[FairfieldLife] Stories of St. Vincent Ferrer raising people from the dead
http://www.miraclesofthesaints.com/2010/10/saints-who-raised-dead-people-brought.html
[FairfieldLife] Stories about St. Francis
http://www.padrepiodevotions.org/wordsoffrancis.asp
[FairfieldLife] Stories told
Stories told It is amazing isn't it. For fifty years now I have been sharing stories of the mystical and transcendent nature of our being which are revealed to us by way of direct personal experience. It has stirred a lot of waters out there. However, for years many have been saying write an autobiography. No way, it cannot be done. And how boring it would be not only to write it but to read it. The average day in the life of a nobody mystic. Just like anybody else's average day. But occasionally I have told bits of, in the books and in emails to groups and emails in private to people. You must have know all this yourselves if you are mystics too. But it is ironic, for when one days that, tell of just normal daily events in ones life, they tell out for more. Truly they do. You give them all this mystical and transcendent stuff for years, and yet when you talk of a few days here and there in your life they yell for more :- ) I don't get it :- ) Oh, and by the way, mystics do not sit in white robes contemplating on their belly button. Here is a typical example of just one I posted the other day and may wanted more of it; it is only short . Another Memoir The days of home made beer communists backgammon divorce and teenage queenies. Some title eh :- ) Tis all true though. It covers about a two year period, way back when. For academic purposes only I had joined the British Communist Party, just to see what these people were really like and what they were all about. As I have mentioned before they were a great bunch, mostly professionals etc, and they knew damn well that socialism would never take in this country, so it was just a pipe dream and they all knew it. We used to meet up in various pubs and in each others home. One of the other young ones there (most were well into middle age) was the husband of my future wife whom I had not yet met :- ) It was at the time when I had decided to go, leave home, get a divorce, and set up a place of my own, for the two kids were now old enough and I had had enough of it for eighteen years. But one night, in the wee small hours, whilst driving some geezers taxi for him I picked up this young woman, with two blokes, and I thought WOW and it was a POW! :- ) She told me that she was coming to my Driving School. Fair enough most people around there did. And you know, one thing leads to another and bobs your flipping uncle :- ) She was after a divorce too, and only nineteen. Wow! But her husband whom I had met at the Communist Party meets took a bit of dim view of it when I told him I was going off with his wife. But all three of us used to go out for a meal and a drink in the evenings together, and play pool and snooker et al. I quite liked him, although he was not very nice to her and a bit of a druggie. Anyway, we did our thing and went off to live together in a basement flat which she called the Hobbit Hole. It was a bit of a hole as well, and as damp as damp could bloody get. But we had a fantastic kitchen and living room. All we had was cushions which she had made and a new Hi-Fi system which I had brought ad hoc (still got it and it's working fine). Both my kids used to come around and the oldest one came to live there with us. Also my best friend was always there. All the driving instructors and local nurses used to come around for a meal and drinks, and also all the local communists and many chess players from the area :- ) It was hilarious. Then of course my daughter then pushing seventeen met this young guy and he and his brothers and mates came too. Talk about a quiet little elopement :- ) This bloody pop music used to blare out from these kids there all day and most of the night on my hi-fi system, Gawd it was noisy :- ) We also had thirteen cats there. This was all a bit of a shock to me really because I had been living a very normal and respectable life :- ) But I did not mind, it was fun and something different. One day this kid asked me if he could marry my daughter and I said no not bloody likely for you are both too young. But they did, and they both came to live with us :- ) They are still married and with two grown up kids :- ) I also became an advisor to a pop group with a female singer who were all tied in with this crowd. That was fun, and they were quite good too. But the best of the lot was when we were alone. But I ain't going to tell you about that. Leave it to your imagination. When our first two kids were old enough to come to a weeding (about five and two) we got married. We did not tell anybody. Didn't intend to get married but we thought it best for the kids. No, mystics do not sit around in white robes contemplating on their belly button. They grab the day and live it. They were good days too, as were all the rest of them each in very different ways. The army was fun too, but that is another story, and many years before that one. Personally I think mystics are a little bit wicked. Don't you? Write an
[FairfieldLife] Stories
Maharishi is one of the greatest spiritual teachers the world has ever known. He is a living saint, fully enlightened, and thus incapable of doing anything that is not fully in accord with the laws of nature. There- fore anything that anyone says against him is false, and indicates that the person saying it is either deluded or has some malevolent intent towards this great saint. He's one of the world's 'good guys,' and anyone who speaks ill of him is a 'bad guy.' Maharishi is a con man who has systematically ripped off the gullible seekers who have followed him for decades. He promises them everything -- including enlightenment -- and delivers on almost nothing. And to protect himself he has created an autocracy that punishes any questioning of his authority or his essential 'right' to dictate to his followers what they should do and think with excommunication or worse (legal action should they violate the copy- rights he has taken out on common domain techniques and knowledge). He's a 'bad guy,' and anyone who tells the 'truth' about him (as defined above) is a 'good guy.' Global warming is a serious problem that threatens the future of humanity and the Earth, and those who attempt to diminish its importance are enemies of humanity. Global warming is a scam perpetrated by 'scientists' who are in it for the money, and who are putting over one of the biggest frauds in history on their fellow human beings. Polticians of the Republican/Democratic Party (pick one) are 'good guys' who have the welfare of the population as a whole in their hearts. Anyone who says something negative about them is doing so because they *oppose* the welfare of the population as a whole. Such people are liars and are not to be trusted. Polticians of the Republican/Democratic Party (pick one) are 'bad guys' who have sold out to the interests of those who control them from behind the scenes. The only thing they care about is themselves, and putting more money and more power in their pockets. Anyone who says something negative about them is doing so because they *oppose* these self-interested actions, and are acting from a sense of heroism, 'protecting' the welfare of the population as a whole. Such people are heroes and are to be trusted implicitly because they *are* heroes. I am 'right' because because the sources I have quoted to support my position are 'better' than yours. You are 'wrong' because because the sources you have quoted to support your position are 'lesser' than mine. My view of who I am and what I do and why I do it is 'correct' and yours is 'incorrect,' because I say so. No one could *possibly* believe the things you're saying about me, so the fact that you're saying them means that you are intentionally 'lying' about me. Your view of who you am and what you do and why you do it is 'incorrect' and mine is 'correct,' because I say so. I *do* believe the things I'm saying about you, and you just can't handle the possibility that they're true. What do all these stories have in common? First, obviously, they're all Just Stories. NONE of them are 'true' or 'truth' -- they're just stories that we tell ourselves and others. The other thing that all of these stories have in common is that they are all OPINION. No matter how many 'facts' or 'sources' one trots out to support them, opinions they are and opinions they remain. There is NOTHING you can do to make them more than opinion. Can't we all just get along? Can't we have opinions of our own without believing that the opinions of others are lesser or wrong and that the others who hold these opinions are lesser than we are or less right than we are? What if we lived in a universe in which ALL of the stories we tell to ourselves and to others are true, and just *seem* to be contradictory? What if the universe supported ALL of these seeming contradictions, without missing a step, and found a way to reconcile ALL of them? It seems to me that we DO live in such a universe. If it can reconcile all these seemingly contradictory stories, why can't we?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Stories
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 3:50 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Stories What if we lived in a universe in which ALL of the stories we tell to ourselves and to others are true, and just *seem* to be contradictory? What if the universe supported ALL of these seeming contradictions, without missing a step, and found a way to reconcile ALL of them? It seems to me that we DO live in such a universe. If it can reconcile all these seemingly contradictory stories, why can't we? We can, by being more universal, which is what were trying to do, if we aspire to enlightenment. Learning to recognize ones cherished stories as relative perspectives that are not necessarily more true than their opposites is a powerful technique for enlightenment. Book recommendation¨A Thousand Names for Joy by Byron Katie
[FairfieldLife] Stories -- was Re: where Maharishi went wrong
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've got a serious question for everybody and no implicit criticism is meant and I'm also curious if there is a legitimate/valid, whatever reason, someone can come up with that I'm not quite getting. Why do we need any story whatsoever regarding MMY? We can neither confirm nor disconfirm any story. The arguments go on and on. Most of our stories whether in the pro or con camp are simply narratives of what we already believe. All we have is our own experiences regarding MMY. The stories can never, ever resolve; they never make sense unless you deny huge chunks of contradictory material. So, why and what is this need that some, all, a few, including moi, struggle with? -Peter The question raises some interesting issues. First, the broader question is why do we need any stories. Second, what exactly is a story. Some thoughts. The terem stories itself is a bit of a story -- having for me a bit of a connotation of stemming from pop-psycholgy roots with an inherent condescending view of having stories -- a sort of coping mechanism that gets us throught the day. Or night. Stories are really broader than this, they stretch across a broad domain: they can be i)explanations and/or ii)evaluations. Stories can explain i) how things work and/ or ii) what is. When they explain things well -- explain relevant observable data, and can be used accurately predict, we call them scientific theories. (Not to be confused with slang use of theory -- aka Reagan on evolution well, its just a theory.) As such, they are useful, and positive. I am glad NASA had a good story to rely on about how the planets move before they launched rockets towards them. Stories about what is, are often less useful. It usually involves a judgement or categorization. He is a bad person. Such evaluation stories are useful when we need to make a decision, to make a choice about someone or something. She is to be a good person. I will therefore trust her advice. Decision prompted stories can be working hypotheses and have a stated uncertainty / adjustment component, instead of being absolute. She appears to be a good person, but I don't really know, thus I will trust her advice, but may change course as I get more information. Hyper-evaluation -- having stories, making judgements and categorizing many many people and things, outside of having to make a decision regarding them/it, is usually a waste of time and a big habit of the monkey-mind. Coping stories and rationalizations are a type of evaluation of what is and are not useful in the long run. The intellect neeeds to be on guard that one is not rationalizing a certain choice or behavior by hiding from its true impetus, nature or impact. Such as, I know I need to lose a few pounds, but sugar is satvic and chocolate has the love chemical, so another few pieces of chocolate won't hurt -- and is really a good thing. Do we need stories about MMY that reconcile the apparent contradictions? Perhaps -- if we need to make a decision that relates to him. For example, if you are debating to go to the recert course, then reconciling issues via a story may be usful and warranted. If no decision is necessary, why do we need a story? To feed the monkey mind something to hop up and down and squeal about for a while? Anyway, thats my monkey-minded story for now -- to help me make it through the day -- and night. I may have a new story about stories tomorrow. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Stories and Pure Experience
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so much that his personality is flawed, but that it is exactly what it is. Flawed implies some sort of standard or basis of evaluation. I don't know what that would be other than some story I need to tell myself. Do you classify having dementia a story? That was your story or explanation yesterday. Is this story now being dropped? Or is the story that MMY is simply an unexplainable paradox being dropped? (Prior stories). Is it a story -- your evaluation of others as having an unfulfilled father issues in explaining other's behavior towards MMY? Or is that purely experienced? But now you can't then take the counter position and say that his personality is perfect. It is neither flawed nor perfect. If you drop all stories you just have pure experience left. Is it really possible to drop all stories and experiencing someone or something purely? Doesn't all experience have some intermediary level of interpretation? I equate interpretation as story. How are you defining story? Is it different from interpretation? If one is to believe the claimants to Brahman on this list, even THAT is an understanding -- which implies to me it is an interpretation of an experience. And doesn't leesha-vidya and personality provide a layer of interpreation on the world which differentiates the relative views of those who are Blazing Brahman? For example, MMY and SSRS apparently view the UK differently on the surface level. They have different stories about it. So, again I am trying ot get to the point of is it really possible to drop all stories and experiencing someone or something purely -- even in Brahman? And that experience varies from person to person. Why does the experience vary from person to person if there is no intermediary level of interpreation or story? For me MMY is absolute Brahman and that Brahman moves in profoundly mysterious ways to awaken to itself. All this MMY nonsense is pure leela. A deliciously mad dish of perfect Kali devouring your mind. Is that a story -- a level of interpretation -- or do you hold that as pure experience? This is not a critic of your statements. Rather, your posts bring up (some times subtle) distinctions, sometimes apparent contradictions, which if explained, would make your points clearer -- if not profound. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Stories and Pure Experience
--- akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so much that his personality is flawed, but that it is exactly what it is. Flawed implies some sort of standard or basis of evaluation. I don't know what that would be other than some story I need to tell myself. Do you classify having dementia a story? That was your story or explanation yesterday. Yes, that is a story within the dharma of waking state. It is an attempt to understand within that context. Is this story now being dropped? Or is the story that MMY is simply an unexplainable paradox being dropped? (Prior stories). It's all being dropped in that particular post. Is it a story -- your evaluation of others as having an unfulfilled father issues in explaining other's behavior towards MMY? Or is that purely experienced? Just a story that you appropriately turned around (ala Byron Katie) towards me which I fully agree with. But now you can't then take the counter position and say that his personality is perfect. It is neither flawed nor perfect. If you drop all stories you just have pure experience left. Is it really possible to drop all stories and experiencing someone or something purely? Doesn't all experience have some intermediary level of interpretation? I equate interpretation as story. How are you defining story? Is it different from interpretation? Here story is just the explanatory construct used by mind to have experience make sense. Pure experience is a bodily felt only. There's not a story intrinsic to it, that is something the mind does. Yet, on the other hand, that experience also constrains what meanings can be generated, as it were, from that experience. So there is something intrinsic to experience that could be thought of as limiting the meaning that is generated from it. But the range of the meaning would only apply to our experience and not another's experience. So our experience is not that MMY is mad. Our experience is something quite personal in reaction to his behavior. All we can do is generate meaning within the domain of our own experiencing. As soon as we start talking about others, it's truly just a story and usually something used to manage our own uncomfortable experiencing. If one is to believe the claimants to Brahman on this list, even THAT is an understanding -- which implies to me it is an interpretation of an experience. And doesn't leesha-vidya and personality provide a layer of interpreation on the world which differentiates the relative views of those who are Blazing Brahman? Yes, I agree. That's why any spoken teaching is limited. I like Dakshinamurti. He didn't speak a word and just radiated that until you got it. Any spoken teaching must necessarily transcend itself into That. For example, MMY and SSRS apparently view the UK differently on the surface level. They have different stories about it. So, again I am trying ot get to the point of is it really possible to drop all stories and experiencing someone or something purely -- even in Brahman? Yes, because (here's a story!) Brahman is outside of mind. It can not be recognized by mind. Mind only sees nothingness when it tries to see Brahman. And that experience varies from person to person. Why does the experience vary from person to person if there is no intermediary level of interpreation or story? I'm just saying people have different experiences of the same thing. For me MMY is absolute Brahman and that Brahman moves in profoundly mysterious ways to awaken to itself. All this MMY nonsense is pure leela. A deliciously mad dish of perfect Kali devouring your mind. Is that a story -- a level of interpretation -- or do you hold that as pure experience? Another story because it is spoken. This is not a critic of your statements. Rather, your posts bring up (some times subtle) distinctions, sometimes apparent contradictions, which if explained, would make your points clearer -- if not profound. I'm with ya Akasha! -Peter To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
