken up > > and that Robin was just the person to do it--which could > > be why Maharishi told Bevan to leave Robin alone.) > > > > There are several pieces in the Files section that confirm > > what Robin had in mind. Here's a quote from one of them, > > the text
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > (snip) > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > > > (Carlsen.) > > > > > > Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with > > > Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an > > > example. > > > > > > Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most > > > important thing to know in this context is that according > > > to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, > > > Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU > > > with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, > > > and a big public mess was the result. > > > > > > Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to > > > Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he > > > was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his > > > group were TM initiators) but never interfered. > > > > > > Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of > > > the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted > > > to "protect" TMers from. > > > > > I disagree. I was around exactly when Robin was in full cry > > and while I never went to hear him (and would not have bothered > > to being at the time a fairly loyal Tm teacher) I heard from > > others I trusted how odd the whole thing was. Whatever we have > > heard that MMY supposedly told Bevan, there is more to the > > story. > > Well, when you find out what more there was, do let us > know. I'm just telling you what Peter said here that > Bevan told him, and Peter is pretty reliable. Perhaps you > can straighten it out with him. > > And as I mentioned, there's also the fact that while > Maharishi kept tabs on Robin and his group of TM > initiators in Canada, Maharishi never interfered, so it > appears Maharishi didn't think any "protection" was > required. The fact that MMY did not interfere says nothing about whether he felt Robin's followers needed "protecting." > > > It was not benign from what I heard from friends at that very > > time. People OTP or even somewhat devoted to MMY did NOT go > > and see or follow Robin. (Whether it is good to be OTP is a > > whole other discussion). Robin and his group were not > > considered at all to be devoted to MMY. > > That may be, but those doing the considering were simply > uninformed (or misinformed) on that point. Even after > Maharishi had to disown Robin in the court case Bevan > instigated, and Robin and his group had to leave town, > Robin remained loyal to Maharishi for at least a couple > of years (not sure of the exact time frame). > > What's so ironic about your stance is that Robin came > to MIU with the *very same beef* you and others have with > its unreasonable rigidity and blacklisting and > gatekeeping. He felt MIU was stifling and even distorting > Maharishi's teaching. There's a case to be made that > Robin was way ahead of the game, having recognized > earlier than most others that MIU was shooting itself in > the foot. > > (In fact, one might even make a case that Maharishi > thought the powers-that-be at MIU needed to be shaken up > and that Robin was just the person to do it--which could > be why Maharishi told Bevan to leave Robin alone.) > > There are several pieces in the Files section that confirm > what Robin had in mind. Here's a quote from one of them, > the text of an ad Robin placed in the Fairfield Ledger > (it's in the Miscellaneous Writings folder): > > "...For the sake of the immaculate wisdom that does flow from the > transcendent, and from the heart of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, we challenge > faculty members at MIU to a public debate on the following topic: 'Be it > resolved that Maharishi International University has begun to define the > Science of Creative Intelligence--and to live out the Science of Creative > Intelligence--in a form which violates the sacred springs of meaning and > feeling of Western civilization, and which furthermore threatens to bring > about the eventual demise of the Science of Creative Intelligence.'" > > *Of course* the Big Deals at MIU would have done their best > to spread the word that Robin was anathema. *Of course* > they would have pronounced it OTP for TMers to go hear what > he had to say. *Of course* they would have portrayed him as > a threat to the purity of the teaching. > > And you believed them--without ever doing any investigating > on your own. It was not at all, for me
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
The answers are several; A - I have no idea B - 7thray is nearly as crazy as you and I don't generally pay attention to his stuff C - I might not have answered for the same reason you never answer the question of do you think Benjy Creme should be allowed to do presentations at the Domes? Should people who have been to see Benjy and listened to his bullshit about Maitreya be allowed to come into the Domes since you think the Aryan Purity Policy is such a good Dome idea? From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 12:24 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > The Meissner effect is an expulsion of a magnetic field from a superconductor > during its transition to the superconducting state. > > that don't have shit to do with a Hindu devotional practice done to receive > the favor of various Goddesses Instead of making more new and wild claims, why don't you answer the question put to you by Steve : --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > Unbelievable how ignorant people can be. and how many hours of "channeling" do you have under your belt?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > (snip) > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > > > (Carlsen.) > > > > Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with > > Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an > > example. > > > > Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most > > important thing to know in this context is that according > > to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, > > Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU > > with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, > > and a big public mess was the result. > > > > Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to > > Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he > > was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his > > group were TM initiators) but never interfered. > > > > Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of > > the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted > > to "protect" TMers from. > > > I disagree. I was around exactly when Robin was in full cry > and while I never went to hear him (and would not have bothered > to being at the time a fairly loyal Tm teacher) I heard from > others I trusted how odd the whole thing was. Whatever we have > heard that MMY supposedly told Bevan, there is more to the > story. Well, when you find out what more there was, do let us know. I'm just telling you what Peter said here that Bevan told him, and Peter is pretty reliable. Perhaps you can straighten it out with him. And as I mentioned, there's also the fact that while Maharishi kept tabs on Robin and his group of TM initiators in Canada, Maharishi never interfered, so it appears Maharishi didn't think any "protection" was required. > It was not benign from what I heard from friends at that very > time. People OTP or even somewhat devoted to MMY did NOT go > and see or follow Robin. (Whether it is good to be OTP is a > whole other discussion). Robin and his group were not > considered at all to be devoted to MMY. That may be, but those doing the considering were simply uninformed (or misinformed) on that point. Even after Maharishi had to disown Robin in the court case Bevan instigated, and Robin and his group had to leave town, Robin remained loyal to Maharishi for at least a couple of years (not sure of the exact time frame). What's so ironic about your stance is that Robin came to MIU with the *very same beef* you and others have with its unreasonable rigidity and blacklisting and gatekeeping. He felt MIU was stifling and even distorting Maharishi's teaching. There's a case to be made that Robin was way ahead of the game, having recognized earlier than most others that MIU was shooting itself in the foot. (In fact, one might even make a case that Maharishi thought the powers-that-be at MIU needed to be shaken up and that Robin was just the person to do it--which could be why Maharishi told Bevan to leave Robin alone.) There are several pieces in the Files section that confirm what Robin had in mind. Here's a quote from one of them, the text of an ad Robin placed in the Fairfield Ledger (it's in the Miscellaneous Writings folder): "...For the sake of the immaculate wisdom that does flow from the transcendent, and from the heart of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, we challenge faculty members at MIU to a public debate on the following topic: 'Be it resolved that Maharishi International University has begun to define the Science of Creative Intelligence--and to live out the Science of Creative Intelligence--in a form which violates the sacred springs of meaning and feeling of Western civilization, and which furthermore threatens to bring about the eventual demise of the Science of Creative Intelligence.'" *Of course* the Big Deals at MIU would have done their best to spread the word that Robin was anathema. *Of course* they would have pronounced it OTP for TMers to go hear what he had to say. *Of course* they would have portrayed him as a threat to the purity of the teaching. And you believed them--without ever doing any investigating on your own. In reality, Robin was a threat *to them*--to their fiefdom, to their authority. > In the end, it turned out that Robin's group was pretty > dysfunctional, at least in how they related to him. Yes, in the end, no question about that. Robin went off the rails in the final year or so of his group's existence. Maybe Ann could say more about this. But that was well after Robin's stint at MIU. > So, I sta
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
How 'bout I channel Maitreya for you Nabby? Would you be my friend then? From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 12:24 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > The Meissner effect is an expulsion of a magnetic field from a superconductor > during its transition to the superconducting state. > > that don't have shit to do with a Hindu devotional practice done to receive > the favor of various Goddesses Instead of making more new and wild claims, why don't you answer the question put to you by Steve : --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > Unbelievable how ignorant people can be. and how many hours of "channeling" do you have under your belt?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > (snip) > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). > > (Carlsen.) > > Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with > Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an > example. > > Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most > important thing to know in this context is that according > to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, > Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU > with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, > and a big public mess was the result. > > Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to > Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he > was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his > group were TM initiators) but never interfered. > > Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of > the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted > to "protect" TMers from. > I disagree. I was around exactly when Robin was in full cry and while I never went to hear him (and would not have bothered to being at the time a fairly loyal Tm teacher) I heard from others I trusted how odd the whole thing was. Whatever we have heard that MMY supposedly told Bevan, there is more to the story. It was not benign from what I heard from friends at that very time. People OTP or even somewhat devoted to MMY did NOT go and see or follow Robin. (Whether it is good to be OTP is a whole other discussion). Robin and his group were not considered at all to be devoted to MMY. In the end, it turned out that Robin's group was pretty dysfunctional, at least in how they related to him. So, I stand by my opinion, that Robin's group was a good example of something other than TM that was not a healthy experience, at least for most people. People have a right to choose to be involved in anything, but let's not sugar coat that particular example.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > The Meissner effect is an expulsion of a magnetic field from a superconductor > during its transition to the superconducting state. > > that don't have shit to do with a Hindu devotional practice done to receive > the favor of various Goddesses Instead of making more new and wild claims, why don't you answer the question put to you by Steve : --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > Unbelievable how ignorant people can be. and how many hours of "channeling" do you have under your belt?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: (snip) > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking > elsewhere: First, to protect people from getting sidetracked > from the TM path and onto a flashier but less evolutionary > method. The assumption here was that TMers were in many cases > unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). (Carlsen.) Wayback, since you are obviously not that familiar with Robin's "deal," you probably shouldn't use him as an example. Without going into a long dissertation, possibly the most important thing to know in this context is that according to Peter Sutphen, Bevan said Maharishi had ordered him, Bevan, to leave Robin alone when Robin showed up at MIU with his group. Bevan ignored Maharishi's instruction, and a big public mess was the result. Robin and his followers were completely dedicated to Maharishi. Maharishi had kept his eye on Robin when he was teaching in Canada (at that point most of his group were TM initiators) but never interfered. Bottom line, Robin was an anomaly, not an example of the "lesser and possibly harmful crap" Maharishi wanted to "protect" TMers from.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
Yep, using the Dome badge as punishment in fealty test over people while hoping to git a large and proper Meissner Effect out of the Domes is insurmountably impossible without a change in the leadership and/or the TM-anti-saint guidelines. A large change is needed right now from within TM. -Buck --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of those > > > > too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you are in > > > > danger of losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has existed for > > > > decades - it ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to maintain the > > > state of hostility and hatred between the two positions, but logic says > > > that there should be a change of direction in order to turn a new page in > > > this unstable relationship and minimize the state of hostility and > > > mistrust between the two positions. > > > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking elsewhere: > > First, to protect people from getting sidetracked from the TM path and onto > > a flashier but less evolutionary method. The assumption here was that TMers > > were in many cases unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal > > and lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there > > is value in sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it with other > > ways and creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would > > suffer if the public noticed that TM'ers were still looking for help to > > solve their own issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, a belief that > > TM was the best way and pretty much the only way to enlightenment. > > > > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except clearly > the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as articles of faith > like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with a few ultra-preservationist > meditators in the middle of everything holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and > the Dome meditation hostage with their own faith about things. > -Buck in the Dome > > > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things are > > different in this day and age it is a fact that people will easily be able > > to look at other methods to meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. To > > assume that once a person learns TM they will never be curious about > > another program or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the assumption > > that they should be excluded from the good graces of the TMO if they do > > widen their horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to > > strictly follow MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and realize > > how different our world is now and how infantalizing the old policy is. > > > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that deals with > > the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only for the > > practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are welcome. Welcome > > back. > > > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for the > > guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us hope for a > > communal peace and reconciliation in a large group meditation before then. > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like > > > > > leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, > > > > > TMSP, rounding, and being around Marshy has led them to this pass - > > > > > draw - my suggestion is get out before you waste anymore time, > > > > > effort, energy and money. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of > > > > Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me gr
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
The Meissner effect is an expulsion of a magnetic field from a superconductor during its transition to the superconducting state. that don't have shit to do with a Hindu devotional practice done to receive the favor of various Goddesses which is what Ultra Hindu Fanatic Marshy the Con Artist gave to everyone under the guise of calling a "simple, natural mental technique practiced 20 minutes twice a day." Of course if George Harrison had known it was a Hindu devotional practice, he would never have had to go over to the Hare Krishnas. From: Buck To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of those > > > too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you are in > > > danger of losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has existed for > > > decades - it ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to maintain the state > > of hostility and hatred between the two positions, but logic says that > > there should be a change of direction in order to turn a new page in this > > unstable relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust > > between the two positions. > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking elsewhere: > First, to protect people from getting sidetracked from the TM path and onto a > flashier but less evolutionary method. The assumption here was that TMers > were in many cases unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there is > value in sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it with other ways > and creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would suffer if > the public noticed that TM'ers were still looking for help to solve their own > issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, a belief that TM was the best way > and pretty much the only way to enlightenment. > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with a few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage with their own faith about things. -Buck in the Dome > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things are > different in this day and age it is a fact that people will easily be able > to look at other methods to meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. To assume > that once a person learns TM they will never be curious about another program > or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the assumption that they should > be excluded from the good graces of the TMO if they do widen their > horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to strictly follow > MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and realize how different our > world is now and how infantalizing the old policy is. > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that deals with > the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only for the > practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are welcome. Welcome > back. > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for the > guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us hope for a > communal peace and reconciliation in a large group meditation before then. > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like > > > > leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, TMSP, > > > > rounding, and being around Marshy has led them to this pass - draw - my > > > > suggestion is get out before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and > > > > money. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of > > > Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. We have > > > s
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of those > > > too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you are in > > > danger of losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has existed for > > > decades - it ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to maintain the state > > of hostility and hatred between the two positions, but logic says that > > there should be a change of direction in order to turn a new page in this > > unstable relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust > > between the two positions. > > From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking elsewhere: > First, to protect people from getting sidetracked from the TM path and onto a > flashier but less evolutionary method. The assumption here was that TMers > were in many cases unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and > lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there is > value in sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it with other ways > and creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would suffer if > the public noticed that TM'ers were still looking for help to solve their own > issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, a belief that TM was the best way > and pretty much the only way to enlightenment. > Yes the [TM sufficiency articles] held by the tru-believers, except clearly the meditating movement does not believe or hold them as articles of faith like our TM-taliban does. We got a problem with a few ultra-preservationist meditators in the middle of everything holding the Meissner Effect [ME] and the Dome meditation hostage with their own faith about things. -Buck in the Dome > Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things are > different in this day and age it is a fact that people will easily be able > to look at other methods to meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. To assume > that once a person learns TM they will never be curious about another program > or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the assumption that they should > be excluded from the good graces of the TMO if they do widen their > horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to strictly follow > MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and realize how different our > world is now and how infantalizing the old policy is. > > How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that deals with > the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only for the > practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are welcome. Welcome > back. > > Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for the > guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us hope for a > communal peace and reconciliation in a large group meditation before then. > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like > > > > leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, TMSP, > > > > rounding, and being around Marshy has led them to this pass - draw - my > > > > suggestion is get out before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and > > > > money. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of > > > Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. We have > > > suffered many blows as a result of extremism. > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Â > > > > > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save the TM > > > > movement. A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only to sustain a > > > > meditation group for the Dome meditation numbers. A meditation without > > > > fear. The TM movement's anti-saint poli
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of those too > > blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you are in danger of > > losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has existed for decades - it > > ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > > > > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to maintain the state > of hostility and hatred between the two positions, but logic says that there > should be a change of direction in order to turn a new page in this unstable > relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust between the two > positions. >From what I recall, there were 4 reasons MMY forbid looking elsewhere: First, >to protect people from getting sidetracked from the TM path and onto a >flashier but less evolutionary method. The assumption here was that TMers were >in many cases unable to discern the difference between the Real Deal and >lesser and possibly harmful crap (ie Robin Carlson, etc). Second, there is >value in sticking with a single path and not "diluting" it with other ways and >creating a mishmash of approaches. Third, the TMO and MMY would suffer if the >public noticed that TM'ers were still looking for help to solve their own >issues or to find a better Master. Fourth, a belief that TM was the best way >and pretty much the only way to enlightenment. Now, whatever of the above points might be true, or not, things are different in this day and age it is a fact that people will easily be able to look at other methods to meditate, calm themselves, or evolve. To assume that once a person learns TM they will never be curious about another program or teacher or saint is ludicrous. And so is the assumption that they should be excluded from the good graces of the TMO if they do widen their horizons.The TMO has to make a decision soon: to continue to strictly follow MMY"s policy from about 1970, or to soften up and realize how different our world is now and how infantalizing the old policy is. How simple it would be to just scrap the whole department that deals with the blacklisting and gatekeeping. Just say the Domes are only for the practice of TM and TMSP, but all who agree to do this are welcome. Welcome back. Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in a large group meditation before then. > -Buck > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like > > > leaders took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, TMSP, > > > rounding, and being around Marshy has led them to this pass - draw - my > > > suggestion is get out before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and > > > money. > > > > > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of Global > > Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. We have suffered > > many blows as a result of extremism. > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > > > > > Â > > > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save the TM > > > movement. A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only to sustain a > > > meditation group for the Dome meditation numbers. A meditation without > > > fear. The TM movement's anti-saint policies have long bred hypocrisy and > > > contempt for the movement and its leadership inside and outside the > > > meditating community. We need only look at the decades long slide in > > > numbers meditating or the Dome meditation numbers. They are down and it > > > is an uphill fight to get numbers back against the hard-heads on top. > > > Simply to save the Dome numbers meditating there needs to come along a > > > flat out repeal movement against these Dome policies. The Dome policies > > > and guidelines have clearly failed to sustain our numbers and it is time > > > and has become our larger responsibility to change those guidelines with > > > repeal. The Taliban-like leaders of the movement with their anti-saint > &g
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of those too > blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you are in danger of > losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has existed for decades - it > ain't gonna change now, Pappy. > > It seems that extremists on both sides are determined to maintain the state of hostility and hatred between the two positions, but logic says that there should be a change of direction in order to turn a new page in this unstable relationship and minimize the state of hostility and mistrust between the two positions. Everyone around the Prime Minister is saying they are only waiting for the guy to die to resolve the conflict. However in mediation let us hope for a communal peace and reconciliation in a large group meditation before then. -Buck > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like leaders > > took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, TMSP, rounding, > > and being around Marshy has led them to this pass - draw - my suggestion is > > get out before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and money. > > > > > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of Global > Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. We have suffered > many blows as a result of extremism. > -Buck > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > > > Â > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save the TM > > movement. A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only to sustain a > > meditation group for the Dome meditation numbers. A meditation without > > fear. The TM movement's anti-saint policies have long bred hypocrisy and > > contempt for the movement and its leadership inside and outside the > > meditating community. We need only look at the decades long slide in > > numbers meditating or the Dome meditation numbers. They are down and it is > > an uphill fight to get numbers back against the hard-heads on top. Simply > > to save the Dome numbers meditating there needs to come along a flat out > > repeal movement against these Dome policies. The Dome policies and > > guidelines have clearly failed to sustain our numbers and it is time and > > has become our larger responsibility to change those guidelines with > > repeal. The Taliban-like leaders of the movement with their anti-saint > > policies have made for a TM movement of > > corruption, liars and hypocrites. More than reforming, the time is come > > for the repeal of the anti-saint polices to save the Dome meditating > > program; Repeal now the anti-saint guidelines to save the Dome numbers. > > The saints are returning soon again. It is a fact of life. Repeal the > > TM-Anti-Saint policies now to save the Domes before it is too late.. The > > time has come to make your voice heard and join the Anti-Saint repeal > > movement for all our benefit." > > > > > > > > Repealing TM's anti-saint policies it seems has terribly strong parallels > > > to the context of the 18th Amendment 'Repeal Movement' in the 20th > > > Century. Take a look at this short piece on Pauline Sabin of the > > > movement to repeal the 18th amendment: A theme of the undoing of the > > > 'dry's' from early was their own self-destruct of unbending policies in > > > the face of a reality. Sort of like TM's movement administration trying > > > to restrict and prohibit its own people from visiting other saints and > > > holy people and only relying on its own TM teachers and consultants. > > > > > > As comparison critique this is a thought provoking documentary on Pauline > > > Sabin and the movement to repeal the 18th Amendment, Have a look: > > > > > > > > > http://www.wgbh.org/programs/Baseball-The-Tenth-Inning-1199/episodes/Women-of-PROHIBITION-Pauline-Sabin-34763 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, you say this NOW, now that it's come out that > > > > > > > > > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > > > > > > > > > what excuses you make for him lying about it for
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
As the Global Country of World Peace exists only in the minds of those too blind to see Marshy's legacy for what it was, a scam, you are in danger of losing nothing and the extremism you speak of has existed for decades - it ain't gonna change now, Pappy. From: Buck To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 10:12 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like leaders > took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, TMSP, rounding, and > being around Marshy has led them to this pass - draw - my suggestion is get > out before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and money. > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. We have suffered many blows as a result of extremism. -Buck > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save the TM movement. > A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only to sustain a meditation group > for the Dome meditation numbers. A meditation without fear. The TM > movement's anti-saint policies have long bred hypocrisy and contempt for the > movement and its leadership inside and outside the meditating community. We > need only look at the decades long slide in numbers meditating or the Dome > meditation numbers. They are down and it is an uphill fight to get numbers > back against the hard-heads on top. Simply to save the Dome numbers > meditating there needs to come along a flat out repeal movement against these > Dome policies. The Dome policies and guidelines have clearly failed to > sustain our numbers and it is time and has become our larger responsibility > to change those guidelines with repeal. The Taliban-like leaders of the > movement with their anti-saint policies have made for a TM movement of > corruption, liars and hypocrites. More than reforming, the time is come for > the repeal of the anti-saint polices to save the Dome meditating program; > Repeal now the anti-saint guidelines to save the Dome numbers. The saints > are returning soon again. It is a fact of life. Repeal the TM-Anti-Saint > policies now to save the Domes before it is too late.. The time has come to > make your voice heard and join the Anti-Saint repeal movement for all our > benefit." > > > > > Repealing TM's anti-saint policies it seems has terribly strong parallels > > to the context of the 18th Amendment 'Repeal Movement' in the 20th Century. > > Take a look at this short piece on Pauline Sabin of the movement to repeal > > the 18th amendment: A theme of the undoing of the 'dry's' from early was > > their own self-destruct of unbending policies in the face of a reality. > > Sort of like TM's movement administration trying to restrict and prohibit > > its own people from visiting other saints and holy people and only relying > > on its own TM teachers and consultants. > > > > As comparison critique this is a thought provoking documentary on Pauline > > Sabin and the movement to repeal the 18th Amendment, Have a look: > > > > > > http://www.wgbh.org/programs/Baseball-The-Tenth-Inning-1199/episodes/Women-of-PROHIBITION-Pauline-Sabin-34763 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, you say this NOW, now that it's come out that > > > > > > > > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > > > > > > > > what excuses you make for him lying about it for so long, > > > > > > > > and to so many? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is a really tough question. That could easily be someone's > > scholarly thesis topic alone on Fairfield. How meditators have dealt with > > the > > deceit and moral dissonance of their leadership. That became more directly > > addressed in a series of posts by a range of old meditators writing on FFL > > between Christmas and New Year's a month ago. It was really interesting to > > read > > how different people resolved their relationship with the Tmo. > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > &g
[FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > what you fail to take into consideration is that your Taliban-like leaders > took their cue from Marshy himself and that YEARS of TM, TMSP, rounding, and > being around Marshy has led them to this pass - draw - my suggestion is get > out before you waste anymore time, effort, energy and money. > > Son, what I truly wish is for moderation to return to the Country of Global Peace. This is my only wish. Extremism pains me greatly. We have suffered many blows as a result of extremism. -Buck > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > > > > > Repealing TM's Anti-Saint Policies > > Urgently "A 'repeal movement' is clearly needed now to save the TM movement. > A repeal of the anti-saint policies if only to sustain a meditation group > for the Dome meditation numbers. A meditation without fear. The TM > movement's anti-saint policies have long bred hypocrisy and contempt for the > movement and its leadership inside and outside the meditating community. We > need only look at the decades long slide in numbers meditating or the Dome > meditation numbers. They are down and it is an uphill fight to get numbers > back against the hard-heads on top. Simply to save the Dome numbers > meditating there needs to come along a flat out repeal movement against these > Dome policies. The Dome policies and guidelines have clearly failed to > sustain our numbers and it is time and has become our larger responsibility > to change those guidelines with repeal. The Taliban-like leaders of the > movement with their anti-saint policies have made for a TM movement of > corruption, liars and hypocrites. More than reforming, the time is come for > the repeal of the anti-saint polices to save the Dome meditating program; > Repeal now the anti-saint guidelines to save the Dome numbers. The saints > are returning soon again. It is a fact of life. Repeal the TM-Anti-Saint > policies now to save the Domes before it is too late.. The time has come to > make your voice heard and join the Anti-Saint repeal movement for all our > benefit." > > > > > Repealing TM's anti-saint policies it seems has terribly strong parallels > > to the context of the 18th Amendment 'Repeal Movement' in the 20th Century. > > Take a look at this short piece on Pauline Sabin of the movement to repeal > > the 18th amendment: A theme of the undoing of the 'dry's' from early was > > their own self-destruct of unbending policies in the face of a reality. > > Sort of like TM's movement administration trying to restrict and prohibit > > its own people from visiting other saints and holy people and only relying > > on its own TM teachers and consultants. > > > > As comparison critique this is a thought provoking documentary on Pauline > > Sabin and the movement to repeal the 18th Amendment, Have a look: > > > > > > http://www.wgbh.org/programs/Baseball-The-Tenth-Inning-1199/episodes/Women-of-PROHIBITION-Pauline-Sabin-34763 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, you say this NOW, now that it's come out that > > > > > > > > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > > > > > > > > what excuses you make for him lying about it for so long, > > > > > > > > and to so many? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is a really tough question. That could easily be someone's > > scholarly thesis topic alone on Fairfield. How meditators have dealt with > > the > > deceit and moral dissonance of their leadership. That became more directly > > addressed in a series of posts by a range of old meditators writing on FFL > > between Christmas and New Year's a month ago. It was really interesting to > > read > > how different people resolved their relationship with the Tmo. > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > Back then it seems the problems were more simply over the money, > > > fund-raising technique and the anti-saint policy that were driving people > > > away. > > > > > > > > > > > Even Back then there were yet some lot of 'unknowns' like the women to > > > > be discovered. > > > > > > > > > > Surveying the old [meditating] community, The
