date:20060330

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yhvhworld [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 --- 
 Thanks for posting this(below) excellent discourse!  What 
 he says is apparently true in regard to what may come 
 later - after the primal sounds and so forth.

 OTOH, Buddhism is no less Dharmic than Saivite Hinduism, 
 but the Buddhist Masters cognize their own Scriptures.  
 MMY seems to equate Vedic with good (if it's not 
 Vedic, then it isn't worth a hill of beans).  All 
 Buddhist teachers would disagree with this.

I think the difference in the two systems (Hindu and
Buddhist) as to how they view cognition of truth 
is related to the baseline assumptions that underly
each tradition.

Hinduism is very much a creation myth-based belief
system; it's linear. There was a moment of First Creation,
with gods and goddesses and beings of power directly
involved with the Creation. Buddhism believes that the
universe is eternal, and that there has never been and
will never be a moment in which the universe was not
manifest and created. So it makes sense that the Hindu
system would look for truth in something that supposedly
was closer to the moment of Creation (in other words,
in their myth system, the Vedas) than the Buddhists would.
The Buddhists are free to look for truth in pretty much
anything in creation, at any moment in time.

Hinduism believes very strongly in a fall from grace,
similar to the Christian fall from Eden. Because time
*is* linear in its view, there have been various Yugas,
and like everything else in the Hindu system, these
Yugas or time periods are hierarchical. The oldest
(closest to the moment of Creation) are considered
higher, more evolved; the later ones (further away
from the moment of Creation) are considered lower.
(And then everything repeats itself, like a stuck record.)

Again, Buddhism, not burdened with the notions of 
linear time and a hierarchical representation of that
time, considers every moment as NOW and allows for the 
full cognition of truth in every moment, whether the 
object or moment being used as a trigger for cognition
took place centuries ago or a moment ago. In the Buddhist 
system it is as easy to cognize truth right here, right 
NOW as it ever was at any moment in time. Therefore, 
Buddhists don't have the same built-in reverence for 
and preference for scriptures of the past that Hindus have,
and are more willing to look to everyday objects around
them as having as much innate meaning and truth as
the scriptures of old have.

Finally, Hinduism has a strong element of predetermination
in its models of consciousness. There is a strong feeling
that nothing is new under the sun, that you are merely
rediscovering ancient truth, as opposed to stumbling
upon a brand-new way of appreciating truth, or as opposed
to actually discovering a new truth.  Because many Hindus
assume that they are *not* in charge of their own ability
to evolve and realize enlightenment, much less their 
ability to perform their own actions, they are less likely
to consider themselves capable of cognizing any new
truth in the everyday world around them. Instead, in their
view divine forces cause them or enable them to rediscover 
truth in the oldest objects, the Vedas. 

Buddhists have no problem with regard to taking credit 
for their own initiative, or with doing something new,
cognizing some new truth in the everyday objects of the
world around them. The Buddhist operating system is
based on each individual having total free will; there
is no sense of predestination or of having one's actions
led or determined by an outside agency. Therefore
Buddhists are free to try new things, to experiment, and,
occasionally, to *find* new truths in the everyday objects
of NOW.

Anyway, the purpose of all of this is not to start a 
Hindu/Buddhist dick-size contest. :-) I just think that
it's important, when comparing Buddhism to most other
philosophical systems on the planet, to realize *how*
different its baseline assumptions are from most of the
others. Buddhism doesn't believe in a Creation, in a 
Creator, in the better-ness of the past as opposed to
the present (or a better future, for that matter),
and it *does* believe in total free will (within the 
boundaries of a wonderful teaching mechanism called 
karma). 

All in all, these are *very* different baseline assumptions
than those that would be made by a Hindu, or a Christian,
or a Jew, or whatever. Not better, but vive la différence.







 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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:

[FairfieldLife] On Inheritance

Because yhvhworld's neat post on some of the differences 
between the Hindu approach to cognition and the Buddhist 
approach got me thinking about those differences, and 
*that* got me thinking about comparing different belief
systems, period, here's a rap for those who are interested
in comparative religion/spirituality.  All others can 
safely press the 'Next' key now.  :-)

One of the reasons I like to look at the *myths* that
underlie a belief system is because in my opinion it's
important to do so -- those myths provide a template 
that pretty much structures and limits everything else 
within the belief system.

It's all about inheritance.

Those of you who are object-oriented programmers will
understand this. Objects in an object-oriented pro-
gramming language come with baggage. They have 
*inheritance*. That is, if the lowest-level version
of the object has property X, then pretty much all
higher-level (descendant) variants of that object 
will *inherit* property X. 

In terms of a belief system, I tend to believe that
the *myths* on which they are based often provide the
lowest-level object in their object-oriented system.

In Judaism/Christianity, the lowest-level myths have
to do with 1) a moment of creation, before which the
universe did not exist; 2) the universe *being* created
by someone/something, in this case, God; 3) human beings
having been created by God and subject to his/her/its
will; 4) God actually *having* a will, caring what
happens in his/her/its creation enough to micromanage
it; and 5) God actually having the *ability* to micro-
manage his/her/its creation.  All of these things are 
implied by the Adam/Eve/Eden creation myth.

In my view, this myth *has* to be understood to under-
stand everything else that comes up with regard to either
Judaism or Christianity. These five elements form the 
*baseline* beliefs of the entire belief system. They are
inherited by all other dogma in the system. *None* of 
the five beliefs inherent in the Adam/Eve/Eden myth are 
*ever* challenged by the subsequent dogma of the systems
that are based on that myth. The myth forms a set of 
*baseline assumptions* that become sacrosanct, never to 
be challenged or doubted.

This is just a theory on my part, but I think there is 
some validity in it. If you want to understand a philosophy 
or belief system, look to its myths, especially its creation
myths. *They* will structure the entire rest of the 
philosophy/belief system, by virtue of being inherited
by all other objects in that philosophy/belief system.









 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

2006-03-30 Thread coulsong2001

In the below Barry says that Buddhism believes that the universe is 
eternal, and that there has never been and will never be a moment in 
which the universe was not manifest and created. 

In fact, I've noticed (while lurking) that he quite often makes this 
assertion. But it's my impression that this is just plain wrong - 
Buddhism does NOT say this.

The question of whether the world is eternal or not eternal is one 
of the Buddha's 'ten indeterminate questions'. In fact, Buddhism 
says that 

- it is not true that world is eternal 
- it is not true that world is not eternal 
- it is not true that world is both eternal and not eternal 
- it is not true that world is neither eternal nor not eternal 

One interpretation (which is plausible to me) of why the Buddha 
called such 
questions 'indetermine', is that to give any answer to them (e.g. to 
the question is the universe eternal) is to commit a category 
error.

Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy to spot 
as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before you were to go 
out. If someone were to ask in which direction the fire had gone, 
north, south, east, or west, what would you reply?

I got this from this website: 
http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
which has a nice discussion on these issues. 

Regards,

Geoff

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yhvhworld yhvhworld@ 
 wrote:
  --- 
  Thanks for posting this(below) excellent discourse!  What 
  he says is apparently true in regard to what may come 
  later - after the primal sounds and so forth.
 
  OTOH, Buddhism is no less Dharmic than Saivite Hinduism, 
  but the Buddhist Masters cognize their own Scriptures.  
  MMY seems to equate Vedic with good (if it's not 
  Vedic, then it isn't worth a hill of beans).  All 
  Buddhist teachers would disagree with this.
 
 I think the difference in the two systems (Hindu and
 Buddhist) as to how they view cognition of truth 
 is related to the baseline assumptions that underly
 each tradition.
 
 Hinduism is very much a creation myth-based belief
 system; it's linear. There was a moment of First Creation,
 with gods and goddesses and beings of power directly
 involved with the Creation. Buddhism believes that the
 universe is eternal, and that there has never been and
 will never be a moment in which the universe was not
 manifest and created. So it makes sense that the Hindu
 system would look for truth in something that supposedly
 was closer to the moment of Creation (in other words,
 in their myth system, the Vedas) than the Buddhists would.
 The Buddhists are free to look for truth in pretty much
 anything in creation, at any moment in time.
 
 Hinduism believes very strongly in a fall from grace,
 similar to the Christian fall from Eden. Because time
 *is* linear in its view, there have been various Yugas,
 and like everything else in the Hindu system, these
 Yugas or time periods are hierarchical. The oldest
 (closest to the moment of Creation) are considered
 higher, more evolved; the later ones (further away
 from the moment of Creation) are considered lower.
 (And then everything repeats itself, like a stuck record.)
 
 Again, Buddhism, not burdened with the notions of 
 linear time and a hierarchical representation of that
 time, considers every moment as NOW and allows for the 
 full cognition of truth in every moment, whether the 
 object or moment being used as a trigger for cognition
 took place centuries ago or a moment ago. In the Buddhist 
 system it is as easy to cognize truth right here, right 
 NOW as it ever was at any moment in time. Therefore, 
 Buddhists don't have the same built-in reverence for 
 and preference for scriptures of the past that Hindus have,
 and are more willing to look to everyday objects around
 them as having as much innate meaning and truth as
 the scriptures of old have.
 
 Finally, Hinduism has a strong element of predetermination
 in its models of consciousness. There is a strong feeling
 that nothing is new under the sun, that you are merely
 rediscovering ancient truth, as opposed to stumbling
 upon a brand-new way of appreciating truth, or as opposed
 to actually discovering a new truth.  Because many Hindus
 assume that they are *not* in charge of their own ability
 to evolve and realize enlightenment, much less their 
 ability to perform their own actions, they are less likely
 to consider themselves capable of cognizing any new
 truth in the everyday world around them. Instead, in their
 view divine forces cause them or enable them to rediscover 
 truth in the oldest objects, the Vedas. 
 
 Buddhists have no problem with regard to taking credit 
 for their own initiative, or with doing something new,
 cognizing some new truth in the everyday objects of the
 world around them. The Buddhist operating system is
 based on each individual having total free will; there

[FairfieldLife] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

While what you say below about the indeterminable questions
is true, Geoff, I have a very different theory as to why
the Buddha chose to fit certain things into that category.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with category errors.
It's because thinking about them is a total waste of time. 
Nothing would be gained from knowing the answer. :-)  

That said, you are welcome to your opinion as to what the
Buddha said about whether the universe was ever created
or not (which is the main point I'm homing in on, *not*
whether it is eternal in the sense of lasting forever into
the future). I base my belief on what I have been told by 
real, live teachers of Buddhism from several different 
sects -- Japanese, Tibetan, and Chinese. All were agreed 
on a cosmology in which there was never a start to creation.  
That's the thing that I think most distinguishes the mythos
of Buddhism from almost any other philosophy or study. It
creates a very, very different set of assumptions than
believing that there *was* a start to creation and that
creation has flowed linearly since that start.

Your mileage may vary...sounds as if it has. Believe 
whatever you want. I tend to believe the real-life teachers
I've met and worked with. If you have heard differently from 
the real-life teachers with whom you have personally studied 
Buddhism, I'd love to hear who they were and what they thought 
about this matter. If, on the other hand, you're just looking 
for a pissing contest based on something you read on a website
somewhere, look elsewhere.  :-)

 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 In the below Barry says that Buddhism believes that the 
 universe is eternal, and that there has never been and 
 will never be a moment in which the universe was not 
 manifest and created. 
 
 In fact, I've noticed (while lurking) that he quite often 
 makes this assertion. But it's my impression that this is 
 just plain wrong - Buddhism does NOT say this.
 
 The question of whether the world is eternal or not eternal 
 is one of the Buddha's 'ten indeterminate questions'. In 
 fact, Buddhism says that 
 
 - it is not true that world is eternal 
 - it is not true that world is not eternal 
 - it is not true that world is both eternal and not eternal 
 - it is not true that world is neither eternal nor not eternal 
 
 One interpretation (which is plausible to me) of why the 
 Buddha called such questions 'indetermine', is that to give 
 any answer to them (e.g. to the question is the universe 
 eternal) is to commit a category error.
 
 Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy 
 to spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before 
 you were to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction 
 the fire had gone, north, south, east, or west, what would 
 you reply?
 
 I got this from this website: 
 http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
 which has a nice discussion on these issues. 
 
 Regards,
 
 Geoff






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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

The historical Buddha, Shakyamuni taught on the impermanence of all compounded things. He also taught the middle way, which means he did not accept "eternalism" nor the other extreme, "nihlism".On Mar 30, 2006, at 7:08 AM, coulsong2001 wrote: In the below Barry says that "Buddhism believes that the universe is eternal, and that there has never been and will never be a moment in which the universe was not manifest and created." In fact, I've noticed (while lurking) that he quite often makes this assertion. But it's my impression that this is just plain wrong - Buddhism does NOT say this. The question of whether the world is eternal or not eternal is one of the Buddha's 'ten indeterminate questions'. In fact, Buddhism says that - it is not true that world is eternal - it is not true that world is not eternal - it is not true that world is both eternal and not eternal - it is not true that world is neither eternal nor not eternal One interpretation (which is plausible to me) of why the Buddha called such questions 'indetermine', is that to give any answer to them (e.g. to the question "is the universe eternal") is to commit a category error. Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy to spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before you were to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction the fire had gone, north, south, east, or west, what would you reply? I got this from this website: http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html which has a nice discussion on these issues. Regards, Geoff

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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)



On Mar 29, 2006, at 11:45 PM, yhvhworld wrote:--- Thanks for posting this(below) excellent discourse!  What he says isapparently true in regard to what may come "later" - after the primalsounds and so forth.OTOH, Buddhism is no less "Dharmic" than Saivite Hinduism, but theBuddhist Masters cognize their own Scriptures.  MMY seems to equate"Vedic" with "good" (if it's not Vedic, then it isn't worth a hill ofbeans).  All Buddhist teachers would disagree with this.In addition, cognizing the Vedas only goes so far, since IMO all ofmathematics could be regarded as "Vedic", but MMY doesn't know muchabout math. (evidently, mathematics is in MMY's "later" category); ASWELL AS (and this is important!): the ability to cognize the FUTURE.Otherwise, if MMY could predict the future, he would no doubt use thisability to become a commodities market wizard, making all of thebillions he so ravishly desires.To conclude, "cognizing the Vedas" isn't valued at all in Buddhism;or perhaps the definition of the Vedas needs to be expanded toincorporate Buddhist texts and pure Platonic knowledge like mathematics.How about the broadest definition possible: Cognizing anything true.Or simply experiencing "speech" at the level of pashyanti, the-speech-which-sees. We all have that capacity, whether we actualize it is another thing.I like what Danielou says on an expanded use of the word "Veda". He hits the nail right on the head:"The Sacred BooksAs we have seen, writing is an urban phenomenon, characteristic of the Kali Yuga. To freeze the teachings of "prophets" in books regarded as sacred is to paralyze the spirit of research; it fixes so-called established truths and tends to create blind faith instead of the search for knowledge. The nature of knowledge is to evolve. Like other aspects of the human being, it knows periods of progress and decline. The teaching of the Rishi(s) is a living thing that enables the species to realize its role at various stages of its evolution. It can only be transmitted by initiation through qualified individuals. The fixation in Writings of the visions and perceptions of Seers, which represent the forms of knowledge necessary at a certain moment of the evolution of the species, whether it be a matter of cosmological, scientific, religious, or moral ideas, presents grave risks. The sacred book valid for all time and all people is a fiction.The new Sâmkhya sometimes replaces the word Agama (tradition) by the word Veda (from the root vid, knowledge) to represent permanent information (akshara), the plan that is at the basis of all aspects of creation, the object of all research, all science, all metaphysics, all true knowledge. Taken in this sense, the word Vedä has nothing to do with the religious texts known by this name. The notion of Vedä represents the belief in a universal law, the object of knowledge. This implies the acceptance of the idea that there exists divine order of the world of which it is possible to have a fragmentary glimpse, an "approach" (upanishad), even though this order remains on the whole unknowable. No one can pretend to possess the "truth" in any domain. A dogmatic teaching can be neither scientifically nor philosophically nor morally justifiable.    The advent of writing has allowed for the substitution of conceptions of religious or social reformers, in the guise of inspired prophets, for the teachings of the Seers. This has oven birth to the religions of the book that characterize the Kali Yuga.    The superstition of the written word is an obstacle to the development of knowledge in the domain of scientific or religious information. The religions of the book have been one of the most effective instruments of man's decadence during the course of the Kali Yuga and have been used by urban oligarchies, both religious and secular, as instruments of domination.    To take texts, whether called Vedä, Bible, or Koran, as an _expression_ of reality or of divine will is puerile and dangerous. This is part of the antireligion which lowers the concept of the divine to the human scale."





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'








  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Maharishi university of management
  
  
Maharishi mahesh yogi
  
  
Ramana maharshi
  
  

   
  







  
  
  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] Cyberstalker stats redux (was Re: Donovan last night) :-)


On Mar 30, 2006, at 1:31 AM, authfriend wrote:

 Because I think malignant phonies need to be exposed
 and scorned.

That would make a nice bumpersticker.



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

2006-03-30 Thread coulsong2001

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 While what you say below about the indeterminable questions
 is true, Geoff, I have a very different theory as to why
 the Buddha chose to fit certain things into that category.
 It has nothing whatsoever to do with category errors.
 It's because thinking about them is a total waste of time. 
 Nothing would be gained from knowing the answer. :-)  

Except that your argument seems to be that something would indeed be 
gained from knowing the answer - that it would tend towards a world 
view that avoided some of the negative aspects of the Hindu world 
view as you see them and supported some of the positive aspects of 
the Buddhist world view as you see them. :-)
 
 That said, you are welcome to your opinion as to what the
 Buddha said about whether the universe was ever created
 or not (which is the main point I'm homing in on, *not*
 whether it is eternal in the sense of lasting forever into
 the future). 

('Eternal' in this context means that the universe will last forever 
into the future AND that there never was a start to it.)

 I base my belief on what I have been told by 
 real, live teachers of Buddhism from several different 
 sects -- Japanese, Tibetan, and Chinese. All were agreed 
 on a cosmology in which there was never a start to creation.  
 That's the thing that I think most distinguishes the mythos
 of Buddhism from almost any other philosophy or study. It
 creates a very, very different set of assumptions than
 believing that there *was* a start to creation and that
 creation has flowed linearly since that start.
 
 Your mileage may vary...sounds as if it has. Believe 
 whatever you want. 

Thanks!

 I tend to believe the real-life teachers
 I've met and worked with. If you have heard differently from 
 the real-life teachers with whom you have personally studied 
 Buddhism, I'd love to hear who they were and what they thought 
 about this matter. 

I got interested in this initially on a course I did (actually I 
just sat in on the lectures :-)) at Columbia University, New York, 
that was run by a prominent Buddhist called Robert Thurman. As I 
remember it (I could be wrong though as it was a few years back) he 
took the category error view.

 If, on the other hand, you're just looking 
 for a pissing contest based on something you read on a website
 somewhere, look elsewhere.  :-)

I was looking for a discussion on the nature of the indeterminate 
questions rather than on the specific questions themselves. As you 
say, your view is that thinking about them is a total waste of time 
(this, apparently, is indeed a common view in Buddhist traditions). 

And yet you have obviously thought about this one at least and come 
to a specific conclusion. :-)

Regards,

Geoff
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 geoff@ 
 wrote:
 
  In the below Barry says that Buddhism believes that the 
  universe is eternal, and that there has never been and 
  will never be a moment in which the universe was not 
  manifest and created. 
  
  In fact, I've noticed (while lurking) that he quite often 
  makes this assertion. But it's my impression that this is 
  just plain wrong - Buddhism does NOT say this.
  
  The question of whether the world is eternal or not eternal 
  is one of the Buddha's 'ten indeterminate questions'. In 
  fact, Buddhism says that 
  
  - it is not true that world is eternal 
  - it is not true that world is not eternal 
  - it is not true that world is both eternal and not eternal 
  - it is not true that world is neither eternal nor not eternal 
  
  One interpretation (which is plausible to me) of why the 
  Buddha called such questions 'indetermine', is that to give 
  any answer to them (e.g. to the question is the universe 
  eternal) is to commit a category error.
  
  Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy 
  to spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before 
  you were to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction 
  the fire had gone, north, south, east, or west, what would 
  you reply?
  
  I got this from this website: 
  http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
  which has a nice discussion on these issues. 
  
  Regards,
  
  Geoff








 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] Cyberstalker stats redux (was Re: Donovan last night) :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 You'll need a large bumper.

Is there any chance of uploading this to the photos section
or sending it to me via email? The Web reader strips out
all graphics. Thanks.







 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] Re: FF neighborhood meditation halls, : Global Family Chat March 18th

2006-03-30 Thread Jason Spock




 NoBody in SSRS camp is offended by TM. in fact SSRS teaches TM in the Third-Level course. it is Sahaja Samadhi meditation. Sudharshana Kriya is no more harmful than Yogic-flying.! When I told my Sudharshna instructor that, I am a follower of Maharishi, he spoke very highly of Maharishi. SSRS says that there is always a place for Maharishi and his associates in his Bangalore Ashram. Always Welcome he says.  bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:  Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:16:48 -Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: FF neighborhood meditation halls, : Global Family Chat March 18thHe's popular among people whose dark auras are offended by the light of TM...the poison SSRS peddles looks like nectar to fools.  
		Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.





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] Cyberstalker stats redux (was Re: Donovan last night) :-)

2006-03-30 Thread Sal Sunshine

Cool.

One wonders--what about non-malignant phonies? You know, your average, garden-variety, everyday, obnoxious but basically harmless phony? What do they deserve--the stocks? :) And who judges?

Sal


On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:00 AM, Vaj wrote:

You'll need a large bumper.




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. 


JScorn.jpg>

[FairfieldLife] Coffee Art

For those of you who share my love of coffee and
things coffee, a video of some of the wonderful
things you can do with your next cuppa java:

http://tinyurl.com/jasz9







 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

2006-03-30 Thread sparaig


 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yhvhworld yhvhworld@ 

   To conclude, cognizing the Vedas isn't valued at all in Buddhism;
  or perhaps the definition of the Vedas needs to be expanded to
  incorporate Buddhist texts and pure Platonic knowledge like 
  mathematics. How about the broadest definition possible: Cognizing 
  anything true.


What is truth?





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] Cyberstalker stats redux (was Re: Donovan last night) :-)

2006-03-30 Thread Sal Sunshine

No, because her first name is Judy.

Sal


On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:57 PM, shempmcgurk wrote:

 Why Torah?

 Because her last name is Stein?

[FairfieldLife] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
snip
 Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy to
 spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before you were 
 to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction the fire had 
 gone, north, south, east, or west, what would you reply?
 
 I got this from this website: 
 http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
 which has a nice discussion on these issues.

My *sakes*, what a fascinating site!

Who IS that guy??

I just spent about a half an hour clicking around
the site trying to find out who he (?) is and got
nowhere.  Then I realized I must be asking an
indeterminate question.  ;-)







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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yhvhworld yhvhworld@ 
 
To conclude, cognizing the Vedas isn't valued at all in 
Buddhism;
   or perhaps the definition of the Vedas needs to be expanded to
   incorporate Buddhist texts and pure Platonic knowledge like 
   mathematics. How about the broadest definition possible: 
   Cognizing anything true.
 
 
 What is truth?

Anything you cognize.








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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)



On Mar 30, 2006, at 10:38 AM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yhvhworld" yhvhworld@    To conclude, "cognizing the Vedas" isn't valued at all in Buddhism;  or perhaps the definition of the Vedas needs to be expanded to  incorporate Buddhist texts and pure Platonic knowledge like   mathematics. How about the broadest definition possible: Cognizing   anything true.What is truth?1(mwd)satyamf(%{A})n. true , real , actual , genuine , sincere , honest , truthful , faithful , pure , virtuous , good. successful , effectual , valid (%{satyaM-kR} , `" to make true , ratify , realise , fulfil "') RV. c. c. ; m. the uppermost of the seven Lokas or worlds (the abode of Brahma1 and heaven of truth ; see %{loka}) L. ; N. of the ninth Kalpa (q.v.) Pur. ; the As3vattha tree L. ; N. of Vishn2u L. ; of Ra1ma-candra L. ; of a supernatural being Gaut. VarBr2S. Hcat. ; of a deity presiding over the Na1ndi1-mukha S3ra1ddha L. ; of one of the Vis3ve Deva1h Cat. ; of a Vya1sa Cat. ; of a son of Havir-dha1na BhP. ; of a son of Vitatya MBh. ; of one of the 7 R2ishis in various Manvantaras Hariv. Pur. ; (with %{AcArya}) N. of an astronomer (author of the Hora1-s3a1stra) VarBr2S. ; pl. N. of a class of gods in various Manvantaras Hariv. Pur. ; (%{A}) f. speaking the truth , sincerity , veracity W. ; a partic. S3akti Pan5car. ; N. of Durga1 Cat. ; of S3ita1 L. ; of Satyavati1 (mother of Vya1sa) L. ; = %{satya-bhAmA} MBh. Hariv. S3is3. ; of the family deity of the Kutsas and Atharvans Cat. ; of a daughter of Dharma (and wife of S3am2-yu) MBh. ; of the mother of Satya (= %{tuSita}) VP. ; of the wife of Manthu (and mother of Bhauvana) BhP. ; of a daughter of Nagna-jit (and wife of Kr2ishn2a) ib. ; (%{am}) n. truth , reality (%{satyena} , `" truly "' , `" certainly "' , `" really "' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] , `" for what reason , how is it that? "' [EMAIL PROTECTED] , `" for that reason , so truly "' ; %{yathA-tena} [or %{evaM}] %{satyena} , `" as-so truly "' ; with Buddhists truth is of two kinds , viz. %{saMvRti-} and %{paramA7rtha-satyam} , `" truth by general consent "' and `" self-evident truth "' Dharmas. 95 ; for the four fundamental truths of Buddhists see MWB. 43 ; 56) RV. c. c. ; speaking the truth , sincerity , veracity KenUp. Mn. R. c. ; a solemn asseveration , vow , promise , oath ([EMAIL PROTECTED] , `" wishing to fulfil one's promise or keep one's word "') AV. c. c. ; demonstrated conclusion , dogma W. ; the quality of goodness or purity or knowledge MW. ; the first of the four Yugas or ages (= 1. %{-kRta4} q.v.) L. ; a partic. mythical weapon R. ; the uppermost of the 7 Lokas (see under m.) Veda7ntas. BhP. ; one of the 7 Vya1hr2itis L. ; partic. Satya-formula A1s3vS3r. ; = %{udaka} , water Naigh. i , 12 ; (also with %{prajApateH}) N. of Sa1mans A1rshBr. S3rS. ; (%{a4m}) ind. (g. %{cA7di} and %{svar-Adi}) truly , indeed , certainly , verily , necessarily , yes , very well (%{satyam-tu} , [EMAIL PROTECTED] , %{tathA7pi} , `" it is true - but , yet , however "' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] , `" indeed , certainly "') RV. c. c. [Cf. accord. to some , Gk. $.]





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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

2006-03-30 Thread coulsong2001

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 geoff@ 
 wrote:
 snip
  Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy to
  spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before you 
were 
  to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction the fire 
had 
  gone, north, south, east, or west, what would you reply?
  
  I got this from this website: 
  http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
  which has a nice discussion on these issues.
 
 My *sakes*, what a fascinating site!
 
 Who IS that guy??
 
 I just spent about a half an hour clicking around
 the site trying to find out who he (?) is and got
 nowhere.  Then I realized I must be asking an
 indeterminate question.  ;-)

Probably! I don't know who the owner of the site is either. I was 
just reminded of all this stuff by Barry's point on the universe 
being eternal, and remembering vaguely about the 'indeterminate 
questions' from Thurman's course, and I found the site via Google. I 
thought it was a really good discussion of the issues.

Geoff






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] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

2006-03-30 Thread jim_flanegin

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 geoff@ 
  wrote:
  snip
   Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy to
   spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before you 
 were 
   to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction the fire 
 had 
   gone, north, south, east, or west, what would you reply?
   
   I got this from this website: 
   
http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
   which has a nice discussion on these issues.
  
  My *sakes*, what a fascinating site!
  
  Who IS that guy??
  
  I just spent about a half an hour clicking around
  the site trying to find out who he (?) is and got
  nowhere.  Then I realized I must be asking an
  indeterminate question.  ;-)
 
 Probably! I don't know who the owner of the site is either. I was 
 just reminded of all this stuff by Barry's point on the universe 
 being eternal, and remembering vaguely about the 'indeterminate 
 questions' from Thurman's course, and I found the site via Google. 
I 
 thought it was a really good discussion of the issues.
 
 Geoff

I looked at it, and it made my head hurt. An elaborate attempt to 
explain the inexplicable. To quote Seinfeld, not that there's 
anything wrong with it...






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] 'Field Theory- Have you heard of this?

2006-03-30 Thread Robert Gimbel

This is the main thing I was asking about yesterday. It's some kind of school, but I just wanted you to read this basic theory, which relates to quatum mechanics, and particle/wave theory, applying it to consciousness, and manifestation. basic theorythe four pillars of field training particle and
field The idea that we create our reality is at least as old as the Vedas, which state that Atman [the individual soul] is Brahman [the Cosmos]. This suggests that the whole of experience somehow resides in consciousness, and that our consciousness actually shapes, informs, and organizes what seem to be random events. Field theory recognizes that our consciousness has the same multiple nature we see in electrons, indeed, all quanta, so our consciousness has Particle and Field aspects. Most of the popular New Age material on reality-creating fails because it presumes, mistakenly, that the self that does the creating is the Particle selfour most local identity, the one that says I all day, that experiences itself as in the physical body, and so, separate from other Is." The Particle self is extremely
limited in knowledge, resources, and efficiency, and by nature identifies with things and conditions, e.g., I am a person, I am sorry, I am here, and so on. As Particles, we tend to experience world as cause and the self as effect, and so live in continual reaction to outer conditions; as these conditions appear to be separate from us, we naturally exert our will to improve or avoid them. Our Field identity, on the other hand, is nonlocal; not bound by time or space; unlimited in knowledge, vision, and efficiency; and aware of itself as the cause of worldly experience. Its most fundamental _expression_ is not "I am this or that," but simply, "I AM."intention and correspondence Intention includes what we take to be real, which
ultimately comes down to what we identify with. So, for example, the belief, There isnt enough money is rooted in the belief, I am poor. This turns out to be a crucial point in Field theory, since our creating follows necessarily from identity, from who we believe we are. This is all we can change, and all we need to change.The Self that creates reality is not the Particle self, a point that hardly can be overstated. Many people, caught up in popular oversimplifications of we create our reality thinking have tried affirmation, visualization, and other consciousness techniques to change their experience in the world, only to find themselves running into walls, because they were unwittingly believing in (intending) the very condition they wanted to change. As long as the I strives to change conditions rather than simply changing its self-definition, conditions have no choice but
to persist. The I that would create reality deliberately cannot stand apart from its creation. Paradoxically, this means that we cant change reality through an act of will, because the very attempt confers the status of reality on the thing it seeks to change. In trying to make real something that it regards as not real, it casts its vote wrongly and secures the very outcome it would overcome. When we try to create conditions, the results are likely to backfire and lead to disappointment. On the other hand, when we recast our identity, conditions change spontaneously and effortlessly as required by the law of correspondence. So, our work is only on ourselves. This is why in Field practice, the aim is alignment, and not manifestation.Creation is the operating of the law of correspondence between Particle and Field. The Particle, by nature, must intend; the Field must correspond. Following the principles of chaos theory,
intentions exert a nonlocal organizing effect, fulfilling themselves whether or not were aware of what were intending. As we start intending deliberately, this nonlocal effect shows up as happy coincidences, miraculous timing, and other synchronicities, As Field training deals directly with the most fundamental structures of Particle consciousness (identity and reality), conditions tend to improve quickly and dramatically, having no choice but to correspond to who we believe we are. When this changes for the better, everything changes accordingly. http://www.fieldcenter.org/
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'

[FairfieldLife] MMY on Vedic Cognition (was Re: a Spiritual Master?)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, coulsong2001 geoff@ 
  wrote:
  snip
   Here is an example of an indeterminate question that is easy to
   spot as such: Suppose a fire which had been burning before you 
 were 
   to go out. If someone were to ask in which direction the fire 
 had 
   gone, north, south, east, or west, what would you reply?
   
   I got this from this website: 
   http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/avyaakata.html 
   which has a nice discussion on these issues.
  
  My *sakes*, what a fascinating site!
  
  Who IS that guy??
  
  I just spent about a half an hour clicking around
  the site trying to find out who he (?) is and got
  nowhere.  Then I realized I must be asking an
  indeterminate question.  ;-)
 
 Probably! I don't know who the owner of the site is either. I was 
 just reminded of all this stuff by Barry's point on the universe 
 being eternal, and remembering vaguely about the 'indeterminate 
 questions' from Thurman's course, and I found the site via Google.
 I thought it was a really good discussion of the issues.

He sure has a gift for putting these impossible abstractions
into words.







 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~- 

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] Re: 'Field Theory- Have you heard of this?