[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[george_deforest]

> Peter wrote:
>
> I did a process through the art of living (SSRS) that
> helps you unstress impressions from previous
> lifetimes. It was pretty interesting. The past lives
> that came up were a roman general (I was involved in
> logistics and troop support, not direct combat.) I
> died of a heart attack in that one. I worked on the
> pyramids as a physical laborer, but I was mentally
> retarded (I'm serious!) and died at 18 from falling
> off a large stone block and fracturing my skull. I
> lived a long life in Norway in the mid 1800's the son
> of a wealthy land owner. In that lifetime my current
> father was my son who drowned when he was 10 and my
> daughter is now my wife (I know, Freud would have a
> field day with those dynamics) I was also Rick Archer
> in a previous life and in a future life I'm going to
> be Curtis!

interesting! i went to a psychic lady once, and she told me
i was a fisherman in Norway a couple centuries back; in that
life i injured my eye with a fish hook.

curious that in this life, i was born severely cross-eyed
(had surgery for it at age 4), as well as a condition called 
monocular vision (ie, no depth perception).

other "feelings" i've had of past life: i died, along with 
another friend from decades ago, in a war against the 
Germans, not sure WWI or WWII.

and, i'm pretty sure i was a monk in medieval Ireland,
this one feels the most certain.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "george_deforest"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> and, i'm pretty sure i was a monk in medieval Ireland,
> this one feels the most certain.

In that case, you'd almost certainly enjoy the 
wonderful book, "How the Irish Saved Civilization." 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Richard J. Williams]

TurquoiseB wrote:
> At that moment Rama walked by, poked me 
> in the side, and said, "Yep, that was you."
>
Did any of the older Rama students point out that
the historical Buddha didn't teach reincarnation? 
There has to be a reincarnating soul monad in 
order to reincarnate. I wonder if the Zen Master
Rama ever read Buddha's First Sermon. There's no
mention of a "soul" in the Noble Eightfold Path.

Rick Archer wrote:
> > Who knows? It's interesting to think that one's 
> > physical remains from previous lives are probably 
> > still scattered around the world in various graves.
> >
> I was once standing in a museum, on a "field trip" 
> there with a buncha other Rama students, and found
> myself fascinated by an Egyptian mummy. It wasn't
> that pretty a mummy :-), just a buncha bones and
> brown skin wrapped in rags, but I was fascinated 
> anyway. At that moment Rama walked by, poked me 
> in the side, and said, "Yep, that was you."
> 
> That and the proverbial three bucks...Starbucks, etc.
> 
> I personally have no memories of the Egyptian period
> or any intuitive "feel" for having been there, so it 
> might even take five bucks at Starbucks.  :-)
> 
> As a kid I had dreams five or six times a month for
> maybe ten years of myself swordfighting, using a long
> sword held two-handed, in a fighting style unlike 
> anything I'd ever seen in the movies. It took me
> seeing my first Japanese samurai film to "get" the
> fighting style, and where and when the dreams might
> have been glimpses of. Might have been. I can't be
> sure, of course. I've had similar dreams of life in
> Tibet, again starting from an early age, again 
> before I knew that there was such a place as Tibet
> or what it looked like.
> 
> The only one I'm fairly sure of is that I paid my
> dues as a Cathar perfecti at one point. When I go to
> the Cathar chateaux and other areas frequented by 
> them here in France, I tend to have rather intense
> visual flashbacks, and can often tell the people
> touring the chateau with me what we'll find in the
> next rooms and what they'll look like, before we
> get there. None of us has been there before this time
> around. They're usually freaked out by this; I have 
> begun to accept it as fairly normal. Go figure.
> 
> That said, all of these flashes don't really mean
> much of anything, do they? They don't help us much
> with our self discovery this time around much, unless
> we can pinpoint some samskara in the past that still
> needs work in the present.
> 
> I'm always amused by the New Age tendency to claim
> that they were *famous* people in the past. The Rama
> guy claimed he was Cardinal Richilieu; I can't see
> that *at all*. And Shirley MacLaine's been any
> *number* of famous people. Wasn't anyone ever the
> scullery maids and the cooks and the janitors?  :-)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: question for the Buddhists

[Richard J. Williams]

Kenny wrote:
> > Rinpoche, Sogyal
> >
Sogyal Rinpoche gave the name 'Rigpa' to his work 
and to the vehicle he was developing to serve the 
Buddha's teaching in the west.
>
TurquoiseB wrote:
>...AFAIK he's a legitimate Tibetan Dzogchen 
> master of the Nyingma tradition.
>
Sogyal Rinpoche is a Master of the Karma Kagyu, 'Rigpa' 
tradition of Tibetan Buddhist meditation. 

Rigpa Fellowship:

Roqueredonde, France
Lerab Ling
L'Engayreque
34650 Roqueredonde France 
http://www.rigpa.org/

Read more:

Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004
Subject: Rigpa: The Stages of Meditation
http://tinyurl.com/2duc4l

Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:51:07 -0500
Subject: TM, Dzogchen, and staying in the View
http://tinyurl.com/28od8r

Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 15 Oct 2005 14:07:47 -0700
Subject: Babysit your Rigpa
http://tinyurl.com/2dr5r8

> > Hi There, I have a question for you. The author 
> > of the book, "The Tibetan Book of Living and 
> > Dying" is Sogyal Rinpoche. Is this his actual 
> > name and if you looked him up in an index would 
> > his name be listed as:
> > 
> > or is one of these words/names a title?
> > 
> > Thank you!!
> >
> 'Rinpoche' is a title, meaning 'precious one.' It
> has far less of a meaning in the West than in a
> strong, structured Tibetan tradition. In many
> such traditions, one really has to *earn* the
> title of 'Rinpoche,' and it would be considered
> an affront of the highest order to call yourself
> 'Rinpoche' without having deserved the title.
> Flash forward to the West, where no one has much
> of any idea about the traditions in question, and
> anyone can call themselves what they want. 
> 
> So. Are there people out there on the spiritual
> smorgasbord circuit who call themselves 'Rinpoche'
> who never did anything to deserve the title? You
> betcha. Is Sogyal Rinpoche one of them? I don't
> think so. His title seems to have been well-
> earned; AFAIK he's a legitimate Tibetan Dzogchen 
> master of the Nyingma tradition. His organization,
> Rigpa, is worldwide; there are even branches near
> where I live in France.
> 
> That said, he has not been above controversy him-
> self, having been accused in 1994 by a female 
> devotee of having coerced her into a sexual rela-
> tionship with him. One blogger, who runs a site
> called the Integral Options Cafe, refers to him
> as "a perfect example of a flawed man who was still 
> a valuable teacher." Like Chogyam Trungpa before
> him, Sogyal Rinpoche seems to be capable of being
> very human while writing some of the best Buddhist
> teachings going. His "The Tibetan Book of Living
> and Dying" is an absolute classic. Go figure.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most 
> imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen.
> 
> YouTube:
> http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay


MAGNIFICENT!  I've always felt that women were closer to Being
[Divinity] by nature, than men. Unfortunately that sentiment is not
predominant in this world. In fact, just the opposite appears to be
the case:

ALWAYS THE LESSER PRIORITY

By David Podvin

John Lennon wrote, "Woman is the nigger of the world". Woman
should be so lucky. She does not rank nearly that high, and she never
has. A typical example recently arrived from the Supreme Court, which
ruled that saving a female life is insufficiently relevant to justify
performing a late term abortion. The justices stressed that although
the lives of women are important, there exists a higher priority.

There always does. Throughout history, women's rights have been
subordinated to greater causes, the greatest cause being homage to the
Almighty. Judaism and Christianity and Islam differ greatly, but
misogyny is the place where true believers meet to greet. The pious
agree that in accordance with God's will females must be tormented.

Toward that end Orthodox Jewish men thank their Messiah for not
making them women and coerce females into second-class status.
Fundamentalist Christian men codify misogyny into law and stigmatize
those females who resist the social roles of antiquity. Traditionalist
Muslim men demand that women be wrapped like mummies before public
appearances, mutilate their *censored*orises to discourage wayward
lust, and engage in honor killings against those distaff dissidents
who exhibit subversive feminist tendencies. This sectarian persecution
is never done in the name of malice. The ecumenical party line is that
females are abused only because the Lord wouldn't have it any other way.

Primitive superstition notwithstanding, women deserve better…

Click to read more:
http://makethemaccountable.com/index.php/2007/06/10/always-the-lesser-priority

[FairfieldLife] Re: Al Gore: ban Shiva

[Jason Spock]

 
   
   I'm sorry Shempji, but things don't work that way.
   
   Our ability to control Weather systems and Climate is slowly becoming a 
reality.
   
   Cloud seeding is already done in 35 countries over the world.  It's just 
a matter of decades before we aquire the ability to neutralise Tornados, 
Hurricanes, heat in the deserts, sand-storms, even EarthQuakes.!
   
 http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002163.html
   
 
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=THE20051008&articleId=1061
   
   The frightening part is what we are going to do with it, once we acquire 
that kind of capability.

shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 23:01:37 -
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Al Gore: ban Shiva

   
  Associated Press -- June 7, 2007

In an apparent extension of his proposal that CO2 in the atmosphere 
be reduced, Al Gore today called for the elimination of Shiva, the 
Destroyer.

"Anything that destroys is negative," said Gore. "It simply isn't 
right that a destructive force such as Shiva be allowed to continue 
to exist and wreak havoc on the environment. "

Gore was asked whether he wanted to eliminate the other two basic 
forces in the universe as well.

"We have no problem with either Vishnu or Brahma as the former is 
responsible for maintenance in the universe and the latter for 
creation. These are good, positive forces. We only want negative, 
destructive forces eliminated. We're only for positive things."

Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic was swift to 
respond. "The nature of life is change. It is constantly changing. 
In order for change to occur, destruction of what exists must occur. 
Destruction as a force is as equally important as creation.

"Mr. Gore seems to view the world and the environment as an 
unchanging static organism. But it can and does 
change...continuall y. Be it polar ice caps or the weather, change 
has always occurred and will continue to take place. However, some 
people can't come to terms with the ever-changing nature of life. 
Psychologically, it takes them out of their comfort zone because they 
seek permanence in the relative field, something that is impossible. 
Therefore, when they observe change occuring in life they seek an 
answer to explain a phenomenon that, on the face of it, is unpleasant 
and icky to them.

"It is akin to those who seek answers to irrational acts, such as the 
assassination of John F. Kennedy. To accept that just one single, 
insane gunman could bring down the president of the United States is 
so inconceivable to many that they construct conspiracy theories in 
order to bring rationality to where it doesn't exist.

"In the same way, Gore assumes unpleasant change that he observes 
occuring in nature -- such as an unusually strong hurricane season or 
a hot summer -- must therefore be due to some manmade unnatural 
cause. He then seeks to find a cause that will explain the 
unpleasantness. He has done that by assigning the cause of global 
warming to manmade CO2 and he now wants to do that with an entire 
force of nature, Shiva, because "destruction" seems to him such a 
nasty thing.

Asked if he still felt whether Mr. Gore's sanity should be 
questioned, Mr. Klaus replied: "yes."
   
   

   
-
Building a website is a piece of cake. 
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[new . morning]

Do you two, and others who have identified some past life: do you
identify with that person?

Some jyoptishis (probably with some psychic abilities) have told me
what I was in the past. While it seems to fit, I don't particualry
relate or identify with that person. Similar with my past "lives" /
days in this life. I can identify "that" person, but I don't
particularly identify with him. Sort of like identifying a family
member. Perhaps sometimes, it seem, like identifying the wandering
black sheep of the family, when bailing him out of jail: "yeah oficer,
thats one of 'ours'. We'll take responsibility for him and try to keep
him out of trouble". 

I can idenify these "past people" as somehow related to me, and will
grudgingly take responsibility for their apparently strange and wild
actions, but I don't particularly identify with 'them'. 

Though it may be a cliche, they seem more like actors in a film I once
saw. Q: "Did you see that film about that young teen-age kid that went
head-over-heels for an indian guru, and followed him around the US and
Europe doing deep meditation and the rest of the guru's trip. It was
set in the 60' and 70's -- a good 'period piece'. Good set-designs"?
A: "Yeah, I think I saw that one. But I am sort of fuzzy on the plot."

A friend of mine used to joke about her husband, "THAT man keeps
showing up." While it was clear she loved him a lot, it seemed she was
not identifed with him -- she had her own inner satisfaction and
completeness -- and did not depend on him for that. Her
tongue-in-check observation makes me laugh when thinking about
"myself". "That man keeps showing up".

 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "george_deforest"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Peter wrote:
> >
> > I did a process through the art of living (SSRS) that
> > helps you unstress impressions from previous
> > lifetimes. It was pretty interesting. The past lives
> > that came up were a roman general (I was involved in
> > logistics and troop support, not direct combat.) I
> > died of a heart attack in that one. I worked on the
> > pyramids as a physical laborer, but I was mentally
> > retarded (I'm serious!) and died at 18 from falling
> > off a large stone block and fracturing my skull. I
> > lived a long life in Norway in the mid 1800's the son
> > of a wealthy land owner. In that lifetime my current
> > father was my son who drowned when he was 10 and my
> > daughter is now my wife (I know, Freud would have a
> > field day with those dynamics) I was also Rick Archer
> > in a previous life and in a future life I'm going to
> > be Curtis!
> 
> interesting! i went to a psychic lady once, and she told me
> i was a fisherman in Norway a couple centuries back; in that
> life i injured my eye with a fish hook.
> 
> curious that in this life, i was born severely cross-eyed
> (had surgery for it at age 4), as well as a condition called 
> monocular vision (ie, no depth perception).
> 
> other "feelings" i've had of past life: i died, along with 
> another friend from decades ago, in a war against the 
> Germans, not sure WWI or WWII.
> 
> and, i'm pretty sure i was a monk in medieval Ireland,
> this one feels the most certain.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Janet Luise]

And then there's Yoga Vashista with that world within world in a room
where all the so named "past lives" were all taking place at the same
instant...
After all isn't TIME just a division for us un-united beings who are
still dealing with  individualized self-interest?

Meher Baba talks about a "dropped soul"  A drop of the ocean that goes
along thinking its separate from the ocean..when it first asks
"Who am I" identifies with a stone, mineral, up the chain to bugs,
fish ape, scientist, woman etc...  Only when it can honestly answer
the question "who am I" with the statement "I AM GOD"  is God's game
complete.

And interesting the concern is THAT system  (not like MMY once saying
the problem being people weren't getting enlightened fast enough, have
to keep coming back - creating a log jam of people wanting to be
born.)  is that so much STONE is being crushed that the weak link is
on the very FIRST stage!


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "martyboi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I know someone who claims he is sometimes aware of living several 
> lives simultaneously right now - and sometimes there's even a little 
> leakage, so that he has trouble keeping it all sorted. Did that 
> event happen to the me in this body, or to the me in another one of 
> the bodies?
> 
> So perhaps, whatever it is that reincarnates - takes on several 
> bodies at a time. Having a single incarnation at a time seems a 
> little inefficient in a grand universe like this anyway.
> 
> From the point of view of the Self, there's only one soul 
> reincarnating as everyone anyway! 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Cashew juice in Iowa?

[Janet Luise]

The cashew NUT grows out of the top of an apple like fruit & the juice
from this is really wonderful.  Getting to that arthric stage & having
to really cut back on citric, sugar and caffein, i've been looking for
a good juice to drink.  Cashew juice is really IT.  I've found a
concentrate from Brazil that lets you add your own Stevia, honey,
sugar etc which one does need for mango, papaya, passion fruit.  
Cashew tastes really good without adding anything.  A small bottle
(500 ml) makes a gallon a juice & cost about $2. 

I'll be in Iowa this summer and am wondering if any store in Fairfield
or Iowa City has this?Everybody's Somebody's, Coop?

If NOT maybe someone in Fairfield would like to sell it.

I'm sure it's available from other countries but what I have is this

 The brand name is defruta & its imported by Liberty Imports USA in
Allentown PA 18109.They're pushing a NON-concentrate that has cane
sugar added to the other juices (300 ml)  but haven't seen cashew juice.

OK the fine print encludes Xanthan GUm (stabilizer) Sodium Benzoate
and Metabisulphite (preservatives).  Does that kill it for Fairfield?
I'd appreciate any info anyone might have on this. Thanks

Janet Luise

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[new . morning]

With the film analogy, Rick's. recently posted exchange with friends
come to mind.  Like two actors meeting 30 years after having done
college drama together. 

Guy1: "So you are still doing community theatre like when I last saw you?"

Guy2: "Yeah, its the greatest. Its by far the fastest track to the
top, especially my theatre in located in Podunk, a town of 10,000 in
the midwest, far from any urban center."

Guy1: "Really?"

Guy2: "Oh totally! Its the only way to get to the top. Its like a
rocketship. You are really missing out! We do the same play over and
over again, every season, with some minor variations to expand our range."

Guy1: " And what actors from your theatre have actually made it to the
top?" 

Guy2: " You just don't get it do you! Thasts so irrelevant a question.
Why are you so hostile and angry. Is it because of my great success?"

Guy1: "No I am just trying to understand. I have found more value by
going into films. I have done 25 in the last 30 years. Mostly
character bits, some supporting actor roles. I auditioned for a couple
of leads, but that didn't work out. Which is fine with me, I am not
sure its what its cracked up to be. A lot more pressure, and one of
the few if only benefits seems to be that a higher class of women seem
interested in you. Like what Jack has found."

guy2: "Oh you are SO deluding yourself that success in fims has
ANYTHING to do with "going to the top" 

Guy 1: "What exactly does "going to the top" mean to you?

Guy2: "Why are you so incredibly hostile!!! This 'new role every year
thing' is clearly turnig you into a self-absorbant  asshole" 

Guy1: "Yeah, I played one of those a couple of years ago. It was
fascinating. It really stretched my range. A couple of years earlier,
 I played the  opposite -- a midievel Irish monk. Last year I played a
journalist in WWII and the final scene was me being gunned down on a
beach as I ran with an exclusive story which would have changed the
course of the war. Gotta love the rapid swithcing of the roles back
and forth. It really matures you as an actor."

Guy2: "Oh what bullshit. You clearly are on a dead-end path and are
totally hostile and angry about my huge success in community theatre
in Podunk playing the same role for 30 years. THATS the TRUE path to
"the top". 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do you two, and others who have identified some past life: do you
> identify with that person?
> 
> Some jyoptishis (probably with some psychic abilities) have told me
> what I was in the past. While it seems to fit, I don't particualry
> relate or identify with that person. Similar with my past "lives" /
> days in this life. I can identify "that" person, but I don't
> particularly identify with him. Sort of like identifying a family
> member. Perhaps sometimes, it seem, like identifying the wandering
> black sheep of the family, when bailing him out of jail: "yeah oficer,
> thats one of 'ours'. We'll take responsibility for him and try to keep
> him out of trouble". 
> 
> I can idenify these "past people" as somehow related to me, and will
> grudgingly take responsibility for their apparently strange and wild
> actions, but I don't particularly identify with 'them'. 
> 
> Though it may be a cliche, they seem more like actors in a film I once
> saw. Q: "Did you see that film about that young teen-age kid that went
> head-over-heels for an indian guru, and followed him around the US and
> Europe doing deep meditation and the rest of the guru's trip. It was
> set in the 60' and 70's -- a good 'period piece'. Good set-designs"?
> A: "Yeah, I think I saw that one. But I am sort of fuzzy on the plot."
> 
> A friend of mine used to joke about her husband, "THAT man keeps
> showing up." While it was clear she loved him a lot, it seemed she was
> not identifed with him -- she had her own inner satisfaction and
> completeness -- and did not depend on him for that. Her
> tongue-in-check observation makes me laugh when thinking about
> "myself". "That man keeps showing up".
> 
>  
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "george_deforest"
>  wrote:
> >
> > > Peter wrote:
> > >
> > > I did a process through the art of living (SSRS) that
> > > helps you unstress impressions from previous
> > > lifetimes. It was pretty interesting. The past lives
> > > that came up were a roman general (I was involved in
> > > logistics and troop support, not direct combat.) I
> > > died of a heart attack in that one. I worked on the
> > > pyramids as a physical laborer, but I was mentally
> > > retarded (I'm serious!) and died at 18 from falling
> > > off a large stone block and fracturing my skull. I
> > > lived a long life in Norway in the mid 1800's the son
> > > of a wealthy land owner. In that lifetime my current
> > > father was my son who drowned when he was 10 and my
> > > daughter is now my wife (I know, Freud would have a
> > > field day with those dynamics) I was also Rick Archer
> > > in

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> With the film analogy, Rick's. recently posted exchange with friends
> come to mind.  Like two actors meeting 30 years after having done
> college drama together. 
> 
> Guy1: "So you are still doing community theatre like when I last 
? saw you?"
> 
> Guy2: "Yeah, its the greatest. Its by far the fastest track to the
> top, especially my theatre in located in Podunk, a town of 10,000 
> in the midwest, far from any urban center."
> 
> Guy1: "Really?"
> 
> Guy2: "Oh totally! Its the only way to get to the top. Its like a
> rocketship. You are really missing out! We do the same play over and
> over again, every season, with some minor variations to expand our 
> range."
>
> Guy1: " And what actors from your theatre have actually made it to 
> the top?" 
> 
> Guy2: " You just don't get it do you! Thasts so irrelevant a 
> question. Why are you so hostile and angry. Is it because of my 
> great success?"

Funny. And apt.

 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> > Do you two, and others who have identified some past life: do you
> > identify with that person?

It's just a role.

There was a funny story told about one of the great
actors, Lawrence Olivier. He was in a piece with a
younger actor, who was from the Method school of
acting -- put on the role at the beginning of prod-
uction, and *stay* in it until the film was finished.

They were shooting a scene together and, between takes,
the younger actor stayed in character, while "Larry"
dropped character the moment the director yelled "Cut."
Larry would be laughing and joking with the crew the
whole time, having a ball, and then when the director
called for the next take, snap! -- he'd be right back
in character. Then "Cut," and he'd be back to laughing
and joking with the crew, while the younger actor was
stuck in his role.

Finally the young actor asked Olivier, "Larry...how
do you DO this?"

Olivier looked at the young fellow and said, "It's 
called ACTING. You should try it someday."

:-)

[FairfieldLife] QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[do.rflex]

Thanks if you have an answer.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Duveyoung]

I read a quote from Lawrence Olivier about what makes actors tick.

He said, "Look at me.  Look at me.  Look at me."

So, actors are normal people after all, eh?

Edg


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> > With the film analogy, Rick's. recently posted exchange with friends
> > come to mind.  Like two actors meeting 30 years after having done
> > college drama together. 
> > 
> > Guy1: "So you are still doing community theatre like when I last 
> ? saw you?"
> > 
> > Guy2: "Yeah, its the greatest. Its by far the fastest track to the
> > top, especially my theatre in located in Podunk, a town of 10,000 
> > in the midwest, far from any urban center."
> > 
> > Guy1: "Really?"
> > 
> > Guy2: "Oh totally! Its the only way to get to the top. Its like a
> > rocketship. You are really missing out! We do the same play over and
> > over again, every season, with some minor variations to expand our 
> > range."
> >
> > Guy1: " And what actors from your theatre have actually made it to 
> > the top?" 
> > 
> > Guy2: " You just don't get it do you! Thasts so irrelevant a 
> > question. Why are you so hostile and angry. Is it because of my 
> > great success?"
> 
> Funny. And apt.
> 
>  
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> > >
> > > Do you two, and others who have identified some past life: do you
> > > identify with that person?
> 
> It's just a role.
> 
> There was a funny story told about one of the great
> actors, Lawrence Olivier. He was in a piece with a
> younger actor, who was from the Method school of
> acting -- put on the role at the beginning of prod-
> uction, and *stay* in it until the film was finished.
> 
> They were shooting a scene together and, between takes,
> the younger actor stayed in character, while "Larry"
> dropped character the moment the director yelled "Cut."
> Larry would be laughing and joking with the crew the
> whole time, having a ball, and then when the director
> called for the next take, snap! -- he'd be right back
> in character. Then "Cut," and he'd be back to laughing
> and joking with the crew, while the younger actor was
> stuck in his role.
> 
> Finally the young actor asked Olivier, "Larry...how
> do you DO this?"
> 
> Olivier looked at the young fellow and said, "It's 
> called ACTING. You should try it someday."
> 
> :-)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks if you have an answer.

Perhaps he was like author Erica Jong and had
a...uh...fear of frying.

:-)

Hey, you didn't specify *good* answer...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most 
> > imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen.
> > 
> > YouTube:
> > http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay
> 
> 
> MAGNIFICENT!  I've always felt that women were closer to Being
> [Divinity] by nature, than men. Unfortunately that sentiment is not
> predominant in this world. In fact, just the opposite appears to be
> the case:
> 
I've thought for awhile that the issue begins and ends with men 
being stronger physically and that the human race on this planet has 
not until pretty recently been able to see people in terms of merit, 
vs might is right. On the other hand if women were stronger, men 
would probably be in the same place of subservience. 

The one shining ray of hope is that I find many of the kids today 
are bright and balanced souls. My daughter who just completed 11th 
grade just has no sense of inequality in her, just doesn't 
acknowledge it when others attempt to apply it to her or get her to 
go along with it. Her friends are the same way. Not fighting for 
their rights, but rather never even entertaining the thought than 
they are anything more or less than 100% equal to anyone else. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > Thanks if you have an answer.
> 
> Perhaps he was like author Erica Jong and had
> a...uh...fear of frying.
> 
> :-)
> 
> Hey, you didn't specify *good* answer...
>
Barry's Mom: "Oh Barry, you are SO clever! Now don't eat so many 
cookies, you'll get chubby."
Barry: beaming.
:-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Thanks if you have an answer.
>
Having read that little book about Guru Dev, the real thing or 
something, I do recall he had awareness of being in his mother's womb. 
Given that and his strides in personal development during his life, 
there was no doubt an awareness of his subtle bodies, and dissolution 
in the Ganges was just a preferred way to go. I see him as a man vs an 
icon and then such things like cremation come down to his personal 
preferences. Even the gods have personal preferences. Other than that, 
as the Gita says, "the course of action is unfathomable.":-) 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 10, 2007, at 10:20 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Finally the young actor asked Olivier, "Larry...how
do you DO this?"

Olivier looked at the young fellow and said, "It's
called ACTING. You should try it someday."


That was to Dustin Hoffman, supposedly.  Also a great actor, just 
different--  although I do agree that Oliver's take sounds a lot more 
relaxing.  Can't say I ever quite grokked what the Method method was 
all about.  Whatever it's about, though, sure seems to have produced a 
lot of great acting.


Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[Peter]

Traditionally saints are not cremated because their
bodies are understood to be a continuing source of
darshan for many years. I'm sure the juice runs out at
some point though as the elements return to their
primal state and you have a pile of dust.

--- "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> 
> Thanks if you have an answer.
> 
> 
> 
> 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]
> 
> 
> 



 

Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast
with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most 
> > > imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen.
> > > 
> > > YouTube:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay
> > 
> > 
> > MAGNIFICENT!  I've always felt that women were closer to Being
> > [Divinity] by nature, than men. Unfortunately that sentiment is not
> > predominant in this world. In fact, just the opposite appears to be
> > the case:
> > 
> I've thought for awhile that the issue begins and ends with men 
> being stronger physically and that the human race on this planet has 
> not until pretty recently been able to see people in terms of merit, 
> vs might is right. On the other hand if women were stronger, men 
> would probably be in the same place of subservience.


Maybe I'm wrong, but I've understood that women's bodies are more
durable generally, than men's. The human female survives childbirth
better than the male.

I don't know for sure but I don't believe that in most matriarchal
societies treatment of the male is comparable to the misogyny we see
in the patriarchal world.

 
> The one shining ray of hope is that I find many of the kids today 
> are bright and balanced souls. My daughter who just completed 11th 
> grade just has no sense of inequality in her, just doesn't 
> acknowledge it when others attempt to apply it to her or get her to 
> go along with it. Her friends are the same way. Not fighting for 
> their rights, but rather never even entertaining the thought than 
> they are anything more or less than 100% equal to anyone else.


Love to hear that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks if you have an answer.
> >
> Having read that little book about Guru Dev, the real thing or 
> something, I do recall he had awareness of being in his mother's womb. 
> Given that and his strides in personal development during his life, 
> there was no doubt an awareness of his subtle bodies, and dissolution 
> in the Ganges was just a preferred way to go. I see him as a man vs an 
> icon and then such things like cremation come down to his personal 
> preferences. Even the gods have personal preferences. Other than that, 
> as the Gita says, "the course of action is unfathomable.":-)


Your answer of personal preference, makes sense to me.

[FairfieldLife] ME Must Work: Nadal Wins Third French Open

[new . morning]

Nadal just won his third straight French Open. And he is from and
lives in Mallorca. All of our rounding there clearly purified the
atmosphere there to allow and culture the raising of a champion on its
soil. 

(the MUM press office couldn't have said it better."

:)

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[new . morning]

Well, it does make you think where the term "Holt Shit" comes from.

Envision pilgrimages to ... 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Traditionally saints are not cremated because their
> bodies are understood to be a continuing source of
> darshan for many years. I'm sure the juice runs out at
> some point though as the elements return to their
> primal state and you have a pile of dust.
> 
> --- "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks if you have an answer.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>

> Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast
> with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Jun 10, 2007, at 10:20 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> > Finally the young actor asked Olivier, "Larry...how
> > do you DO this?"
> >
> > Olivier looked at the young fellow and said, "It's
> > called ACTING. You should try it someday."
> 
> That was to Dustin Hoffman, supposedly.  Also a great actor, 
> just different -- although I do agree that Oliver's take sounds 
> a lot more relaxing.  

Indeed. I once saw a documentary or "making of" that
showed Jack Nicholson doing about 20 takes of a scene
from "A Few Good Men." He was playing Col. Nathan R. 
Jessep, and in the scene he's sitting in the witness
chair being cross-examined by Tom Cruise. In the clip,
Nicholson never moves from the chair between takes.
But in between each take he's Just Jack, telling jokes,
laughing with people on the set. And then, like Olivier,
the director calls for the next take and like that!, in
a split second he's back in character as Jessep.
Quite a thing to see.

> Can't say I ever quite grokked what the Method method was 
> all about. Whatever it's about, though, sure seems to have 
> produced a lot of great acting.

Probably a lot of divorces and breakups, too. I mean,
once...way back when, Meryl Streep lived with Al Pacino.
Can you *imagine* that apartment if they were both
Method actors (Pacino is, I don't know if she is) 
playing heavy roles in different plays or films?  :-)

I ran into Al Pacino once in L.A. Literally. I was 
walking after work in the Little Tokyo area and I'd
come across what was obviously a film crew, shooting.
I was paying attention to what was going on across 
the street and walked right into this short guy. The
top of his head was barely at my chin level.

He mumbled something rather sinister-sounding, and I
looked down, and it was Al Pacino, between scenes,
pacing back and forth like a madman, totally in char-
acter. The movie they were shooting was "Scarface." 
Screy, lemme tell you.

Some of these method guys and gals really DO get into
character at the start of a movie and don't get out
of that character until the movie is finished. Can
you *imagine* what that must do to your personal life?
Can you imagine what it must have been like to live
with De Niro during the filming of "Taxi Driver?"

[FairfieldLife] Re: FFL Unresponsive

[bhairitu]

Funnier yet.  I can post here on the web site but I'm not getting the
emails though the settings are for email delivery.  More bad Yahoo
programming.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Since I just switched to AT&T Yahoo DSL from Earthlink I shouldn't get 
> anymore hard bounces unless they think their own servers are gone.  ;-)
> 
> Vaj wrote:
> > Yes, it's on again off again kinda thing. I often lose my email
due to 
> > "bounced" emails for some reason.
> >
> > On Jun 8, 2007, at 2:11 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> >> A new member signed up several days ago and at first opted to get
the 
> >> daily digest but then changed it to individual emails, but she's 
> >> still not getting individual emails. Another member went on vacation 
> >> and changed his setting several days ago to "no emails," yet he's 
> >> still getting individual emails. Are others experiencing problems 
> >> like this? Is this typical?
> >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 10, 2007, at 11:38 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:




Can't say I ever quite grokked what the Method method was
all about. Whatever it's about, though, sure seems to have
produced a lot of great acting.


Probably a lot of divorces and breakups, too.


And that's the result of the acting method they use?  Doubtful.  More 
like they take themselves so seriously they can't handle it when 
somebody else doesn't.  Don't know if I'd want to lay responsibility 
for that with anyone but the people themselves.  They could all have 
presumably chosen a different path to get to the same goal.


And I believe Olivier was divorced at least twice.


 I mean, once...way back when, Meryl Streep lived with Al Pacino.
Can you *imagine* that apartment if they were both
Method actors (Pacino is, I don't know if she is)
playing heavy roles in different plays or films?  :-)


Well, Pacino has never been divorced (never been married, to my 
knowledge at least) and Streep has been successfully married for almost 
30 years.


And actually, I have heard that Streep does *exactly* that during 
filming, stays in character take after take until the director calls 
for a long break or the day wraps.  And now that I think about it, it 
does make a certain amount of sense to not break your concentration if 
you're going to have to get right back in character.  Undoubtedly 
somebody of Olivier's stature, at the point in life he had reached, 
might not any longer see things that way  and wouldn't mind letting his 
guard down.  Would be interesting to know what he was like 30 years 
before that, though.  Bet he was a whole different person.


In the clip,
Nicholson never moves from the chair between takes.
But in between each take he's Just Jack, telling jokes,
laughing with people on the set. And then, like Olivier,
the director calls for the next take and like that!, in
a split second he's back in character as Jessep.
Quite a thing to see.

Nicholson almost never takes himself very seriously, as far as I can 
tell.  He's always got that twinkle in his eye and that way of forming 
an almost instant bond with the audience.  He's always pretty much just 
Jack, which is a big part of what, IMO, makes him great.


Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fateful Voice of a Generation Still Drowns Out Real Science

[Jason Spock]

 
   
  You got to be Joking.
   
  It's been well established that most Pesticides have a molecular 
resemblence to female hormones.  They contaminate the eco-system and cause 
effemination of males.

shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:18:51 -
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fateful Voice of a Generation Still Drowns Out 
Real Science

   
  Rachel Carson was probably responsible for more human deaths than Pol Pot, 
Fidel Castro, and Che Guevara combined.

Her science -- the Science of Scare -- is being replayed today as the 
Science of Global Warming. In other words, not a science but a fear-
mongering religion in which Al Gore is the Pope and David Suzuki one 
of his Cardinals.
   
   

   
-
Got a little couch potato? 
Check out fun summer activities for kids.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Jun 10, 2007, at 11:38 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> >
> >> Can't say I ever quite grokked what the Method method was
> >> all about. Whatever it's about, though, sure seems to have
> >> produced a lot of great acting.
> >
> > Probably a lot of divorces and breakups, too.
> 
> And that's the result of the acting method they use?
> Doubtful.  More like they take themselves so seriously
> they can't handle it when somebody else doesn't.

I suspect that's why they take to Method acting in
the first place, so the Method is correlated with
divorces and breakups, but the personality is the
underlying cause of both.

I also suspect there have been a lot of terrific
Method actors because a lot of inherently terrific
actors liked the Method. They'd have been terrific
no matter what approach they used, in other words.


> And I believe Olivier was divorced at least twice.

Twice, yes, and his second marriage to Vivien Liegh
was horrendously stormy (but probably mainly because
she was bipolar).

> >  I mean, once...way back when, Meryl Streep lived with Al Pacino.
> > Can you *imagine* that apartment if they were both
> > Method actors (Pacino is, I don't know if she is)
> > playing heavy roles in different plays or films?  :-)
> 
> Well, Pacino has never been divorced (never been married, to my 
> knowledge at least) and Streep has been successfully married for 
> almost 30 years.

I *think* Barry may be mistaken about Pacino and
Streep living together.


> Undoubtedly 
> somebody of Olivier's stature, at the point in life he had reached, 
> might not any longer see things that way  and wouldn't mind letting 
> his guard down.  Would be interesting to know what he was like 30 
> years before that, though.  Bet he was a whole different person.

I've seen a couple of interviews with Olivier in
his later years, and he seemed to me completely
inarticulate when asked about his approach to
acting. He was never a particularly emotive actor,
though; and you could almost always *see* him
acting--albeit brilliantly.

> In the clip,
> Nicholson never moves from the chair between takes.
> But in between each take he's Just Jack, telling jokes,
> laughing with people on the set. And then, like Olivier,
> the director calls for the next take and like that!, in
> a split second he's back in character as Jessep.
> Quite a thing to see.
> 
> Nicholson almost never takes himself very seriously, as far as I 
> can tell.

He takes his acting *dreadfully* seriously, at
least according to one interview with him I read.

> He's always got that twinkle in his eye and that way of forming 
> an almost instant bond with the audience.  He's always pretty much
> just Jack, which is a big part of what, IMO, makes him great.

By me, he's the most overrated actor in Hollywood. As
far as I'm concerned, the only good thing he's done
was his smallish part as Eugene O'Neill in Warren
Beatty's "Reds." As you say, he's always pretty much
just Jack; and as with Olivier, you can almost always
see him acting, but with nowhere near as good results.
Why he even bothers with the Method, I can't imagine.
It doesn't seem to me to have done him any good.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most 
> > imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen.
> > 
> > YouTube:
> > http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay
> >
> Thanks for sharing this- it is an amazing piece and must have taken 
> quite a while to compile. I was trying to figure out if the 
sequence 
> was purely historical. Close but probably not exactly. Really liked 
> it!:-)

It's only *very* roughly chronological. It covers
about 500 years. The first half covers the first 
250 years or so, but it goes back and forth in time
over that period. The second half goes back and forth
too, but it's a little closer to being in historical
order.

I just watched it again, and this time I noticed
something kind of sad: even in the second half,
there aren't any paintings of women of color. Maybe
a couple are, but they aren't obviously so. There
are plenty the creator of the video could have
chosen from.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Dector: A Prison of the Mind, Sthapatya Veda

[authfriend]

A veritable feast of red herrings from Vaj,
along with several new lies:

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 5, 2007, at 10:53 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Jun 4, 2007, at 10:00 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > > Here's the lie Vaj told:
> > > >
> > > > "if you do a web search for 'Do nothing and accomplish
> > > > everything' the phrase is usually tied to get rich
> > > > quick schemes."
> > > >
> > > > In fact, virtually every Google hit on the phrase
> > > > is tied to Gratzon's book, which is not, of course,
> > > > a "get rich quick scheme."
> > >
> > > Well, since you failed to define a "get rich quick
> > > scheme" I find your lame response unconvincing.
> >
> > Most people (including you) know what "get-rich-quick
> > scheme" refers to:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get-rich-quick_scheme
> 
> Not at all the type of scheme I was referring to.

Yes, it is.

 Of course it should  
> be clear that I was specifically talking about TM org inspired  
> schemes for success, wealth and/or financial gain through support
> of natural law, etc.

A get-rich-quick scheme is a get-rich-quick
scheme, no matter who or what "inspires" it.

> But then again, Judy knew that

Not only didn't I, I still don't. What I do
know is that this is Vaj continuing to try to
justify his lie.


> > More importantly, though, your lie suggested the
> > links were to lots of different get-rich-quick
> > schemes, not to a single book.
> 
> And there are others. Will I take the time to hunt them down
> and list them for you? Unlikely for me to contact people I've
> not seen in years, nor is it likely I will violate their 
> confidentiality by doing so publicly.

Utter non sequitur, another attempted diversion.

As Vaj knows, I've said several times now that
I'm *not* suggesting TMers haven't engaged in
get-rich-quick schemes. Vaj continues to batter
what he is well aware is a straw man.

> Besides I've already proven my point with hundreds of links.

Hilarious. Vaj has done no such thing, of
course. He hasn't provided even *one* link.

> I'm sure you'll get over it in time if you try.

No, I think I'll keep right on pointing
out that Vaj is building a veritable
mountain of lies in an attempt to cover up
the first one.

> How many movement entrepreneurs were you friends with Judy? Please  
> share some of your friend's misfortunes online on a public forum,  
> we'd love to hear them. I take it you get my point.

Another non sequitur. Exactly what would
it prove if I did, or did not, know any
such people?

 After all, you  
> claim to have 'been around' in the TMO. Surely you know
> someone since you've been around the TMO so much.

To the contrary, I've said explicitly that
I'm not even on the periphery of the TMO, as
Vaj knows.

> Just for the record, there was no indication whether or not
> these hundreds of links would be connected to a single book
> or not (kind of irrelevant since some of these are links to 
> different people).

I checked quite a few in which the text of
the Google hits did not mention Gratzon or
his book. On the pages themselves, every one
of them had to do with Gratzon and his book.

> The intention was to demonstrate they simply exist on the web, at
> that time.

Vaj's intention was to suggest that Google
lists lots of sites about different TM-
related get-rich-quick schemes tied to the
phrase "Do nothing and accomplish everything."
It does not. Vaj was lying.


> > > So let's look at Judy's assertion that Gratzon's book is not
> > > part of the genre of "get rich quick scheme" books and whether
> > > or not it aims a quicker approach to starting a business
> > > compared to the more traditional approaches.
> >
> > Irrelevant argument on both counts. There are no
> > "schemes" in Gratzon's book, so it isn't part of
> > the genre of books advancing such schemes.
> 
> Of course, IMO the book is about such schemes

No, it's not. Again, what it's about is
changing one's attitude about effort being
required to make money, the thesis being that
once you get over that attitude, things tend
to automatically fall into place.

There are no "schemes" proposed in the book.

, so this is an  
> irrelevant point. People tend to do their "scheming" in private.

Entirely irrelevant. I never claimed nobody
devised their own schemes after reading the
book, as Vaj knows.

 And  
> of course the number of schemes operating under the 'do nothing,  
> accomplish everything' rubric extend beyond the ideas in a book.  
> Different people interpreted it differently and applied it  
> differently.

I never suggested otherwise, as Vaj knows.
Another red herring.

 > Rather,
> > it attempts to prepare readers psychologically to
> > approach the endeavor of making money without
> > thinking it has to involve great effort on their
> > part. His basic thesis is that once you stop
> > thinking this way, things begin to fall int

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "larry.potter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most 
> > imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen.
> > 
> > YouTube:
> > http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay
> 
> i *saw* one woman that has many faces; no wonder i love them all.   ;)
> 
> lovely.

Oh, Larry, what a wonderful perception! That's a
real day-brightener.

[FairfieldLife] Re: What Does The self Fear Most?

[authfriend]

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

> Ok, here is the point that's intrigued me. I fully
> admit to having read very little Advaita, where these
> ideas seem to be coming from. I walked away from TM
> and having much of an interest in the Hindu-based
> philosophies 25 years ago, and wandered down paths
> more frequented by Buddhists.
> 
> So when I first encountered, a few days ago, your use
> of the term "primal identification," and, even more
> shocking (to me), "sin" used with regard to manifestation,
> it kinda threw me for a loop. I must admit to having
> NEVER entertained such a concept as "sin" with regard
> to the manifest universe.

I'd love to know where the notion that Advaita views
manifestation as "sin" came from. I've never
encountered that idea in any of the material I've
read on Advaita, and certainly not from Maharishi.

If there is "sin," as I understand it, it's in
having "forgotten" one's unmanifest nature.

Then there's this, two responses MMY has given (at
different times) to the question, "Why did the
Absolute manifest?"

(1) Perhaps for the sake of variety?

(2) It didn't.

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[emptybill]

Guru Dev Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was a renunciate in Adi-Shankara's
monastic order - known as dashanami sampradaya. The name "sampradaya
dasha-nami" means "lineage of ten names", each name refering to a
specific designation.  Paramahansa Yogananda's guru, Sri Yukteshvar was
a dashanami with the sannyasa name - Swami Yukteshvara Giri ("giri"
means mountain). The 1930's guru Swami Shivananda of Rishikesh was a
Saraswati (meaning both river and goddess) as is Swami Satchitananda. 
Based upon my recollection, the Saraswati lineage is only open to
never-married Brahmins.  Other castes must use one of the other
designations.

Dashanami sannyasins (swami-s) have formally renouced the world
(including family ties) during their invesiture with cloth, name, pot
and somtimes staff. This rite has to be performed by another dashanamin
(usually one's own dashanami guru). This formal rite usually includes
diksha of one of the Mahavakya-s (great utterances) from one of the 12
Upanishads commented upon by Shankara. This clarifying statement about
the nature of reality is then used by the new swami as the contemplative
and meditative focus of practice. Tat-tvam-asi (That you are) is the
most well known mahavakya.

Because of their intense renunciation and unbroken contemplative
discernment, Swami sannyasins are considered to already be thoroughly
burned in the fire of tapasya (spiritual ascesis). Therefore their
bodies are not consumed in a fureral fire but are usually buried or
interned in a stone monument called a "samadhi".

Guru Dev chose internment in a stone coffin and submergence in the
Ganges. It was his way to demonstrate to devotees that he was gone
beyond and that there was nothing they could hold. The changing (nitya)
and unchanging (anitya) are considered incommesurate and this is the
focus of their teachings to others.

empty


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Thanks if you have an answer.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Sal Sunshine]

On Jun 10, 2007, at 12:54 PM, authfriend wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:


On Jun 10, 2007, at 11:38 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:




Can't say I ever quite grokked what the Method method was
all about. Whatever it's about, though, sure seems to have
produced a lot of great acting.


Probably a lot of divorces and breakups, too.


And that's the result of the acting method they use?
Doubtful.  More like they take themselves so seriously
they can't handle it when somebody else doesn't.


I suspect that's why they take to Method acting in
the first place, so the Method is correlated with
divorces and breakups, but the personality is the
underlying cause of both.


Yep.


I also suspect there have been a lot of terrific
Method actors because a lot of inherently terrific
actors liked the Method. They'd have been terrific
no matter what approach they used, in other words.


Agreed.  And to even get into the school that taught it, the  one in 
NYC, I'm pretty sure you already had to have made some kind of name for 
yourself already, demonstrated some better-than-average acting ability 
for them to even consider you.




 I mean, once...way back when, Meryl Streep lived with Al Pacino.
Can you *imagine* that apartment if they were both
Method actors (Pacino is, I don't know if she is)
playing heavy roles in different plays or films?  :-)


Well, Pacino has never been divorced (never been married, to my
knowledge at least) and Streep has been successfully married for
almost 30 years.


I *think* Barry may be mistaken about Pacino and
Streep living together.


Yeah, I think he's thinking of John Cazales, another actor from the 
Godfather whom Streep was engaged to and who died of cancer shortly 
before they were supposed to be married.




Undoubtedly
somebody of Olivier's stature, at the point in life he had reached,
might not any longer see things that way  and wouldn't mind letting
his guard down.  Would be interesting to know what he was like 30
years before that, though.  Bet he was a whole different person.


I've seen a couple of interviews with Olivier in
his later years, and he seemed to me completely
inarticulate when asked about his approach to
acting. He was never a particularly emotive actor,
though; and you could almost always *see* him
acting--albeit brilliantly.




Nicholson almost never takes himself very seriously, as far as I
can tell.


He takes his acting *dreadfully* seriously, at
least according to one interview with him I read.


By me, he's the most overrated actor in Hollywood.


I'd say that title goes to Tom Cruise by a mile.  Could never figure 
out that guy's popularity.  Nicholson at least is fun to watch, IMO.


Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] ME Must Work: Nadal Wins Third French Open

[gullible fool]

The advanced VortexHealing class known as "Omega" was
held in Mallorca two years ago May and the third Omega
class will commence in exactly one week. Must have
helped.
  
--- "new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Nadal just won his third straight French Open. And
> he is from and
> lives in Mallorca. All of our rounding there clearly
> purified the
> atmosphere there to allow and culture the raising of
> a champion on its
> soil. 
> 
> (the MUM press office couldn't have said it better."
> 
> :)
> 
> 
> 
> 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]
> 
> 
> 



 

Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

[FairfieldLife] Re: What Does The self Fear Most?

[Duveyoung]

Judy,

We agree.  I use "sin" merely as a poetic term for "you're screwed, dude."

If the Absolute "level" is ignored, then one is, as if, committing
suicide -- Ramana has definitely used the word "suicide" for this
identification -- exclusively -- with amness/isness, since it "kills"
the Self by misdirection.  So, I feel like "sin" is poetically close
enough for "un-enlightenment."  

Turq espouses amness is the Self, but if that concept is in actuality
not one's living mindful experience (hopefully it is for Turq) and if
that concept is merely dogma-believed, then calling amness the Self is
egoic delusion-attachment despite it being a true statement.  

Until the Absolute is realized, the ego will indeed be evolving
towards realization via the yagyas of normal life, and the ego will be
found to say, "I'm evolving towards realizing the Absolute."  But,
though it is a correct statement, the ego can never reach the Absolute
nor "see it" in order to target it, nor do anything at all but yet
seemingly be sentient nonetheless. 

It can be discovered that the sentience behind ego resides solely in
the Absolute, but only by a neti-neti-neti process whereby one finally
says, "I've sought every WHERE, and none of this is the Absolute, and
none of this is sentient, including the ego that is presently thinking
it is sentient, and since only the Absolute remains unsearched, well,
that's where real sentience must abide." That's amness being
indirectly aware of the Absolute by a concluding process, not an
experience of the Absolute which cannot be any quality ever.

I think Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is on record as saying that the purpose
of creation (amness) is the expansion of happiness.  I'm comfortable
with that as the primal intent of amness, but the connection between
the Absolute and the arising of that primal intent to manifest can
only be realized -- not understood via mechanical sense of being able
to trace back to the source of amness -- Brahma failed the lotus stalk
test after all.  

The mind-you cannot get there.  Absolute-you cannot be anywhere else.
 If the mind is processing "looking for me," only the Absolute can be
found, but only by the mind ceasing to exist for a moment.  If the
mind is looking for anything else, only amness can be found.  The
mantra is sought by the mind, so it is followed to amness, but inside
amness, no mantra and no mind can be found, and thus no "leading to
the Absolute" can happen.

See Message #133187 for my tale of a geranium.
  
http://tinyurl.com/2jn8yt

I think Turq views every speck of life as being as valuable as that
geranium.  An atheist appreciating life as sacred, go figure.  I think
Turq is an angel -- deeply addicted to amness' offers.  Just like me.  '-)

Judy, your reply will very interesting to me, since I think you've
"got it" when it comes to using movement nomenclature.  Perhaps a
dictionary written by us can be a bridge between our worlds.

Edg






--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> 
> > Ok, here is the point that's intrigued me. I fully
> > admit to having read very little Advaita, where these
> > ideas seem to be coming from. I walked away from TM
> > and having much of an interest in the Hindu-based
> > philosophies 25 years ago, and wandered down paths
> > more frequented by Buddhists.
> > 
> > So when I first encountered, a few days ago, your use
> > of the term "primal identification," and, even more
> > shocking (to me), "sin" used with regard to manifestation,
> > it kinda threw me for a loop. I must admit to having
> > NEVER entertained such a concept as "sin" with regard
> > to the manifest universe.
> 
> I'd love to know where the notion that Advaita views
> manifestation as "sin" came from. I've never
> encountered that idea in any of the material I've
> read on Advaita, and certainly not from Maharishi.
> 
> If there is "sin," as I understand it, it's in
> having "forgotten" one's unmanifest nature.
> 
> Then there's this, two responses MMY has given (at
> different times) to the question, "Why did the
> Absolute manifest?"
> 
> (1) Perhaps for the sake of variety?
> 
> (2) It didn't.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: What Does The self Fear Most?

[authfriend]

A couple of comments below...

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Judy,
> 
> We agree.  I use "sin" merely as a poetic term for "you're screwed, 
dude."
> 
> If the Absolute "level" is ignored, then one is, as if, committing
> suicide -- Ramana has definitely used the word "suicide" for this
> identification -- exclusively -- with amness/isness, since 
it "kills"
> the Self by misdirection.  So, I feel like "sin" is poetically close
> enough for "un-enlightenment."  
> 
> Turq espouses amness is the Self, but if that concept is in 
actuality
> not one's living mindful experience (hopefully it is for Turq) and 
if
> that concept is merely dogma-believed, then calling amness the Self 
is
> egoic delusion-attachment despite it being a true statement.  
> 
> Until the Absolute is realized, the ego will indeed be evolving
> towards realization via the yagyas of normal life, and the ego will 
be
> found to say, "I'm evolving towards realizing the Absolute."  But,
> though it is a correct statement, the ego can never reach the 
Absolute
> nor "see it" in order to target it, nor do anything at all but yet
> seemingly be sentient nonetheless. 
> 
> It can be discovered that the sentience behind ego resides solely in
> the Absolute, but only by a neti-neti-neti process whereby one 
finally
> says, "I've sought every WHERE, and none of this is the Absolute, 
and
> none of this is sentient, including the ego that is presently 
thinking
> it is sentient, and since only the Absolute remains unsearched, 
well,
> that's where real sentience must abide." That's amness being
> indirectly aware of the Absolute by a concluding process, not an
> experience of the Absolute which cannot be any quality ever.
> 
> I think Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is on record as saying that the 
purpose
> of creation (amness) is the expansion of happiness.  I'm comfortable
> with that as the primal intent of amness, but the connection between
> the Absolute and the arising of that primal intent to manifest can
> only be realized -- not understood via mechanical sense of being 
able
> to trace back to the source of amness -- Brahma failed the lotus 
stalk
> test after all.  
> 
> The mind-you cannot get there.  Absolute-you cannot be anywhere 
else.
>  If the mind is processing "looking for me," only the Absolute can 
be
> found, but only by the mind ceasing to exist for a moment.  If the
> mind is looking for anything else, only amness can be found.  The
> mantra is sought by the mind, so it is followed to amness, but 
inside
> amness, no mantra and no mind can be found, and thus no "leading to
> the Absolute" can happen.

This, I really don't follow at all. First you say the
Absolute can be found only by the mind ceasing to
exist; then you say when the mind ceases to exist
at the end of the mantra trail, there can be no
finding of the Absolute.  Huh??

> See Message #133187 for my tale of a geranium.
>   
> http://tinyurl.com/2jn8yt
> 
> I think Turq views every speck of life as being as valuable as that
> geranium.  An atheist appreciating life as sacred, go figure.  I 
think
> Turq is an angel -- deeply addicted to amness' offers.  Just like 
me.  '-)
> 
> Judy, your reply will very interesting to me, since I think you've
> "got it" when it comes to using movement nomenclature.  Perhaps a
> dictionary written by us can be a bridge between our worlds.

Oy, I'm not sure I'm up to the challenge.

Let me ask you something, though. Where do you
(if you do) fit Brahman into your scheme?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[george_deforest]

> new.morning wrote:
>
> Do you two, and others who have identified some past life: do you
> identify with that person?
> 
> Some jyoptishis (probably with some psychic abilities) have told me
> what I was in the past. While it seems to fit, I don't particualry
> relate or identify with that person. Similar with my past "lives" /
> days in this life. I can identify "that" person, but I don't
> particularly identify with him. Sort of like identifying a family
> member. Perhaps sometimes, it seem, like identifying the wandering
> black sheep of the family, when bailing him out of jail: "yeah oficer,
> thats one of 'ours'. We'll take responsibility for him and try to keep
> him out of trouble". 

interesting question. i dont think we are supposed to "identify"
too much with past lives. Usually we forget them, and probably that is
as Nature intended. The only really important incarnation is the one
we have "in the Now", because as MMY used to say: "the past is just
a lesser state of evolution".

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Helen Wambaugh did a lot of data gathering using a simple 
> recollection technique in large groups over a couple of years.
> She obtained past-life recall memories for 30,000+ people. The 
> overwhelming response she catalogued does not fit our usual 
> prejudgments bases upon the self-deluded musings of the new-
> agers we all have met.
> 
> Based upon her data, very few people experienced any 
> historically relevant lifetime and of those who did, they 
> usually were only accessories to people with power or
> influence. The mass totality were typically simple folk - 
> village dwellers or farmers of various kinds.

Heh. I was going to write a very similar post.
I couldn't remember the name of the researcher,
though, so I'm glad you did (except that it's 
Wambach, not Wambaugh).

I'm not sure it was 30,000 people, more like 1,000,
at least from what I found on the Web.

In any case, her findings were quite striking in
a number of respects. She had apparently set out to
*disprove* reincarnation, but the results convinced
her it was a real phenomenon.

She wrote two books, "Life Before Life" and "Reliving
Past Lives" (both out of print but available used).

This is a pretty good (if uncritical) summary of
what Wambach discovered:

http://www.halexandria.org/dward433.htm

Among other things, her subjects were virtually
unanimous that they did not inhabit the fetus
that was to become their body until at least six
months' gestation, and in some cases not until
right before birth.

At some point it becomes more difficult to
*explain away* results like hers than to simply
accept that reincarnation is a reality.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> " I'm always amused by the New Age tendency to claim
> > that they were *famous* people in the past. The Rama
> > guy claimed he was Cardinal Richilieu; I can't see
> > that *at all*. And Shirley MacLaine's been any
> > *number* of famous people. Wasn't anyone ever the
> > scullery maids and the cooks and the janitors?  :-)"
> 
> Not to mention the "math" problem that there are so many
> more people alive today than any time in history.

Er, what you'd want to compare is the number of
people alive today with the total number of people
who have ever lived (including in prehistoric times),
not with the population at any particular time in
history.


> There is a great story about Bridy Murphy who had gone
> to a world's fair and seen a detailed medieval village in 
> miniature as a child.  Years later she remembered details
> about her "past" life in those times it was taken as proof
> of the theory until the true nature of her "memories" were
> uncovered.

The Bridey Murphy past life wasn't in medieval
times but in 19th century Ireland. I believe
you've got her confused with somebody else.

The Bridey Murphy case, as it happens, was purportedly
debunked as well by "experts," but subsequent detailed
examination of the "debunking" has revealed that it
wasn't anywhere near as thorough and definitive as
claimed.

See this chapter in the book by C.J. Ducasse, "A
Critical Examination of the Belief in a Life
After Death," available on the Web at:

http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/books/ducasse/critical/25.htm

http://tinyurl.com/3544ek

Ducasse's summary of his findings on the Bridey
Murphy case is that the woman's recollections
under hypnosis of her life as Bridey Murphy do
not constitute proof, but that they have not been
disproved either. (He also suggests that, rather
than specific memories of a past life, the
information the woman supposedly "remembered" may
actually have been a matter of paranormal
knowledge of these facts. So he isn't a True
Believer in reincarnation per se by any means.)

Commenting on the supposed debunking,
Ducasse makes an interesting observation:

"As repeatedly has been pointed out in earlier
chapters, the temptations to wishful thinking
and to emotionally biassed [sic] conclusions
are even greater on the side of the entrenched
religious orthodoxy of the time and place
concerned, or on the side of the vested
'scientific commonsense of the epoch,' than on
the side of the protagonists of prima facie
paradoxical views."

[FairfieldLife] Re: QUESTION: Does anyone know why Guru Dev chose not to be cremated?

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Guru Dev Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was a renunciate in Adi-Shankara's
> monastic order - known as dashanami sampradaya. The name "sampradaya
> dasha-nami" means "lineage of ten names", each name refering to a
> specific designation.  Paramahansa Yogananda's guru, Sri Yukteshvar was
> a dashanami with the sannyasa name - Swami Yukteshvara Giri ("giri"
> means mountain). The 1930's guru Swami Shivananda of Rishikesh was a
> Saraswati (meaning both river and goddess) as is Swami Satchitananda. 
> Based upon my recollection, the Saraswati lineage is only open to
> never-married Brahmins.  Other castes must use one of the other
> designations.
> 
> Dashanami sannyasins (swami-s) have formally renouced the world
> (including family ties) during their invesiture with cloth, name, pot
> and somtimes staff. This rite has to be performed by another dashanamin
> (usually one's own dashanami guru). This formal rite usually includes
> diksha of one of the Mahavakya-s (great utterances) from one of the 12
> Upanishads commented upon by Shankara. This clarifying statement about
> the nature of reality is then used by the new swami as the contemplative
> and meditative focus of practice. Tat-tvam-asi (That you are) is the
> most well known mahavakya.
> 
> Because of their intense renunciation and unbroken contemplative
> discernment, Swami sannyasins are considered to already be thoroughly
> burned in the fire of tapasya (spiritual ascesis). Therefore their
> bodies are not consumed in a fureral fire but are usually buried or
> interned in a stone monument called a "samadhi".
> 
> Guru Dev chose internment in a stone coffin and submergence in the
> Ganges. It was his way to demonstrate to devotees that he was gone
> beyond and that there was nothing they could hold. The changing (nitya)
> and unchanging (anitya) are considered incommesurate and this is the
> focus of their teachings to others.


Thanks again.


> 
> empty
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks if you have an answer.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Reversal of subtle pranas key to transcending...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> I see her quite differently, now that my own anger/hurt/
> blame around the TMO has been healed. Essentially in this
> bodymind of awareness, she's a Dharmapala of practically
> perfect diamond-mind!

Needless, perhaps, to say, I'm thoroughly
enjoying this discussion. ;-)

There's a very odd resonance to it, however,
that Rory will probably find of interest.

A couple of years ago on alt.m.t, Barry took
to referring to me not by name but as "the
pig." That was amusing, to say the least.

But then he attacked another of his critics
with this:

[You are] still unable even to 
> > *conceive* of disagreeing with someone 
> > politically or spiritually and still being able 
> > to treat them like a human being.

I pointed out that this was an interesting
complaint from a person who was in the habit
of referring to me as a pig.

I added:

> And if you keep on doing it, I will assume my true form 
> and pay you a visit in the dead of night: 
>
> http://tinyurl.com/5yvfu 
>
> You have been warned.

Check out the link, Rory. Then click on the
"Back" button on the left of the page to see
what it's an image of (if you don't recognize
it).

I had discovered it while surfing one day
and thought it seemed a propos...

(That site, by the way, is quite extraordinary.
Worth taking some time to explore.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Reversal of subtle pranas key to transcending...

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There's a very odd resonance to it, however,
> that Rory will probably find of interest.
> 
> A couple of years ago on alt.m.t, Barry took
> to referring to me not by name but as "the
> pig." That was amusing, to say the least.

Ah, another relaxing, rejeuvenating long
weekend, eh Jude? The kind that helps one
get centered and more able to...uh...live 
in the present? :-)

But if you're *gonna* live in the past, 
and attempt to suck others into it as
well, you should at least go back a tad 
further in the past, to the *genesis* of 
me referring to you as a pig. It had not 
to do with your porcine features or your
tendency to root around in the mud, but 
with your tendency to attempt to draw out 
arguments as long as humanly possible.

a.m.t.,  Mar 22 2004:
> However, it does seem obvious that to pursue the issue further
> would be beating a dead horse. I have said pretty much all I can
> say on the subject, and although I am pretty certain Judy could
> talk *forever* about it or any other subject, I have neither the
> time nor the inclination to hear it.
> 
> For I really *do* believe that any further discussion (and since
> we are speaking of Judy here, read "argument" for "discussion"
> and "endless" for "further") is fruitless. An older friend of my
> father's used to say, "You can discuss philosophy with a pig, but
> it doesn't settle anything, and it only aggravates the pig."
> 
> And yes, for fans of When Harry Met Sally, Judy is the pig in 
> this scenario.  :-)

For the record, I never meant to infer that 
Judy was a pig, per se. I spent some time 
growing up on farms, and I have more respect 
for pigs than to do that. Pigs *are* tempera-
mental, and may have their angry moments, but 
no pig in my experience has ever held a grudge 
for three years. :-)

How many posts are you going to waste trash-
ing me and Vaj *this* week, Judy? I find it
interesting that you returned to FFL to find 
it a veritable bastion of gentility, with nary
an argument or harsh word in sight. And it
took you less than two hours of posting to 
bring it down to your level again.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the most spectacularly well-done, most beautiful, most 
> > > imaginative, most uplifting video I've ever seen.
> > > 
> > > YouTube:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/2r73ay
> > >
> > Thanks for sharing this- it is an amazing piece and must have 
taken 
> > quite a while to compile. I was trying to figure out if the 
> sequence 
> > was purely historical. Close but probably not exactly. Really 
liked 
> > it!:-)
> 
> It's only *very* roughly chronological. It covers
> about 500 years. The first half covers the first 
> 250 years or so, but it goes back and forth in time
> over that period. The second half goes back and forth
> too, but it's a little closer to being in historical
> order.

That was my general sense- the moving within roughly defined periods.
 
> I just watched it again, and this time I noticed
> something kind of sad: even in the second half,
> there aren't any paintings of women of color. Maybe
> a couple are, but they aren't obviously so. There
> are plenty the creator of the video could have
> chosen from.
>
eh- probably would've been a little jarring to morph that way. we'll 
save that for Gaugin (sp?) version...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Reversal of subtle pranas key to transcending...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > There's a very odd resonance to it, however,
> > that Rory will probably find of interest.
> > 
> > A couple of years ago on alt.m.t, Barry took
> > to referring to me not by name but as "the
> > pig." That was amusing, to say the least.
> 
> Ah, another relaxing, rejeuvenating long
> weekend, eh Jude? The kind that helps one
> get centered and more able to...uh...live 
> in the present? :-)

Barry. Read the context. This had to do with
something Rory said. I had to give some of
the backstory, or the connection wouldn't
have made any sense.

I'm sorry it embarrasses you, but them's
the breaks, I'm afraid.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:

> > I just watched it again, and this time I noticed
> > something kind of sad: even in the second half,
> > there aren't any paintings of women of color. Maybe
> > a couple are, but they aren't obviously so. There
> > are plenty the creator of the video could have
> > chosen from.
> >
> eh- probably would've been a little jarring to morph that way. 
we'll 
> save that for Gaugin (sp?) version...

Don't know why it would have been jarring.
That guy could morph *anything*. I think it
would have been a wonderful touch. As Larry
said so beautifully, one woman with many
faces.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[emptybill]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
> I'm not sure it was 30,000 people, more like 1,000,
> at least from what I found on the Web.
> 
> In any case, her findings were quite striking in
> a number of respects. She had apparently set out to
> *disprove* reincarnation, but the results convinced
> her it was a real phenomenon.
> 
> > 
> At some point it becomes more difficult to
> *explain away* results like hers than to simply
> accept that reincarnation is a reality.
>

Yes. Thanks for the clarification on numbers. I read those numbers in 
someone's account of her research about seven or eight years ago. It 
could be an error in the critic's account of her work or just a 
confusion in my memory - although that large number was one of the 
data that pulled at my attention when first hearing about it. Perhaps 
it was just an ordinary fuzzy memory, like my recall of her name.

When your old, toothless and tettering like me - help me booduh gay-
reb dora-jay - (provided for Vaj) then remembering anything is like a 
convincing proof that the cause of this moment is the preceding 
moment. Notice I said like. Like my 18 year old daughter would say. 

Again thanks for the clarification.

empty

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > wrote:
> 
> > > I just watched it again, and this time I noticed
> > > something kind of sad: even in the second half,
> > > there aren't any paintings of women of color. Maybe
> > > a couple are, but they aren't obviously so. There
> > > are plenty the creator of the video could have
> > > chosen from.
> > >
> > eh- probably would've been a little jarring to morph that way. 
> we'll 
> > save that for Gaugin (sp?) version...
> 
> Don't know why it would have been jarring.
> That guy could morph *anything*. I think it
> would have been a wonderful touch. As Larry
> said so beautifully, one woman with many
> faces.
>
Come to think of it, why not go all out and do a morph with all 
living things included? Anything with a face anyway...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Reversal of subtle pranas key to transcending...

[Rory Goff]

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

> Needless, perhaps, to say, I'm thoroughly
> enjoying this discussion. ;-)
> 
> There's a very odd resonance to it, however,
> that Rory will probably find of interest.

I did, Judy; many thanks! A few additional comments below...
 
> A couple of years ago on alt.m.t, Barry took
> to referring to me not by name but as "the
> pig." That was amusing, to say the least.
> 
> But then he attacked another of his critics
> with this:
> 
> [You are] still unable even to 
> > > *conceive* of disagreeing with someone 
> > > politically or spiritually and still being able 
> > > to treat them like a human being.
> 
> I pointed out that this was an interesting
> complaint from a person who was in the habit
> of referring to me as a pig.

*lol*
 
> I added:
> 
> > And if you keep on doing it, I will assume my true form 
> > and pay you a visit in the dead of night: 
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/5yvfu 
> >
> > You have been warned.
> 
> Check out the link, Rory. Then click on the
> "Back" button on the left of the page to see
> what it's an image of (if you don't recognize
> it).
> 
> I had discovered it while surfing one day
> and thought it seemed a propos...

*LOL* Wow! That's *beautiful* Judy! Many thanks ... great story! :-D

> (That site, by the way, is quite extraordinary.
> Worth taking some time to explore.)

Yes, it does look interesting... I'm going back to look into it in 
more detail. And thank you also for the *eternal Woman* youtube 
video. Gorgeous!

*L*L*L*

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> When your old, toothless and tettering like me - help me booduh
> gay-reb dora-jay - (provided for Vaj) then remembering anything
> is like a convincing proof that the cause of this moment is the 
> preceding moment. Notice I said like. Like my 18 year old daughter 
> would say. 

  I have the distinct sense you still have a
few teeth left.

But I ain't too far behind ya on the memory thing.
Thank God for the Web!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Women in Art

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > > > I just watched it again, and this time I noticed
> > > > something kind of sad: even in the second half,
> > > > there aren't any paintings of women of color. Maybe
> > > > a couple are, but they aren't obviously so. There
> > > > are plenty the creator of the video could have
> > > > chosen from.
> > > >
> > > eh- probably would've been a little jarring to morph that way. 
> > we'll 
> > > save that for Gaugin (sp?) version...
> > 
> > Don't know why it would have been jarring.
> > That guy could morph *anything*. I think it
> > would have been a wonderful touch. As Larry
> > said so beautifully, one woman with many
> > faces.
> >
> Come to think of it, why not go all out and do a morph with all 
> living things included? Anything with a face anyway...

Unity Consciousness on YouTube!

>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Reversal of subtle pranas key to transcending...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> > Check out the link, Rory. Then click on the
> > "Back" button on the left of the page to see
> > what it's an image of (if you don't recognize
> > it).
> > 
> > I had discovered it while surfing one day
> > and thought it seemed a propos...
> 
> *LOL* Wow! That's *beautiful* Judy! Many thanks ... great story! :-D

Turns out he's a buffalo rather than a pig,
according to the traditional iconography.
But with that snout, he looks enough like a
pig to have served the purpose.

I had no idea who he was at the time, and
for that matter, I have no idea now why
your exchange with Vaj about moi as
Dharmapala called him to mind. I certainly
didn't remember his name or status.

> > (That site, by the way, is quite extraordinary.
> > Worth taking some time to explore.)
> 
> Yes, it does look interesting... I'm going back to look into it in 
> more detail. And thank you also for the *eternal Woman* youtube 
> video. Gorgeous!

Glad you liked it. I couldn't find the video
creator's name anywhere, but kudos to him or her.
A real labor of love.

[FairfieldLife] FYI - for the Buddhists and quasi-Buddhists in FF

[emptybill]

Rime Shedrub Ling Tibetan Buddhist CentersAnd Younge Khachab
RinpocheWarmly welcome you to attend our annual summer Dzogchen
RetreatJuly 13th – 17th, 2007 in Madison, Wisconsin  Ka Gye Deshek
Dupa
The transmission of the Eight Vidyadharas
And teachings on the Seven Nails of Shri Singha
The Ka Gye Deshek Dupa is the pith teachings given by
the Dakini Leyki Wangmo to great Mahasiddhis,
including Padmasambhava. They have to do with the
accomplishment practices of the Anu and Ati-yoga cycle
of teachings.
This is an extremely rare offering in the West keeping
in the tradition Rinpoche has established of creating
a Sangha of learned practitioners in the Nyingma and
Kagyu lineages. Rinpoche's teaching style is open yet
profound, alternating from explanation of the
philosophy, to meditation instruction, to actual
practice under his direction. He is a renowned
scholar in the Rime tradition.

* Teachings will be held at the Warner Park Community Center 1625
Northport Ave. Madison in the
Community Room 1.
* June 13th -17th 9-4pm each day. Reminder that these are full day
teachings with a two hour lunch
break. There are several places within walking distance to have lunch
nearby or picnic.
*Cost is $325 for the entire five days. Payment plan is available in
monthly or weekly deposits. It is
suggested to contact Sangha about sharing hotels, or hostel stay during
the summer. There is hotel information on the web site. If cost is a
hardship please contact center for arrangements as no one will be turned
away.

For information on how to register please see our
website at www.rimeshedrubling.org 
Or contact us at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

608-243-8055

[FairfieldLife] Re: What Does The self Fear Most?

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Edg,
> 
> Happy that you got off on my rap enough to write
> all this, and happy that it made you happy to
> write it. But you're still selling, and I'm not
> a prospective buyer. I was just walking through
> the market digging all the sights and sounds and
> wandered past your booth.  :-)
> 
> I would never be so silly as to believe that there
> was such a thing as "one truth," let alone try to
> express it. I'll leave that to you...
> 
> Unc
> 
I can conclude from your response to Edg and others
that there is only one truth and that remains for you
only the truths that you yourself have discovered. You
are not beholden to the logic or experiences of others
when they are offered to you, although you could
potentially learn from them. 

No, you will only choose that which you have
discovered and which you decide glorifies your own
self image. A good example are the Bruce Cockburn
quotes that you post from time to time. Safe bet,
because Bruce is a well known and "cool" musician, and
he has never chased you, asking you accept his stuff.
You gladly accept it, possibly because you wish to
emulate him. You do have a weakness for musicians I've
noticed.

I have noticed also that you often reply emotionally
when someone attempts to get a logical response from
you, including the silent emotional response of no
response at all. Again, there is not an attempt at
common understanding. It instead becomes a silly ego
challenge, which you then define in your own terms, in
order to "win". And "win" you do, at least in your own
mind. Because after all, anything offered from others
is clearly understood as inferior, such as Edg's
prolonged posting to you. Something you can sneer at
and find ways to describe why you don't belong, aren't
buying it, categorize, categorize, categorize.

And when I peel away all the multifaceted ways in
which you play, avoid and evade, I see someone
emotionally fragile, and often lonely, who wants to
join in but is desperately afraid to let down his
guard. Putting on one mask or another, and all the
while silently and loudly declaring If I Didn't Invent
It Or Embrace It On My Own, I Reject It. You play with
a lot of masks, and yet they are all easy to see
through. 

So I suppose that leaves you with a choice- keep on
starving your heart and hiding in the towers of your
mind, making up the stories about why this and why
that, drawing from books the imprecise categories in
which to put other's words, or just forget about all
of that transparent stuff, let go, and be truly free.
Your choice, but don't say I didn't warn you. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's deathbed instructions to Maharishi . . .

[Ron]

Hello group,

Since being in touch with Rick lately, I followed 2 threads- is that
what you call them? I read all the comments about Guru Dev's deathbed
instructions, and also comments about Maharishi's latest comments
about  being caged in when not being in a proper vastu.

I am not claiming to be up on all current events for what takes place
in the movement, and therefore my assessment can be off, but there was
very little inquiry about Maharishsi saying he was caged in. When I
read this, I thought what I think almost everyone would think- we know
from Tm and otherwise that with this state of enlightenment, nothing
cages in that consciousness- and actually, then enlightened tell you
that this is what they are, consciousness, and caution the disciples -
do not think of the Guru as persona.

There was at least one comment here in the group, and the question was
posed- what sort of fragile state of enlightenment is this that is
dependent on a house for illumination?

My angle I am coming at it with is that I am with another Guru, the
advancement in consciousness that came about was very quick, then I
knew this new existence was always possible, and it is directly
related to methodologies used and grace of Guru. And then general
comments from my Guru is a Guru can only take you as far as they are.

So, in the angle I am coming from, it is not just this comment from
Maharishi, it is the overall situation of what unfolded- it is like an
added piece to the puzzle when I read these comments.

Regarding the deathbed instructions from Guru Dev, firstly all that
has been said by my Guru has been straight truth, not sugar coated.
Confusion is simply not there because the Guru is right there to clear
the air. My findings is that all has been truthful, therefore what is
said is reliable and honest, no reason not to believe it.

In the case of this situation with Maharishi, and the deathbed
instructions, I am simply no longer used to speculating about what
happened because in my camp here, I pick up the phone, or send an
email and the reliable answer is there in 5 minutes.

Maharishi is in form at present- this question seemingly cant even be
asked and even if it were, it doesn't seem the air would be all
cleared up anyway.

So, I can join right in with the speculators and guess that Dr.
Varma's comments were not accurate. I heard the same story that many
did from Maharishi which puts it at Maharishi being a self appointed
Guru, I guess similar as Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.

Coming from my Guru, it was said there is a tradition where a Guru was
appointed Guru by their Guru. Furthermore, Maharishi did not take full
Sanyas vows, or full vows within the tradition of GuruDev. Maybe he
was a secretary? It is not normal for a Guru to entrust the innermost
knowledge to a secretary. My Guru said that in her case, there is one
being groomed now for this position, but this is one that has taken
sanyas and it simply is a flow that this person is selected. My Gurus
general comments are this is how a Guru is appointed, not by wanting
to be Guru or declaring ones self to be one.

My Guru started a TM yahoo discussion group, there are already some
posts up about this subject:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

or try this:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TM_Discussion/?yguid=228252276

My Guru is from the same tradition as TM's Guru Dev.

Ron 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[emptybill]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I did a process through the art of living (SSRS) that
> helps you unstress impressions from previous
> lifetimes. It was pretty interesting.

I have not done SSRS's eternity process although I have talked with
teachers who have done it. Although simple in procedure, apparently it
can be a pretty intense three-hour process.



The general idea of looking at our affinity with a particular person
from the past may show us something about our own psychological
composition. However it pales in comparison with past-life recall. But
if we also move past recall and move deeper into actually reliving a
past-lifetime then we may find ourselves unprepared for what we
experience. The good news is that there are methods to station awareness
outside of a particular past-life personality so the current-life person
can observe past-life events in a more dispassionate way. The bad news
is that most people don't know how to do this.



Back in the 80's, I trained in a past-life regression method with a
group of people lead by a reader-conductor team with years of experience
in this method. The past-life regression training occurred at the end of
four years of work with many other techniques for developing subtler
forms of perception. It was also done in the context of a larger group
ranging in size from 30-50 people. After completing the reader-conductor
training and doing reading for other people for a while, I suddenly
started wondering about the karma of the group, particularly the gang of
five people I had worked so closely with for six years. Since two of the
five were the original teachers, I went to them and suggested that we do
a reading on ourselves as a collective group. They suggested that rather
than depend upon someone else we use the tools we had trained in and
independently research for any past life connections using only our own
minds. So we did.



Later, we enhanced our past-life perceptual training skills by combining
them with various form of pranayama. This intensified the experience of
these past-life imprints to a degree that was unimaginable before
actually amplifying the technique. This may also have been a very
foolish mistake. By combining a deep level recollection technique with
pranayama, I personally found myself launched into a full
three-dimensional immersion in that past lifetime, at once enveloping
and unrelenting. The results were at first intriguing, then
exhilarating. However, as we dug deeper into the various past-life
details the other members found these past-life immersions to be quite
troubling. This past lifetime wasn't the kind of vision they liked
seeing, it was just too dark and overwhelming. Finally, I began pushing
everyone to plunge into the past and resolve the karma of that time.
Another big mistake! Yah, we went back to that lifetime. We plunged into
the imprint pool with intense pranayama and then went down the immersion
drain. And surprise …  we all went into horrific final experiences
of being violently killed and for some of us, tortured as part of it.
Since all of this was in full 3-D absorption it was more intense than
any movie and more terrible than any imagination.



The results were predictable of course. Most of the others freaked-out
and stopped meeting together. I ended up walking around like a ghost for
eight months. In a way it was funny. The others thought they were real
yogi types last lifetimes. Not so. For my part, the details showed me
that I had an Asura for a guru last lifetime. It also proved to me that
from an Asura you could only receive an Asura's result – total
destruction. - So much for past lives.



ps:Things aren't always what they seem,

Even skim milk parades as cream.



Empty

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Peter]

--- emptybill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I did a process through the art of living (SSRS)
> that
> > helps you unstress impressions from previous
> > lifetimes. It was pretty interesting.
> 
> I have not done SSRS's eternity process although I
> have talked with
> teachers who have done it. Although simple in
> procedure, apparently it
> can be a pretty intense three-hour process.
> 
> 
> 
> The general idea of looking at our affinity with a
> particular person
> from the past may show us something about our own
> psychological
> composition. However it pales in comparison with
> past-life recall. But
> if we also move past recall and move deeper into
> actually reliving a
> past-lifetime then we may find ourselves unprepared
> for what we
> experience. The good news is that there are methods
> to station awareness
> outside of a particular past-life personality so the
> current-life person
> can observe past-life events in a more dispassionate
> way. The bad news
> is that most people don't know how to do this.
> 
> 
> 
> Back in the 80's, I trained in a past-life
> regression method with a
> group of people lead by a reader-conductor team with
> years of experience
> in this method. The past-life regression training
> occurred at the end of
> four years of work with many other techniques for
> developing subtler
> forms of perception. It was also done in the context
> of a larger group
> ranging in size from 30-50 people. After completing
> the reader-conductor
> training and doing reading for other people for a
> while, I suddenly
> started wondering about the karma of the group,
> particularly the gang of
> five people I had worked so closely with for six
> years. Since two of the
> five were the original teachers, I went to them and
> suggested that we do
> a reading on ourselves as a collective group. They
> suggested that rather
> than depend upon someone else we use the tools we
> had trained in and
> independently research for any past life connections
> using only our own
> minds. So we did.
> 
> 
> 
> Later, we enhanced our past-life perceptual training
> skills by combining
> them with various form of pranayama. This
> intensified the experience of
> these past-life imprints to a degree that was
> unimaginable before
> actually amplifying the technique. This may also
> have been a very
> foolish mistake. By combining a deep level
> recollection technique with
> pranayama, I personally found myself launched into a
> full
> three-dimensional immersion in that past lifetime,
> at once enveloping
> and unrelenting. The results were at first
> intriguing, then
> exhilarating. However, as we dug deeper into the
> various past-life
> details the other members found these past-life
> immersions to be quite
> troubling. This past lifetime wasn't the kind of
> vision they liked
> seeing, it was just too dark and overwhelming.
> Finally, I began pushing
> everyone to plunge into the past and resolve the
> karma of that time.
> Another big mistake! Yah, we went back to that
> lifetime. We plunged into
> the imprint pool with intense pranayama and then
> went down the immersion
> drain. And surprise …  we all went into horrific
> final experiences
> of being violently killed and for some of us,
> tortured as part of it.
> Since all of this was in full 3-D absorption it was
> more intense than
> any movie and more terrible than any imagination.
> 
> 
> 
> The results were predictable of course. Most of the
> others freaked-out
> and stopped meeting together. I ended up walking
> around like a ghost for
> eight months. In a way it was funny. The others
> thought they were real
> yogi types last lifetimes. Not so. For my part, the
> details showed me
> that I had an Asura for a guru last lifetime. It
> also proved to me that
> from an Asura you could only receive an Asura's
> result – total
> destruction. - So much for past lives.
> 
> 
> 
> ps:Things aren't always what they seem,
> 
> Even skim milk parades as cream.
> 
> 
> 
> Empty

Interesting post, Empty. When you start screwing
around on those subtle levels without guidance...boom!
The eternity process is interesting, but I wouldn't do
it again. No desire. I experienced several deaths, but
they were not fully identified with and thus not
overwhelming. 




> 
> 
> 
> 



 

Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast
with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of emptybill
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 4:40 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous
Incarnations

 

If you go back and follow your link to the wiki page, then go down to 
the last three (3) lines just above the references section at the 
bottom, you will see the following information:

According to 2002 data:[14]
· The number who have ever been born is 106,456,000,000 
· The world population in mid-2002 was …..6,215,000,000 
· The percentage of those ever born who were living in
2002 was 5.8%

A possible follow up question may also be
intriquing - where are the other 100+ billion jivas?

Most of those are the same people, being born over and over again. So for
instance, if we’ve each had a thousand lives, that leaves only 106,456,000
cycling through.

 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007
1:39 PM
 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous Incarnations

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of TurquoiseB
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 11:39 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Idea for a Fun Thread: People's Previous
Incarnations

 

Some of these method guys and gals really DO get into
character at the start of a movie and don't get out
of that character until the movie is finished. Can
you *imagine* what that must do to your personal life?
Can you imagine what it must have been like to live
with De Niro during the filming of "Taxi Driver?”

I heard that DiCaprio did that during the shooting of the Howard Hughes
movie, The Aviator, and that he needed a personal attendant to keep a pretty
close eye on him while Hughes’ nutty phase was being filmed.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007
1:39 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's deathbed instructions to Maharishi . . .

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello group,
> 
> Since being in touch with Rick lately, I followed 2 threads- is 
that
> what you call them? I read all the comments about Guru Dev's 
deathbed
> instructions, and also comments about Maharishi's latest comments
> about  being caged in when not being in a proper vastu.
> 
> I am not claiming to be up on all current events for what takes 
place
> in the movement, and therefore my assessment can be off, but there 
was
> very little inquiry about Maharishsi saying he was caged in. When I
> read this, I thought what I think almost everyone would think- we 
know
> from Tm and otherwise that with this state of enlightenment, 
nothing
> cages in that consciousness- and actually, then enlightened tell 
you
> that this is what they are, consciousness, and caution the 
disciples -
> do not think of the Guru as persona.
> 
> There was at least one comment here in the group, and the question 
was
> posed- what sort of fragile state of enlightenment is this that is
> dependent on a house for illumination?
> 
> My angle I am coming at it with is that I am with another Guru, the
> advancement in consciousness that came about was very quick, then I
> knew this new existence was always possible, and it is directly
> related to methodologies used and grace of Guru. And then general
> comments from my Guru is a Guru can only take you as far as they 
are.

So...you were dependent on Maharishi for answers for awhile, and now 
you are dependent on someone else for answers? Devotion is a 
beautiful experience, however at some point it merges with the 
ability to be completely independent also. Jai Guru Dev. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Home Loan Alternative

[bob_brigante]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "suziezuzie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> >
> > Here is the Excel file
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/files/Local%
20Services/
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "suziezuzie" 

> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "suziezuzie" 
> 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > What these banks do is charge you all the interest up 
> front. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The banks are not front-loading interest. They are charging 
> interest
> > > > > on a "pay-as-you-go" basis. That is, they are charging 
> interest on 
> > > > the
> > > > > outstanding principal. No more, no less. As the principal 
> declines, 
> > > > so
> > > > > does the interest on the remaining principal.
> > > > 
> > > > This is true for short term loans only, not 30 year fixed 
> loans. 
> > > 
> > > Not true. The principle is the same. If you have a teaser low 
> interest
> > > loan for the first 5 years, or an ARM, or other more complex 
loan,
> > > then its a slightly different structure -- but the principle is 
> the
> > > same -- you pay interest on the outstanding principal. 
> > > 
> > > You and the author of the link you gave appear to feel that 
> because
> > > initial interest payments are more than principal in the first 
> years
> > > of the mortgage, that it is "front loaded". Thats an odd 
> definition of
> > > front-loaded. Front loaded traditionally means paying MORE 
interst
> > > than is warranted by what is due on remaining principal. 
> > > 
> > > Create a payment and interest stream in Excel or Google SS and 
you
> > > will understand whats going on. 
> > > 
> > > I have put  an excel ss that mimics your case in the FFL files
> > > "Service". Actual interest does not sink to the level of 
principal
> > > until year 21. But that is NOT front loading in the traditional
> > > finance sense of the word.
> > >
> 
> I never heard the term front loaded before so I thought you were 
> using it to mean what we're talking about, that the interest on a 
30 
> year fixed home loan is calculated by the banks on purpose to be 
paid 
> at the beginning of the loan as you've shown on your excel sheet. 
> This is an arbitrary arrangement by the banks. The interest could 
> have been arranged so the principle so that both could be paid 
> together over the 30 years by simply adding the principle and 
> interest together and dividing the amount over 30 years. The reason 
> the banks do this, is to collect the interest first. That way, if 
the 
> borrower should decide to pay off the entire loan early, let's say 
> after 10 years, they will end up paying almost the entire amount of 
> principle. Look at your excel sheet and you'll see that after 10 
> years, the accumulative interest is over $60,000 and the 
accumulative 
> principle is only $17,000. The pay off would be around $100,000.
> 



> This is what I'm talking about, banks purposely collecting almost 
all 
> of the interest up front. In my opinion, this is a scam. 
> 
> Mark
>


*


In that case, you can scam the banks right back:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/10/magazine/10wwln-freakonomics-t.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev's deathbed instructions to Maharishi . . .

[Ron]

> 
> So...you were dependent on Maharishi for answers for awhile, and now 
> you are dependent on someone else for answers? 

ANSWER IN CAPS SO YOU FIND MY TEXT, I AM NOT SHOUTING

FIRST PART OF THIS LINE- WHAT WAS- I DONT HAVE A CLEAR DEFINITION TO GIVE YOU 
ABOUT ME BEING DEPENDANT ON MAHARIHSI FOR ANSWERS- NOT THINKING AT THE 
MOMENT- I DID TM, HAD GOOD EXPERIENCES- PROBABLY THE WAY I GOT MY ANSWERS 
WHILE IN TM IS SIMILAR TO HOW THE REST GET THEIR ANSWERS, NO NEED TO DESCRIBE 
THAT, YOU ALREADY KNOW IT

2CD PART OF YOUR LINE- I WOULD RATHER JUST DEFINE MY WAY WHAT IS TAKING PLACE, 
THEN IF THAT FITS IN WITH YOUR DEFINITION, THEN OK

IN ORDER TO DO THIS, FIRSTLY I WILL DEFINE WHAT A GURU IS ACORDING TO MY GURU- 
A 
GURU IS WHAT YOU ARE WITHOUT THE COVERINGS, AND A GURU IS THERE TO GUIDE ONE 
TO REMOVE THESE COVERINGS BUT NOT TO LIVE YOUR LIFE, EACH ONE MAKES THEIR OWN 
CHOICES AND LIVES WITH THESE CHOICES

SO, IN ENTERING THE PATH I AM ON NOW, IT MEANS I HAVE WALKED AWAY FROM MY 
PREVIOUS PATH. IT COULD BE THAT SOME HAVE ONLY ONE GURU, SOME MAY HAVE MANY 
IN THEIR JOURNEY- MY GURU HAD 4.

IN ENTERING MY PATH, WHAT MY GURU SAID IS THAT SHE WILL NOT WORK WITH OTHERS 
WHO HAVE A GURU BECAUSE THIS IS IMMORAL, SO, EITHER THEY HAVE TO HAVE 
PERMISSION TO HAVE 2 GURUS OR THEY ARE GOING TO WALK AWAY FROM WHERE THEY 
ARE. THIS WAY, MY GURU DOESNT HAVE TO PUT IN THIS ENERGY THAT COMES ABOUT AS 
A RESULT OF THE CONFUSION. 

SO, THE PATHS ARE DIFFERENT.  I DID NOT HAVE A ONE TO ONE RELATIONSHIP WITH 
MAHARISHI, MAYBE SOME DO. WHERE I AM NOW, I DO HAVE A ONE TO ONE RELATIONSHIP. 
THERE IS A FAITH REALLY- ACORDING TO MY GURU- WHEN ONE IS ON THE PATH. 
MAHARISHI STEERED AWAY FROM THAT WORD I BELIEVE BECAUSE AS A BROAD APPEAL, 
SWEET TRUTH, AS MAHARISHI WOULD REFER TO IT, IS USED.

I WOULD SAY THE DISTANCE BETWEEN WHAT ONE IS DIRECTLY EXPERIENCEING AND WHAT 
ONE IS TOLD IS THE END RESLUT- THAT IS WHERE THE FAITH COMES IN. AS SUCH, 
PRACTICES ARE GIVEN, ETC- THEN IT IS SURRENDER FOR ME IN THIS PATH, DOING WHAT 
IS 
GIVEN AS GIVEN- CLASSIFYING THIS AS GUIDENCE ALOING THE WAY SO THE END RESULT 
IS 
REACHED.

THE END RESULT IS ALL FALLING AWAY, ATTACHEMENT TO EGO, MIND, BODY- I AM TOLD 
THE END RESULT IS THAT WE WILL KNOW 100% THAT WE ARE NOT THE BODY, NOT THE 
MIND OR CONDITIONINGS- THOSE THINGS WHICH WILL FALL AWAY - MY GURU WOULD 
DEFINE AS EGO

Devotion is a 
> beautiful experience, however at some point it merges with the 
> ability to be completely independent also. Jai Guru Dev. :-)


ONE OF THE YOUTUBE VIDEOS IN WHICH MY GURU IS SPEAKING IS TITLED IS THERE A 
NEED 
FOR CONFIRMATION FROM THE GURU, ALSO OTHER VIDEOS ARE - IT THERE A NEED FOR A 
GURU.

I AM TOLD THAT ULTIMATELY THERE IS NO OUTTER GURU, NO OUTTER ANYTHING FOR 
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OUTTER AND INNER FOR THERE IS ONLY ONE. I 
WOULD BE LIEING IF I SAID I FULLY KNOW THIS FROM DIRECT EXPERIENCE, THERE ARE 
GLIMPSES, AND THEN THE COMMENT FROM MY GURU THAT WHILE GLIMPSES ARE GOOD 
ALONG THE WAY, AS IT IS AN INSPIRATION FOR ONE TO CONTINUE, IT DOESNT HOLD 
WATER COMPARED TO BEING ESTABLISHED IN REALIZATION.

SO, YOUR COMMENT THAT AT SOME POINT, THERE IS ONLY ONE, NO TWO, ALL IS 
MERGED- YES, I HAVE HEARD IT AND SOME GLIMPSES ARE THERE, BUT THIS IS NOT MY 
REALITY NOW. AS SUCH, THERE IS A HEIRARCHY IN PLACE IN THE PATH. THIS MEANS THE 
GURU IS NOT MY BUDDY TO PAL AROUND WITH, AND SPEAK ON THE SAME LEVEL, AND 
THE TRUTH SPOKEN BY THE GURU IS NOT THE EQUALL TRUTH SPOKEN BY THE DISCIPLE.

THESE POINTS WERE MADE BY MY GURU, I AM PASSING IT ALONG AS BEST I CAN. PEOPLE 
LOVE TO HEAR YOU DONT NEED A GURU FOR ALL IS ONE, THERE IS ONLY THE INNER GURU 
ANYWAY. MY GURU SAID MUCH OF THIS WAS BORN OUT OF RAMANA MAHARIHSI BECAUSE 
HE WAS SELF REALIZED BUT EVEN HE SAYS 100% THAT ONE NEEDS A GURU IN ORDER FOR 
ENLIGHTENMENT TO UNFOLD.

IT IS HARD FOR ME TO EXPLAIN BUT I JUST CANT THINK NOW TO BOX UP A DEFINITION 
FOR HOW IT WAS WITH TM AND HOW IT IS NOW. IT DOES NOT RESONATE WITH ME THAT I 
WAS DEPENDANT FOR ANSWERS IN TM, AND ALSO THAT I AM DEPENDANT FOR ANSWERS 
HERE ON MY PATH NOW.

WHEN I FIRST ENTERED MY PATH HERE, I HAD SO MANY QUESTIONS, THEY ARE ALL IN THE 
ARCHIVES IN THE YAHOO GROUPS, AS MY GURU HAS YAHOO GROUPS. NOW, THERE ARE 
NOT MANY QUESTIONS- THIS IS ACTUALLY A COMMENT FROM MY GURU- THE QUESTIONS 
FALL AWAY AS ONE PROGRESSES ALONG THE WAY.

I GUESS I GAVE A LONG REPLY HERE BUT TOO LATE NOW. MAYBE YOU ARE CRITICAL OF MY 
CHOICES OR WHAT I DID OR AM DOING. NO ONE WILL APPEAL TO EVERYONE, SO MAY 
SOME ENJOY WHAT I JUST WROTE



RON

[FairfieldLife] Israel successfully launches Ofek 7 spy satellite

[Robert Gimbel]

Israel successfully launches Ofek 7 spy satellite
  Jun. 11, 2007 5:21 | Updated Jun. 11, 2007 7:58

  In the face of Iran's race to obtain nuclear weapons and predictions that war 
with Syria is on the horizon, Israel strengthened its foothold in space 
pre-dawn Monday and successfully launched a spy satellite, which defense 
officials said granted the IDF unprecedented operational capabilities.   The 
satellite, called Ofek 7, was launched from the Palmahim Air Force Base and 
successfully reached orbit. Officials said however that it would take several 
days to test the satellite's systems before it would be declared operational. 
The satellite was launched atop a Shavit missile. The successful launch 
came as a great relief for the defense establishment and particularly Israel 
Aerospace Industries, lead contractor of the Ofek project. In September 2004, 
Israel failed to successfully launch the Ofek 6, which in its third boost stage 
plummeted to the sea. At the time, despite the disappointment, the Defense 
Ministry continued ahead with its development of the Ofek 7. 
  
  Weighing 300 kilograms, the Ofek 7 will orbit earth from up to 600 kilometers 
in space. It has a four-year lifespan and will communicate its images via 
downlink with an IAI-run ground station.   Defense officials said that the 
launching of the satellite was part of the MOD's multi-year work plan but was 
also in line with the defense establishment's "operational needs." Israel has 
traditionally launched a new satellite once every two-and-a-half years staring 
in the late 1980s.   While refusing to divulge the performance levels of the 
new satellite, defense officials said that it was by far the most advanced 
satellite Israel has launched into space. Officials said that it was superior 
to the Eros B satellite - launched in April 2006 - which has the ability to 
spot images on the ground as small as 70 centimeters. The officials refused to 
divulge what made it superior   "With this launch we have improved Israel's 
operational capabilities by dozens of percent," said Brig.-Gen.
 Haim Eshet, director of Space Programming at the MOD's Research and 
Development Directorate (MAFAT). "This is due to the improvements made to the 
satellite and also since we now have better coverage in the skies."   In 
addition to the Eros B - a civilian-owned satellite used by the MOD on a 
contract basis - Israel currently operates the Ofek 5 spy satellite, 
successfully launched in May 2002.   It was supposed to have had a four-year 
life span, but its producers boast that it is still functioning and continues 
to produce high-resolution pictures from space. Its telescopic camera was 
designed by Elbit Systems and has variable direction capability.   The Ofek 5 
satellite is in an elliptical orbit that reportedly takes it over Iran, Iraq, 
and Syria once every 90 minutes. 
  
  By YAAKOV KATZ



   
-
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.