Re: [FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
On Aug 6, 2006, at 11:40 PM, new.morning wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In fact it is a rigid egoic stance that Vaj has committed himself to, and cannot now see the falsity of. Why do I say this? Simply because of his inability to respond when his postings are criticized. Instead he retreats into his silence. Could there be any other possible explanations for this retreat? or do you know this to be true, absolutely? I don't always, even often, agree with Vaj's points or logic. However, as a rule, not specifically addressing any specific Vaj response / non-response) simply not responding, at times, is a sign of strength and wisdom. Particularly when others have grossly miscast points and POVs, or made silly responses replete woth logical, cognitive and factual errors -- or hollow empty rhetoric or dogma. For some discussions, a short and early death is a great blessing. God, I go away for a little while and get a mail box of hate mail.I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. Good excuse. Declare the challenges to what you say miscast, shake your head, and move on, and then nobody will ever know whether you actually have a basis for dismissing them. (Just imagine Vaj's contempt if someone he is pleased to label a TB proffered such an excuse for not dealing with a challenge. It's interesting that the so-called TBs here are usually willing to address challenges and actually have a discussion, but many of the TNBs are not.) 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 6, 2006, at 11:40 PM, new.morning wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: In fact it is a rigid egoic stance that Vaj has committed himself to, and cannot now see the falsity of. Why do I say this? Simply because of his inability to respond when his postings are criticized. Instead he retreats into his silence. Could there be any other possible explanations for this retreat? or do you know this to be true, absolutely? I don't always, even often, agree with Vaj's points or logic. However, as a rule, not specifically addressing any specific Vaj response / non-response) simply not responding, at times, is a sign of strength and wisdom. Particularly when others have grossly miscast points and POVs, or made silly responses replete woth logical, cognitive and factual errors -- or hollow empty rhetoric or dogma. For some discussions, a short and early death is a great blessing. God, I go away for a little while and get a mail box of hate mail. You consider my comments or Jims as hate mail. I was defending, in general, the type of behavior of yours Jim was criticing. Hardly hate mail. Do you consider my comment I don't always, even often, agree with Vaj's points or logic. as hate mail? If so, WOW! So perhaps its Jim's prose you view as hate mail: 1) In fact it is a rigid egoic stance that Vaj has committed himself to, and cannot now see the falsity of. Ok thats Jim's opinion. 2) Why do I say this? Simply because of his inability to respond when his postings are criticized. Instead he retreats into his silence. Says more about Jims limited use and abilities of logic than anything to do with hate mail. You really find the above sparse sentences as hate mail? if so, I'd say fragile ego complex with paranoid schizoid tendencies -- but Dr. Pete says we can't diagnose over the internet any more. As aside, nothing to do with Vaj, but following up the last point about the impropriety of diagnosing over the internet, I wonder if that includes diagnosing other people's motives and states of mind. That would be a useful, since attemting such is usually foolhardy. But it would reduce posts by 50%. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. Good excuse. Declare the challenges to what you say miscast, shake your head, and move on, and then nobody will ever know whether you actually have a basis for dismissing them. (Just imagine Vaj's contempt if someone he is pleased to label a TB proffered such an excuse for not dealing with a challenge. It's interesting that the so-called TBs here are usually willing to address challenges and actually have a discussion, but many of the TNBs are not.) I've been told that the TBers have ruined the list. I guess no-one likes to hear their NEW belief-system challenged by people who embrace the old one... 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] As aside, nothing to do with Vaj, but following up the last point about the impropriety of diagnosing over the internet, I wonder if that includes diagnosing other people's motives and states of mind. That would be a useful, since attemting such is usually foolhardy. But it would reduce posts by 50%. I get where you're coming from... 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
During the period prior to the arrival of 'TBers' from Alt.Med I personally preferred the level of intelligent discussions here at FFL. Since that time things have tended to get more 'in your face' (as they tended to be at alt.med), an attitude that militates against confortable casual exchanges. But perhaps Peter is correct when he suggested the problem lies in the fact that the core topics about TM MMY have already been dealt with, over and over again. However, the notion that FFL is a contest between 'True Believers' those who are opposed to them is poppycock, it is just too simplistic a way to look at it. In fact, personally, I find I tend to agree with most people who post here at some time or another about something, I sense that others do too. If there is a contest here, it is more about who can appear to be smarter than someone else, which is just so-o-o-o dull. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. Good excuse. Declare the challenges to what you say miscast, shake your head, and move on, and then nobody will ever know whether you actually have a basis for dismissing them. (Just imagine Vaj's contempt if someone he is pleased to label a TB proffered such an excuse for not dealing with a challenge. It's interesting that the so-called TBs here are usually willing to address challenges and actually have a discussion, but many of the TNBs are not.) I've been told that the TBers have ruined the list. I guess no-one likes to hear their NEW belief-system challenged by people who embrace the old one... 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. Good excuse. Declare the challenges to what you say miscast, shake your head, and move on, and then nobody will ever know whether you actually have a basis for dismissing them. (Just imagine Vaj's contempt if someone he is pleased to label a TB proffered such an excuse for not dealing with a challenge. It's interesting that the so-called TBs here are usually willing to address challenges and actually have a discussion, but many of the TNBs are not.) I've been told that the TBers have ruined the list. I guess no-one likes to hear their NEW belief-system challenged by people who embrace the old one... Or even by those who insist that their new belief system be well supported, and their trashing of the old one be rational and accurate. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. Good excuse. Declare the challenges to what you say miscast, shake your head, and move on, and then nobody will ever know whether you actually have a basis for dismissing them. (Just imagine Vaj's contempt if someone he is pleased to label a TB proffered such an excuse for not dealing with a challenge. It's interesting that the so-called TBs here are usually willing to address challenges and actually have a discussion, but many of the TNBs are not.) I've been told that the TBers have ruined the list. I guess no-one likes to hear their NEW belief-system challenged by people who embrace the old one... Or even by those who insist that their new belief system be well supported, and their trashing of the old one be rational and accurate. In his more subtle and very sophisticated way Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and his charlatanism is [sic] a far more destructive and dangerous cult leader than Jim Jones who induced more than 900 people to commit suicide in Guyana. Denaro, 1986. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: During the period prior to the arrival of 'TBers' from Alt.Med I personally preferred the level of intelligent discussions here at FFL. Since that time things have tended to get more 'in your face' (as they tended to be at alt.med), an attitude that militates against confortable casual exchanges. But perhaps Peter is correct when he suggested the problem lies in the fact that the core topics about TM MMY have already been dealt with, over and over again. However, the notion that FFL is a contest between 'True Believers' those who are opposed to them is poppycock, it is just too simplistic a way to look at it. In fact, personally, I find I tend to agree with most people who post here at some time or another about something, I sense that others do too. If there is a contest here, it is more about who can appear to be smarter than someone else, which is just so-o-o-o dull. WEeel The stuff that has already been dealt with is often dealt with in a piss-poor manner. Let's take the claim that TM research is discredited... For example, in one court case, a guy named Denaro gave a sworn affidavit where he claimed that during his time at MIU as Grants Director, he came to realize that everyone was a liar, etc. As one of the contributors to the WIkipedia Transcendental Meditation entry, I did some fact-checking. He certainly made these claims... In 1986, about the 18 month period he spent at MUM in 1975-76, 5 years before the school attained accreditation. Coincidentally, all the research that was bad, wrong, deceptive, etc., that he encountered, during his time as Grants Director at MIU amounts to a single study published by Michael Dillback in 1977, and I'm not convinced that THAT study was done out of MIU either. No other peer reviewed research was published by any researcher assoicated with MIU at that time (Dillbeck, Orme-Johnson, Wallace) until 198 after the school was accredited. The only studies you'll find are the in-house stuff published in Collected Papers Vol I, and everyone agrees that that is a pretty poor source of research material, but those studies were published in-house and probably didn't get any grants money so Denaro rightfully shouldn't have referred to them as though he knew something about them on a professional level. Incidentally, Denaro's sworn 1976 affidavit goes on to say: In his more subtle and very sophisticated way Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and his charlatanism is [sic] a far more destructive and dangerous cult leader than Jim Jones who induced more than 900 people to commit suicide in Guyana. My impression is, this turns out to be the quality of reference that people here use to hash out these points over and over again. BTW, Wiki isn't considered the most reliable of online sources of info, and by Wiki rules, NONE of the Sexy Sadie files is admissable as a reference because it's not published anywhere. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I usually just say what I have to say and that's it. If there's some enjoyable or worthwhile correspondence after a comment, I'll add some, if I feel it's constructive. Otherwise I don't bother, esp. since this list has gone rather down hill. So know I won't usually respond to set ups or the miscast points as in current threads. I just shake my head and move on. Good excuse. Declare the challenges to what you say miscast, shake your head, and move on, and then nobody will ever know whether you actually have a basis for dismissing them. (Just imagine Vaj's contempt if someone he is pleased to label a TB proffered such an excuse for not dealing with a challenge. It's interesting that the so-called TBs here are usually willing to address challenges and actually have a discussion, but many of the TNBs are not.) I've been told that the TBers have ruined the list. I guess no-one likes to hear their NEW belief-system challenged by people who embrace the old one... 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: But perhaps Peter is correct when he suggested the problem lies in the fact that the core topics about TM MMY have already been dealt with, over and over again. WEeel The stuff that has already been dealt with is often dealt with in a piss-poor manner. Peter and Paul are referring to quite a large volume of posts written prior to your arrival. Did you go through the archives and read them all? ... My impression is, this turns out to be the quality of reference that people here use to hash out these points over and over again. Opps. Your impression? You mean you are saying a generally wonderful set of posts and exchanges, and/or their references, is piss-poor -- and you have not even read them? Oh My! BTW, Wiki isn't considered the most reliable of online sources of info, and by Wiki rules, NONE of the Sexy Sadie files is admissable as a reference because it's not published anywhere. I assume Wiki would not rely on your impressions either. Since they are um piss-poor. But your Wiki reference is instersting. Is your logic stream leading you to conclude that if something is not published, it is unreliable? If not, why did you bring up the Wiki reference? Do you know what is in your refrigerator? Or what your GF, if and when you have one, likes? Are these things published anywhere? Is your informatin for such matters relaible? 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: But perhaps Peter is correct when he suggested the problem lies in the fact that the core topics about TM MMY have already been dealt with, over and over again. WEeel The stuff that has already been dealt with is often dealt with in a piss-poor manner. Peter and Paul are referring to quite a large volume of posts written prior to your arrival. Did you go through the archives and read them all? A good portion of them actually. It took almost forever. Do you recall a period on this forum when I was responding to articles posted several yaers ago? ... My impression is, this turns out to be the quality of reference that people here use to hash out these points over and over again. Opps. Your impression? You mean you are saying a generally wonderful set of posts and exchanges, and/or their references, is piss-poor -- and you have not even read them? Oh My! Those that I read, and I read a lot. BTW, Wiki isn't considered the most reliable of online sources of info, and by Wiki rules, NONE of the Sexy Sadie files is admissable as a reference because it's not published anywhere. I assume Wiki would not rely on your impressions either. Since they are um piss-poor. True enough. Wikipedia requires some kind of citation for everything. There are quite a few guidelines for what can be said and how it must be cited and what kind of citations are acceptable. But your Wiki reference is instersting. Is your logic stream leading you to conclude that if something is not published, it is unreliable? If not, why did you bring up the Wiki reference? Just to point out that the dependence on the Sexy Sadie and other such material that is used to justify much of what is said here doesn't even rise to the level of relibability a Wikipedia entry. Do you know what is in your refrigerator? Or what your GF, if and when you have one, likes? Are these things published anywhere? Is your informatin for such matters relaible? Is such information used to justify attacks on people and organizations? Is such used to justify the arguments made in favor of such attacks? 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: I assume Wiki would not rely on your impressions either. Since they are um piss-poor. True enough. Wikipedia requires some kind of citation for everything. There are quite a few guidelines for what can be said and how it must be cited and what kind of citations are acceptable. i am not challenging you on the rules, but i read a lot of wikipedia, and there LOTS of statements without cites. In time, more cites come. But articles without exhastive cites are not, generally, deleted. Articles get better over time. i find Wiki to be an incredible resourse. And I love their related projects. WikiBooks -- textbooks on many of not all subjects eventually -- free of charge, and instantly distributable. WikiSource -- free online text content WikiCommons -- free online media content And my favorite Wikiversity -- developing -- but eventually on-line lectures, course materials, tests, certification, etc, for all disciplines. potentially, a free, on-line, university education for anyone world wide. But your Wiki reference is instersting. Is your logic stream leading you to conclude that if something is not published, it is unreliable? If not, why did you bring up the Wiki reference? Just to point out that the dependence on the Sexy Sadie and other such material ... doesn't even rise to the level of relibability a Wikipedia entry. i got it. as to SS material being used to justify much of what is said here --- see below. Your perspective is quite different than mine on the material being used as justification and attacks Do you know what is in your refrigerator? Or what your GF, if and when you have one, likes? Are these things published anywhere? Is your informatin for such matters relaible? Is such information used to justify attacks on people and organizations? Is such used to justify the arguments made in favor of such attacks? i don't know if you textually attack ex-GFs or not. :) However, while I am sure you can cite examples of the SS material being used to justify attacks on people and organizations -- i don't think thats the majority use. If I am typical, I read it, said ok, interesting -- raised some issues about bias and perspective (Ned comes to mind) -- and then went ahead with my day. I didn't use the material to attack M or the TMO. I doubt more than a handful of readers use it that way. Except of course the sociopaths :) 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: I've been told that the TBers have ruined the list. I guess no-one likes to hear their NEW belief-system challenged by people who embrace the old one... to develop a whole beleif system, an new epistimology perhaps, about TM, or nonTM? What kind of person actually does that? On this list i find a whole spctrum of experiences, logic, faith, hope, dogma, analysis, cognitive errors and ego barricades about TM or nonTM -- but few if any belief systems. Do these systems begin with basic axioms? And work out to postulates? Or even by those who insist that their new belief system be well supported, People insist that others support their own personal belief systems? Even assuming that you mean beliefs and and not belief systems, i don't see a lot of insistance that others must believe my beliefs. Granted, there is at times a lot of odd fist pounding, irrationality, name calling, rudeness, cognitive and factual errors, etc. And at times, rarer than in the past, there are great expressions of facts, reason and well digested/inner-interpreted experiences. A lot of what is going on here, IMO, is people working out and refining their own beliefs -- as they attempt to show others the merits of a particular view. And if you you don't believe me, I will throw a tantrum . I INSIST you believe ME! :) 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: snip Or even by those who insist that their new belief system be well supported, People insist that others support their own personal belief systems? Obviously not. See if you can think of another way to read it. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
I have been practising transcendental meditation regularly for well over three decades now, but that has not made me a 'true believer'. But, I am a firm believer about one thing at least and that is in using proper methodology for the purposes of detection work. The whole sex scandal story about MMY has made extremelely dodgey reading since the first claims filtered through into the public domain, and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about whether it has been published, just that it does not 'scan' well. In fact many years ago I had the same feeling about Erik Von Daniken's books, and then I watched a documentary which took his claims apart and then confronted the man (who wriggled uncomfortably, made a few shifty comments and retreated into silence looking very frightened indeed). In the case of the allegations about MMYs sexuality it is not that I disbelieve all the claims made, just that I doubt MMY ever had actual sexual intercourse with a woman (however close he might have come). Actually, for the record, I suspect that most if not all the material currently circulating about MMYs alleged sexuality has been put about solely to discredit MMY, simple as that, a rather ramshackle attempt at cocking a snoot at him, rather than an orchestrated attack, but perhaps a mixture of both. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: But perhaps Peter is correct when he suggested the problem lies in the fact that the core topics about TM MMY have already been dealt with, over and over again. WEeel The stuff that has already been dealt with is often dealt with in a piss-poor manner. Peter and Paul are referring to quite a large volume of posts written prior to your arrival. Did you go through the archives and read them all? ... My impression is, this turns out to be the quality of reference that people here use to hash out these points over and over again. Opps. Your impression? You mean you are saying a generally wonderful set of posts and exchanges, and/or their references, is piss-poor -- and you have not even read them? Oh My! BTW, Wiki isn't considered the most reliable of online sources of info, and by Wiki rules, NONE of the Sexy Sadie files is admissable as a reference because it's not published anywhere. I assume Wiki would not rely on your impressions either. Since they are um piss-poor. But your Wiki reference is instersting. Is your logic stream leading you to conclude that if something is not published, it is unreliable? If not, why did you bring up the Wiki reference? Do you know what is in your refrigerator? Or what your GF, if and when you have one, likes? Are these things published anywhere? Is your informatin for such matters relaible? 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap on 8/7/06 4:32 PM, Paul Mason at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been practising transcendental meditation regularly for well over three decades now, but that has not made me a 'true believer'. But, I am a firm believer about one thing at least and that is in using proper methodology for the purposes of detection work. I believe that as time goes on, the evidence will become more convincing, and youll end up revising your opinion. You might already have done so, had you had the conversations Ive had. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
I'd be happy to revise my opinion, I am not attached one way or the other on this subject. Same with 'where did the TM teaching come from?', I don't have a fixed outcome in mind for that either, though I suspect that MMY's teachings were fairly predictably Hindu, until he got close to the USA. Coincidentally, it was then that he opted for the 'fixed donations' route too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 8/7/06 4:32 PM, Paul Mason at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been practising transcendental meditation regularly for well over three decades now, but that has not made me a 'true believer'. But, I am a firm believer about one thing at least and that is in using proper methodology for the purposes of detection work. I believe that as time goes on, the evidence will become more convincing, and you¹ll end up revising your opinion. You might already have done so, had you had the conversations I¹ve had. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows something more than me about energy flows. And its his business. And even if not, i don't walk out on other teachers and mentors because they banged a 24-yr old attractive blonde. For some, I actually silently applaud. So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about whether it has been published, just that it does not 'scan' well. Thats not a universal problem, thats a problem you have with them. In fact many years ago I had the same feeling about Erik Von Daniken's books, and then I watched a documentary which took his claims apart ... So you have a history of problems in this area. very interesting... :) In the case of the allegations about MMYs sexuality it is not that I disbelieve all the claims made, Ok, a shift in positions? just that I doubt MMY ever had actual sexual intercourse with a woman (however close he might have come). OK. So if he, naked, was about to have intercourse with a naked willing 24-yrold participant, but didn't -- is that a huge distinction for you compared to if he did? Actually, for the record, I suspect I suspect are key words. Pure opinion, no fact. Much less persuasive than the SS files. that most if not all the material currently circulating about MMYs alleged sexuality has been put about solely to discredit MMY, haha. i smell a conspiracy theory. And your suspicions have little basis in the actual history of the genesis of the files. simple as that, a rather ramshackle attempt at cocking a snoot at him, rather than an orchestrated attack, but perhaps a mixture of both. Any other possblities? Perhaps to share information one found interesting? Perhaps to provide some material, which along wit h so much other material, experiences, knowledge, allows others to make up their minds on things? 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows something more than me about energy flows. And its his business. And even if not, i don't walk out on other teachers and mentors because they banged a 24-yr old attractive blonde. For some, I actually silently applaud. So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about whether it has been published, just that it does not 'scan' well. Thats not a universal problem, thats a problem you have with them. In fact many years ago I had the same feeling about Erik Von Daniken's books, and then I watched a documentary which took his claims apart ... So you have a history of problems in this area. very interesting... :) In the case of the allegations about MMYs sexuality it is not that I disbelieve all the claims made, Ok, a shift in positions? just that I doubt MMY ever had actual sexual intercourse with a woman (however close he might have come). OK. So if he, naked, was about to have intercourse with a naked willing 24-yrold participant, but didn't -- is that a huge distinction for you compared to if he did? Actually, for the record, I suspect I suspect are key words. Pure opinion, no fact. Much less persuasive than the SS files. that most if not all the material currently circulating about MMYs alleged sexuality has been put about solely to discredit MMY, haha. i smell a conspiracy theory. And your suspicions have little basis in the actual history of the genesis of the files. simple as that, a rather ramshackle attempt at cocking a snoot at him, rather than an orchestrated attack, but perhaps a mixture of both. Any other possblities? Perhaps to share information one found interesting? Perhaps to provide some material, which along wit h so much other material, experiences, knowledge, allows others to make up their minds on things? 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:
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
A red flag for spin goes up, perhaps undjusifiably so, for statements like already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. On the surface, he sounds like quite the rogue. On second thought, do all prominent indians deserve shielding if they have done some un-noble things? Is someone known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public exposure of such un-nobles necessarily a bad person? If it was Conny Larsson, collecting mail for Linda Williams Pierce -- who is apparently quite sick and may have others hadling her mail -- then perhaps that is quite a noble thing. Apparently Conny directly witnessed (and experienced?) abuses by Sai Baba -- and is dedicating a lot of time and resources to education others about the potential downside of involment with SB. Not a bad thing, is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows something more than me about energy flows. And its his business. And even if not, i don't walk out on other teachers and mentors because they banged a 24-yr old attractive blonde. For some, I actually silently applaud. So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about whether it has been published, just that it does not 'scan' well. Thats not a universal problem, thats a problem you have with them. In fact many years ago I had the same feeling about Erik Von Daniken's books, and then I watched a documentary which took his claims apart ... So you have a history of problems in this area. very interesting... :) In the case of the allegations about MMYs sexuality it is not that I disbelieve all the claims made, Ok, a shift in positions? just that I doubt MMY ever had actual sexual intercourse with a woman (however close he might have come). OK. So if he, naked, was about to have intercourse with a naked willing 24-yrold participant, but didn't -- is that a huge distinction for you compared to if he did? Actually, for the record, I suspect I suspect are key words. Pure opinion, no fact. Much less persuasive than the SS files.
Re: [FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap on 8/7/06 6:03 PM, Paul Mason at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. You tried to reach Judith through Conny Larsson, who is a Sai Baba debunker. And on that basis you doubt all the Sexy Sadie information? __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
I completely agree that if Sai Baba has made the abuses of power he is accused of, then he deserves to be exposed. I have long sought good close-up footage of Sai handing out vibhuti, and today I have been able to study a variety of video clips, and I am very glad for this opportunity. Many thanks to whoever obtained this data and made it available! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A red flag for spin goes up, perhaps undjusifiably so, for statements like already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. On the surface, he sounds like quite the rogue. On second thought, do all prominent indians deserve shielding if they have done some un-noble things? Is someone known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public exposure of such un-nobles necessarily a bad person? If it was Conny Larsson, collecting mail for Linda Williams Pierce - - who is apparently quite sick and may have others hadling her mail -- then perhaps that is quite a noble thing. Apparently Conny directly witnessed (and experienced?) abuses by Sai Baba -- and is dedicating a lot of time and resources to education others about the potential downside of involment with SB. Not a bad thing, is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows something more than me about energy flows. And its his business. And even if not, i don't walk out on other teachers and mentors because they banged a 24- yr old attractive blonde. For some, I actually silently applaud. So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about whether it has been published, just that it does not 'scan' well. Thats not a universal problem, thats a problem you have with them. In fact many years ago I had the same feeling about Erik Von Daniken's books, and then I watched a documentary which took his claims apart ... So you have a history of problems in this area. very interesting... :)
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
My favorite was the lingum out of the mouth trick. He wasn't even trying on that one and everyone seemed so pleased with what he did. Plus it was about a 10 on the gaydar scale! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I completely agree that if Sai Baba has made the abuses of power he is accused of, then he deserves to be exposed. I have long sought good close-up footage of Sai handing out vibhuti, and today I have been able to study a variety of video clips, and I am very glad for this opportunity. Many thanks to whoever obtained this data and made it available! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: A red flag for spin goes up, perhaps undjusifiably so, for statements like already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. On the surface, he sounds like quite the rogue. On second thought, do all prominent indians deserve shielding if they have done some un-noble things? Is someone known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public exposure of such un-nobles necessarily a bad person? If it was Conny Larsson, collecting mail for Linda Williams Pierce - - who is apparently quite sick and may have others hadling her mail -- then perhaps that is quite a noble thing. Apparently Conny directly witnessed (and experienced?) abuses by Sai Baba -- and is dedicating a lot of time and resources to education others about the potential downside of involment with SB. Not a bad thing, is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows something more than me about energy flows. And its his business. And even if not, i don't walk out on other teachers and mentors because they banged a 24- yr old attractive blonde. For some, I actually silently applaud. So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
Quite, the expression on his face was what was taking my attention too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My favorite was the lingum out of the mouth trick. He wasn't even trying on that one and everyone seemed so pleased with what he did. Plus it was about a 10 on the gaydar scale! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: I completely agree that if Sai Baba has made the abuses of power he is accused of, then he deserves to be exposed. I have long sought good close-up footage of Sai handing out vibhuti, and today I have been able to study a variety of video clips, and I am very glad for this opportunity. Many thanks to whoever obtained this data and made it available! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: A red flag for spin goes up, perhaps undjusifiably so, for statements like already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. On the surface, he sounds like quite the rogue. On second thought, do all prominent indians deserve shielding if they have done some un-noble things? Is someone known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public exposure of such un-nobles necessarily a bad person? If it was Conny Larsson, collecting mail for Linda Williams Pierce - - who is apparently quite sick and may have others hadling her mail -- then perhaps that is quite a noble thing. Apparently Conny directly witnessed (and experienced?) abuses by Sai Baba -- and is dedicating a lot of time and resources to education others about the potential downside of involment with SB. Not a bad thing, is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student - - I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows
Re: [FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap on 8/7/06 6:41 PM, Paul Mason at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I completely agree that if Sai Baba has made the abuses of power he is accused of, then he deserves to be exposed. I have long sought good close-up footage of Sai handing out vibhuti, and today I have been able to study a variety of video clips, and I am very glad for this opportunity. Many thanks to whoever obtained this data and made it available! I got it in an email I received from Conny. __._,_.___ 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 Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 8/7/06 4:32 PM, Paul Mason at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been practising transcendental meditation regularly for well over three decades now, but that has not made me a 'true believer'. But, I am a firm believer about one thing at least and that is in using proper methodology for the purposes of detection work. I believe that as time goes on, the evidence will become more convincing, and you¹ll end up revising your opinion. You might already have done so, had you had the conversations I¹ve had. So, who is a more credible witness, Anita Hill, or Clarence Thomas? Why? 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My favorite was the lingum out of the mouth trick. He wasn't even trying on that one and everyone seemed so pleased with what he did. Plus it was about a 10 on the gaydar scale! I love watching the crowd as he does the manifestations. They are so taken with him! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: I completely agree that if Sai Baba has made the abuses of power he is accused of, then he deserves to be exposed. I have long sought good close-up footage of Sai handing out vibhuti, and today I have been able to study a variety of video clips, and I am very glad for this opportunity. Many thanks to whoever obtained this data and made it available! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: A red flag for spin goes up, perhaps undjusifiably so, for statements like already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. On the surface, he sounds like quite the rogue. On second thought, do all prominent indians deserve shielding if they have done some un-noble things? Is someone known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public exposure of such un-nobles necessarily a bad person? If it was Conny Larsson, collecting mail for Linda Williams Pierce - - who is apparently quite sick and may have others hadling her mail -- then perhaps that is quite a noble thing. Apparently Conny directly witnessed (and experienced?) abuses by Sai Baba -- and is dedicating a lot of time and resources to education others about the potential downside of involment with SB. Not a bad thing, is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone on. To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than for you. Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Its odd, to me, how people wrap extra stuff around more simple events. Guilt ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, probably 23-24 at the time of her reading mail to MMY. (Though she was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently thought he was). And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and are ill-effected by them. Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when nakedness befalls? So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is assuming guilt when, at least IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence would be, IMO, Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the basis of third-hand material is very faulty. Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, probabilistically. Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being true is not large for me. I figure
[FairfieldLife] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: It's also sad that some people are still burning a candle for it all. There will always be enablers for the sociopaths and always those who never see beyond the conditioning, the marketing and the spin. And so they spin it again. To be honest, Vaj, you come off as a bit sociopathic yourself..or ...or a double glazing salesman. TM is the best example of the adage Good marketing can sell a bad product but bad marketing will never sell a good product. The only people who condemn TM properly taught are either those with an axe to grind or prats who do not do as they are taught by their teacher. In Vaj's case, he believes through his Buddhist training that he is doing us a favor with his anti-TM stance. It is both a culmination of all of his spiritual study, and a delusion that he knows the truth, and is breaking boundaries for us by stating opposition to our thoughts and observations about TM and Maharishi, or Mahesh [Shiva] as Vaj calls him. In fact it is a rigid egoic stance that Vaj has committed himself to, and cannot now see the falsity of. Why do I say this? Simply because of his inability to respond when his postings are criticized. Instead he retreats into his silence. He uses this technique to recharge the egoic delusion in which he is trapped. After doing so, and dissolving the impressions of the conflict between the challenger and his ongoing delusion, he then re- emerges, posting, but with no longer a link to any post that challenges him. He is stuck in a trap. On the one hand his long time study of spiritual practices have provided him with some benefit. On the other hand he is trapped by this study, unwilling to do anything which truly dissolves the boundaries in which he is so rigidly held. This is a dangerous place for a seeker to be in- Vaj denies to himself that he hungers for permanent Self-Realization (because his ego tells him he is there- a feeling which his heart does not support), while at the same time having achieved enough ability to transcend so that he has created more freedom for himself than the average person. This satisfies his ego to the point where he can justify his spiritual existence, yet deny himself the hunger that would take him further on his path, truly breaking his attachments. Wake up Vaj! You are not the saviour of those who believe in Mahesh and TM! It is you who are doubting and dissatisfied. All of the doubt and scorn that you sow is truly within You, within the Point Of View that You hold. It is the disappointment of your heart, not the truth about Maharishi and TM. The answer is within You, not outside. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In fact it is a rigid egoic stance that Vaj has committed himself to, and cannot now see the falsity of. Why do I say this? Simply because of his inability to respond when his postings are criticized. Instead he retreats into his silence. Could there be any other possible explanations for this retreat? or do you know this to be true, absolutely? I don't always, even often, agree with Vaj's points or logic. However, as a rule, not specifically addressing any specific Vaj response / non-response) simply not responding, at times, is a sign of strength and wisdom. Particularly when others have grossly miscast points and POVs, or made silly responses replete woth logical, cognitive and factual errors -- or hollow empty rhetoric or dogma. For some discussions, a short and early death is a great blessing. 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] [was Re: Number of people learning TM ] Vaj's trap
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: In fact it is a rigid egoic stance that Vaj has committed himself to, and cannot now see the falsity of. Why do I say this? Simply because of his inability to respond when his postings are criticized. Instead he retreats into his silence. Could there be any other possible explanations for this retreat? or do you know this to be true, absolutely? I said more, and you haven't posted it here. Per what I posted in its entirety, yes, I know it to be true. Absolutely, for all time? To say yes, would put Vaj in a cage don't you think? I don't always, even often, agree with Vaj's points or logic. However, as a rule, not specifically addressing any specific Vaj response / non-response) simply not responding, at times, is a sign of strength and wisdom. Particularly when others have grossly miscast points and POVs, or made silly responses replete woth logical, cognitive and factual errors -- or hollow empty rhetoric or dogma. For some discussions, a short and early death is a great blessing. 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/
