Share,
Did you ever take Ali Najafee's SET seminars in Fairfield? I know
someone who was there when they were going on and it seemed to
strike a nerve doing exactly what you are talking about. There
were massively popular back in the lat 80's. Since then there
have been oodles of people through FF with this message John
Gray, Barbara De Agangelis...
Although I am a fan of some emotional work, many of these courses
had an assumptive cult vibe about their perspectives also.
Assumptions on parade! That combined with taking advantage of
meditator's imaginatively lively trance states.
But this perspective is in direct conflict with Maharishi's
teaching about these kinds of programs and their value to TM
people. It says tat TM is not a complete self development program
and that was not what Maharishi was teaching or selling. He was
selling a solution to ALL problems and reflected the biases of
his tradition which was "don't fix it, transcend it."
Personally I support whatever you find value in for you.
Conceptually I see this as pretty clear evidence that the TM self
development programs don't so what they claimed to do. This
counter-evidence is being ignored and jeri rigged into a new
system of self development that you guys are creating on your own
in FF. (Not that there is anything wrong with that from outside
the movement.)
Participating in these programs was explicitly discouraged by
Maharishi, I never heard him say anything close to the conclusion
you have drawn for yourself. I have no beef with the
accommodations you have made to make up for the programs'
falures, good on ya sista! But my interest here is in Maharishi's
teaching and in that context your perspective for what people
need is hampered by an absolutist teaching that promises what it
cannot deliver. We didn't hear the message wrong, the message was
wrong. And it discourages people who could use some other kind of
help from getting it. It enables people with real mental
problems and when they blow up, the movement turns is back on
them as damaged goods, victimizing the victim with the stigma of
not living up to the unrealistic perfectionist standard in the
movement.
Thanks for promoting conversation from different perspectives
here Share. I think we are on the
same page on that front.
---In fairfieldli...@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:fairfieldli...@yahoogroups.com>, <sharelong60@...>
<mailto:sharelong60@...> wrote :
Curtis, it's only recently that some spiritual groups, including
the TMO, have recognized the importance of emotional good health
and social intelligence to go along with the what empty
hilariously calls "litement." Or maybe I should say that it's
only recently that such groups realized that expert help might be
needed in these areas. IOW, we don't tell someone with a
toothache to get their meditation checked! So why not use experts
for these other important areas of human development?
And I see that even the SAND conference featured a panel that
focused on, according to Rick's BAT intro, emotions and
spirituality. It seems to be the hot topic these days and I am
mightily relieved.
I love it when disagreements on FFL revolve around ideas and
evidence and rationality rather than personal attacks,no matter
how cleverly worded. I'm aiming to be, as best as I can, the
change I wanna see...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* "curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife]"
<mailto:curtisdeltablues@...[FairfieldLife]>
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, November 4, 2014 10:23 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 7 Techniques to Handle Toxic People
You know what is the dominate dynamic on FFL?
There is a group who criticizes the organization we were all a
part of, the founder and the beliefs of the followers. (I am a
proud member of this group.)
And a group who personally attacks their personal life with
made-up assumptions about their state of mind and life in place
of making a reasoned argument for the positive power of their
beliefs.
The single counter argument for this group, no matter what detail
of the movement and its beliefs are criticized seems to be :
"Yeah but you are a poopy pants so neirner, neiner, neiner!"
This is a stunning indictment of the vocal supporters of
Maharishi here that the sophistic tool of personal attack,
complete with fabrications about the critics personal life and
business, is the go-to weapon in practically every response.
And let me cut off the "but. but, but he started it" routine. You
guys are supposed to be representing the most precious knowledge
of mankind and HIGHER states of consciousness. I am just an
ordinary working artist. (Yeah, Nabs jump on that to prove my
point, go ahead!) I am not the one making claims that I am in a
permanent state of infused being or that I am somehow
participating in the most important work for the future of
mankind, saving the world for an actual example claim.
So when your reaction to me saying that Maharishi seemed to be a
super ambitious guy selling a panacea (which he literally and
explicitly WAS) is to attack what I do for a living, or make up
that I am somehow not successful in my life or career which you
could know NOTHING about...
you reveal that, like your self proclaimed "master" the emperor
has no clothes.
Just notice what you are about to type right now. Let's see if
there is a response that makes a cogent point to reflect upon
concerning the power and beauty of this knowledge you hold so dear...
or if it is the same old routine. I am gunna predict no response
because I just took away the only response you got. I would love
to be proven wrong. Conversation might actually break out here.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>,
<no_re...@yahoogroups.com> <mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
The strange thing is that one hardly sees so much anger and
frustration in the real world as on FFL. Even people who deal
with heavy problems like living on the streets, addicts of all
kinds very often have the Insight to see from where their
problems stem; themselves. Not so on FFL.
Me thinks my old theory still holds; many of the participants
here are quitters that jumped the ship that could have brought
them safely across the Ocean (as Muktananda described TM).
Unconsciously they know this but instead of analyzing themselves
honestly they start to kick in all other directions than where a
kick would be justified; their own butt. Add to this the fact
that many have reached an age where bitterness and anger perhaps
is irreversable.
Particularily they blame the only Saint they ever knew for their
failure not realizing he was only there to guide and inspire, the
real work had to be done by the student himself. Not having the
inclination towards self-discipline any path requires anger
builds up and eventually catch fire - as seen on a daily basis by
several poor souls here on FFL.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>,
<fleetwood_macncheese@...> <mailto:fleetwood_macncheese@...> wrote :
I don't understand this non-issue that Share has created. The
article I posted, specifically listed seven techniques to deal
with toxic people, and Share gets hung up on the title! She also
has an awful lot to say about what "we" would do, if... I used it
as an opportunity to use technique #1, "set limits", not that
Share is toxic, but she sometimes writes, before thinking it
through.
I recognize that B fits the stereotype of a toxic individual,
with his button pushing and desire to "get in touch with his
inner asshole" (his words, not mine...). However, I also
recognize that his life is basically over - He doesn't have the
strength for a jog around the block, and his mind is growing
feeble. All my life I have defended the underdog, and even now,
with B spouting his usual, I cannot get angry with him. My heart
pities him. He doesn't have much of a life, and if he needs to
spend it on here denigrating others, so be it. He is easy enough
to ignore.
I worked with a few people at the nursing home, filled both with
rage and dementia, and there is not much to do, except wait for
them to settle down of their own accord, usually after mealtimes.
As Nabby mentioned about these types, their self anger catches
fire, and all we can do is watch it burn out of control.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <awoelflebater@...>
<mailto:awoelflebater@...> wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <sharelong60@...>
<mailto:sharelong60@...> wrote :
Ann, I'd say it depends on your intention, esp your general
intention in living. Do you want to benefit yourself and others?
Or do you want to do harm? As for the rest, I think it's pretty
simple. If someone is harming us and won't stop, then we remove
ourselves from their life. If someone is harming others and won't
stop, then we put them in jail until they can be rehabilitated.
Sometimes jail is not possible and I personally don't think jail
cures anyone of anything, in fact, jail mostly makes bad guys
badder. And of course you are talking about a criminal level of
toxicity when you talk about jail. Most of the toxicity is not
something you could incarcerate someone for. I'm talking garden
variety toxicity.
Here online, if someone says something untrue, we say what is
true. If someone says something we don't agree with, we say we
don't agree. If someone is a jerk, we say we think that, ONE
time. To say it over and over is imo a sign that the name caller
is projecting and or venting.
I think a lot of the nastiness online is people venting what they
are unwilling or unable to vent about in their 3D life.
If the asshole keeps on and on and on then one time is often not
enough in terms of responding to it or attempting to deflect the
untruths or negativity. When someone keeps farting in the room
you just can't get away with opening the window once.
Again, my opinion.
Ditto.
*From:* "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]"
<mailto:awoelflebater@...[FairfieldLife]>
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*Sent:* Monday, November 3, 2014 10:16 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] 7 Techniques to Handle Toxic People
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <sharelong60@...>
<mailto:sharelong60@...> wrote :
Fleetwood, in many fairytales, if the king and queen don't invite
the Wicked Witch to the birth celebration of their baby, then she
arrives anyway and puts a curse on the little one! Meaning that
we all have toxic elements in us to some degree. If we don't deal
with them in a healthy way, then they show up in our life as
allegedly toxic people, etc.
First you call people toxic. Next thing you know, you're burning
them at the stake or leading them into the gas oven!
Is it okay to call someone as "asshole", "obnoxious", "annoying"
or any other number of adjectives? Is it possible for people to
actually be these things or are we merely putting our own
subjective spin on how others act? Under what circumstances do we
hold others responsible for their actions and effect on us or on
others? What is the point where we say enough is enough? Or do we
simply accept the behaviour of others as none of our business
even when it impacts our lives?
