---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Yes I am indeed ignorant.
So, why do you suppose they called Persia Iran?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
But western culture was and still is ignorant of Sanatan Dharma.
The practice of TM isn't based on religious law or
/The practice of TM isn't based on religious law or faith in a cosmic
order, so the term Sanatan Dharma has no meaning to most TMers.
According to Rig Veda 4-138, Hindu is non-native and of Iranian origin./
On 9/22/2014 4:03 PM, netineti108 wrote:
Instead of condemning this statement, one
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
But western culture was and still is ignorant of
FYI, He is a Vedic/Sanskrit Scholar. He was invited to present and did attend
the recent W.A.V.E.S. conference at MUM last month.
If you knew anything about the title his name you might not be so quick to
judge.
That's what you were doing, wasn't it? Judging?
This is a natural outcome of
This is not a piece of history to be believed. Aryans did not compose Veda.
On 9/22/2014 6:02 PM, netineti108 wrote:
This is not a piece of history to be believed.
Not for nothing do they now call Persia, Iran.
Aryans did not compose Veda.
The term Arya is used 36 times in 34 hymns in the Rigveda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
FYI, He is a Vedic/Sanskrit Scholar. He was invited to present and did attend
the recent W.A.V.E.S. conference at MUM last month.
If you knew anything about the title his name you might not be so quick to
judge.
Yes I am indeed ignorant.
Hmmm?
Vernon Katz was the translator and had no part in the commentary, according to
him.
In fact, in a video, Vernon says that he would argue with MMY about MMY's
choice of words for the translation that overrode Veron's carefully devised
scholarly translation, but in the battle of
Vernon Katz was translator and transcriber, not commentator.
And MMY would insist that a different word be used in the translation and Katz
had to oblige, so even the translation was strictly to MMY's specification even
though Katz did all the original translating.
L
---In
In one verse, I seem to recall there is 'deep' in brackets (deep).
Seems like that might be Maharishi's addition...
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
So what you insinuate here is that chapters 7-18 are insignificant and not
worthy of his time.
What I am
Sorry that my words were not properly constructed. I didn't mean to infer that
you hadn't read it.
I meant to say that I had read CBG numerous times.
In my earlier years, it was all I had.
As it turned out, an incomplete commentary Bhagavad Gita does not bring
liberation.
Wow, I didn't
Bevan would not be glad to hear you tell such tales.
From: netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 12:41 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a classic
Bevan who?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
So what you insinuate here is that chapters 7-18
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Sorry that my words were not properly constructed. I didn't mean to infer that
you hadn't read it.
I meant to say that I had read CBG numerous times.
In my earlier years, it was all I had.
As it turned out, an
But western culture was and still is ignorant of Sanatan Dharma.
Yes I saw those pages purported to be the remaining chapters.
I still maintain he was not qualified.
He was selling what the Veda says is a sin to sell.
I put my time into another commentary I find much more complete and practical,
thanks.
which commentary do you use?
From: netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 2:28 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a classic.
I put my time into another
Tat Tvam Asi..The Universal Message of the Bhagavad Gita 2 Volumes. 828
pages. written by Dr. Pathikonda Vishwambara Nath, Founder and Chair of
International Gita Trust.
gitaglobal.com
amazon carries it.
The TMO and Mahesh Yogi would have you believe their's is the only message
worth perpetuating. So who is it that is limiting their horizon?
I used to think it flat until Lord Krishna woke me up.
TM is kindergarten. It has its place, but is not the epitome of sadhana.
Thank you - I'll check it out
From: netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a
classic.
Tat Tvam Asi
Hariḥ Om Tat Sat
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
But western culture was and still is ignorant of Sanatan Dharma.
Yes I saw those pages purported to be the remaining chapters.
I still maintain he was not qualified.
He was selling what the Veda says is a sin to
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
I put my time into another commentary I find much more complete and practical,
thanks.
You are very welcome.
MD Friedman
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:30 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
Mahesh Yogi was not qualified to provide a commentary on the remainder of
the Bhagavad Gita.
*The Mahesh Yogi was one of the best scribes in all India, holding a
science degree in physics from a major university.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:27 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
But western culture was and still is ignorant of Sanatan Dharma.
*The practice of TM isn't based on religious law or faith in a cosmic
order, so the term Sanatan Dharma has no meaning to most TMers. According
to Rig
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:28 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
I put my time into another commentary I find much more complete and
practical, thanks.
Most TMers on this list don't even need a commentary on BG anymore, since
they already know and understand the most important
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41 AM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
So what you insinuate here is that chapters 7-18 are insignificant and
Mahesh Yogi was not qualified to provide a commentary on the remainder of the
Bhagavad Gita.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:30 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
Mahesh Yogi was not qualified to provide a commentary on the remainder of
the Bhagavad Gita.
*There was no need to publish a comment on the remaining chapters since MMY
had already made clear the keystone in the
So what you insinuate here is that chapters 7-18 are insignificant and not
worthy of his time.
What is written above is just intellectuallizing and is not a path with
knowledge to navigate.
It is nothing new. Maybe to the Western mind, but not to those who are brought
up in the Vedic
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Mahesh Yogi was not qualified to provide a commentary on the remainder of the
Bhagavad Gita.
Says you.
Missing a great deal from His Commentary, I expect.
The earth is flat, too, if you limit your horizon enough. Get it??
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Mahesh Yogi was not qualified to provide a commentary on the remainder of the
Bhagavad Gita.
Who is limiting their horizon, here? For decades I thought Mahesh Yogi's
commentary was the be all and end all of Bhagavad Gita commentaries.
Why?
Because the movement said so.
Ignorance is Bliss.
Lord Shiva's discourse to Goddess Parvati...Sri Guru Gita explains who is
qualified and who
Read his commentary for years. It was incomplete.
Have found one that is complete and sweet.
The remainder of the Bhagavad Gita tells why he was not qualified, as well as
Sri Guru Gita which is the TRUE definitive on Guru.
I wasn't there, with Shiva, or Parvati, during that discussion, and I just
wouldn't take an interpretation, on face value, from a third party. I liked
MMY's commentary - but I admit not having read any appreciable amount of it, in
years. Perhaps I will pick it up again. PS Anyone can write a
Oh, But you can be there if you wish!
It is in Sanskrit, the first and eternal language.
My friend told be about this video on Vimeo.com
Search Sri Guru Gita at that site.
It is beautifully sung with lyrics and translation.
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't his
commentary. He just approved but gave no credit to the scholar who
wrote it.
So it goes in the big business of cults.
On 09/17/2014 03:19 PM, fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
wrote:
I wasn't there, with Shiva, or
I am quite sure it is Maharishi's voice, his thoughts, and his truths, though
he had someone else expand, and assemble his ideas, for him. All big business
is the same. ;-)
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, noozguru@... wrote :
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't
@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a
classic.
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't his commentary. He
just approved but gave no credit to the scholar who wrote it.
So it goes
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM, netineti108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
wrote:
So what you insinuate here is that chapters 7-18 are insignificant and not
worthy of his time.
What I am insinuating is that if you don't understand Chapter II verse 45
of BG, and you don't know TM, and you have
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net
[FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't his commentary.
He just approved but gave no credit to the scholar who wrote it.
Vernon Katz did the
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 17, 2014 6:55 PM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be
a classic.
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't his
commentary. He just approved but gave no credit to the scholar who wrote
it.
So it goes
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Read his commentary for years. It was incomplete.
Have found one that is complete and sweet.
The remainder of the Bhagavad Gita tells why he was not qualified, as well as
Sri Guru Gita which is the TRUE definitive on
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote :
I wasn't there, with Shiva, or Parvati, during that discussion, and I just
wouldn't take an interpretation, on face value, from a third party. I liked
MMY's commentary - but I admit not having read any appreciable amount
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Oh, But you can be there if you wish!
It is in Sanskrit, the first and eternal language.
My friend told be about this video on Vimeo.com
Search Sri Guru Gita at that site.
It is beautifully sung with lyrics and
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, noozguru@... wrote :
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't his commentary. He
just approved but gave no credit to the scholar who wrote it.
So it goes in the big business of cults.
B-Man,
Please stop making shit up.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote :
I am quite sure it is Maharishi's voice, his thoughts, and his truths, though
he had someone else expand, and assemble his ideas, for him. All big business
is the same. ;-)
Suggested Readings:
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Bhairitu noozguru@... mailto:noozguru@...
[FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really
: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a
classic.
Except, as we've heard here many a time, it really wasn't his commentary. He
just approved but gave no credit to the scholar who wrote it.
So it goes in the big business of cults.
On 09/17/2014 03:19 PM
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote :
I have a copy of Chapter 7 of MMy's commentary. I got it from MUM Press a few
years ago.
They were supposed to publish incrementally the remaining chapters of the
Gita, but they never did.
IMO, one can probably read the other
The TMO published M's translation and commentary of the B-G Chapter 7
(US$38.00). I have seen it but have not read it. Gita Chapter 7
http://is1.mum.edu/mumpress/p_a07-sav.html
http://is1.mum.edu/mumpress/p_a07-sav.html
Gita Chapter 7 http://is1.mum.edu/mumpress/p_a07-sav.html Maharishi
7:18 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a classic.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote :
I have a copy of Chapter 7 of MMy's commentary. I got it from MUM Press a few
years ago.
They were supposed to publish incrementally
was an historical battle
By what proof other than your willingness to believe it as a part of your
larger need to be Marshy's patsy?
From: danfriedman2002 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 7:18 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's
@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 7:18 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a classic.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote :
I have a copy of Chapter 7 of MMy's commentary. I got it from MUM Press a few
years ago
.
*From:* danfriedman2002 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Friday, September 12, 2014 7:18 AM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never be a
classic.
---In FairfieldLife
larger need to be Marshy's patsy?
*From:* danfriedman2002 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Friday, September 12, 2014 7:18 AM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Why MMY's Bhagavad Gita will never
I am speaking for myself, but of course? You?
Of course, you're speaking for yourself too. No choice in this, eh?
Meanwhile, you've ignored my main gripe -- that we were not trained well -- not
even well enough to define our basic axiomatic words.
If you think you got more outta Maharishi's
Dan,
It's good to hear that the entire commentary has been completed. I, for one,
would like read all of the remaining chapters.
I have read the beginning 6 chapters of the Gita, at least, three times and
have learned very much from it, as to the philosophical and religious
background
If you are speaking for yourself, why did you use the pronoun we instead of
I?
I disagree with you about training. I think the TM teachers were well trained
and did a good job. For myself, I knew enough to teach the technique and
explain it in a coherent way. I taught TM to several hundred
Regarding the Kurukshetra War
-
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
You lost me at According to Wikipedia
-
Well, short attention span or reading problems, huh? How about Encylopaedia
Britannica:
The Mahabharata is an important
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote :
Regarding the Kurukshetra War
-
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
You lost me at According to Wikipedia
-
Well, short attention span or reading problems, huh? How
The 5 Pandus were meant to represent the 5 lower chakras under the power of the
soul and the 100 evil minded sons of Dhritarashtra were meant to represent all
the vices man is subject to in life, Duryodana chief among them as Material
Desire.
Which came first? the war? or the allegory of
On 9/12/2014 12:55 PM, anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
Regarding the Kurukshetra War
The Aryan-speakers invaded South Asia and started a long battle
beginning in 1500 B.C. if not before. That's why they invented the
chariot to be used in battle.
Forum:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
The 5 Pandus were meant to represent the 5 lower chakras under the power of
the soul and the 100 evil minded sons of Dhritarashtra were meant to represent
all the vices man is subject to in life, Duryodana chief among
Do you expect, really to get an answer from Edg on this inconsistency? Edg is
cowardly in that way. Doesn't like to answer when caught in a contradiction,
or obvious falsehood.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
If you are speaking for yourself, why did
I have a copy of Chapter 7 of MMy's commentary. I got it from MUM Press a few
years ago.
They were supposed to publish incrementally the remaining chapters of the
Gita, but they never did.
IMO, one can probably read the other translations of the Gita and understand
the message in the
70 matches
Mail list logo
