--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@... wrote:
Hey, all
According to Mantreshwar, an ancient jyotish author, my birth chart
has a yoga for being a sanyasi, practicing a form of Buddhism. As a
practicing TM meditator, I was at first puzzled by this observation.
However,
on 6/28/05 12:45 AM, TurquoiseB at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. Concepts are useful tools. I see arguing over
who invented/discovered
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I think your one-up-manship is perfect, because it is who you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL
On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
TM as a form of Buddhist practice.
If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble truths
or bodhichitta, therefore it would not qualify :-) Since it has not
created
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
TM as a form of Buddhist practice.
If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble truths
or
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
TM as a form of Buddhist practice.
If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble
truths
or
On Jun 27, 2005, at 7:46 AM, sparaig wrote:
What accumulations are those? Is Zen a non-buddhist technique?
The accumulations of a Buddha, merit and wisdom.
Re: Zen, go to Google, put in the words 'Zen Buddhism' and click
search.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go
Well, considering that Gautama was a prince in Vedic kingdom,
trained by Brahmin priests and who learned Sanskrit and the Vedas in
depth, it is not surprising that what he taught (or rather what his
disciples taught) was a form of Vedic knowledge. It is like the
difference between Catholicism
On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:23 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
This is not true.
Bevin the Buddha.
If you see him by the road, swerve.
...but you might want to make sure you are in a Hummer first :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:42 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
However, once he was safely dead, they had a change
of heart and claimed that the same guy they'd been
demonizing had miraculously become an incarnation of
Vishnu.
Also Shiva depending on who you talk to.
To subscribe, send a message to:
It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
TM as a form of Buddhist practice.Regards,John R.
-But if you're not a Buddhist you can't
rightly say though. Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist
meditation.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 7:46 AM, sparaig wrote:
What accumulations are those? Is Zen a non-buddhist technique?
The accumulations of a Buddha, merit and wisdom.
Re: Zen, go to Google, put in the words 'Zen Buddhism' and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would
consider
TM as a form of Buddhist
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
-But if you're not a Buddhist you can't rightly say though. Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist meditation.
What's interesting, at very least as history, is that it appears Advaita Vedanta--both that of Shankara and his paramguru
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:23 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
This is not true.
Bevin the Buddha.
If you see him by the road, swerve.
...but you might want to make sure you are in a Hummer first :-)
But if you swerve, be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, considering that Gautama was a prince in Vedic kingdom,
trained by Brahmin priests and who learned Sanskrit and the
Vedas
in
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
You have no idea what accumulations of merit and wisdom the long-term
witnessing folk show.
Then tell. I'm listening.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:15 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
No, that is a myth. Made up. No historical evidence. They barely
noticed his few hundred followers.
Isn't that kinda like saying people barely noticed Shankara's four
followers?
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
-But if you're not a Buddhist you can't rightly say though.
Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist meditation.
What's interesting, at very least as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:15 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
No, that is a myth. Made up. No historical evidence. They barely
noticed his few hundred followers.
Isn't that kinda like saying people barely noticed Shankara's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble
truths
or bodhichitta, therefore it would not qualify :-) Since it has not
created any Buddhas it could not be considered a path to
enlightenment--after all
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble
truths
or bodhichitta, therefore it would not qualify :-) Since it has
not
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
(I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
You have no idea what accumulations of merit and wisdom the
long-term
witnessing folk show.
Then tell. I'm listening.
Researchers at MUM had subjects fill out various
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:15 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
No, that is a myth. Made up. No historical evidence. They barely
noticed his few hundred followers.
Isn't that kinda like saying people barely noticed Shankara's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
(I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
Facts? We don't need no stinking facts! :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
You have no idea what accumulations of merit and wisdom the
long-term
witnessing folk show.
Then tell. I'm listening.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
(I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
personality test? I am wondering if you (and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
(I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
personality test? I am wondering if you (and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
You have no idea what accumulations of merit and wisdom the
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:33 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
(I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
understanding of enlightenment false (or something).
Explains a lot about the TM approach to other
--- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
You have no idea what accumulations of merit
and wisdom the
long-term
witnessing folk
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:36 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
Oh yea, this from a guy that posts some California dude with his toy
EEG machine showing his empty mind.
Well Off, it's a casual experiment, I would hope you wouldn't take it
as any more than that. The most interesting thing is that he
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
personality test? I am wondering if you (and Bob Brigante) might be
something like a --TJ, as opposed to an --FP, for example...
I ask this as I am tempted to
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Peter Sutphen wrote:
Good assessment instruments for self-report measures
take a good amount of time to develop because of the
above problems. The questions need to have low face
validity (i.e., it is not self-evident what is a
good or a bad response). The
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pretty hard person to find.
Well for starters one might look at the rather large pool of
disaffected ex-TMers, particuarly ones exhibiting strong anti-TM bias,
and examine some of them for signs of enlightenment :-)
To
--- off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
-But if you're not a Buddhist you can't
rightly say though.
Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist
--- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Peter Sutphen wrote:
Good assessment instruments for self-report
measures
take a good amount of time to develop because of
the
above problems. The questions need to have low
face
validity (i.e., it is not
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually have a friend who is licensed to give that test and I
took
the long test (as opposed to the short ones you see on the net). I
guess the results are broken down into four pairs. I fell in the
middle
on all four
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
You have no idea what accumulations of merit and wisdom the
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:48 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
personality test? I am wondering if you (and Bob Brigante) might be
something like a --TJ, as opposed to an
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pretty hard person to find.
Well for starters one might look at the rather large pool of
disaffected ex-TMers, particuarly ones exhibiting strong anti-TM bias,
and examine some
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[...]
Good assessment instruments for self-report measures
take a good amount of time to develop because of the
above problems. The questions need to have low face
validity (i.e., it is not self-evident what is a
good or a bad response).
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Peter Sutphen wrote:
Good assessment instruments for self-report measures
take a good amount of time to develop because of the
above problems. The questions need to have low face
validity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
-But if you're not a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually have a friend who is licensed to give that test and I
took
the long test (as opposed to the short ones you see on the net). I
guess the results are broken down into four pairs. I fell in the
middle
on all four
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
The concept of Maya is clearly stated in the Rig
Veda Richo Akshare
verse, and many other places. It is a constant
theme, and to say
that Buddha invented it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[...]
There's some good research in TM and some really
crappy research in TM. Most of the crappy research
comes about because pilot studies are being done with
marginal research designs because the researcher is
looking for some effect
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:22 AM, authfriend wrote:
MMY's translation of the Richo Akshare verse:
The verses of Veda exist in the collapse of fullness in the
transcendental field, in which reside all the impulses of creative
intelligence, the laws of Nature, responsible for the whole manifest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess you would have to find someone like that. I think your
issue is that when responses are made in regards to a particular
path you are assuming that is what I Vaj or someone else believes.
Paths are relative.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be even more interesting to look at the pool who simply see
things as they are.
Of course, but if you are looking specifically to eliminate pro-TM
bias, you might want to select from anti-TM those-who-see-things-as-
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:22 AM, authfriend wrote:
MMY's translation of the Richo Akshare verse:
The verses of Veda exist in the collapse of fullness in the
transcendental field, in which reside all the impulses of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:22 AM, authfriend wrote:
MMY's translation of the Richo Akshare verse:
The verses of Veda exist in the collapse of fullness in the
transcendental field, in which reside all the impulses of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
understanding of
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc, no?
The question would be: is MMY's translation ad hoc? If it is accurate,
than the claim that maya is a buddhist invention seems strained...
Well I never said that it was an invention. I merely pointed out that
Maya
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:15 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:36 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
Oh yea, this from a guy that posts some California dude with his toy
EEG machine showing his empty mind.
Well Off, it's a
Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
understanding of enlightenment false (or something).
Explains a lot about the TM approach to other
forms of spiritual development, n'est-ce pas? :-)
I'm
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc, no?
The question would be: is MMY's translation ad hoc? If it is
accurate,
than the claim that maya is a buddhist invention seems
strained...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
understanding of enlightenment false (or something).
Explains a lot about the TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My point is that there are many spiritual traditions
on the planet that would never even *conceive* of
entering into a debate with another tradition to
prove their understanding of enlightenment false
(or, if the
On Jun 27, 2005, at 12:08 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Clearly, if the story you refer to is true, that
was not true for Shankara, and for his tradition.
Wasn't Shankara's debate trip about Dvaita vs. Advaita?
Arguably his most famous work, the Brahma-sutra-bhasya, is all about
how he feels
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the
great
spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove
their
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
any path is going to take us anywhere other than here, and so I
don't think Buddhahood can be achieved at all. Rather, we do
what we do until we don't, if you see what I mean.
And
Maya is a useful concept used to explain something
in a particular condition/state/level of
consciousness.
--- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
any path is going to take us anywhere other than here, and so I
don't think Buddhahood can be achieved at all.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
any path is going to take us
(First post delayed or lost; trying again)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So you are seeking a better later by resolving your blindspot?
No, I am merely reading my lines. My appreciation of perfection-here-
now is not necessarily going to be Yours;
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc, no?
The question would be: is MMY's translation ad hoc? If it is
accurate,
than the claim that maya is a buddhist invention seems
strained...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maya is a useful concept used to explain something
in a particular condition/state/level of
consciousness.
And *to* a particular condition/state/level of
consciousness. If one is at the point where
maya is seen as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
any path is going to take us
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, path gives folks something to do with
themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
probably better than fighting wars or whacking off.
Yes (though one might argue that one can play with a path *and*
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
However, path gives folks something to do with
themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
probably better than fighting wars or
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
However, path gives folks something to do with
themselves
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
However, path gives folks something to do with
themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
probably better than fighting wars or whacking off.
Yes (though one might argue that one can play with a path *and*
play with oneself simultaneously)...
Which
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Am I missing something here? If
so, I appreciate your patience in attempting to explain it to me.
It
must be a pretty huge blindspot, because I am definitely not
getting
it.
So you are seeking a better
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
However, path gives folks something to do with
themselves
Wow, so this long-lost post finally made it home! Must have detoured
too close to a black-hole. Talk about postcards from the edge...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So you are seeking a better later by resolving your blindspot?
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wow, so this long-lost post finally made it home! Must have
detoured too close to a black-hole. Talk about postcards from
the edge...
It's been happening a lot lately, on a lot of the Yahoo
groups. Posts taking hours
--- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maya is a useful concept used to explain
something
in a particular condition/state/level of
consciousness.
And *to* a particular condition/state/level of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. Concepts are useful tools. I see arguing over
who invented/discovered the concept as a little
fruitless unless you're working on your doctoral
dissertation. Then by all means split the split of the
split of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, path gives folks something to do with
themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
probably better than fighting wars or whacking off.
Yes (though one might argue that one can
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It sounds as if you are describing the Natural State--which is a form
of meditation but it is also a non-meditation. There is a path for this
form of meditation. I describe it as meditation isn't, getting used to
is. But yes it is a path, has a view and has a result...that is of
course if you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
...and presumably with God - a risk I would be most
reluctant to take.
Uns.
To paraphrase Pogo, we have met the Divinity and S/He is Us.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It sounds as if you are describing the Natural State--which is a
form
of meditation but it is also a non-meditation. There is a path for
this
form of meditation. I describe it as meditation isn't, getting used
to
is. But
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No, I am simply reading my lines. I didn't say My perfect-here-now
resolution would look perfect-here-now, to You -- only to Me.
You're
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
(I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
Just out of curiosity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I think your one-up-manship is perfect, because it is who you are,
its
your nature -- to see as far as you can see.
Cool, I can live with that :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bbrigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, that's it -- I'm turning your unlicensed dogma into the
Fairfield
authorities:
http://tinyurl.com/bf9d4
*lol* Thanks, Bob :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I think your one-up-manship is perfect, because it is who you are,
its
your nature -- to see as far as you can see.
Cool, I can live with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. Concepts are useful tools. I see arguing over
who invented/discovered the concept as a little
fruitless unless you're working on
Hey, all
According to Mantreshwar, an ancient jyotish author, my birth chart
has a yoga for being a sanyasi, practicing a form of Buddhism. As a
practicing TM meditator, I was at first puzzled by this observation.
However, after pondering the description of this yoga, I became
appreciative
96 matches
Mail list logo
