Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

2014-10-08 Thread Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
Bankers make plenty of money in wartime - you better believe it! You think arms 
deals, both those that are done by governments and those done in the shadows 
are carried out by guys in dark clothes carrying around suitcases full of 
money? The bankers are all too eager to shuttle money back and forth between 
all sorts of governments and clients - they make tons of dough in and from war.




 From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2014 1:42 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM
 


  
Paranoia about banksters -- is sanity.  Are you actually not seeing the true 
rulers of the world?

To diss this guy's possible psychological twist in his panties about Zionism 
while the War Mongers of the world have their way with the masses, is to serve 
them, their goals and their EVIL.

I accuse you of being a supporter of evil.  Fuck you for not being informed, 
and if informed, fuck you for mindfully being evil.

The issue isn't this guy - - it's your turning of a blind eye towards the 
psychopaths.this foul dynamic is the cause of all the world's misery and 
YOU'RE JUST TRUCKING ALONG LIKE YOU AIN'T DOING SHIT.

This is shit right here that you've done.  You made the world a little shittier 
by pretending a guy is more important than MILLIONS WHO ARE ABOUT TO DIE.

Fuck you time ten.


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

2014-10-08 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 10/8/2014 12:42 PM, Duveyoung wrote:


Paranoia about banksters -- is sanity.  Are you actually not seeing 
the true rulers of the world?




/Use your head - if the Middle East was ruled by the Israelis there 
would be peace in the entire region. If Jews controlled the banks and 
the U.S. Government, we wouldn't have trillions of dollars in national 
debt.//Fuck you Jew-hating bastards a trillion times. Go figure./


/http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock//




To diss this guy's possible psychological twist in his panties about 
Zionism while the War Mongers of the world have their way with the 
masses, is to serve them, their goals and their EVIL.


I accuse you of being a supporter of evil.  Fuck you for not being 
informed, and if informed, fuck you for mindfully being evil.


The issue isn't this guy - - it's your turning of a blind eye towards 
the psychopaths.this foul dynamic is the cause of all the world's 
misery and YOU'RE JUST TRUCKING ALONG LIKE YOU AIN'T DOING SHIT.


This is shit right here that you've done.  You made the world a little 
shittier by pretending a guy is more important than MILLIONS WHO ARE 
ABOUT TO DIE.


Fuck you time ten.






Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

2014-10-08 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]
On 10/8/2014 1:18 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:

Bankers make plenty of money in wartime - you better believe it!


/Well, let's hope the U.S. banks are making money. //
//
//The whole idea is to use the ISIL as an excuse to send in more U.S. 
troops, through the backdoor, to actively do what we wanted to do more 
than ten years ago - to remove the dictators like Hussein and the Assad 
government and the Kings of Saudi - to stabilize the entire Middle East 
so we can get the oil and send it to Europe and the Ukraine. The U.S. is 
almost 100% energy independent. //

//
//Following your logic, you are supporting the terrorists in the Middle 
East every time you cash a paycheck at a bank, or start up your car in 
the morning - just like you support the drug cartels every time you 
light up a joint.Go figure./



You think arms deals, both those that are done by governments and 
those done in the shadows are carried out by guys in dark clothes 
carrying around suitcases full of money? The bankers are all too eager 
to shuttle money back and forth between all sorts of governments and 
clients - they make tons of dough in and from war.



*From:* Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 8, 2014 1:42 PM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

Paranoia about banksters -- is sanity.  Are you actually not seeing 
the true rulers of the world?


To diss this guy's possible psychological twist in his panties about 
Zionism while the War Mongers of the world have their way with the 
masses, is to serve them, their goals and their EVIL.


I accuse you of being a supporter of evil.  Fuck you for not being 
informed, and if informed, fuck you for mindfully being evil.


The issue isn't this guy - - it's your turning of a blind eye towards 
the psychopaths.this foul dynamic is the cause of all the world's 
misery and YOU'RE JUST TRUCKING ALONG LIKE YOU AIN'T DOING SHIT.


This is shit right here that you've done.  You made the world a little 
shittier by pretending a guy is more important than MILLIONS WHO ARE 
ABOUT TO DIE.


Fuck you time ten.







Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

2014-10-08 Thread Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]
This short clip from one of my favorite films The International 
explains it all:


http://youtu.be/UiN1xHaNDJ0

On 10/08/2014 11:18 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:
Bankers make plenty of money in wartime - you better believe it! You 
think arms deals, both those that are done by governments and those 
done in the shadows are carried out by guys in dark clothes carrying 
around suitcases full of money? The bankers are all too eager to 
shuttle money back and forth between all sorts of governments and 
clients - they make tons of dough in and from war.



*From:* Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 8, 2014 1:42 PM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

Paranoia about banksters -- is sanity.  Are you actually not seeing 
the true rulers of the world?


To diss this guy's possible psychological twist in his panties about 
Zionism while the War Mongers of the world have their way with the 
masses, is to serve them, their goals and their EVIL.


I accuse you of being a supporter of evil.  Fuck you for not being 
informed, and if informed, fuck you for mindfully being evil.


The issue isn't this guy - - it's your turning of a blind eye towards 
the psychopaths.this foul dynamic is the cause of all the world's 
misery and YOU'RE JUST TRUCKING ALONG LIKE YOU AIN'T DOING SHIT.


This is shit right here that you've done.  You made the world a little 
shittier by pretending a guy is more important than MILLIONS WHO ARE 
ABOUT TO DIE.


Fuck you time ten.







Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

2014-10-08 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 10/8/2014 3:20 PM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife] wrote:


This short clip from one of my favorite films The International 
explains it all:


/Wait! I thought Michael Moore made the film that explains it all. Go 
figure./




http://youtu.be/UiN1xHaNDJ0

On 10/08/2014 11:18 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:
Bankers make plenty of money in wartime - you better believe it! You 
think arms deals, both those that are done by governments and those 
done in the shadows are carried out by guys in dark clothes carrying 
around suitcases full of money? The bankers are all too eager to 
shuttle money back and forth between all sorts of governments and 
clients - they make tons of dough in and from war.



*From:* Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 8, 2014 1:42 PM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth -- the bitterness untouched by TM

Paranoia about banksters -- is sanity.  Are you actually not seeing 
the true rulers of the world?


To diss this guy's possible psychological twist in his panties about 
Zionism while the War Mongers of the world have their way with the 
masses, is to serve them, their goals and their EVIL.


I accuse you of being a supporter of evil.  Fuck you for not being 
informed, and if informed, fuck you for mindfully being evil.


The issue isn't this guy - - it's your turning of a blind eye towards 
the psychopaths.this foul dynamic is the cause of all the world's 
misery and YOU'RE JUST TRUCKING ALONG LIKE YOU AIN'T DOING SHIT.


This is shit right here that you've done.  You made the world a 
little shittier by pretending a guy is more important than MILLIONS 
WHO ARE ABOUT TO DIE.


Fuck you time ten.









Re: [FairfieldLife] Pravda (Truth) on WW III

2014-03-10 Thread Pundit Sir
The Jews Who Fought for Hitler:
https://news.yahoo.com/jews-fought-hitler-190500625--politics.html


On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 2:22 PM, cardemais...@yahoo.com wrote:





 http://english.pravda.ru/society/anomal/25-03-2011/117328-third_world_war-0/

  



Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-24 Thread Share Long
Thanks, Ann. I tend to come from a perspective of psychological health is good. 
But I know one spritual teacher, David Deida, who though he thinks it's good 
too, also thinks that people can love unconditionally even if they're totally 
screwed up!





On Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:02 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com 
awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.

I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.






On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@...
turquoiseb@... wrote:

 
A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 








Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-24 Thread doctordumbass
Who, then, is doing the unconditional loving, in those cases? It is a very 
strange thing to assert, since it is conditioning which prevents unconditional 
love, in the first place. Perhaps he is merely mentioning the old saw, to not 
wait for full enlightenment, to begin living a full life, and that is always 
good advice.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Thanks, Ann. I tend to come from a perspective of psychological health is 
good. But I know one spritual teacher, David Deida, who though he thinks it's 
good too, also thinks that people can love unconditionally even if they're 
totally screwed up!
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:02 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... 
wrote:
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.
 

 I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.
 
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@... turquoiseb@... wrote:
 
   A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 


 



 














 


 












Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-24 Thread Share Long
But Doc, is it conditioning that is preventing unconditional love. Or is it the 
belief that conditioning is preventing unconditional love that is the real 
culprit?!
PS I find David Deida to be a very profound thinker so I take to heart what he 
says.





On Monday, February 24, 2014 8:20 AM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com 
doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote:
 
  
Who, then, is doing the unconditional loving, in those cases? It is a very 
strange thing to assert, since it is conditioning which prevents unconditional 
love, in the first place. Perhaps he is merely mentioning the old saw, to not 
wait for full enlightenment, to begin living a full life, and that is always 
good advice.



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


Thanks, Ann. I tend to come from a perspective of psychological health is good. 
But I know one spritual teacher, David Deida, who though he thinks it's good 
too, also thinks that people can love unconditionally even if they're totally 
screwed up!





On Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:02 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... 
wrote:

 




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.

I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.






On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@...
turquoiseb@... wrote:

 
A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 










Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-24 Thread doctordumbass
Beliefs in limitations don't arise, unless the limitation is evident within 
oneself. Similarly, a belief in one's unlimited ability doesn't arise, unless 
the ability within oneself is present - latent, perhaps, but present.
So, although we all enjoy 'owning' our beliefs, even arguing for them, and 
thinking of them as choices we each make, they are really much more of a 
rationalized expression, of the state of our physiology.
However, as humans, we have this unique ability to set a conflict within 
ourselves, to believe in something, that in terms of everyday life, we cannot 
support. It is simply not possible - Not impossible, in terms of future 
achievement, but in terms of simply thinking it so, it is not possible for a 
belief to instantaneously override the physiology. 
That means, if, as this guy says, we believe in giving unconditional love, but 
we do not have the capacity, all we can offer is inner conflict, and why would 
you want to pass that on? Once the ability to offer unconditional love is 
there, it doesn't matter what our belief is, at all - we can only spread, and 
share it.
I find that humans are not as smart as we *think* we are - life, itself, serves 
as much better mirror, and teacher. :-)


 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 But Doc, is it conditioning that is preventing unconditional love. Or is it 
the belief that conditioning is preventing unconditional love that is the real 
culprit?!
PS I find David Deida to be a very profound thinker so I take to heart what he 
says.
 

 
 
 On Monday, February 24, 2014 8:20 AM, doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... 
wrote:
 
   Who, then, is doing the unconditional loving, in those cases? It is a very 
strange thing to assert, since it is conditioning which prevents unconditional 
love, in the first place. Perhaps he is merely mentioning the old saw, to not 
wait for full enlightenment, to begin living a full life, and that is always 
good advice.

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Thanks, Ann. I tend to come from a perspective of psychological health is 
good. But I know one spritual teacher, David Deida, who though he thinks it's 
good too, also thinks that people can love unconditionally even if they're 
totally screwed up!
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:02 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... 
wrote:
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.
 

 I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.
 
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@... turquoiseb@... wrote:
 
   A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 


 



 














 














 


 












Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-24 Thread Share Long
Doc, I agree that all this stuff resides in the physiology and arises from 
there. But then I remember reading about saints who were in bliss but also 
great physical pain. Any thoughts about that? 





On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:02 PM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com 
doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote:
 
  
Beliefs in limitations don't arise, unless the limitation is evident within 
oneself. Similarly, a belief in one's unlimited ability doesn't arise, unless 
the ability within oneself is present - latent, perhaps, but present.
So, although we all enjoy 'owning' our beliefs, even arguing for them, and 
thinking of them as choices we each make, they are really much more of a 
rationalized expression, of the state of our physiology.
However, as humans, we have this unique ability to set a conflict within 
ourselves, to believe in something, that in terms of everyday life, we cannot 
support. It is simply not possible - Not impossible, in terms of future 
achievement, but in terms of simply thinking it so, it is not possible for a 
belief to instantaneously override the physiology. 
That means, if, as this guy says, we believe in giving unconditional love, but 
we do not have the capacity, all we can offer is inner conflict, and why would 
you want to pass that on? Once the ability to offer unconditional love is 
there, it doesn't matter what our belief is, at all - we can only spread, and 
share it.
I find that humans are not as smart as we *think* we are - life, itself, serves 
as much better mirror, and teacher. :-)




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


But Doc, is it conditioning that is preventing unconditional love. Or is it the 
belief that conditioning is preventing unconditional love that is the real 
culprit?!
PS I find David Deida to be a very profound thinker so I take to heart what he 
says.





On Monday, February 24, 2014 8:20 AM, doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... 
wrote:

 
Who, then, is doing the unconditional loving, in those cases? It is a very 
strange thing to assert, since it is conditioning which prevents unconditional 
love, in the first place. Perhaps he is merely mentioning the old saw, to not 
wait for full enlightenment, to begin living a full life, and that is always 
good advice.



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


Thanks, Ann. I tend to come from a perspective of psychological health is good. 
But I know one spritual teacher, David Deida, who though he thinks it's good 
too, also thinks that people can love unconditionally even if they're totally 
screwed
up!





On Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:02 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... 
wrote:

 




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.

I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.






On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@...
turquoiseb@... wrote:

 
A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 












Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-24 Thread doctordumbass
As it relates to the earlier discussion about radiating unconditional love, 
such a saint would be fully aware of both the bliss, and the great physical 
pain, and the source of each. Maybe it is then like stubbing your toe, while 
your child is running towards you, for a hug. The hug still happens, fully and 
deeply, while you think, ouch, that toe hurts.  

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Doc, I agree that all this stuff resides in the physiology and arises from 
there. But then I remember reading about saints who were in bliss but also 
great physical pain. Any thoughts about that? 
 

 
 
 On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:02 PM, doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... 
wrote:
 
   Beliefs in limitations don't arise, unless the limitation is evident within 
oneself. Similarly, a belief in one's unlimited ability doesn't arise, unless 
the ability within oneself is present - latent, perhaps, but present.
So, although we all enjoy 'owning' our beliefs, even arguing for them, and 
thinking of them as choices we each make, they are really much more of a 
rationalized expression, of the state of our physiology.
However, as humans, we have this unique ability to set a conflict within 
ourselves, to believe in something, that in terms of everyday life, we cannot 
support. It is simply not possible - Not impossible, in terms of future 
achievement, but in terms of simply thinking it so, it is not possible for a 
belief to instantaneously override the physiology. 
That means, if, as this guy says, we believe in giving unconditional love, but 
we do not have the capacity, all we can offer is inner conflict, and why would 
you want to pass that on? Once the ability to offer unconditional love is 
there, it doesn't matter what our belief is, at all - we can only spread, and 
share it.
I find that humans are not as smart as we *think* we are - life, itself, serves 
as much better mirror, and teacher. :-)



 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 But Doc, is it conditioning that is preventing unconditional love. Or is it 
the belief that conditioning is preventing unconditional love that is the real 
culprit?!
PS I find David Deida to be a very profound thinker so I take to heart what he 
says.
 

 
 
 On Monday, February 24, 2014 8:20 AM, doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... 
wrote:
 
   Who, then, is doing the unconditional loving, in those cases? It is a very 
strange thing to assert, since it is conditioning which prevents unconditional 
love, in the first place. Perhaps he is merely mentioning the old saw, to not 
wait for full enlightenment, to begin living a full life, and that is always 
good advice.

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Thanks, Ann. I tend to come from a perspective of psychological health is 
good. But I know one spritual teacher, David Deida, who though he thinks it's 
good too, also thinks that people can love unconditionally even if they're 
totally screwed up!
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 8:02 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... 
wrote:
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.
 

 I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.
 
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@... turquoiseb@... wrote:
 
   A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 


 



 














 














 














 


 












Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-23 Thread Share Long
turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.





On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoi...@yahoo.com 
turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 






Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-23 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/23/2014 3:53 PM, Share Long wrote:
 what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
 for others, indeed for all life.
 
Man is the measure of all things. - Protagoras


Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth

2014-02-23 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 turq, I very much enjoy these statistics and understand what you are saying. 
However, I think the conclusions need to be a bit more nuanced. Because if a 
person thinks he or she is insignificant, then they will think other humans are 
insignificant too. And that often leads to all kinds of problematic behavior. I 
think what's better is a healthy self regard which promotes growth in regard 
for others, indeed for all life.
 

 I like this post, Share. I believe much of what you say here is true.
 
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:55 AM, turquoiseb@... turquoiseb@... wrote:
 
   A post for those who claim to value the Truth. Here it is. Now get over your 
puny self. 


 



 


 












Re: [FairfieldLife] sweet truth a fundamental misunderstanding

2013-12-04 Thread Share Long
Thanks Paul, this is good info. I've heard third hand that someone challenged 
Maharishi saying that the truth is not always sweet. And Maharishi reportedly 
replied: if it's not sweet, it's not true.





On Wednesday, December 4, 2013 11:41 AM, Paul Simdars psimd...@lisco.com 
wrote:
 
  

This verse is from the Manu Smriti (4.138):

Original translation:

satyaM brUyAt priyaM brUyAt   speak the truth, speak sweetly
na brUyAt satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth that is
unpleasant
priyaM ca nAnRRitaM brUyAt   don't speak untruth that is
pleasant
eSha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||  this is the eternal law

the Literal translation is:

truth speak, lovingly speak
don't speak truth unloving
lovingly untruth don't speak
this is law eternal

My enhanced translation

satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving
way
priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a
pleasant way
esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law

I'm certain that the shloka is talking about how to speak the truth
not the quality of the truth itself.  That is, it's not the truth
that is to be sweet or not, truth is truth.. but it is HOW you say
it that is the rule.

the key word you in the first three lines is priyam
this is derived from the word prem which means love, so I feel it
is appropriate to translate priyam as lovingly, although
sweetly, pleasantly are not far off.

But I have to emphasize that this shloka doesn't not say that one
should, under any circumstances, not tell the truth, but it is
guiding one to say the truth in a pleasant way.  The truth must be
told (satyam eva jayate truth alone triumphs)

ca means and (used very differently in Sanskrit than English /
not a connective word)
ritam is another word for truth
nan negation no or not
bruyat means speak or say

priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak a pleasant untruth

The word ca echoes the repetitive logic from earlier line (meaning
don't)
nanritam means untrurth

priyam is used here to describe a way of speaking, not nature of
the truth.
Therefore it should mean lovingly


The reason I think this is a fundamental issue is that people may
feel that you should never tell someone something they don't want to
hear.  But that is not what it says.  You can tell your friend that
he didn't win the election or you can rub his nose in it and call
him a loser.  The fact (or truth) is the same but the way you say it
is different.

If you only tell people what they want to hear, you create bubble
mentality.  People will live in a bubble they create because they
only want to hear what they want to hear.  That is NOT speaking the
sweet truth as defined in the Manu Smriti.






Re: [FairfieldLife] sweet truth a fundamental misunderstanding

2013-12-04 Thread Richard J. Williams
Thanks for posting this, Paul - it came at just the right time. Very 
perceptive interpretation. This is just what I've been looking for. 
Please keep up the good work!


On 12/4/2013 11:40 AM, Paul Simdars wrote:



This verse is from the Manu Smriti (4.138):

Original translation:

satyaM brUyAt priyaM brUyAt   speak the truth, speak sweetly
na brUyAt satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth that is unpleasant
priyaM ca nAnRRitaM brUyAt   don't speak untruth that is pleasant
eSha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||  this is the eternal law

the Literal translation is:

truth speak, lovingly speak
don't speak truth unloving
lovingly untruth don't speak
this is law eternal

My enhanced translation

satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat   speak the truth, speak sweetly
na bruyat satyam apriyam |  don't speak truth in an unloving way
priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak untruth in a pleasant way
esha dharmah sanatanah ||   this is the eternal law

I'm certain that the shloka is talking about how to speak the truth 
not the quality of the truth itself.  That is, it's not the truth that 
is to be sweet or not, truth is truth.. but it is HOW you say it that 
is the rule.


the key word you in the first three lines is priyam
this is derived from the word prem which means love, so I feel it is 
appropriate to translate priyam as lovingly, although sweetly, 
pleasantly are not far off.


But I have to emphasize that this shloka doesn't not say that one 
should, under any circumstances, not tell the truth, but it is guiding 
one to say the truth in a pleasant way.  The truth must be told 
(satyam eva jayate truth alone triumphs)


ca means and (used very differently in Sanskrit than English / not 
a connective word)

ritam is another word for truth
nan negation no or not
bruyat means speak or say

priyam ca nanritam bruyat   don't speak a pleasant untruth

The word ca echoes the repetitive logic from earlier line (meaning 
don't)

nanritam means untrurth

priyam is used here to describe a way of speaking, not nature of the 
truth.

Therefore it should mean lovingly


The reason I think this is a fundamental issue is that people may feel 
that you should never tell someone something they don't want to hear.  
But that is not what it says.  You can tell your friend that he didn't 
win the election or you can rub his nose in it and call him a loser.  
The fact (or truth) is the same but the way you say it is different.


If you only tell people what they want to hear, you create bubble 
mentality.  People will live in a bubble they create because they 
only want to hear what they want to hear.  That is NOT speaking the 
sweet truth as defined in the Manu Smriti.






Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth about Osama bin Laden and Iraq from Wesley Clark

2008-11-24 Thread Bhairitu
Rick Archer wrote:
 from WesleyClark http://www.youtube.com/user/WesleyClark 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8aOiMmekGk
So YouTube moves into the 21st century.  They now show videos in 
widescreen aspect ratio 16:9.  No more having to create a letterbox 
version of a video for YouTube but not for Vimeo.  :-D

http://www.youtube.com/blog?entry=0i22UDAOfj8



RE: [FairfieldLife] The truth about flying, CC in 5-8, etc.

2007-12-11 Thread Rick Archer
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Duveyoung
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 12:55 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] The truth about flying, CC in 5-8, etc.

 

Since I began writing, my shoveling has all been erased under another
four inches of snow.

You lucky bastard. All we’re getting is ice here. I’d LOVE to have all that
snow. Get yourself some cross-country or back country skis if you don’t have
any and get out there and work up a sweat. Burn off some of that rage.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.0/1180 - Release Date: 12/10/2007
2:51 PM
 


Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Truth

2007-09-10 Thread Peter

--- matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


  Charlie Lutes told me he could tune into the OM at
 will.

Charlie said a lot of sh*t that we now realize was
sh*t! We loved the old coot, but many take his tales
with a grain of salt now. 




 
 
 - In 
 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  from Perfect Madness, from awakening to
 enlightenment by Donna Lee
  Gorrell page 121:
  
  The third eye is the beacon to the inner universe
 that sees the 
 inner
  and outer as inseparable. This eye sees all
 creation as unified and
  yet permits one to operate within the world of
 complexities and
  multitudes. The opening of the third eye is the
 opening of 
 knowledge,
  which is understanding and experiencing---in
 unison---life's
  phenomena. When the third eye opens, the intellect
 and the emotions,
  thoughts and feelings, can finally work
 together--as one.
  
  The opening of the third eye is the pure and
 simple cognitive 
 ability
  to see living Truth, unfettered and pure. Truth is
 not something we
  can put our finger on or file away as real or
 pertinent. It cannot
  even be written or talked about with any accuracy,
 for words are 
 only
  pointers. The most amazing thing about the opening
 of the third eye 
 is
  that it sees Truth as alive. Untouched by human
 intellect, unstirred
  by emotion, and undivided in its purpose. Truth is
 the living
  principle upon which the universe was and is
 created.
 
 
 
 
 
 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
 
 
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 



   

Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/


Re: [FairfieldLife] If truth be told...

2006-03-22 Thread Rick Archer
on 3/22/06 3:22 PM, shempmcgurk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Am I the only one who is not disappointed that Debra Lafave did not
 get a prison sentence for her supposed rape of that 14-year-old boy?
 
 Sorry, but I agree with the so-called double standard.  When I was 14-
 years old, I would have given my right arm to have sex with such a
 babe.
 
 It IS different betweeen men and women as far as this issue is
 concerned, equality of the sexes not withstanding!
 
 Truthfully, do any of the men on this forum really feel that what
 was done to the 14 year old was so horrible?
 
 Would YOU have said no to her?

Same thing happened to me when I was about a year older than that, with my
best friend's mother. I was drunk the first time, and had yet to develop a
sense of morality or ethics. If something felt good, I was inclined to do
it. She probably wasn't more mature than I was in this respect. The affair
went on for at least a year. When I got tired of it, she did the same with
some of my friends. On the whole, it didn't have a good effect on me, to say
the least. Never, at any time between then and now, have I felt that she
should have been jailed for this. But some sort of therapy to help her grow
out of this behavior would have been useful.




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] Conditioning./Truth

2005-07-11 Thread Robert Gimbel




This also has to do with the quality of teaching of the so-called Socratic Method, based on the teachings of Socrates, in that the questions would determine the teaching; and the depth of the questions, would elicit the depth of response. 
Therefore there would be a group desire to transcend to deeper levels of truth, in order to ask deeper questions of Socrates... 
I always felt that Maharishi is a reincarnation of Socrates, in that I had heard, that one explanation for the blind love for him, was because in a previous incarnation, that he had been matured; so I thought of Socrates, when I heard that, as well as the similar garb...TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm fascinated enough with this subject to makeit its own thread, to see if others here areequally fascinated. See, we maybe conditioned to stop the car when the traffic lights turn red. You can provisionally accept it, validate  it as true, based on observation etc. The conditioning is  that you connect two facts, the red traffic lights, and the need to stop the car. But that's a different type of conditioning; that's more like Pavlov's dogs. I was talking (and thought you were talking) about becoming convinced that something is true. But its all connected. You experience something, and then you are being told something about that experience. (Or are
 otherwise no need for all the lectures!) What you know, reinforces the experience in a certain way. Then the reinforced experience reinforces your belief about it again. You cannot isolate the two.  It seems terribly important *to* the conditioned ego to believe that it hasn't been conditioned, that it has thought up (or "verified") all these concepts that have been taught to it on its own. The bottom line, however, is that it rarely, if ever, deviates from the concepts taught to it. And also feels the compulsion to argue their obvious "truth" with others.My approach to the subject of "conditioning" has alot to do with my time with Rama. Whatever else hemight have been, he was a master at channeling and"broadcasting" light (or whatever it was) so stronglythat it just blew away *all* of your conditioning.You'd go to the desert with him convinced you
 had pretty much everything figured out, and the next dayyou'd awaken essentially *empty*, with not a certaintyleft in you. About *anything*. It was as if the slatehad been wiped clean. That's a *very* disconcerting process to go through.There is very little to hang onto, and very littleself left to even want to. The *only* thing left tocling to is Self.And, when repeated over and over for years, this process has the definite advantage (or disadvantage...however you see it) of leaving one very suspicious of the concept of "truth." When you've seen your own "truths" blastedto bits and revealed as merely passing relative truths hundreds of times, you don't tend to develop the same attachment to the *latest* "truth" that some seekers do. Or that's my experience, anyway.The bottom line for me, when I encounter a new spiritualtrip, is to try to suss out how strongly this
 group believes it knows the "truth." If the group has a *very*strong set of dogma, and its practitioners display a *very* strong attachment to the idea that they "know the truth," what I inquire into next is the subjective "pace of change" that these practitioners report as a result of their practice.What I've found (and others should feel free to contra-dict me if you've found otherwise) is that, in general,the slower the pace of spiritual change in the seekers, the stronger the clinging to dogma and the belief that they "know the truth" is in those seekers. And the opposite -- in groups whose adherents seem to experience a very *rapid* pace of change, in which they see what they consider to be radical spiritual progress on a daily or at least a weekly basis, there is very *little* tendency to cling to dogma or certainty about what constitutes "truth." It's as if "truth" is allowed in
 these latter groups to "flow," to be a dynamic process that changes every day, as the seeker changes.UncTo subscribe, send a message to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/and click 'Join This Group!' 
		 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.


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.



  









Re: [FairfieldLife] Conditioning./Truth

2005-07-11 Thread Rick Archer
Thanks for posting this Barry. I've been too busy to engage in much
discussion, but I find the observation useful, and have mentioned it to
several people in discussions today. It reminds me of Byron Katie, who
encourages people to question everything they regard as absolute truth.


on 7/11/05 3:45 AM, TurquoiseB at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I'm fascinated enough with this subject to make
 it its own thread, to see if others here are
 equally fascinated.
 
 See, we maybe conditioned to stop the car when the traffic
 lights turn red. You can provisionally accept it, validate
 it as true, based on observation etc. The conditioning is
 that you connect two facts, the
 red traffic lights, and the need to stop the car.
 
 But that's a different type of conditioning;
 that's more like Pavlov's dogs. I was talking
 (and thought you were talking) about becoming
 convinced that something is true.
 
 But its all connected. You experience something, and then you are
 being told something about that experience. (Or are otherwise no
 need for all the lectures!) What you know, reinforces the
 experience in a certain way. Then the reinforced experience
 reinforces your belief about it again. You cannot isolate the two.
 
 It seems terribly important *to* the conditioned ego
 to believe that it hasn't been conditioned, that it
 has thought up (or verified) all these concepts
 that have been taught to it on its own. The bottom
 line, however, is that it rarely, if ever, deviates
 from the concepts taught to it. And also feels the
 compulsion to argue their obvious truth with others.
 
 My approach to the subject of conditioning has a
 lot to do with my time with Rama.  Whatever else he
 might have been, he was a master at channeling and
 broadcasting light (or whatever it was) so strongly
 that it just blew away *all* of your conditioning.
 You'd go to the desert with him convinced you had
 pretty much everything figured out, and the next day
 you'd awaken essentially *empty*, with not a certainty
 left in you.  About *anything*.  It was as if the slate
 had been wiped clean.
 
 That's a *very* disconcerting process to go through.
 There is very little to hang onto, and very little
 self left to even want to.  The *only* thing left to
 cling to is Self.
 
 And, when repeated over and over for years, this process
 has the definite advantage (or disadvantage...however you
 see it) of leaving one very suspicious of the concept
 of truth.  When you've seen your own truths blasted
 to bits and revealed as merely passing relative truths
 hundreds of times, you don't tend to develop the same
 attachment to the *latest* truth that some seekers do.
 Or that's my experience, anyway.
 
 The bottom line for me, when I encounter a new spiritual
 trip, is to try to suss out how strongly this group
 believes it knows the truth.  If the group has a *very*
 strong set of dogma, and its practitioners display a
 *very* strong attachment to the idea that they know the
 truth, what I inquire into next is the subjective pace
 of change that these practitioners report as a result
 of their practice.
 
 What I've found (and others should feel free to contra-
 dict me if you've found otherwise) is that, in general,
 the slower the pace of spiritual change in the seekers,
 the stronger the clinging to dogma and the belief that
 they know the truth is in those seekers.
 
 And the opposite -- in groups whose adherents seem to
 experience a very *rapid* pace of change, in which they
 see what they consider to be radical spiritual progress
 on a daily or at least a weekly basis, there is very
 *little* tendency to cling to dogma or certainty about
 what constitutes truth.  It's as if truth is allowed
 in these latter groups to flow, to be a dynamic process
 that changes every day, as the seeker changes.
 
 Unc





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] The Truth About Britain

2005-05-24 Thread Robert Gimbel



Sad that the average time is so small. Men really need to practice more, I would say...
Funny, how deeply programed we are to be so obsessed for five minutes of pleasure?
Or, maybe not so funny...L B Shriver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Message: 2  Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:26:59 -0700 From: NHNE [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Study: Length Of Time People Spend Having SexNHNE News ListCurrent Members: 1337Subscribe/unsubscribe/archive info at the bottom of this message.---WATCH THE CLOCK, DARLING  BRITS LAST LONGEST AT SEXBy Ben DowellThe Sunday Times - BritainMay 22, 2005http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1622297,00.htmlA scientific study to be published this week will suggest that British menare world leaders at sex, at least when they are measured against the clock.But that is not saying much considering that most men in other countrieswere at
 best five-minute wonders.After equipping hundreds of couples in various countries with stopwatches,researchers have for the first time amassed accurate data on the length oftime that people spend having sex.Across all the countries studied, the average time for actual lovemaking was5.4 minutes. Around that figure, however, the researchers found considerablevariations related to age and nationality.While British men took on average 7.6 minutes, the typical American took 7minutes, while the Spanish lasted 5.8 minutes and the Dutch 5.1 minutes.The Turks produced the biggest surprise: on average they spend just 3.7minutes at it.In all the countries studied there was no significant difference in thetimings whether the men were using condoms or not.In the research, to be published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, Britishand Dutch scientists studied 500 couples aged over 18 in the
 five countries."Sexual events were stopwatch-timed over a four-week period and recorded,"says Dr Marcel Waldinger, a leading neuro-psychiatrist based at UtrechtUniversity who led the research.The findings also revealed how the time from start to finish of sexdecreased with age, from an average of 6.5 minutes for men aged 18-30 to 4.3minutes for those over 51.The researchers say the findings indicate that male sexual functioningvaries significantly between healthy individuals, and there is no easydefinition of what should be classified as average sexual performance orpremature ejaculation."The wide range among normal men points to a physical rather than apsychological cause for premature ejaculation," said Waldinger."The results will help to lift the taboo over premature ejaculation becausethey show that men are indeed different from one another."Just why there are significant
 national differences is not clear and theresearchers plan bigger studies and yet more research to find anexplanation.NHNE News List:To subscribe, send a message to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]To subscribe, send a message to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/and click 'Join This Group!' 
		Discover Yahoo! 
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online & more.  Check it out!


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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.










Re: [FairfieldLife] The Truth Is!

2005-04-06 Thread Peter Sutphen

Say it ain't so Joe! If this is what is really
happening the TMO is in very big trouble. Maybe my
dream of 25 years ago is true--the TMO is run by
rakshasas.
-Peter

--- anonymousff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
 It's amazing to see people pay $5800.00 plus room
 and board so they 
 can BE what they already are! :-) ROFLOL
 
 Actually, it's all about getting money to pay for
 the completion of 
 the pundit project. They ran out of money because
 there are no 
 pundits. People have stopped their donations because
 it was 
 contingent on pundits. And the bank won't give them
 anymore money, 
 because the bank money was contingent on the
 donations of the people 
 who thought there would be pundits this time.
 
 So what to do? What to do? Let's un-governorize
 all the governors 
 and then hold a course and charge them thousands of
 dollars to make 
 them governors again. The course fees will give us
 the money to 
 complete the pundit project. MUM staff and faculty
 will be task 
 forced to do all the work for essentially no
 additional expense. 
 We'll tell everyone that this special wave of
 new knowledge will 
 bring in Sat Yuga by July 21. This will make
 everyone guilty if they 
 don't drop everything and come right away. Then
 we'll tell everyone 
 that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity,
 they don't want to 
 miss it. It may never come again. They will all rush
 here.
 
 After the course everyone will be all blissed and
 happy that they got 
 in on it and are governors again. Oh wait excuse
 me--CERTIFIED 
 GOVERNORS with the certificate to prove it. And
 some will be Raja 
 Designates that  were able to sit in the front row,
 near the real 
 Rajas, during the course. Like that, like that.
 
 And even though we said the pundit project was
 completed months ago, 
 when we put out that fake brochure with the doctored
 photos. NOW we 
 will actually have a completed pundit project --
 WELL, except for the 
 pundit part. We'll have some extra cash on hand, and
 a completed 
 housing facility ready for Purusha and/or Mother
 Divine when they are 
 evicted from North Carolina. It will all work out
 very beautifully, 
 and very beautifully, and very beautifully! No one
 will be the wiser, 
 he he he! A little lighter in the wallet perhaps,
 but OBVIOUSLY no 
 one has gotten any WISER!
 
 Creative Intelligence in action! Infinite Organizing
 Power! It's all 
 s beautiful!
 
 ENGAGING TOTAL NATURAL LAW -- 
TO FOOL ALL OF THE PEOPLE, ALL OF THE TIME!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 To subscribe, send a message to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 Or go to: 
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
 and click 'Join This Group!' 
 Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  
 
 
 
 

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


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/