>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Nay, no, that is not true you guys, you cavil me. Turqb a CurtisDb you
> > > got me wrong.
> > > We'd be nothing without each other here. I have nothing but goodwill
> > > towards everyone here.
> > >
> > > Image two guys between meditation here (a laborer on the one hand and an
> > > intellectual on the other) coming out of Revelations Café in Fairfield
> > > crossing over to Paradiso Cafe arm-in-arm (may be it's even Buck and
> > > Turqb) shouting to themselves, chanting to one another in brotherly love,
> > >
> > > Om ! May the Unified Field protect us both together;
> > > may It nourish us both together;
> > > May we work conjointly with great energy,
> > > May our study be vigorous and effective;
> > > May we not mutually dispute
> > > May we not hate any.
> > >
> > > The world would be the better place!
> > >
> > > -Buck
> > >
> >
> > Of course, this image would mean that Hell had just froze over considering
> > that Turqb declines ever to come back to be with meditative Fairfield.
> > But Om, the image gives hope. And just seeing it in mind brings some
> > tears to mine eyes.
> >
>
> Think now just how many grown old sons and daughters of meditation gone away
> like Turq and CurtisDb are wandering out there to come back! The prodigal
> children of TM. If they'd only come home. They should be beautiful when
> they'd come back and could get in to the domes, if they can.
>
>
So my prayer is always and for whoever they be for the spiritual in everyone,
"Om ! May the Unified Field protect us both together;". Yes it's a slog and
difficult uphill climb for some, and some have even fallen down along the way.
We can't deny that.
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
> > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was mulling over a few versions of this post myself Barry, but since
> > > > you nailed it I can get off with just a:
> > > >
> > > > what he said.
> > > >
> > > > Favorite line:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Call the media. "Buck" has just suggested that Fairfield
> > > > > Life be run the way the TMO is. :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You know, the TM Hymn on Negativity
> > > > > > I should think it would make a nice unified code of conduct
> > > > > > as an inclusive guideline for posting on FairfieldLife.
> > > > > > Particularly for posting negativity here on FFL.
> > > > >
> > > > > We'll miss you. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Seriously, dude, what would you call all your endless
> > > > > posts denouncing Bevan and the Rajas?
> > > > >
> > > > > "Negative" is a RELATIVE concept, not an absolute
> > > > > one. I'd be willing to bet that any of the people you
> > > > > rail against would consider you and your "Buck" char-
> > > > > acter more than a little negative. And, from their
> > > > > point of view, they'd be correct, because to them
> > > > > "negative" means anything that criticizes or goes
> > > > > against what they believe to be true and correct.
> > > > >
> > > > > I thought that earlier you yourself were making the
> > > > > point that the injunction to "never entertain nega-
> > > > > tivity and never denounce anyone" was a two-edged
> > > > > sword that could be (and, as I remember you suggest-
> > > > > ing, was) used by the TMO to control minds and
> > > > > opinions. I agree with that earlier assessment, and
> > > > > feel that what you propose above is just another
> > > > > flavor of it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Who gets to decide what is "negative" and what is not?
> > > > > You? The mysterious "we" you refer to below? Not. Gonna.
> > > > > Happen. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > > You know, posting on FFL is a privilege, not a right. We
> > > > > > should do more to protect that privilege. This is a simple
> > > > > > guideline that is very easily enforced. Coulld just revoke
> > > > > > someone's FFL membership when they violate it. For being
> > > > > > negative like that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Call the media. "Buck" has just suggested that Fairfield
> > > > > Life be run the way the TMO is. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > > Have it on the homepage as part of the forum description so
> > > > > > it comes up every time. It's a uniform code of justice to
> > > > > > attend to that we could all use and our moderators enforce.
> > > > > > We'd all be better off and the list a safer place to be.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can think of no place on earth that would be a safer
> > > > > place to be with someone of the "Buck" mindset running it.
> > > > > Just sayin'.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Om ! May the Unified Field protect us both together;
> > > > > > may It nourish us both together;
> > > > > > May we work conjointly with great energy,
> > > > > > May our study be vigorous and effective;
> > > > > > May we not mutually dispute
> > > > > > or may we not hate any.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I kind of suspected you'd come up with the more correct
> > > > > > > translation of that hymn. Thanks Cardm,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Om ! May the Unified Field protect us both together;
> > > > > > > may It nourish us both together;
> > > > > > > May we work conjointly with great energy,
> > > > > > > May our study be vigorous and effective;
> > > > > > > May we not mutually dispute
> > > may we not hate any.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <no_reply@>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister
> > > > > > > > > <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Om Jeezus X-mas, they've been chanting it wrong all this
> > > > > > > > > > > time!
> > > > > > > > > > > Well then, no wonder.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > saha nau avatu .
> > > > > > > > > > > saha nau bhunaktu .
> > > > > > > > > > > saha viiryaM karavaavahai .
> > > > > > > > > > > tejasvi nau;
> > > > > > > > > > > adhiitam astu maa vidviSaavahai .
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That's pada-paaTha (word-reading), so to speak.
> > > > > > > > > > The saMhitaa-paaTha goes like this:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > saha naav avatu . saha nau bhunaktu . saha viiryaM
> > > > > > > > > > karavaavahai .
> > > > > > > > > > tejasvi naav adhiitam astu maa vidviSaavahai .
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That is, before a *vowel*, 'nau' changes to 'naav',
> > > > > > > > > > without any effect on the *semantic* level.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This seems to be the most accurate translation I could
> > > > > > > > > find quickly:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Om ! May He protect us both together; may He nourish us both
> > > > > > > > > together;
> > > > > > > > > May we work conjointly with great energy,
> > > > > > > > > May our study be vigorous and effective;
> > > > > > > > > May we not mutually dispute (or may we not hate any).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Oh, so that's the correct translation. For us meditators here,
> > > > > > > > it reads really well substituting in `Unified Field. It's
> > > > > > > > beautiful even if it is not the way Maharishi and Bevan used
> > > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Om ! May the Unified Field protect us both together;
> > > > > > > > may It nourish us both together;
> > > > > > > > May we work conjointly with great energy,
> > > > > > > > May our study be vigorous and effective;
> > > > > > > > May we not mutually dispute (or may we not hate any).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > May He protect (avatu) us both (nau [~now] accusative
> > > > > > > > > *dual*) together (saha);
> > > > > > > > > may He nourish (bhunaktu) us both (nau) together (saha);
> > > > > > > > > May we work (karavaavahai) conjointly (saha)
> > > > > > > > > with great energy (viiryam),
> > > > > > > > > May our study be (adhiitam [study] astu [may (it) be])
> > > > > > > > > vigorous-and-effective (tejasvi);
> > > > > > > > > May we not (maa: 'we' in the verb ->) mutually-dispute
> > > > > > > > > (vidviSaavahai)
> > > > > > > > > (or may we not hate any: vidviSaavahai).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
