[FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For what little my opinion will be worth, and I'm mainly a lurker, I have really enjoyed reading FF Life again since the 5 post limit came into being. It is much more manageable, the tone is much more civil, and there is not a lot of one liner posts and the people who felt a need to post about anything and everything either have left the group of they have learned to post less. I vote to keep it like this, with the five posts. That's my vote, too. It seems to me that most people on the forum have become less reactive, and have learned to take their time and respond only to stuff that deserves a response. Those who have not learned this will, under a 35-posts-per-week rule, go crazy in the first few days of the week and then probably *have* to be silenced for the rest of the week by moderation, requiring more work for the moderators them- selves. I think the five post per day thing is a good deal all around.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Pity the Poor Pundits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, george_deforest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow. This is potentially a time bomb...and the key word here is indentured. Because indentured servitude is close to if not on a par with slavery, which is illegal in most parts of the world (in the U.S., anyway). there are specific laws that seem to prohibit the kind of activity described above by Rick Archer and, if true, it is a veritable scandal in the making. I can see the headline now: indentured slavery alive and well in the cornfields of Iowa... ...or... The Maharishi enslaves Indian serfs; confines them like cattle. not only is this a potential scandal with bad publicity; it is also, IMO a great sin. are not these pandit boys all of the highest brahmin cast, and doing gods work (ie, nature support)? they if anyone deserve respectful treatment, let alone freedom from outright abuse. if these rumors are true, shame on those responsible! the idealist in me is shocked! i hope these kind of stories turn out to be just ill founded rumors, or misunderstandings. Who paid for their airfare, the room and board, their clothing and education ? If they are let free to roam around they'll soon disappear, smitten by the markedforces, with the result that superadiance will go down. Not to mention that the american authorities hardly will let more Pundits into america. Is that what you want ? Grow up, don't let the fool in you be shocked. It boils down to the same thing over and over again; to be a follower of Maharishi is not for the fainthearted idealists but for those who are seriously wanting to make sacrifises for growth on a difficult and somewhat lonely path. If you are not willing to do that; jump the ship. I know of groups in your country who are working very hard to make the Pundit-project a failure. Don't be a part of their group Mr !
[FairfieldLife] Re: George Bush is obviously responsible!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, handsonmaui handsonmaui@ wrote: This is why I have not gotten my panties in a bunch over global warming. There is only one verifiable reason for temperature change of any significance on this or any other planet in our solar system...the SUN (and our orbit in relationship to it)! If you should by any chance be interested in actually informing yourself about the significance of Mars warming vis-a-vis warming here on earth, check this out: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192 Judy's response is typical of global warming alarmists: instead of being HAPPY about hearing news that contradicts man-made global warming and the belief in the ensuing catastrophe that such a belief entails, she is resentful. Judy has on numerous occasions demonstrated this very same attitude of close-mindedness and anger in the past on this forum when similar news is presented to her. I submit that this is an irrational response. And I'd like to give you an analogy to make my point. Suppose you went to your doctor for your annual check-up and, as a result of your blood test, he sits you down and tells you that you have inoperable brain cancer and you have only 3 months to live. Devastated, you start to get your affairs in order. But you nevertheless go to another doctor for a second opinion. Sadly, he confirms the first doctor's opinion. However, just to be on the safe side, you go to a third doctor. And he tells you: the other two doctors made a typical mistake with this kind of diagnosis. I've been in this field for years and it's a common mistake. The other doctors, while well-meaning, are wrong. Not only do you not have brain cancer, you're in perfect health and you're going to live until you're ninety! How would you feel after hearing such news? Would it be safe to say that, at the very least, you would feel cautiously optimistic and, at most, ecstatic? Sure, at this point you'd probably want to go to yet a fourth doctor and even revisit the first and second to get a final consensus but I think we can conclude that you would be starting to see the bright side of life and you'd feel that your prospects were looking up. Here's the point: if global warming is supposed to be the horrible, terrible thing that the alarmists claim it is, you would think that they would be the first ones in line to await good news about the whole thing. You'd think that they would, upon hearing good news about the future of our planet that, at the very least, they would express cautious optimism upon hearing about the polar ice caps on Mars melting. A rational person would respond: Boy, I do very much hope that you are right! Wouldn't it be wonderful if I and Al Gore and all the rest of us who have sincerely and truly believed that this catastrophe would soon befall us were wrong and that global warming is not going to happen? A rational person would be on their hands and knees saying: More than anything I want to be proven wrong! How great it will be that our dire predictions were mistaken! But, no, the alarmists are unhappy at the mere suggestion that global warming may not be happening. They resent and reject out-of-hand any information that contradicts their conclusion that the-sky-is-falling. And that's why I suspect their motives. Their almost universal response to opposing viewpoints is irrational. It simply doesn't gel with either reason or the scientific approach, let alone the emotional response that one would expect. The climate change on Mars as well as its direct correlation with the change on earth has been known for some time (but the news media doesn't seem to care). Possibly because it has nothing to do with earth's warming trend? snip What about the will of God... maybe the Age of Enlightenment has an average temperature similar to Maui year around??? I'd take that. There are also lots of sites on the Web that run down the potential consequences of global warming.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Pity the Poor Pundits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It boils down to the same thing over and over again; to be a follower of Maharishi is not for the fainthearted idealists but for those who are seriously wanting to make sacrifises for growth on a difficult and somewhat lonely path. If you are not willing to do that; jump the ship. Kinda puts a new angle on the life is bliss message, or the nature supports message, of the 200% of life message. The sacrifice part, well, lets ask the Shrivastava's or Giorish about that. lurk
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: George Bush is obviously responsible!
What about the will of God... maybe the Age of Enlightenment has an average temperature similar to Maui year around??? I'd take that. That's right! Charlie Lutes said the age of emlightenment would bring sub-tropical weather to the US! This tidbit I heard him say personally, in a talk in Westwood, MA, in 1978 or 1979. --- handsonmaui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is why I have not gotten my panties in a bunch over global warming. There is only one verifiable reason for temperature change of any significance on this or any other planet in our solar system... the SUN (and our orbit in relationship to it)! The climate change on Mars as well as its direct correlation with the change on earth has been known for some time (but the news media doesn't seem to care). Maybe we should blame it on the Mars rovers?? That's not to say I don't support the efforts that are taking place to eradicate the perceived problem (warming).. but I support them for different reasons less oil usage means political and economic influence from the Middle East will be greatly reduced. Vegetarianism, or at least only occasional meat consumption, by the masses will eliminate hog confinement operations and make more food (grains and veggies) available for the starving masses around the world. Global warming... doesn't really concern me because I am not convinced that it is a negative or positive. I can't quite understand why everyone who talks of the coming of Sat Yuga, the new millennium, the golden age, etc. gets all bent out of shape that things are changing and are so sure the it is BAD (really bad). What about the will of God... maybe the Age of Enlightenment has an average temperature similar to Maui year around??? I'd take that. HandsOnMaui --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: April 29, 2007 Climate change hits Mars Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap, writes Jonathan Leake. Scientists from Nasa say that Mars has warmed by about 0.5C since the 1970s. This is similar to the warming experienced on Earth over approximately the same period. Since there is no known life on Mars it suggests rapid changes in planetary climates could be natural phenomena. The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth. One of the researchers, Lori Fenton, believes variations in radiation and temperature across the surface of the Red Planet are generating strong winds. In a paper published in the journal Nature, she suggests that such winds can stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising the planet's temperature. Fenton's team unearthed heat maps of the Martian surface from Nasa's Viking mission in the 1970s and compared them with maps gathered more than two decades later by Mars Global Surveyor. They found there had been widespread changes, with some areas becoming darker. When a surface darkens it absorbs more heat, eventually radiating that heat back to warm the thin Martian atmosphere: lighter surfaces have the opposite effect. The temperature differences between the two are thought to be stirring up more winds, and dust, creating a cycle that is warming the planet. 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] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: George Bush is obviously responsible!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, handsonmaui handsonmaui@ wrote: This is why I have not gotten my panties in a bunch over global warming. There is only one verifiable reason for temperature change of any significance on this or any other planet in our solar system...the SUN (and our orbit in relationship to it)! If you should by any chance be interested in actually informing yourself about the significance of Mars warming vis-a-vis warming here on earth, check this out: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192 Judy's response is typical of global warming alarmists: instead of being HAPPY about hearing news that contradicts man-made global warming Except that the Mars warming news does *not* contradict man-made global warming. Read the post at the link, Shemp. snip I submit that this is an irrational response. Actually, it's irrational to be happy about news that is irrelevant to the dire situation on this planet (unless you have relatives on Mars who've been uncomfortably chilly, I guess).
[FairfieldLife] The Bottom Line on the Five Post Limit
When considering modifying the five-post-per-day limit, might I pose a question to the group? In the *entire* time you have been on FFL, have you *ever* known *anyone* to have more than five interesting things to say per day? I certainly haven't. That includes myself, and some of the best, most entertaining, and least irksome writers here. I would actually have to say that I've never found any individual poster here to have more than two or three interesting things to say during one 24-hour period. What I *have* noticed is that sometimes people (including myself) get carried away with them- selves and their own self importance to the point that they *think* they have more than five interesting things to say in one 24-hour period. My experience is that the inverse is more often the case -- the MORE compelled the poster is to make his case or defend his stance or get deeper into the issues, the LESS likely it is that anyone else on the forum actually finds what the poster has to say interesting, and the LESS likely it is that they follow up and respond. Anyone else notice the same thing? It's almost like a law of nature -- in order to feel that what one has to say is important, and that other people need to hear it, there has to be a great deal of ego and small s self present. And on the other side, among those being subjected to these compulsive ego and small s self rants, the more EGO they feel or intuit in a poster's rants, the more likely they are to hit the Next key after only a few sentences, and never bother to even read it, much less reply. I guess this is just another way of saying that I think that the five post limit is just about perfect. The mere fact that you believe you have more than five interesting things to say during one 24-hour period should probably tell you that you don't.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
IMHO, this site has been vastly improved by the five-post limit. It is now more readable, individual's ideas are easier to follow, and it has eliminated much of the annoying bickering. The only improvement I could suggest is a one-post-per-day limit. In this way, a person would really, really, really have to think about what they were posting. A good solution for the postoholics would be to collect all of their responses for the day in one post, and then send it in at the end of the day as one big cathartic blast. Here's another idea: Remove the limit, but set up a charity organization, in which each person voluntarily (billed monthly) contributed $1.00 USD per post? Sort of like a walkathon...but more like a postathon. Tongue removed from cheekthat's not a bad idea! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone jokingly suggested we should make it an average of 5 posts a day -- thus 35 a week or something. Hard to track and administer. However, I find I barely have time to read a few posts during the week, much less write many. However on the weekends, FFL and / or other forums provide a valuable outlet and vista for me to get outside the very focused (interesting but within a small channel of LIFE) intellectual and other pursuits/demands in my career work. And to think of broader issues that also nourish my life. As Barry has said, many write to discover. ...
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The joys of walking
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rory Goff Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 12:26 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The joys of walking --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You should come and play at it sometime, Curtis. If ever you visit FF, be sure you're here on the first Friday of the month in warm weather and bring your guitar and drum kit. I second Rick's invitation, Curtis. We'd love to see you here! And hear you, see? :-) Rory, when you cross Glasgow Road, heading west, turn left at the fork in the trail rather than crossing the wetlands, then walk parallel to Glasgow road for 100 yards until the path forks to the right. Follow that up and down and up some hills, across a meadow and into Lamson Woods. At the T intersection in the woods, take a right. You'll come out at the wooden bridge at the other side of the wetlands. Nice detour. Many thanks, Rick! Looking forward to trying that! Check yourself for ticks after you go through the woods. Or tuck your pants into your socks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Bottom Line on the Five Post Limit
I like the five post rule. In the past, some days I just didn't have the heart to scroll through 100 posts to find if any of my favorite posters had written. If I went away for the weekend, I'd come back to hundreds of posts, and these I mostly wouldn't even comb through, because there were so many new posts coming in to keep up with. Also, just to be real, when I post something, DAMMIT I WANT TO SEE ITS TITLE FOR AT LEAST A FEW HOURS on the first page of the message board. When someone posts obsessively, all the other posts are pushed lower on the lists, and, I, as a writer who puts a lot of time into the posts, find that it hurts, sniff sniffle, to become off-page so quickly. Sue me, but it's a big reason for my voting for the five post rule. As for not having five important things to say per day.yeah right...like that's true -- the problem is that really handling a concept with integrity requires bringing one's attention, again and again, to the subject at hand and note the new ideas that springboard off the central topic. This fleshing out takes a lot of dedication, rereading, editing, and passion for the material. I have lots more to say, but I just don't have the resources to generate a presentation of them that has any quality. As a writer, I'm always wanting to put something down that resonates for at least the near future. Everything gets dated fast, but I try to shoulder my way into the future by bullying past the Evil Forces Of Anachronism! Anyway, I try, and this takes time, and I like to see that my efforts are, for a few hours, on the front page menu of posts for the hungry minds here. Ego? Yep. Keep the five post rule. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When considering modifying the five-post-per-day limit, might I pose a question to the group? In the *entire* time you have been on FFL, have you *ever* known *anyone* to have more than five interesting things to say per day? I certainly haven't. That includes myself, and some of the best, most entertaining, and least irksome writers here. I would actually have to say that I've never found any individual poster here to have more than two or three interesting things to say during one 24-hour period. What I *have* noticed is that sometimes people (including myself) get carried away with them- selves and their own self importance to the point that they *think* they have more than five interesting things to say in one 24-hour period. My experience is that the inverse is more often the case -- the MORE compelled the poster is to make his case or defend his stance or get deeper into the issues, the LESS likely it is that anyone else on the forum actually finds what the poster has to say interesting, and the LESS likely it is that they follow up and respond. Anyone else notice the same thing? It's almost like a law of nature -- in order to feel that what one has to say is important, and that other people need to hear it, there has to be a great deal of ego and small s self present. And on the other side, among those being subjected to these compulsive ego and small s self rants, the more EGO they feel or intuit in a poster's rants, the more likely they are to hit the Next key after only a few sentences, and never bother to even read it, much less reply. I guess this is just another way of saying that I think that the five post limit is just about perfect. The mere fact that you believe you have more than five interesting things to say during one 24-hour period should probably tell you that you don't.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Bottom Line on the Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip What I *have* noticed is that sometimes people (including myself) get carried away with them- selves and their own self importance to the point that they *think* they have more than five interesting things to say in one 24-hour period. My experience is that the inverse is more often the case -- the MORE compelled the poster is to make his case or defend his stance or get deeper into the issues, the LESS likely it is that anyone else on the forum actually finds what the poster has to say interesting, and the LESS likely it is that they follow up and respond. Actually, the situations you're describing in these two paragraphs are not necessarily related. An exchange in which folks get deeper into the issues can (and often does) take place over many days (and is usually more substantive if it does). Some of the meatiest discussions on alt.m.t went on for weeks, with *at most* one post per day by each of the participants and frequently only one post over several days. That kind of discussion has almost never occurred on FFL, at least since I've been here, even before the posting limit was imposed. Do FFL posters have shorter attention spans than those on alt.m.t in its better days? I don't know. If so, though, it's too bad. There's a great value in dialectic, as far as I'm concerned: discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation; specifically: the Socratic techniques of exposing false beliefs and eliciting truth Whether any final truths are elicited is beside the point; dialectic, if conducted thoughtfully, tends to get *closer* to the truth, or at least to weed out what is demonstrably false. It usually results, at the least, in clarifying the issues so participants have a better idea of why they disagree. Anyone else notice the same thing? It's almost like a law of nature -- in order to feel that what one has to say is important, and that other people need to hear it, there has to be a great deal of ego and small s self present. That's one possibility. Another is that one engages in dialectic because one wants to refine one's perspective by *listening* to what the other guy has to say about it. In my observation, it's those who decline to engage in closely reasoned exchanges who most suffer from ego problems. They don't *want* to expose their opinions and reasoning to challenge. To have to modify those opinions or improve their reasoning-- to have to acknowledge they were not 100 percent right from the start--is perceived as a threat to the small-s self. And on the other side, among those being subjected to these compulsive ego and small s self rants, the more EGO they feel or intuit in a poster's rants, the more likely they are to hit the Next key after only a few sentences, and never bother to even read it, much less reply. I guess this is just another way of saying that I think that the five post limit is just about perfect. The mere fact that you believe you have more than five interesting things to say during one 24-hour period should probably tell you that you don't. In any case, again, the issue of willingness to engage in, or simply to read, dialectic doesn't really have anything to do with the posting limit. (For that matter, a person might well have more than five interesting things to say a day in more than five different conversations.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Pity the Poor Pundits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, george_deforest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: The other side to this story, of course, is that the Pundits shouldn't expect to be treated any better than the American and European TMers have been treated for the past 30 years in the TM Movement. $30.00 a month stipend PLUS room and board? Why that's a pretty sweet deal from the TMO perspective! i thought that generous millionaire, Howard Settle, was paying everyone on the course 500 per month? isnt that the so-called reason they dont have any money left for fixing a leaky roof on the mens dome? something smells fishy! Not just the Settle money which we are told is supporting the pundits in ffld, but the fact that I brought up before that the tmo has transferred about $200 million from US accounts to channel island offshore accounts over the past 5 years according to IRS filings available at guidestar.org. The likely reason that would be given for this is it's going to support the pundits, but according to rick the pundits are actually taking out loans to the tmo when they join up to support themselves - the indentured servant model. I understand better now the reason for the strict enforcement of no talking to pundits in ffld (with a couple mum staff having been fired for chatting with them).
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Bottom Line on the Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When considering modifying the five-post-per-day limit, might I pose a question to the group? In the *entire* time you have been on FFL, have you *ever* known *anyone* to have more than five interesting things to say per day? I certainly haven't. You may have limited interests. Others may have broader scopes of inquiry. If you don't find more than one or two posts of any person interesting, simply delete/skip them. And if you mean five essay, monologues, personal observations and sometimes rants, then five distinct topics of one poster each may be a natural limit for quality wrtiting. One-side expositions, here is how I see it, or this is how it is blurbs seem to be your preferred mode of dialogue. But there is little or not dialogue in such pronouncents. Before you arrived and before massive bickering broke out (not necessarily a causal link, probably just a coincidence), the forum had many more interesting, usually cordial, often thought provoking exchanges. Often with more than five posts each were needed by the participants to fleshc out a topic. And if there were several intersting topics, another 3-5 posts might be spent discussing that. A year ago when this first issue came up, you were supporting a 10-post a day limit. After you settled down from a denoundcement of all limits as censorship. I am not suggesting no limits. Spairag and the Turq/Judy and other personal bickering wars proved limits were necessary. However, I find some others' arguments that the forum has improved with the 5-post limit is a strawman argumenet.I agree it has improved. But it is not a strictly a dual choice, this or that. Its a suggestion for the same 35 post limit a week, but allows for for periods of more back and forth evelution and exchange of ideas by occasionally allowing a few more posts within a one day perid. That includes myself, and some of the best, most entertaining, and least irksome writers here. I would actually have to say that I've never found any individual poster here to have more than two or three interesting things to say during one 24-hour period. That pershaps says more about you than many posts in and of themselves. I find the Mareks, Curtis', even Judys of the world can easily have at least five interesting posts in a day. As can Peter and others they are on substantive topics. In the golden days, LBS, Mark, Phil Goldberg could easily have 10-15 or more interesting posts / exchanges, diologue pieces in a day. Though not every day. Ideas, responses to great posts, the stimulation of new perspectives to explore come in spurts. Somedays the great posters would post nothing. Other days, more than five. It probably averaged out to 35 or so a week. It wasn't 100 a week or of that scope, as i recall. Things have improved with the five-post limit, no doubt. But the state of the forum are far from the golden age of this list. Five posts, IMO, copntrains what used to be great about this list: lots of thought provoking, idea evolving, stimulating, cordial furerinig of ideas and perspectives through creative exchnage of views. Perhpas that doesn't appealto those who already are set in their views andjust like to let long monologues rip from their orfices. But for those of us who love good exhange to furthter our own thinking, open our perspectives, nd participate in human contact, the current state of the forum is saadly lacking, IMO. We have thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Bottom Line on the Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, just to be real, when I post something, DAMMIT I WANT TO SEE ITS TITLE FOR AT LEAST A FEW HOURS on the first page of the message board. When someone posts obsessively, all the other posts are pushed lower on the lists, and, I, as a writer who puts a lot of time into the posts, find that it hurts, sniff sniffle, to become off-page so quickly. Sue me, but it's a big reason for my voting for the five post rule. Color me cackling incontrollably at this, drawing unwanted attention from the other cafe patrons. :-) As for not having five important things to say per day...yeah right...like that's true -- I don't know if it's true or not. I just found myself considering that as a real possibility -- especially with regard to my own posts -- and then posing it as a question to the group. What caused me to entertain the idea was going back and rereading some of the posts I felt compulsive about when I wrote them, as if I really had to write what I was writing. What I found was that they were often the *least* interesting things I'd written that day, or that week. So I wondered if anyone else felt the same way. ...the problem is that really handling a concept with integrity requires bringing one's attention, again and again, to the subject at hand and note the new ideas that springboard off the central topic. This fleshing out takes a lot of dedication, rereading, editing, and passion for the material. While I don't disagree with what you say in the least, just as another point of view I've found that with the five-post limit I'm more able to do all of that *in one post*. Instead of dragging the train of thought out over several posts, I tend these days to *try* to think it through the first time around, as much as possible. Then, if a few hours later I still find myself thinking about the subject, I might add more, if it really needs saying. And, on rereading the posts made this way, I'm finding that the single, thought-through posts are often doing a far better job of expressing what I wanted to say than the series of six or seven shorter stream-of-consciousness posts I used to write in the past when on similar rants. For the record, I for one have noticed the care that you seem to put into your posts, and appreciate it. Most of them are single-topic, and do a good job of exploring several sides of that topic, while often being damned funny. (The last phrase is the highest compliment I can bestow on another writer, BTW.) As a writer, I'm always wanting to put something down that resonates for at least the near future. Not that it's relevant, but for some reason this reminds me of a great Woody Allen line, I don't want to attain immortality through my work; I want to attain it by not dying. :-) Here's another possibly-apocryphal writer story that I've heard bandied about as a kind of in-office urban legend. Guy spends days working on a report for his boss, and finally turns it it in. It's eight pages long. A few hours later, he gets it back in the office mail along with a note from his boss saying, Nice, but it's too long. Cut it in half. The guy goes back to the drawing board, cuts line after line of superfluous verbiage that isn't really superfluous, and turns in a four-page version of the same post. It comes back again, with a note that says, It's better, but still not right. Cut it in half again. The guy freaks. *Nothing* can be cut out and still say what he needs to say. But he takes the report home and works on it all night and by morning, he has a version that is only two pages long. He takes it to his boss' office and turns it in personally. The boss looks at it and says, Two pages, right? The guy says proudly, Yes. The boss says, Great. I'll read it this time. The five-post limit has been a similar kind of writing lesson for me. I just try to eliminate all those annoying iterations...
[FairfieldLife] Re: George Bush is obviously responsible!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, handsonmaui handsonmaui@ wrote: This is why I have not gotten my panties in a bunch over global warming. There is only one verifiable reason for temperature change of any significance on this or any other planet in our solar system...the SUN (and our orbit in relationship to it)! If you should by any chance be interested in actually informing yourself about the significance of Mars warming vis-a-vis warming here on earth, check this out: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192 Judy's response is typical of global warming alarmists: instead of being HAPPY about hearing news that contradicts man-made global warming Except that the Mars warming news does *not* contradict man-made global warming. Read the post at the link, Shemp. ...which isn't the point. Even assuming, as you say, that the Mars warming news doesn't contradict man-made global warming, why not at least be cautiously optimistic that it COULD be right? Why hit the Google search button so quickly to find a story that would refute it? And why, pray tell, aren't you hitting the Google search button to find an article that AGREES with it instead? And why is your response virtually identical EVERY SINGLE TIME an opposing viewpoint to man-made global warming appears on this forum? You should be HAPPY that someone has given you good news and, gee, at least ONCE, seek out other evidence that it is right!!! You're like a cancer patient who, upon hearing that he's got three months to live, actively seeks out confirmation that this is a correct diagnosis. snip I submit that this is an irrational response. Actually, it's irrational to be happy about news that is irrelevant to the dire situation on this planet (unless you have relatives on Mars who've been uncomfortably chilly, I guess).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Pity the Poor Pundits
In a message dated 4/29/07 7:52:49 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The other side to this story, of course, is that the Pundits shouldn't expect to be treated any better than the American and European TMers have been treated for the past 30 years in the TM Movement. $30.00 a month stipend PLUS room and board? Why that's a pretty sweet deal from the TMO perspective! But but but... maybe they get free Amrit Kalash! ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Pity the Poor Pundits
In a message dated 4/29/07 10:56:17 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: not only is this a potential scandal with bad publicity; it is also, IMO a great sin. are not these pandit boys all of the highest brahmin cast, and doing gods work (ie, nature support)? they if anyone deserve respectful treatment, let alone freedom from outright abuse. if these rumors are true, shame on those responsible! the idealist in me is shocked! i hope these kind of stories turn out to be just ill founded rumors, or misunderstandings. Maybe we could all go out and buy some Blue jeans for all the Pundits! ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Pity the Poor Pundits
In a message dated 4/30/07 5:37:29 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Who paid for their airfare, the room and board, their clothing and education ? If they are let free to roam around they'll soon disappear, smitten by the markedforces, with the result that superadiance will go down. Not to mention that the american authorities hardly will let more Pundits into america. Is that what you want ? Grow up, don't let the fool in you be shocked. It boils down to the same thing over and over again; to be a follower of Maharishi is not for the fainthearted idealists but for those who are seriously wanting to make sacrifises for growth on a difficult and somewhat lonely path. If you are not willing to do that; jump the ship. I know of groups in your country who are working very hard to make the Pundit-project a failure. Don't be a part of their group Mr ! Ummm you are joking... aren't you? Plase. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[FairfieldLife] Re: George Bush is obviously responsible!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip If you should by any chance be interested in actually informing yourself about the significance of Mars warming vis-a-vis warming here on earth, check this out: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192 Judy's response is typical of global warming alarmists: instead of being HAPPY about hearing news that contradicts man-made global warming Except that the Mars warming news does *not* contradict man-made global warming. Read the post at the link, Shemp. ...which isn't the point. Even assuming, as you say, that the Mars warming news doesn't contradict man-made global warming, why not at least be cautiously optimistic that it COULD be right? Because it *isn't* right. They're two different phenomena, as you'll see if you read the URL. The notion that they're the same is factually in error. Not even cautious optimism is called for. It's apples and kiwi fruit. Why hit the Google search button so quickly to find a story that would refute it? Because I already knew it was nonsense, Shemp, from what I'd read previously, including the post for which I gave the URL. And why, pray tell, aren't you hitting the Google search button to find an article that AGREES with it instead? Because any such article would be in error. This isn't a matter of opinion, Shemp, it's a matter of fact. Read the URL. And why is your response virtually identical EVERY SINGLE TIME an opposing viewpoint to man-made global warming appears on this forum? You think I should accept viewpoints that are, from everything I've read and heard, simply incorrect?? You should be HAPPY that someone has given you good news It's not good news. It's irrelevant news. Read the URL. and, gee, at least ONCE, seek out other evidence that it is right!!! No, I already have the evidence that it's *not* right. Read the URL, Shemp. You're like a cancer patient who, upon hearing that he's got three months to live, actively seeks out confirmation that this is a correct diagnosis. Three months to live isn't a diagnosis, it's a prediction based on statistics. But even correcting your phrasing to upon hearing that he has cancer, the analogy is bogus. Here's the real analogy: A person who receives a cancer diagnosis actively seeks out confirmation that it's a correct diagnosis rather than taking hope from the fact that his brother was diagnosed with diabetes. (Also, of course, while opinion plays a role in some cancer diagnoses, it doesn't at all in others.) Shemp, just read the material at the URL, then get back to me, OK? I think you'll see what I'm talking about. At this point, you don't have a clue.
[FairfieldLife] A Thousand names for Joy
Byron Katies newest book as titled above. It is her commentary on the Tao Te CHing all 81 sutras with a chapter for each sutra some short some long.given in an off hand contemporary manner. Excerpt from Chapter 21 The master keeps her mind always at one with the Tao. Page 59 chapter 2 para 2. If my child has died, thats the way of it. Any argument with that brings an eternal hell. 'She died too soon. I didn't get to see her grow up. I could have done something to save her. 'I was a bad mother.' 'God is unjust. But her death is reality. No argument in the world can make the slightest dent in what has already happened. Prayer can't change it, begging and pleading can't change it, punishing yourself can't change it, your will has no power at all. You do have the power, though, to question your thought , turn it around, and find three genuine reasons why the death of your child is equal to her not dying, or even better in the long run, both for her and for you. This takes a radically open mind, and nothing less than an open mind is creative enough to free you from the pain of arguing with what is. An open mind is the only way to peace. As long as you think that you knew what should and shouldn't happen, you're trying to manipulate GOD. This is a recipe for unhappiness. Enjoy TOm T
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
I propose modifying the requirement to a permanent final 7-post limit. Cosmically speaking, 7 is a much better number than 5 (I'm serious). Musically speaking, as progfreaks in general (and fans of King Crimson in particular) already know: if it ain't in seven then ya ain't in heaven. And so I ask you, Mr. Moderator: What else is FFL really other than the Music of the Spheres? Musica universalisFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Musica universalis (lit. universal music, or music of the spheres) is an ancient philosophical concept that regards proportions in the movements of celestial bodies the Sun, Moon, and planets as a form of musica (the Medieval Latin name for music). This 'music' is not literally audible, but simply a harmonic and/or mathematical concept. Some Surat Shabda Yoga Satgurus considered the music of the spheres to be a term synonymous with the Shabda (also known as the Audible Life Stream) in that tradition, because they considered Pythagoras to be a Satguru as well. new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick, I don't want to place an administrative burden on you or anyone. I was thinking more of an honor system -- with sosme verification for blatant abusers. In other words, I think most people can count thier own posts and self limit them. I would tend to post way less than 35 a week, but might do 7-8 /day on week ends, particulrly if Curtis, Marek, Judy, Peter, Mark, Patrick -- among my favorite posters -- or others, engage me / others in an interesting diologue / conversation. No need to really count those whoe honor and demonstrate they can be trusted on an honor system. For the 5% of abusers, it becomes obvious when someone is on a posting jag and needs help. Thus anyone who is annoyed, can count up all posts within 7 days from any starting point and if its more than 35, notify you and you can moderated them. If no one complains, then ok. Bottom line is you do not need to be burdene3d with counting anything. The system is both self-monitored, or monitored by readers. You just need to push the button when it comes to your attention from a volunteer counter / annoyed reader that someone is on a jag and needs help to control themselves. - I am assuming this is an administrative post and doesn't count as my five. Or just Cut me off. :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The trouble with this idea is that, as you said, counting is difficult. But if people really wanted me to, I'd be willing to average posts over a week, and start the recount each Monday morning. Let's have feedback on that idea. An alternative would be for you to do all your writing in your email program or in 5 long emails which you save as drafts until you've done all the writing you want to do and can send them. Of course, that prevents the liveliness of back and forth dialog, and might discourage readership, as many people wouldn't want to read big long things, unless they were extremely well written. I used to notice that FFL became more active on weekends, especially Sundays, as people have more time to participate. So again, I'm open to the idea of a 35-post weekly limit for each member. Let's get some feedback on that. - Ahhh...imagining that irresistible new car smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [FairfieldLife] A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
new.morning wrote: Someone jokingly suggested we should make it an average of 5 posts a day -- thus 35 a week or something. Hard to track and administer. However, I find I barely have time to read a few posts during the week, much less write many. However on the weekends, FFL and / or other forums provide a valuable outlet and vista for me to get outside the very focused (interesting but within a small channel of LIFE) intellectual and other pursuits/demands in my career work. And to think of broader issues that also nourish my life. As Barry has said, many write to discover. I have always found this. I start to write -- to flesh out some seed response / idea, and often, much to my total amazement, have written something different and more, and for me something I needed to hear. As if a muse (perhaps, a drunken, playful, trickster, not always a smart or insightful muse) on my shouder say, listen up bubba and write this down, read it, study it, and take heed! (as Dr Pete scribbles in his note book, hears voices, worse, responds to them, worse yet, bores all of us with them, hmmm .. clearly schzorphrenic, psychotic, narcissistic, anti-social and generally an ass :) ) [and can't spell big words well] Better yet, is when such meanderings (referring to mine, not Dr Petes, though I like his meanderings too), invoke converstation. Like my recent friendly and cross-supportive (IMV) give-and-take with Curtis. Or Curtis' and Marek's recent dialoge (damn, this Curtis fellow seems to often be at the core of good dialogues.) On weekends, I have some time (perhaps quite UNWELL spent) catching up on posts, reflecting on these posts, writing/meandering, responding to some -- and in the process discovering things I was unaware of in my mind-- and if I am very lucky -- starting a good dialogue /productive debate and friendly discussion. Sometimes, following the flow of ideas (and we KNOW we have no control over thoughts, they just BUBBLE up from the ABSOLUTE aka Quantum Dynamical Vacuum State of All Possibilites) it takes more than 5 posts to even begin to embody them. Thus, at least on weekends, I am suggesting, ne, even vigorously arguing that the 5 post limit is anti-vedic, anti-spiritual, annti-satangic, and counter to the ABSOLUTE Quantum Dynamical nature of the Vacuum State of All Possibilites inherent in all of CREATION! smirk Thus I suggest, ne, strongly advocate, that periodically, one can invoke the Weekend Exception to the five post rule. In other words, if one posts only a few posts, or none, during the week, they can post a few more than five on weekends if such are not argumentative, stupid, insipid or factually bogus. I know that knocks most of my posts out of contentions, but you get the point. It would eliminate spraig-like 80/posts a days of unrestrainable obsesive posts (though some wre quite good). And it would disallow vindictive, arguative, baiting slugs fests by, you know, some people and people who lightly veil others as some people. Rick has said he will support changes suggested by the majority. But who would ever give up one of their precious posts to advocate or denounce the above. Thus, I am invoking the mystical quantum ritam seer secret clause deeply embedded in the FFL guidelines. I proclaim to KNOW, at the level of all truth, as inherently true that the majority in FFL agree with this reasonable weekend extension of the five post rule. And unless a majority or members (over 500) explicity post their objection, that we TRY, as in Trial, this minor augmentation of the Rick five-post fiat and see how it goes. If its abused, we can either send the offender to the dome as a re-education camp for 6 months, and/or give then hot oil bathis, or ignore them, or moderate them -- turnin off their posts util they say I will no longer be a ass ten times, in sanskrit and their native language. - And I claim this is a forum administrative piece and should not count toards my five-limit. :) This 5 post thing is the result of a few folks who apparently have an addiction to FFL and maybe afraid of losing their jobs because they spent too much time here (and there were some who didn't have any jobs too). Then we have the folks who must be hungover and thought they were posting to their blog and instead posted here. Posting limits are offensive and infantile. They are the sign of an unenlightened mind and the sign of encroaching fascism in the world. They are such a joke that some friends at Wired are thinking of doing an article on this group. :)
[FairfieldLife] Good Writing
Turq, Your joke about cutting down the report triggered some memories for me. I wrote about a dozen infomercials, years ago now, and during the shoots, I'd be up at 3am rewriting some scene, and then the next morning I'd drag my ass into the meeting with the new material, and the bosses would just take out all my sweet little bon mots. Every little flourish of mine was scrapped off the top like too much frosting -- just wasn't enough time to be pretty and I had trim everything down to the bone -- the bone being what sells. I think I learned a lot from that experience, just like, er was it you that wrote instructional manuals?, well like that I had to get focused on the actual goals of the writing instead of proving myself to be wondrously creative, cool ass, next Updike, world class, scribe for the ages -- you know, how people normally view me. I love good writing. When I don't agree with you or Curtis, (and several other good writers here whom I am too lazy to list) I still read the entire post -- that's good writing. And whether the post is filled with creative wordplay or if it is a straightforward didactic attempt, I'm pleased with seeing your skills in action. To me, posting here HAS to be about creativity. I just have too deep a certainty about my own confusions to pose as a teacher -- though indeed, most jyotishis told me I was destined to be one. I read the writings of the world class brains out there in the real world, and I'm panting to keep up. Try reading Thomas Aquinas about consciousnessit'll test you as much as that Science of Being and Art of Living chapter about when consciousness becomes conscious. And, as much as I could get an A+ on my Advaita final exam, I just don't have the intellectual chops to produce something that's bankable guru spew. But I do have the ability to sing of my perspectives, and that's a valid and authoritative and legitimate expression, cuz, who else is inside my head, eh? So that's my field of expertise -- I'm the expert on the hilarity of Edg's lack of ability to do anything extremely well. Oh, read Ramana Maharshi or Nisargadatta. Those two guys covered it all with such simple statements. What more could anyone do? Don't look at me! Comparatively, I'm the kid in the back of the class shooting spit wads and burping when the teacher is writing on the blackboard. I'm only having funzies. I don't have serious goals when all the knowledge is really right there in the books. Sigh. In India, they say, Knowledge in the books stays in the books. And if ever there was a place where horses were brought to drink but refuse to do so, it's here, and so teaching anyone or converting anyone or even just slightly influencing anyone posting here is purdy durned nigh on to impossible. The readers here are very practiced and bristling, and I don't have the desire to get into a fist fight here, so I'm a trollish gadfly to some extent in that I'm just getting my ego's hunger for attention assuaged. I just haven't wanted to correct anyone's mistakes -- not when I'd have to throw a stone from my glass house at them. That's one of the best things about FFlife: you can be sure that only a certain low level of bullshit can get past the eyes here, otherwise one is crisped in short order. I barely escaped alive from telling you folks about paying for a soldier's meal -- it was so ladened with my own hubris, so I'm ducking and weaving, and it keeps me honest enough to have a modicum of integrity when I write. All my life I've been mostly a guarded personality that took only known risks, but here, I've been letting myself laugh at me for all the ridiculousness, and it's been freeing to just be honest instead of creating a very clever mask. Not that I'm not wearing a mask all the time, but that the one I wear nowadays seems to be more form fitting to my skin. For me, it's amazing to admit I am screwy, cuz, I gotta tell ya, when my ego sees me ratting me out, the little creep does a jig while having a fit, and it's just so comical. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Also, just to be real, when I post something, DAMMIT I WANT TO SEE ITS TITLE FOR AT LEAST A FEW HOURS on the first page of the message board. When someone posts obsessively, all the other posts are pushed lower on the lists, and, I, as a writer who puts a lot of time into the posts, find that it hurts, sniff sniffle, to become off-page so quickly. Sue me, but it's a big reason for my voting for the five post rule. Color me cackling incontrollably at this, drawing unwanted attention from the other cafe patrons. :-) As for not having five important things to say per day...yeah right...like that's true -- I don't know if it's true or not. I just found myself considering that as a real possibility -- especially with regard to my own posts --
[FairfieldLife] Global Warming bias
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] You think I should accept viewpoints that are, from everything I've read and heard, simply incorrect?? [snip] http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28061
[FairfieldLife] Re: George Bush is obviously responsible!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip If you should by any chance be interested in actually informing yourself about the significance of Mars warming vis-a-vis warming here on earth, check this out: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192 Judy's response is typical of global warming alarmists: instead of being HAPPY about hearing news that contradicts man-made global warming Except that the Mars warming news does *not* contradict man-made global warming. Read the post at the link, Shemp. ...which isn't the point. Even assuming, as you say, that the Mars warming news doesn't contradict man-made global warming, why not at least be cautiously optimistic that it COULD be right? Because it *isn't* right. They're two different phenomena, as you'll see if you read the URL. The notion that they're the same is factually in error. Not even cautious optimism is called for. It's apples and kiwi fruit. Why hit the Google search button so quickly to find a story that would refute it? Because I already knew it was nonsense, Shemp, from what I'd read previously, including the post for which I gave the URL. And why, pray tell, aren't you hitting the Google search button to find an article that AGREES with it instead? Because any such article would be in error. This isn't a matter of opinion, Shemp, it's a matter of fact. Read the URL. And why is your response virtually identical EVERY SINGLE TIME an opposing viewpoint to man-made global warming appears on this forum? You think I should accept viewpoints that are, from everything I've read and heard, simply incorrect?? I'd like you to consider opposing viewpoints. Have you seen The Great Global Warming Swindle yet? If so, what is your opinion of it? You should be HAPPY that someone has given you good news It's not good news. It's irrelevant news. Read the URL. and, gee, at least ONCE, seek out other evidence that it is right!!! No, I already have the evidence that it's *not* right. Read the URL, Shemp. You're like a cancer patient who, upon hearing that he's got three months to live, actively seeks out confirmation that this is a correct diagnosis. Three months to live isn't a diagnosis, it's a prediction based on statistics. But even correcting your phrasing to upon hearing that he has cancer, the analogy is bogus. Here's the real analogy: A person who receives a cancer diagnosis actively seeks out confirmation that it's a correct diagnosis rather than taking hope from the fact that his brother was diagnosed with diabetes. (Also, of course, while opinion plays a role in some cancer diagnoses, it doesn't at all in others.) Shemp, just read the material at the URL, then get back to me, OK? I think you'll see what I'm talking about. At this point, you don't have a clue.
[FairfieldLife] central university - germany
just heard they are hoping to buy the land used previously for US base, in Berlin. But Berlin is not central Germany, surely... I suppose there would be no point having a Central University in Siberia somewhere, for Russia either. But then the whole concept of centrality is somehow flawed then.. Don't see how all these universities around the world are going to find students either. Years ago they tried to start a uni in the UK but it was a flop.. Universities are costly things to set up - libraries, halls of residence, laboratories, academic staff salaries etc. You need all that BEFORE students can be confident enough to invest their own resources in this institution instead of somewhere else.. Maybe MMY hopes something SOMEWHERE will work out at the cost of many failures and that this is good enough for him?
RE: [FairfieldLife] A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:53 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit This 5 post thing is the result of a few folks who apparently have an addiction to FFL and maybe afraid of losing their jobs because they spent too much time here (and there were some who didn't have any jobs too). Then we have the folks who must be hungover and thought they were posting to their blog and instead posted here. Posting limits are offensive and infantile. They are the sign of an unenlightened mind and the sign of encroaching fascism in the world. They are such a joke that some friends at Wired are thinking of doing an article on this group. :) Does the smiley face mean you're joking? It would be cool if they did. That would certainly boost membership. Like it or not, the posting limit works, and praise of it is almost unanimous. I'm tempted to try New's 35 post-per-week suggestion (or was it mine?), but opposition to that is almost unanimous. The 7-post limit is kind of an interesting idea. Any feedback on that?
Re: [FairfieldLife] A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bhairitu Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:53 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit This 5 post thing is the result of a few folks who apparently have an addiction to FFL and maybe afraid of losing their jobs because they spent too much time here (and there were some who didn't have any jobs too). Then we have the folks who must be hungover and thought they were posting to their blog and instead posted here. Posting limits are offensive and infantile. They are the sign of an unenlightened mind and the sign of encroaching fascism in the world. They are such a joke that some friends at Wired are thinking of doing an article on this group. :) Does the smiley face mean you're joking? It would be cool if they did. That would certainly boost membership. Like it or not, the posting limit works, and praise of it is almost unanimous. I'm tempted to try New's 35 post-per-week suggestion (or was it mine?), but opposition to that is almost unanimous. The 7-post limit is kind of an interesting idea. Any feedback on that? You need the rollover posting limits that I once suggested but that you have to be administered by some kind of script as I certainly wouldn't suggest doing it manually. I'm for no limits of course just like all the other YahooGroups I'm on (this is the only group I've heard of that has posting limits). I do think that not only Wired would find this situation humorous but also Yahoo. Try whatever takes the least moderator work (being one is sort of a pain as I know) of course that would probably be no limits. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Narada, a cup of tea and, please, don't spill a drop
The Yoga Vashishta has the story that sounds similar to the Narada tea story, and maybe that's what you're thinking of. In the YV Vyasa sends Shukadev to King Janaka for instruction. Shukadev is kind of contemptuous of Janaka because he's the epitome of householder life and Shukadev is sky clad and all that. Anyway, one of the episodes has Janaka telling his men to give Shukadev a complete tour of the whole palace, all the features, etc., etc., but before Shukadev goes off with them Janaka gives him a cup of milk and tells him to hold it. He then tells his men that if Shukadev spills even a single drop they are to cut off his head. At the end of the day's tour when Shukadev is again brought back into the presence of the king, Janaka asks him how he enjoyed the tour. Shukadev tells him how he couldn't enjoy, or even notice, anything because all he could do was keep his attention on not spilling the milk. So too, says King Janaka, does the enlightened live in the world, even the sumptuous world of a palace, without being affected by it, because the enlightened's attention is on the Self. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really -- It's A No-Brainer. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone have the story of Narada that tells of [Vishun, Krishna, Whoever] sending Narada around the world with a cup of tea and tells Narada not to spill a drop? I've googled key words in a multitude of combinations and simply have not found this story anywhere on the Web, though I know for sure I've seen it on the Web or at least it's been sent via email or posted in a newsgroup somewhere. Thank you in advance for your assistance. *Of all that anyone leading or teaching has to convey, the most valuable thing to cultivate and convey to others is a moral conscience. Only such persons deserve to lead others, in any capacity. Anything less is a menace to society. *
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Five Post LimitGREAt AS IT IS.LETS LEARN TO b SUCCENT
EXCELLENT AS IT IS THE VERBOSE LEARN TO BE CONCISE IN ONE POST 4 ALL OUR ENJOYMENT -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 7:50 PM Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit The trouble with this idea is that, as you said, counting is difficult. But if people really wanted me to, I’d be willing to average posts over a week, and start the recount each Monday morning. Let’s have feedback on that idea. An alternative would be for you to do all your writing in your email program or in 5 long emails which you save as drafts until you’ve done all the writing you want to do and can send them. Of course, that prevents the liveliness of back and forth dialog, and might discourage readership, as many people wouldn’t want to read big long things, unless they were extremely well written. I used to notice that FFL became more active on weekends, especially Sundays, as people have more time to participate. So again, I’m open to the idea of a 35-post weekly limit for each member. Let’s get some feedback on that. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
[FairfieldLife] Global Country photo album
http://pictures.globalgoodnews.com/index.html
[FairfieldLife] This guy Girish is creepy
Is this ... http://tinyurl.com/2pgkuf http://tinyurl.com/2pgkuf ... the same guy as this: http://tinyurl.com/2l72eu http://tinyurl.com/2l72eu If so, he's one creepy bastard! I think he fashions himself a Maharishi and can't wait for his uncle to die so that he can take a shot at sitting on the deer skin. Anyone getting a similar vibe?
[FairfieldLife] Immortality
Perfect health and immortality conference summarized by Dr Bevan Morris - Part II Global Good News 30 April 2007 Dr Bevan Morris, Prime Minister of the Global Country of World Peace, continued his summary of the beautiful address by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi during the recent global Press Conference on Perfect Health and Immortality. Dr Morris quoted Maharishi's words that immortality is completely possible. The Vedic Literature, Maharishi said, is full of promises on that level, speaking about the Self of every human being as being beyond space and time. People throughout the ages, all parents, have been wanting their children to live a completely healthy life, to enjoy health, wealth, and wisdom, and now that aspiration is going to be fulfilled. Maharishi said that it's certainly the case until now, that 'mortal is man' has been the understanding, and that one day everyone has to face retirement from this body. 'But he said absolutely, clearly to us,' said Dr Morris, 'that the potentiality for our generation is not to retire from life, but to continue and continue and continue. And this will be on the level of the Unified Field, which has conducted life for millions of years in the past, and will be conducting it for millions of years to come.' The transcendental field of life is beyond space and time, as described by the words of the poet Tennyson, who said, 'For men may come and men may go, but I go on forever.' And this is the reality, Maharishi said, every time we write the word 'I', I did this and I did that, it is always with a capital letter, and it expresses that the 'I' is never small, the 'I' is infinite. Dr Morris elaborated on Maharishi's words that 'modern science is just a miniature of the eternal ancient science of life, called the Vedic Science of Life, and the same scientific results that Dr Hagelin describes in terms of equations, have been well described in Vedic terms', in the long history of Vedic sages, the Vedic Rishis of India. Through time immemorial, the same understanding has been there, for example in the expression Richo akshare parame vyoman - Maharishi explained that this is a Vedic expression from the Rk Veda, which describes the structure of the Unified Field. It describes it in terms of its two extremes, 'A'its infinite value, and 'K'its point. So the reality of the Unified Field is the infinite, and the point of infinity both together, reverberating together. All the Laws of Nature, the Richas of the Veda, that are the cause of everything in the universe, are just on the level of this unified level of consciousness reverberating within itself. Dr Morris reviewed Maharishi's explanation that this level is beyond spaceParame vyoman means it is beyond space. This is the level in Vedic terms, which Dr Hagelin has described rigorously in terms of modern quantum physics and has also related to the structure of Rk Veda. 'Maharishi's advice is,' said Dr Morris, 'to practise Transcendental Meditation as the sun rises and the sun sets every day. There are thousands of teachers to teach you. Experience the Constitution of the Universe in the experience of the Unified Field. Enliven that in life which is the immortal field of life, and take advantage of the fact that Dr Hagelin spent his youth in the Unified Field and now he is giving out the gift of his finding to everyone on earth. 'Maharishi told everyone,' said Dr Morris, 'You are born to be the ruler of the universe. You have to have the Constitution of the Universe in your own simple awareness, and if you don't, you'll always remain poor in your own behaviour, in your own joy and success of life. Concluding his summary of the conference proceedings, Dr Morris said, 'Everyone should be what they were born to be, what the potentiality of life is there for them to be, which is the immortal, invincible level of life.'
[FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Like it or not, the posting limit works, and praise of it is almost unanimous. The 7-post limit is kind of an interesting idea. Any feedback on that? Yah, if the praise of the 5-post limit is nearly unanimous why not leave it as is-what is two more posts per person going to do? People have done a wonderful job in five posts. KH
[FairfieldLife] Just say no to meat
...the average meat eater causes a ton and a half more carbon dioxide emissions for food production than the average vegetarian http://www.slate.com/id/2164086/
[FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Like it or not, the posting limit works, and praise of it is almost unanimous. The 7-post limit is kind of an interesting idea. Any feedback on that? Ken Hassman writes: Yah, if the praise of the 5-post limit is nearly unanimous why not leave it as is-what is two more posts per person going to do? People have done a wonderful job in five posts. KH Tom T writes: Eggzactly. I am very happy with the civility, the consciness and the thought that has gone in to the posts. It is like the difference between two guys haveing a conversation in a bar at 2 AM after way too many beers (pre 5 limit post), and an intelligent conversation over coffee with one of my best friends (status quo now). Much of value is said and noted. Keep it to 5 and see what happens. Tom
[FairfieldLife] The joys of walking
Both Cindy and I love to do the square in the evening after a lite meal. When we are here for the weekends we head out to walk around Walden Lake. I also do my daytime walks to attempt to control the battle of the bulge in the same place. An injured knee likes the level walking on the blacktop road. I start at the bottom of the hill, walk up to the clubhouse around the lake and back . A healthy and interesting walk. One Sunday we spotted over 21 species of birds in a half hour walk. Right now the warblers are moving through and are very unique and quite interesting and beautiful. TOm
[FairfieldLife] Re: This guy Girish is creepy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this ... http://tinyurl.com/2pgkuf http://tinyurl.com/2pgkuf ... the same guy as this: http://tinyurl.com/2l72eu http://tinyurl.com/2l72eu If so, he's one creepy bastard! I think he fashions himself a Maharishi and can't wait for his uncle to die so that he can take a shot at sitting on the deer skin. Anyone getting a similar vibe? Creepy? Very. Cross him at your peril. The core of the movement mafia.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: new.morning wrote: Someone jokingly suggested we should make it an average of 5 posts a day -- thus 35 a week or something. Hard to track and administer. However, I find I barely have time to read a few posts during the week, much less write many. However on the weekends, FFL and / or other forums provide a valuable outlet and vista for me to get outside the very focused (interesting but within a small channel of LIFE) intellectual and other pursuits/demands in my career work. And to think of broader issues that also nourish my life. As Barry has said, many write to discover. I have always found this. I start to write -- to flesh out some seed response / idea, and often, much to my total amazement, have written something different and more, and for me something I needed to hear. As if a muse (perhaps, a drunken, playful, trickster, not always a smart or insightful muse) on my shouder say, listen up bubba and write this down, read it, study it, and take heed! (as Dr Pete scribbles in his note book, hears voices, worse, responds to them, worse yet, bores all of us with them, hmmm .. clearly schzorphrenic, psychotic, narcissistic, anti-social and generally an ass :) ) [and can't spell big words well] Better yet, is when such meanderings (referring to mine, not Dr Petes, though I like his meanderings too), invoke converstation. Like my recent friendly and cross-supportive (IMV) give-and-take with Curtis. Or Curtis' and Marek's recent dialoge (damn, this Curtis fellow seems to often be at the core of good dialogues.) On weekends, I have some time (perhaps quite UNWELL spent) catching up on posts, reflecting on these posts, writing/meandering, responding to some -- and in the process discovering things I was unaware of in my mind-- and if I am very lucky -- starting a good dialogue /productive debate and friendly discussion. Sometimes, following the flow of ideas (and we KNOW we have no control over thoughts, they just BUBBLE up from the ABSOLUTE aka Quantum Dynamical Vacuum State of All Possibilites) it takes more than 5 posts to even begin to embody them. Thus, at least on weekends, I am suggesting, ne, even vigorously arguing that the 5 post limit is anti-vedic, anti-spiritual, annti-satangic, and counter to the ABSOLUTE Quantum Dynamical nature of the Vacuum State of All Possibilites inherent in all of CREATION! smirk Thus I suggest, ne, strongly advocate, that periodically, one can invoke the Weekend Exception to the five post rule. In other words, if one posts only a few posts, or none, during the week, they can post a few more than five on weekends if such are not argumentative, stupid, insipid or factually bogus. I know that knocks most of my posts out of contentions, but you get the point. It would eliminate spraig-like 80/posts a days of unrestrainable obsesive posts (though some wre quite good). And it would disallow vindictive, arguative, baiting slugs fests by, you know, some people and people who lightly veil others as some people. Rick has said he will support changes suggested by the majority. But who would ever give up one of their precious posts to advocate or denounce the above. Thus, I am invoking the mystical quantum ritam seer secret clause deeply embedded in the FFL guidelines. I proclaim to KNOW, at the level of all truth, as inherently true that the majority in FFL agree with this reasonable weekend extension of the five post rule. And unless a majority or members (over 500) explicity post their objection, that we TRY, as in Trial, this minor augmentation of the Rick five-post fiat and see how it goes. If its abused, we can either send the offender to the dome as a re-education camp for 6 months, and/or give then hot oil bathis, or ignore them, or moderate them -- turnin off their posts util they say I will no longer be a ass ten times, in sanskrit and their native language. - And I claim this is a forum administrative piece and should not count toards my five-limit. :) This 5 post thing is the result of a few folks who apparently have an addiction to FFL and maybe afraid of losing their jobs because they spent too much time here (and there were some who didn't have any jobs too). Then we have the folks who must be hungover and thought they were posting to their blog and instead posted here. Posting limits are offensive and infantile. Comment: Obviously you feel that way about snipping as well. lurk They are the sign of an unenlightened mind and the sign of encroaching fascism in the world. They are such a joke that some friends at Wired are thinking of doing an article on this group. :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Narada, a cup of tea and, please, don't spill a drop
Hello Marek, Thank you for offering this story. While it is similar to the one I've heard and read about Narada, it's not the one I'm searching for. Instead of rewriting it from what little I remember, I'm searching for an extant well-said version of it to share with others in driving a point. In the one I'm searching for Narada could fly at will and is sent around the world and instructed not spill a drop at any time during the journey. He arrives back, speaks of how he did not spill a drop, though focused so much on not spilling a drop that he forgot to think about Krishna, Vishnu or whoever supposedly sent him on the trip. I've read and heard the story told as either Vishnu or Krishna sending him, and one other character besides, whose name I don't remember. Katha shastra is always told with specificity to the moment it's being told so it's often that the story being told is changed a bit to meet the specific needs of the circumstance at hand. In the West we may be used to stories staying consistently the same all the time and over many centuries, a characteristic dating as far back Josephus, in contrast to what was more common at the time of morphing stories to meet the needs of the moment, as demonstrated in the ever morphing rendition of the Ramayana, originally by Valmiki, though modified over the centuries by others. *Of all that anyone leading or teaching has to convey, the most valuable thing to cultivate and convey to others is a moral conscience. Only such persons deserve to lead others, in any capacity. Anything less is a menace to society. * ** ** On 4/30/07, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Yoga Vashishta has the story that sounds similar to the Narada tea story, and maybe that's what you're thinking of. In the YV Vyasa sends Shukadev to King Janaka for instruction. Shukadev is kind of contemptuous of Janaka because he's the epitome of householder life and Shukadev is sky clad and all that. Anyway, one of the episodes has Janaka telling his men to give Shukadev a complete tour of the whole palace, all the features, etc., etc., but before Shukadev goes off with them Janaka gives him a cup of milk and tells him to hold it. He then tells his men that if Shukadev spills even a single drop they are to cut off his head. At the end of the day's tour when Shukadev is again brought back into the presence of the king, Janaka asks him how he enjoyed the tour. Shukadev tells him how he couldn't enjoy, or even notice, anything because all he could do was keep his attention on not spilling the milk. So too, says King Janaka, does the enlightened live in the world, even the sumptuous world of a palace, without being affected by it, because the enlightened's attention is on the Self. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really -- It's A No-Brainer. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone have the story of Narada that tells of [Vishun, Krishna, Whoever] sending Narada around the world with a cup of tea and tells Narada not to spill a drop? I've googled key words in a multitude of combinations and simply have not found this story anywhere on the Web, though I know for sure I've seen it on the Web or at least it's been sent via email or posted in a newsgroup somewhere. Thank you in advance for your assistance. *Of all that anyone leading or teaching has to convey, the most valuable thing to cultivate and convey to others is a moral conscience. Only such persons deserve to lead others, in any capacity. Anything less is a menace to society. *
[FairfieldLife] Re: Narada, a cup of tea and, please, don't spill a drop
Thank you, DharmaMitra, for reminding me of it, though if the truth be told, I think I kind of forgot what the actual teaching point was, as it appeared in the Yoga Vasishta. But what I said seemed to work, too, just perhaps not as elegantly. And I like the Narada story you told. After reading it (below) I reflected on just how much the Puranic stories really tickle me (hadn't heard the term, 'Katha Shastra' before). They're so totally out there and yet they seem so solid and clean and right on point. That's one of the things I like about the whole Indian/Hindu backstory that's always percolated through the TMO. One of my favorite Purana stories is the one where the sage, Markandeya, is strolling through creation, which is only existing in some virtual state during one of the dissolutions of the universe; you know, just enjoying the sights and the sounds; and he accidentally falls out of the mouth of Narayana/Krishna who is taking a nap during the cosmic time-out. Of course, Markandeya is now outside of not only creation but the source of creation Itself. A total mind-boggler. I forget how it goes from there but he manages to get back in, but lots more enlightened than before. Anyway, the sheer confidence that a story like that assumes and the overwhelming nature of its imagery and theme just really knocks me for a loop. Very cool, thanks. Marek ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really -- It's A No-Brainer. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Marek, Thank you for offering this story. While it is similar to the one I've heard and read about Narada, it's not the one I'm searching for. Instead of rewriting it from what little I remember, I'm searching for an extant well-said version of it to share with others in driving a point. In the one I'm searching for Narada could fly at will and is sent around the world and instructed not spill a drop at any time during the journey. He arrives back, speaks of how he did not spill a drop, though focused so much on not spilling a drop that he forgot to think about Krishna, Vishnu or whoever supposedly sent him on the trip. I've read and heard the story told as either Vishnu or Krishna sending him, and one other character besides, whose name I don't remember. Katha shastra is always told with specificity to the moment it's being told so it's often that the story being told is changed a bit to meet the specific needs of the circumstance at hand. In the West we may be used to stories staying consistently the same all the time and over many centuries, a characteristic dating as far back Josephus, in contrast to what was more common at the time of morphing stories to meet the needs of the moment, as demonstrated in the ever morphing rendition of the Ramayana, originally by Valmiki, though modified over the centuries by others. *Of all that anyone leading or teaching has to convey, the most valuable thing to cultivate and convey to others is a moral conscience. Only such persons deserve to lead others, in any capacity. Anything less is a menace to society. * ** ** On 4/30/07, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Yoga Vashishta has the story that sounds similar to the Narada tea story, and maybe that's what you're thinking of. In the YV Vyasa sends Shukadev to King Janaka for instruction. Shukadev is kind of contemptuous of Janaka because he's the epitome of householder life and Shukadev is sky clad and all that. Anyway, one of the episodes has Janaka telling his men to give Shukadev a complete tour of the whole palace, all the features, etc., etc., but before Shukadev goes off with them Janaka gives him a cup of milk and tells him to hold it. He then tells his men that if Shukadev spills even a single drop they are to cut off his head. At the end of the day's tour when Shukadev is again brought back into the presence of the king, Janaka asks him how he enjoyed the tour. Shukadev tells him how he couldn't enjoy, or even notice, anything because all he could do was keep his attention on not spilling the milk. So too, says King Janaka, does the enlightened live in the world, even the sumptuous world of a palace, without being affected by it, because the enlightened's attention is on the Self. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really -- It's A No-Brainer. DharmaMitra1@ wrote: Does anyone have the story of Narada that tells of [Vishun, Krishna, Whoever] sending Narada around the world with a cup of tea and tells Narada not to spill a drop? I've googled key words in a multitude of combinations and simply have not found this story anywhere on the Web, though I know for sure I've seen it on the Web or at least it's been sent via email or posted in a newsgroup somewhere. Thank you in advance for your assistance. *Of all that anyone leading or
[FairfieldLife] Amos Ananda
Any old school initiators remember this underground audio recording TM take off on Amos and Andy? My understanding is it was definitely kept under wraps but I heard tiny bits back in the 70's and hoped someone might still have access to it now.
[FairfieldLife] The Continuing Case for AN AVERAGE of Five Posts per Day
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm tempted to try New's 35 post-per-week suggestion (or was it mine?), but opposition to that is almost unanimous. Really? I have seen few if any post specifically oppose an AVERAGE of five posts per day. The common repsonse appears to be a tired strawman argument that gee, five posts a day is better than the chaos of a few months ago, ergo five posts a day is the best of of alll possible worlds. Such simple analysis ignores that insightful and valuable spontaneous back and forth dialogue is reduced with such limits. And posts tend to become longer and less digestible. Hardly the best of all possible systems. I tend to agree with Bhairitu -- the limits were imposed to quell the out of control instincts of 3-4 posters with a universal fiat. Its using a sledge hammer to solve a problem better solved with a more discrete and focused instrument. How pray tell does a (mostly )self-monitored average of five posts a day take away from the improvement seen from a strict (dare I say anal) imposition of 5 posts per day? Yet an average system, taking nothing away, adds a lot - IMO --- promoting a more interesting exchange of ideas -- and enabling shorter, more coherent, focused posts. Both are good things and are currently being driven out of FFL with the new kidergarten level laws. And a lot of the strawman support for a strict five day limt comes from lurkers. I guess they like a readers digest version of discussion and debates -- its easier to absorb. But as a reader and poster, I would like to more dialogue. And I can simple ignore or delete those posters i find little value from. And in an AVERAGE of 5 posts a day system, total posts would be the same. It would simply accomodate the more natureal ebbadn flow of discussions.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A Thousand names for Joy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Byron Katies newest book as titled above. It is her commentary on the Tao Te CHing all 81 sutras with a chapter for each sutra some short some long.given in an off hand contemporary manner. Excerpt from Chapter 21 The master keeps her mind always at one with the Tao. Page 59 chapter 2 para 2. If my child has died, thats the way of it. Any argument with that brings an eternal hell. 'She died too soon. I didn't get to see her grow up. I could have done something to save her. 'I was a bad mother.' 'God is unjust. But her death is reality. No argument in the world can make the slightest dent in what has already happened. Prayer can't change it, begging and pleading can't change it, punishing yourself can't change it, your will has no power at all. You do have the power, though, to question your thought , turn it around, and find three genuine reasons why the death of your child is equal to her not dying, or even better in the long run, both for her and for you. This takes a radically open mind, and nothing less than an open mind is creative enough to free you from the pain of arguing with what is. An open mind is the only way to peace. As long as you think that you knew what should and shouldn't happen, you're trying to manipulate GOD. This is a recipe for unhappiness. Enjoy TOm T Oddly enough, I find her words above very comforting, even if I find it a huge stretch to understand the part about how the death could be better than not dying.
[FairfieldLife] Suzanne Segal
Find her book Collision with the Infinite and read it. It may be available here at Revelations at half price. Used copies surface from time to time. Very interesting story. She was indoctrinated by her parents to believe if Fear was present then there was someting to be afraid of. Both of her parents were survivors of the German concentration camps. Great study of the acronymn for FEAR from the author of Conversations with God. False Evidence that Appears Real. Tom T
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amos Ananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any old school initiators remember this underground audio recording TM take off on Amos and Andy? My understanding is it was definitely kept under wraps but I heard tiny bits back in the 70's and hoped someone might still have access to it now. I heard it back around 71 or 72, I think. I think it was done by Phil Goldberg and ___? I laughed until I ached, altho it would not be considered PC in this day and age. I don't have a copy, but someone here must. I would love to hear it again.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amos Ananda
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of wayback71 Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 10:11 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amos Ananda --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any old school initiators remember this underground audio recording TM take off on Amos and Andy? My understanding is it was definitely kept under wraps but I heard tiny bits back in the 70's and hoped someone might still have access to it now. I heard it back around 71 or 72, I think. I think it was done by Phil Goldberg and ___? I laughed until I ached, altho it would not be considered PC in this day and age. I don't have a copy, but someone here must. I would love to hear it again. Forwarded to Phil.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Narada, a cup of tea and, please, don't spill a drop
If Marek and DharmaMitra want to go on all night telling nice puranic stories, 10-20 posts each, they have my vote. Sometimes the grahas grab you, the sun shines in your heart a certain way, one is in the zone with a particular idea. I say when that happens -- go for it. Pursue the thought and dialogue for all to enjoy. A strict anal five post a day limit squeezes the life out of such moments. And squeezes the life out of FFL. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you, DharmaMitra, for reminding me of it, though if the truth be told, I think I kind of forgot what the actual teaching point was, as it appeared in the Yoga Vasishta. But what I said seemed to work, too, just perhaps not as elegantly. And I like the Narada story you told. After reading it (below) I reflected on just how much the Puranic stories really tickle me (hadn't heard the term, 'Katha Shastra' before). They're so totally out there and yet they seem so solid and clean and right on point. That's one of the things I like about the whole Indian/Hindu backstory that's always percolated through the TMO. One of my favorite Purana stories is the one where the sage, Markandeya, is strolling through creation, which is only existing in some virtual state during one of the dissolutions of the universe; you know, just enjoying the sights and the sounds; and he accidentally falls out of the mouth of Narayana/Krishna who is taking a nap during the cosmic time-out. Of course, Markandeya is now outside of not only creation but the source of creation Itself. A total mind-boggler. I forget how it goes from there but he manages to get back in, but lots more enlightened than before. Anyway, the sheer confidence that a story like that assumes and the overwhelming nature of its imagery and theme just really knocks me for a loop. Very cool, thanks. Marek ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really -- It's A No-Brainer. DharmaMitra1@ wrote: Hello Marek, Thank you for offering this story. While it is similar to the one I've heard and read about Narada, it's not the one I'm searching for. Instead of rewriting it from what little I remember, I'm searching for an extant well-said version of it to share with others in driving a point. In the one I'm searching for Narada could fly at will and is sent around the world and instructed not spill a drop at any time during the journey. He arrives back, speaks of how he did not spill a drop, though focused so much on not spilling a drop that he forgot to think about Krishna, Vishnu or whoever supposedly sent him on the trip. I've read and heard the story told as either Vishnu or Krishna sending him, and one other character besides, whose name I don't remember. Katha shastra is always told with specificity to the moment it's being told so it's often that the story being told is changed a bit to meet the specific needs of the circumstance at hand. In the West we may be used to stories staying consistently the same all the time and over many centuries, a characteristic dating as far back Josephus, in contrast to what was more common at the time of morphing stories to meet the needs of the moment, as demonstrated in the ever morphing rendition of the Ramayana, originally by Valmiki, though modified over the centuries by others. *Of all that anyone leading or teaching has to convey, the most valuable thing to cultivate and convey to others is a moral conscience. Only such persons deserve to lead others, in any capacity. Anything less is a menace to society. * ** ** On 4/30/07, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: The Yoga Vashishta has the story that sounds similar to the Narada tea story, and maybe that's what you're thinking of. In the YV Vyasa sends Shukadev to King Janaka for instruction. Shukadev is kind of contemptuous of Janaka because he's the epitome of householder life and Shukadev is sky clad and all that. Anyway, one of the episodes has Janaka telling his men to give Shukadev a complete tour of the whole palace, all the features, etc., etc., but before Shukadev goes off with them Janaka gives him a cup of milk and tells him to hold it. He then tells his men that if Shukadev spills even a single drop they are to cut off his head. At the end of the day's tour when Shukadev is again brought back into the presence of the king, Janaka asks him how he enjoyed the tour. Shukadev tells him how he couldn't enjoy, or even notice, anything because all he could do was keep his attention on not spilling the milk. So too, says King Janaka, does the enlightened live in the world, even the sumptuous world of a palace, without being affected by it, because the enlightened's attention is on the Self. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Samadhi Is
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: This guy Girish is creepy
--- geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this ... http://tinyurl.com/2pgkuf http://tinyurl.com/2pgkuf ... the same guy as this: http://tinyurl.com/2l72eu http://tinyurl.com/2l72eu If so, he's one creepy bastard! I think he fashions himself a Maharishi and can't wait for his uncle to die so that he can take a shot at sitting on the deer skin. Anyone getting a similar vibe? Creepy? Very. Cross him at your peril. The core of the movement mafia. A chip off the old block: a beautiful, enlightened asura churning the cosmic ocean of consciousness. Only in Kali Yuga! 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] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] 'We Are In A Spiritual Emergency'
My feeling and intuition at present; Is that we are in a phase on earth of a spiritual emergency... So many things happening at once, and dark forces Vs. Light. The pain anguish- in Iraq is becoming so horrendous, it cannot be described... Therefore, whatever means necessary, that Maharishi, has taken at this time, are completely necessary. If the pundits are being paid $30 a month, so what? I got paid $25 a month, when I worked staff, at MIU? But, I wasn't there to make money- Otherwise that would be pretty foolish. So, in my humble opinion, whatever means Maharishi finds necessary, To purify the world at this time, is well worth it. As far as Maharishi protecting himself, from the chaos of the world... He is 89 years old. If Bevan, and John and whoever else screens his calls. He needs to take care of himself, and not get involved in the bickering, Of political power. There is enough political bickering, right now in this country, For ten thousand years of bickering. So, if you want bickering, Watch some political tv shows. MSNBC, seems to have the market now on bickering. r.g. - Ahhh...imagining that irresistible new car smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
[FairfieldLife] Pity, the Poor Pundits
This is interesting: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip: The pundits are indentured to the TMO for at least 20 years. They were all obligated to take out loans to help build some SV structure. It's not clear to me what the structure is. Perhaps their living and chanting facility in India. I'll find out. Anyway, as long as they are punditing, the movement covers the payments, but if they leave, they have to cover them. If they don't Anand and Prakash Srivastava sic the police on them. This happened to the ex-pundit from whom I got this information. · This pundit also said that the Srivastavas are very rich and basically say to MMY, Look, you're very old. Don't worry about these financial matters. We'll take care of them. Doug in FF writing: I wondered about these pundits, and their families. There ain't no such thing as a free cigar, as they say. suspect knowing the TMorg and Maharishi is that these pundits would just show up without being hit up for money in scheme by the TMorg to come to America. Pundit money, coming and going? Rick, what you share here, this reads too much like the story of Earl Kaplan, while welcoming the hundred millionaires and then their wives on the one hand at the front door as he was being robbed by the other hand at the back door by Maharishi and 'trusted' inner movement people at the back door. Coming and going. i don't get to much read everything here at FFL but every once in a while something about FF shows up that is a nugget. Thanks Rik, even if you are just a regular TM practitioner and an un- re-certified un=repentant TM teacher and Governor of the A of E, for sharing this. I often wondered what the deal was with the pundits and their families. What say a true-believer here? Like our friend, Feste37 here, defender that could shed light and bring some transparency to this? How about check on this, and get back to us, a little quicker than Guidestar can report what is going on here in FF? The movement don't have no web-link to their finacial numbers? MUM? Like, money in and money out? -Gov Doug in FF Some pundit news from a well-informed inside source: . The pundits were not given a clear idea of what their living conditions here would be. They were not told they would be cloistered behind fences. They understood that they would be free to move about and see new things here. Most of them are very frustrated and stir-crazy in their confinement. . The tuberculosis rumors are true. I don't know how many are infected, but anyone who has had contact with the pundits has been tested. . In his sales pitch to lure them here, Bob Raja Wynne promised them a $300 monthly stipend, but they are only getting $30. . The pundits are indentured to the TMO for at least 20 years. They were all obligated to take out loans to help build some SV structure. It's not clear to me what the structure is. Perhaps their living and chanting facility in India. I'll find out. Anyway, as long as they are punditing, the movement covers the payments, but if they leave, they have to cover them. If they don't Anand and Prakash Srivastava sic the police on them. This happened to the ex-pundit from whom I got this information. . This pundit also said that the Srivastavas are very rich and basically say to MMY, Look, you're very old. Don't worry about these financial matters. We'll take care of them. On a related note, I'm always arguing that MMY micromanages the movement and no one tells him what to do. I think that generally this is the case, but I can think of one incident which refutes this. When the Natural Law Party was doing its thing, John Gray donated $50,000. He was promptly invited to come to Vlodrop. When he got there, there was a tussle between Bevan and Hagelin, Bevan arguing that John wrote inappropriate books and shouldn't be permitted to meet with Maharishi and Hagelin arguing that the books helped people and that he should meet with him. Apparently MMY let the two of them work out the issue, although I've often seen him do that and then in the end, do what he wanted to do anyway. A compromise was reached in which John talked with MMY on the phone. I don't know whether that reflected MMY's desire or not. In the conversation, MMY tried to recruit John to do stuff for the movement, but John declined, saying he liked the way his life was going.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amos Ananda
I'm a preacher of the Church of the Blinding Light of Presumptuous Assumption myself. Andy, this be yo lucky day. Racist skit to the max, but funny cuz of it being amateur YM insiders doing it, but if it had gotten to the Media it might have been a very hard to erase black mark. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any old school initiators remember this underground audio recording TM take off on Amos and Andy? My understanding is it was definitely kept under wraps but I heard tiny bits back in the 70's and hoped someone might still have access to it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: NewMorn you autocrat you, need to see some scientific chart or peer- review publication before can believe your claim of coup here. Rick, watch out for this guy as a moderator. what is his interest anyway, in FF? Consider the source? Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty; Rick, keep us free; watch this NewMornig guy, he writes clearly as a climber and usurper. Stick to the guidelines Rick, and keep us free. Thank God for the Constitution, our Bills of Rights our Liberty and Union in the Rule of Law, -Doug in FF Thus, I am invoking the mystical quantum ritam seer secret clause deeply embedded in the FFL guidelines. I proclaim to KNOW, at the level of all truth, as inherently true that the majority in FFL agree with this reasonable weekend extension of the five post rule. And unless a majority or members (over 500) explicity post their objection, that we TRY, as in Trial, this minor augmentation of the Rick five-post fiat and see how it goes. If its abused, we can either send the offender to the dome as a re-education camp for 6 months, and/or give then hot oil bathis, or ignore them, or moderate them -- turnin off their posts util they say I will no longer be a ass ten times, in sanskrit and their native language. - And I claim this is a forum administrative piece and should not count toards my five-limit. :) ..
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: This guy Girish is creepy
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 10:40 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: This guy Girish is creepy Creepy? Very. Cross him at your peril. The core of the movement mafia. A chip off the old block: a beautiful, enlightened asura What makes you so sure about the two adjectives?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Pity, the Poor Pundits
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of dhamiltony2k5 Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 10:46 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Pity, the Poor Pundits Rick, what you share here, this reads too much like the story of Earl Kaplan, I have much more to share, but am not at liberty to do so just yet. It gets weirder and weirder.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of dhamiltony2k5 Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:17 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Case for Modifying The Five Post Limit NewMorn you autocrat you, need to see some scientific chart or peer- review publication before can believe your claim of coup here. Rick, watch out for this guy as a moderator. what is his interest anyway, in FF? Consider the source? Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty; Rick, keep us free; watch this NewMornig guy, he writes clearly as a climber and usurper. Stick to the guidelines Rick, and keep us free. Thank God for the Constitution, our Bills of Rights our Liberty and Union in the Rule of Law, You forgot to mention Jesus and the Bible. New Morning is cool, and a friend. Nothing to worry about.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Bottom Line on the Five Post Limit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The five-post limit has been a similar kind of writing lesson for me. I just try to eliminate all those annoying iterations... I come to FFL to find things of interest about FFl. Not got much time to read much of everything here and i do appreciate the 5-post limit for the better quality writing it has brought back here. journalizing FF i do often have about five posts backed-up waiting for the 20 or 60 or so that do show with the FFL 'mesages' link to clear. What point posting something if it is lost in 150 OT personal bickering posts. I now much like the limit now at 5 posts. With the limit it is much more likely that things about FFL do actually show up and one don't have to plow through the OT bickering or CNN stuff to find FFL things of interest about FFl, to find the nuggets.. In life, I do not have time to read much of everything here and i do appreciate the 5-post limit for bringing FFL more to topic. Much more could be said about FF or pundits but often in the last year or so it is hard to get a post in edge-wise. Not much point to leverage against the OT stuff. It is a vast improvement recently with the 5 post limit. 7 tops. JGD, -Old Gov Doug from FF http://pictures.globalgoodnews.com/raam/slides/image003.html
