Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-11 Thread Bhairitu
On 06/11/2011 10:41 AM, sparaig wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: >> On 06/08/2011 10:18 AM, sparaig wrote: >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:52 AM, cardemaister wrote: > [...] > "Bhagavan S[h]ankara now left Prayaga

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-11 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > On 06/08/2011 10:18 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > >> > >> On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:52 AM, cardemaister wrote: [...] > >>> "Bhagavan S[h]ankara now left Prayaga, and travelling through the > >>>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread Bhairitu
On 06/08/2011 10:18 AM, sparaig wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: >> >> On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:52 AM, cardemaister wrote: >> L. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > The UC view of Vedanta, esp. in the Shank. tradition, not only > avoid

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > Do you think I'm a chronic liar? > > Do you lie to me? I don't think so. Not what I asked, although presumably if I were a chronic liar as Vaj asserted in his pos

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > I agree that MMY's scientific standards were pretty > > > > > low, but not that he didn't

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
Nope. Lawson wasn't making a pronouncement to begin with, nor was his response to Barry's question a pronouncement. The only pronouncements in this exchange have been Barry's--and they're flat-out wrong. Remarkably Stupid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In Fai

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > > > > > Willingness to surrender to dharma > > > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > > > Willingness to surrender to dharma > > Define dharma. Show it to me scientifically. I'll wait. The career/beha

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" wrote: > > (snip) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > According to Robin Woodsworth Carlsen, TM-style "enlightenment" is > > actually of form of induced psychosis. It is perceived exactly as > > described, but is in f

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:52 AM, cardemaister wrote: > > > > >> > >> L. > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> The UC view of Vedanta, esp. in the Shank. tradition, not only > >>> avoids siddhis, it considers

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > Yeah, exactly. If individual brains produce individual > > > consciousnesses, you have t

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > Granted, no Nobel Prizes to TMers, as far as we know (but > > it's entirely possible we might not know if there were), > > but I'm not positive scientific exploration per s

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > Granted, no Nobel Prizes to TMers, as far as we know (but > it's entirely possible we might not know if there were), > but I'm not positive scientific exploration per se is the > sine qua non. Other than Physicist-Sidha Brian Josephse

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > > > methinks you will be at this a long time Curtis. > > > At what? Understanding life? Till my dying day. The first thought that flitted through my mind when I re

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread emptybill
Yep, I did a typo while writing but left it in place in the end. Apparently you didn't get the pun. Doesn't matter since it wasn't meant for you. BTW, why would I care what you "think" about anything? Your statement is only your professed self-opinion. No doubt it must be terrifying to be you. I'l

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > methinks you will be at this a long time Curtis. > At what? Understanding life? Till my dying day. And most people are really full of it about him IMO. Not understanding the cultural context and the other messiahs of his time, pe

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread Xenophaneros Anartaxius
I was just restating your questions. I did not expect that you would reply because the questions I asked were not directly aimed at you, they were kind of rhetorical. The discussion your original post provoked forked off in various directions. The reason I am assigning for having brought up th

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex" wrote: > > turquoiseb: > > Define dharma. Show it to me scientifically. I'll wait. > > > This is funny - Barry didn't define anything in his original > questions, so now he wants us to define 'dharma', a basic > term used in Hinduism and Buddhism.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread WillyTex
turquoiseb: > Define dharma. Show it to me scientifically. I'll wait. > This is funny - Barry didn't define anything in his original questions, so now he wants us to define 'dharma', a basic term used in Hinduism and Buddhism. Come to think of it, has Barry ever defined anything? Go figure. > J

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > wrote: > > > > Turq's original 4 (or perhaps 3-1/2 or 3 questions). (Some slight > > emphasis added) (-: [quoting Barry from an earlier post:] > > > I'm serious in this,

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > I agree that MMY's scientific standards were pretty > > > > low, but not that he didn't really believe what he said > > > > about spirituality being measurably re

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" wrote: > > Turq's original 4 (or perhaps 3-1/2 or 3 questions). (Some slight > emphasis added) (-: > > > Just for the fun of it, you understand. :-) > > > > 1. [W]hat exactly (in your opinion, of course, and welcomed > > as the op

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > I agree that MMY's scientific standards were pretty > > > low, but not that he didn't really

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread Xenophaneros Anartaxius
Turq's original 4 (or perhaps 3-1/2 or 3 questions). (Some slight emphasis added) (-: >Just for the fun of it, you understand. :-) > 1. [W]hat exactly (in your opinion, of course, and welcomed as the opinion it is) was the distinction that Maharishi was trying to draw between UC and BC? 2

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > Although I'm not terribly interested in this discussion, > I'm interested in how Lawson deals with your simple > question below, "How would you know?" Seems to me he's > just stating ideas in pronouncements, the same way they > were stat

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
This post demonstrates why Barry deserves no attention here other than scorn for being Remarkably Stupid or a Stupid Liar, or both. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogro

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > > > Willingness to surrender to dharma > > Define dharma. Show it to me scientifically. I'll > wait. My goodness. I w

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > On Jun 7, 2011, at 11:00 PM, emptybill wrote: > > > > > Vaj: > > > Give me some Don Juan Matus anytime over becoming > > > the latest self-proclaimed Super-Rishi or Raja. > > > > Vaj quotes a fictional character from the Canteñada books > > to n

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread Vaj
On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:52 AM, cardemaister wrote: L. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: The UC view of Vedanta, esp. in the Shank. tradition, not only avoids siddhis, it considers them antithetical to the evolution of consciousness. So, why did "Shank." himself util

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread Vaj
On Jun 7, 2011, at 11:00 PM, emptybill wrote: Vaj: Give me some Don Juan Matus anytime over becoming the latest self-proclaimed Super-Rishi or Raja. Vaj quotes a fictional character from the Canteñada books to nail down his arguments. So is this guy a bull-shitter or not? I think "troll" sums

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
Although I'm not terribly interested in this discussion, I'm interested in how Lawson deals with your simple question below, "How would you know?" Seems to me he's just stating ideas in pronouncements, the same way they were stated to him, without any more rational filtering or analysis being per

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread PaliGap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > [...] > > I think I would say "yes & yes". Between asterix (asterixes?), > > true that. But I think those words are not expressing properly > > his position as (fairly consistently)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread whynotnow7
"Bingo. Nothing could be more antithetical to science that the belief that one can "know" things based solely on one's own subjective experience." Really? I appreciate that this sounds good to you, but you do this all the time. You often declare the motives of others here as if known by you, with

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread cardemaister
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" wrote: > > > > This is not a definition but rather an interpretation. > > Try "faithfulness' ... a present-tense definition of shraddha. > > > > OK, just what does teh word "faith

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread cardemaister
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > Shankara actually describes an eight-fold "ladder" of brahman, kind > of his version of Patanjali's eighfold path, the last of which is > that even the vritti of brahman is dropped and dissolved and > "forgotten". > Whoa! Are you sure

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > > > > > Willingness to surrender to dharma > > > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > > > > > One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform > > > wholeheartedly to the status quo

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread Robert
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > > > Willingness to surrender to dharma > > Define dharma. Show it to me scientifically. I'll wait. >(snip) It is eve

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread turquoiseb
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > Willingness to surrender to dharma Define dharma. Show it to me scientifically. I'll wait. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: > [...] > > FWIW, according to

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-08 Thread cardemaister
> > L. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > The UC view of Vedanta, esp. in the Shank. tradition, not only avoids > > siddhis, it considers them antithetical to the evolution of consciousness. > > > So, why did "Shank." himself utilize -- according to Shankara-dig- v

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Robert
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:55 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > >> > > [...] > >> Yeah, exactly. If individual brains produce individual > >> consciousnesses, you have to do some fairly elabor

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Robert
(snip) > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > According to Robin Woodsworth Carlsen, TM-style "enlightenment" is > actually of form of induced psychosis. It is perceived exactly as > described, but is in fact a form of psychosis. Given that one can > experience such things as

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread emptybill
Not just faith but rather "faithfulness". Pledging your fidelity of good faith. Something or someone worthy of trust or belief. Samaya - as in words of honor from a knight to his liege lord. Prussian: "Troth" - truthfulness. English - "Betroth" ... pledge of trust between a husband and wife. "M

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > [...] > > Yeah, exactly. If individual brains produce individual > > consciousnesses, you have to do some fairly elaborate > > acrobatics to speak of Consciousness. MMY was

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread emptybill
Vaj: Give me some Don Juan Matus anytime over becoming the latest self-proclaimed Super-Rishi or Raja. Vaj quotes a fictional character from the Canteñada books to nail down his arguments. So is this guy a bull-shitter or not? I think "troll" sums it up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Va

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Yifu
true, but one doesn't have to know Skt or Hebrew in order to meet them. English works well. http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/emerald-butterfly.jpg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" wrote: > > Angels are merely a Semitic notion. > > There are no "angels" in the Veda-s, Purana-s

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread whynotnow7
At the core of an arrogant man is a traumatized child, hypothetically speaking, again.:-) Why would anything be excluded from self-realization? Conversely, why couldn't someone gain self-realization any number of ways? Notice that those who have nothing good to say about the sidhis often had ver

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread emptybill
Angels are merely a Semitic notion. There are no "angels" in the Veda-s, Purana-s or Tantra-s. "Angelos" means "messenger" in Greek, in other words a news-bearer - not even a messenger of a "god". In Hebrew, "mal'akh yhvh" means "messenger of yhvh. That is all. Fergit the notion that deva-s ar

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread whynotnow7
methinks you will be at this a long time Curtis. Another dude, also with long hair and a beard, has been gone for 2000+ years, and people are still arguing about his message, purpose and intentions. And for the same reasons - they cannot help but filter the guy through their own minds, coming up

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > I agree that MMY's scientific standards were pretty > > low, but not that he didn't really believe what he said > > about spirituality being measurably reflected in t

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread whynotnow7
Jai Guru Dev dude! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > > > One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform wholeheartedly to the > > status quo, whether in terms of science or religion. Maharishi

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread whynotnow7
There have always been wondrous and premature spiritual experiences on the way to self realization. To make them the exclusive province of TM is absurd. However, TM being very effective, especially with rounding, coupled with Maharishi's decision not to take on lifestyle choices for *most* of us

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" wrote: > > This is not a definition but rather an interpretation. > Try "faithfulness' ... a present-tense definition of shraddha. > OK, just what does teh word "faith" mean? Belief without proof? Intuition? Strong in God? Knowledge of things

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread emptybill
The "Shank" tradition for Vaj is "Vidyaranya". But he claim to be a dzogchen yogi so it doesn't matter who he says is an authority. He reads books and goes to webinars and teachings of Tibetans. He has no guru-s or sampradaya. He thinks of himself as the nor'easter Eckhart Tolle. He makes this shit

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread emptybill
This is not a definition but rather an interpretation. Try "faithfulness' ... a present-tense definition of shraddha. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > I've found an interesting alternative definition: > > Willingness to surrender to dharma > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoo

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > According to Robin Woodsworth Carlsen, TM-style > "enlightenment" is actually of form of induced psychosis. Oh, and Robin Woodsworth Carlsen is definitely the go-to person on the causes of psychosis. (That's why we always use his middle name,

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > > > One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform > > wholeheartedly to the status quo, whether in terms of science > > or religion. Maharishi would have gotten nowhe

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" wrote: > > right, but you've gradually changed the terms and definitions. The original > experession I believe was, or related to physical brains. > But, glad we agree if the definitions are expanded to embrace all types of > nervous systems, subtle

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:38 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > >> > >> It kind of shows how un-seriously Maharishi took this information that it > >> would be up to ME to cough up thi

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread nablusoss1008
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform wholeheartedly to the > status quo, whether in terms of science or religion. Maharishi would have > gotten nowhere fast had he looked to science to validate his techniques. So >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Yifu
right, but you've gradually changed the terms and definitions. The original experession I believe was, or related to physical brains. But, glad we agree if the definitions are expanded to embrace all types of nervous systems, subtle or gross. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrot

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" wrote: > > You're not making sense. True, everything is Consciousness all the way down, > but not "brains all the way down". Physically dead people can be considered > human, but can function intelligently without brains. I've met many of them. > ..

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
What evah. bah! Waves hand... L. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:38 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > >> > >> It kind of shows how un-seriously Maharishi took this information that it >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Yifu
You're obscuring the issues by conflating "brains" with subtle nervous systems. In ordinary every day parlance, Angels are considered not having BRAINS (physical nervous systems)...and don't bring up the Biblical statement about physically embodied Angels. ... It's obvious that Angels may have s

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform wholeheartedly to the > status quo, whether in terms of science or religion. Maharishi would have > gotten nowhere fast had he looked to science to validate his techniques. So >

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Vaj
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:55 PM, sparaig wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: >> > [...] >> Yeah, exactly. If individual brains produce individual >> consciousnesses, you have to do some fairly elaborate >> acrobatics to speak of Consciousness. MMY was definitely >> an

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > [...] > Yeah, exactly. If individual brains produce individual > consciousnesses, you have to do some fairly elaborate > acrobatics to speak of Consciousness. MMY was definitely > an Idealist (matter is emergent from consciousness) > r

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two teachings, the one he > used for PR (scientific materialism) and the one he pulled out when there > were believers in the room. He used his PR message to appear sciency (A

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Vaj
According to Robin Woodsworth Carlsen, TM-style "enlightenment" is actually of form of induced psychosis. It is perceived exactly as described, but is in fact a form of psychosis. Given that one can experience such things as "the universe as fluctuations of consciousness" while under the influen

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: [...] > I think I would say "yes & yes". Between asterix (asterixes?), > true that. But I think those words are not expressing properly > his position as (fairly consistently) expressed elsewhere. MMY > was not a reductionist/materialist as

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Yifu
You're not making sense. True, everything is Consciousness all the way down, but not "brains all the way down". Physically dead people can be considered human, but can function intelligently without brains. I've met many of them. ... Re: the notion that people must have physical nervous systems i

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread Vaj
On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:38 PM, sparaig wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: >> >> It kind of shows how un-seriously Maharishi took this information that it >> would be up to ME to cough up this furball! > [...] >> And given that the so called enlightened ha

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
But in the context of the statement, everything IS physical. And [human] consciousness is a product of the functioning of the human brain. The fact that everything physical is consciousness all the way down doesn't mean that human consciousness can perceive this unless it is functioning in a cer

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" wrote: > > Which comes first, the 'Soul' or the 'Body'?... > Do you remember being in the 'Womb'? > Where were you between 'Lives'...? > When you drop the body, will you still 'Exist'? > Does your body know it 'Exists'... > Or is 'Consciousness' the

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > "Every experience has its level of physiology, and so unbounded awareness > > has its own level of physiology which can be measured. Every aspect of life > > is inte

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
I've found an interesting alternative definition: Willingness to surrender to dharma --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: [...] > FWIW, according to Pata�jali, shraddhaa (usually translated to 'faith') > seems to be a /conditio sine qua non/ for samaadhi: > > shraddhaavi

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" wrote: > > thx, on his stmt that everything is physical, consciousness is a product of > brain functioning, etc; sounds a lot like Sam Harris. (scientific > materialism), brain comes first. > ... You're forgetting: it is consciousness all the way d

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform > wholeheartedly to the status quo, whether in terms of science > or religion. Maharishi would have gotten nowhere fast had he > looked to science to validate his techniques. So like

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread whynotnow7
One thing no revolutionary is about to do is conform wholeheartedly to the status quo, whether in terms of science or religion. Maharishi would have gotten nowhere fast had he looked to science to validate his techniques. So like all visionaries, he spoke the language of his audience as appropr

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread PaliGap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > wrote: > > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > He found the presentation of scientific materialism useful as a ma

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread curtisdeltablues
"authfriend" wrote: > Any hint of inconsistency, even if it's obviously just > a matter of "loose talk," will serve as an excuse for > Maharishi-bashing.--- I don't agree that this was loose talk. It was a consistent pattern of how he presented himself to certain audiences. Having spent days

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two > > > teachings, the one

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > > He found the presentation of scientific materialism useful as a marketing > > strategy, which he laid out explicitly in his SOB. (favorite acronym ever!)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread PaliGap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > He found the presentation of scientific materialism useful as a marketing > strategy, which he laid out explicitly in his SOB. (favorite acronym ever!) He did? It's a long time since I SOBbed ;-) But I did read it once, c

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two teachings, the one he > > used for PR (scientific materialism) and the one he pulled out when there >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two > > teachings, the one he used for PR (scientific materialism) > > and the one he pulled out when there we

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" jstein@ wrote: > > > > I think I would say "yes & yes". Between asterix (asterixes?) > > Noes! "Asterix the Gaul"! > > Singular: asterisk. Plural: asterisks. (From the Greek > > *aster

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two > > teachings, the one he used for PR (scientific materialism) > > and the one he pulled out when there were

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread PaliGap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > I think I would say "yes & yes". Between asterix (asterixes?) Noes! "Asterix the Gaul"! > Singular: asterisk. Plural: asterisks. (From the Greek > *aster-iskos*, "little star.") Thanks. "Little star". Spot on!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two > teachings, the one he used for PR (scientific materialism) > and the one he pulled out when there were believers in the > room. He used his PR message to appear sciency (A m

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" wrote: > > > > > > > > thx, on his stmt that every

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread PaliGap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two teachings, the one he > used for PR (scientific materialism) and the one he pulled out when there > were believers in the room. He used his PR message to appear sciency (A

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread curtisdeltablues
This distinction is a classic case of Maharishi's two teachings, the one he used for PR (scientific materialism) and the one he pulled out when there were believers in the room. He used his PR message to appear sciency (A method he actually had contempt for.) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.c

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread PaliGap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" wrote: > > > > > > thx, on his stmt that everything is physical, consciousness > > > is a product of brain functioning, etc;

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread WillyTex
Robert: > Which comes first, the 'Soul' or the 'Body'?... > Do you remember being in the 'Womb'? > Where were you between 'Lives'...? > When you drop the body, will you still 'Exist'? > Does your body know it 'Exists'... > Or is 'Consciousness' the 'First Cause'? > These questions cannot be answe

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex" wrote: > > > > > > Isn't it more accurately summarized as "everything > > > has a physical level, consciousness is correlated > > > with brain functioning"? Metaphysically that's a > > > big difference... > > > > authfriend: > > Correlation d

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread WillyTex
> > Isn't it more accurately summarized as "everything > > has a physical level, consciousness is correlated > > with brain functioning"? Metaphysically that's a > > big difference... > > authfriend: > Correlation does not imply causation. But he was > explicit that consciousness is caused by

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" wrote: > > > > thx, on his stmt that everything is physical, consciousness > > is a product of brain functioning, etc; > > You think that's what it says? (The statement from MMY below). That

[FairfieldLife] Re: Two completely atypical theoretical questions from Turq

2011-06-07 Thread WillyTex
> FWIW, according to Patañjali, shraddhaa (usually > translated to 'faith') seems to be a /conditio > sine qua non/ for samaadhi... > Well, yes, you have to have a certain amount of faith that the goal exists: samadhi. We don't know for sure that a state of samadhi exists, unless we experience i

  1   2   >