Clearly, Vaj is trying to compensate for the mediocre results of
his Garab Dorje/Norbu program by making false and twisted claims
about the programs which really do work.
--I just outright object on the principle of guru bashing as a bad
practice altogether. Please stop it now. I can
a good friend of mine just began TM and already he has transcended
all of this surface-y stuff that Vaj talks about.
i ask Vaj again- what are you doing here on FFL?
I invited Vaj here about two years ago as I became interested in dzogchen
and I wanted someone here who could support me. I
Dzogchen? Isn't that a breath mint?
--- On Fri, 2/13/09, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
From: enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment? (Re: All of
Patanjali's 8 limbs )
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
: [FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment? (Re: All of
Patanjali's 8 limbs )
hey Kirk, all the poster said was that the guru's programs produced
mediocre results, as evidenced by the behavior of one of his
followers. hardly guru bashing. and you have let this same
follower shit all
No, a dessert topping.
On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Peter wrote:
Dzogchen? Isn't that a breath mint?
On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Kirk wrote:
a good friend of mine just began TM and already he has transcended
all of this surface-y stuff that Vaj talks about.
i ask Vaj again- what are you doing here on FFL?
I invited Vaj here about two years ago as I became interested in
dzogchen
and
Well, actually it's a dessert topping and a floor polish.
So you're partially correct.
On Feb 13, 2009, at 10:24 AM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote:
i thought it was a dog turd, but whatever, different strokes, right?:)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote:
No, a
I just can't buy into that. I find the idea of actually having a honest
historical picture of various spiritual orgs, whether it be the Catholic
church, Shambhala International, Inc. or the TM Org fascinating because the
truth is stranger than the fiction. At least that's been my experience.
Ah! No mind, no mind.
--- On Fri, 2/13/09, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:
From: Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment? (Re: All of
Patanjali's 8 limbs )
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 13, 2009, 10:20 AM
And, you've got some chops, ya know? You can sling the lingo, and
that's a rare treat here. You're not parroting in an empty fashion; I
get the history behind your usage -- you know a lot about the roots of
these mystical concepts. Like Vaj's stuff, your stuff doesn't always
ring my
Lil Mahesh isn't offensive to you, however...
L
;-)
--Not really anymore. I just never had the real connection to Maharishi
that others feel. I mean, I just liked the technique. Maharishi made my mind
chase its own tail a bit too much. I don't suppose such things like
On Feb 11, 2009, at 10:23 PM, geezerfreak wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@...
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
transcend
in all of the various Vedantic bodies, only the mental one, they
never really achieve true silence
On Feb 12, 2009, at 9:38 AM, sparaig wrote:
Unfortunately I'm afraid Dr. Austin was probably under the false
impression that he was in fact seeing good meditation research, when
in fact he was not. It is unfortunate that even reputable scientists
are fooled by TM research claims. Hopefully, as
On Feb 10, 2009, at 11:40 PM, yifuxero wrote:
Neo-Advaitins typically downplay such progressions. Vaj called the
attainment of a Glorified Rainbow Light Body an epiphenomenon.
No, you misunderstood what I was saying. The remainder, the non-
DNA containing bodily remains, are the
On Feb 11, 2009, at 5:22 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltabl...@... wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5
dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
Curtis writes in this, I don't share his (Maharishi's) view
that the silence experienced
On Feb 9, 2009, at 10:34 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@...
wrote:
Let me jump into this attachment discussion.
I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until
you experience pure consciousness while the mind
On Feb 11, 2009, at 10:55 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_re...@... wrote:
the key is in Curtis's statement about the silence -experienced in
meditation-. by saying this, he indicates that the silence
experienced in meditation does not
On Feb 11, 2009, at 1:07 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:
I am not talking about an affectation. I am not talking about
imitating. I am talking about who you are and who you can be. You can
cultivate detachment without meditating, it has value and it is not
mere moodmaking. It is you. It is about
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:
IME, meditators get addicted to silent states and calm, thought-free
states, just makes them flat. I suspect this is why many outsiders
experience TM folks as having a flat affect. They don't integrate thought,
they're too
On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:25 PM, sparaig wrote:
Interesting book, but he misquotes teh TM research on TC and claims
that
they only show TC for 15 seconds max, when in fact, the reserach says
15 to 60 seconds max. His discussion then becomes bogus since 60
seconds,
occurring for more than
On Feb 11, 2009, at 4:08 PM, I am the eternal wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:
IME, meditators get addicted to silent states and calm, thought-
free
states, just makes them flat. I suspect this is why many outsiders
experience TM folks as having a
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:
On Feb 11, 2009, at 4:08 PM, I am the eternal wrote:
My observation would be, since TM folks aren't taught how to transcend in
all of the various Vedantic bodies, only the mental one, they never
really achieve true silence
On Feb 11, 2009, at 5:04 PM, I am the eternal wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:
On Feb 11, 2009, at 4:08 PM, I am the eternal wrote:
My observation would be, since TM folks aren't taught how to
transcend in all of the various Vedantic bodies, only
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:10 PM, nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.comwrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote:
transcend
in all of the various Vedantic bodies, only the mental one, they
never really achieve true silence in the yogic sense, just a blank
On Feb 8, 2009, at 6:33 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote:
snip
I don't know that it should be looked at as superior. The ordinary
state of affairs is that our consciousness identifies with our body,
I'm not so sure about that. My
of the dream or you might just look at him and say, what?
--- On Mon, 2/9/09, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote:
From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] What is the nature of attachment?(Re: All of
Patanjali's 8 limbs )
To: FairfieldLife
On Feb 9, 2009, at 3:59 PM, geezerfreak wrote:
It doesn't need fixing. You're buying into
Barry's bilious propaganda.
In any case, all I want to do is get you to
understand what spiritual teachers mean by
identification. I think I've made a start
if I've gotten you to switch from thinking
it's
On Feb 7, 2009, at 3:34 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
I think this yogic identification theory is totally bogus. It is a
made-up problem. I am not identified with any object of perception.
I can be passionate about some things, but trying to paint that as
some kind nonspiritual way to live
On Feb 8, 2009, at 4:19 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
I'm glad you weighed in Vaj. I guess the word identify doesn't have
much meaning for me in this context. I feel my body and flow my
feelings through my instruments when I play them. But saying that
this is an identification doesn't
On Feb 7, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Duveyoung wrote:
You guys have book-ended an issue.
My favorite theory about meat-robot-programming is that 27
repetitions are required to get something to sink in. So here's
about the 20th time that I'm going to bounce this ball called
Identification.
30 matches
Mail list logo
