[FairfieldLife] Support for willytex
I have been following to some degree willytex's posting on Muktananda, MMY, and the hugs. What I have gotten from his thread on the subject is him, in a very ingenious way, attempting to point out the hypocrisy prevalent on this forum. That is, we actually have a photograph of the two having physical contact with their hug yet zero actual proof of all the innuendo that is posted here as fact. Well, willytex took these two facts and juxtaposed them in such a way as to remind people of the, ultimately, very absurd position that is taken here about MMY's sex life. I thought he did it in a very interesting way. Most of you simply didn't get what he was trying to say.
[FairfieldLife] I save Duveyoung's life...and this is the thanks I get?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > lurkernomore20002000 wrote: "I thought it was the 'ol tongue in cheek > type thing, with a decent touch of humor. (Shemp is a funny fellow > many times IMO.) > > Edg: I'm on record for saying that Shemp has cogency, and now, I'll > admit that he can be funny too. > > But also, he can be devastating. I'll end this piece telling all of > you about a boy named Joey, but first, let's examine Shemp's intent to > devastate. > > Not that there's anything wrong with devastation -- egos are > legitimate targets in some scenarios. Certainly any puffery or > preening will attract a barrage of arrows here -- well aimed arrows > that might just chip away at an ego in a gentle goodly way. > > But, IMO, Shemp uses his skills to do one thing only: make people > frustrated, angry, indignant, and off balanced -- and then irk them to > stay in that state as long as possible. > > This is not a loving intent -- maybe if one had a personal guru > willing to be hands on, maybe then one might submit to such a program > of ego battering, but Shemp is no guru of anything. Though, like > Joey, he could be a guru of incredible power. > > Instead, IMO, he seems to be here to ruin people's days -- gleefully > evil about -- it seems. > > I posted here about the Trikke, showed my attachment to it, promoted > it as a true believer will do, and Shemp saw the chance to fly under > my radar and bomb a sacred cow that I thought I had safely presented > here. Stupid me, eh? Obviously, I am very strongly "sold out" to the > Trikke as, well, maybe the best fitness machine yet invented that is > fun and addictive and VERY SAFE to use. What was I thinking > presenting it here? You posted a link to a youtube video of yourself playing very, VERY close to traffic riding on the contraption you call the trikke. And I took you up on your invitation to view the video and commented upon it. Before seeing the video, I had never heard of nor seen a "trikke". Indeed, I thought it referred to some sort of small, cuddly animal from the original Star Trek series. And what I did I see on the video? 1) Cars. 2) You on a contraption. 3) You swerving in long arcs on public roads. 4) Gee, I put the above points together and came up with: disaster! And, then, you posted that Laird Hamilton uses and endorses trikkes. Well! Laird Hamilton, my dear boy, takes his life in his hands as a matter of course every single day of his life! By invoking Hamilton as a user, you are solidifying the point I'm trying to make: this is a highly risky endeavor and only professional risk takers such as Hamilton, should be doing it. Give up riding on trikkes, Duveyoung, and take up something safer, such as sky-diving. I've done more than anyone, Duveyoung, to actually save your life. You should thank me. But, instead, you advocate for my removal from FFL. Well, if you don't want to hear negative comments on your trikke obsession, please don't invite people to see a video of you acting like a swerving dervish on one. Your feeling are hurt way, way out of proportion to anything I could have said here on this forum. You have other issues and they have nothing to do with me. > > Yes, by my own belief system, I was indulging in an identification > that will, some day, have to be set aside, but my identification with > the Trikke was based on its healthful features and benefits. Sattva > -- a safe place to identify until sattva too can be let go of. Me > believing in the Trikke and "selling the concept" here, was as if I > were to take my five year old daughter for a walk in the park, and an > adult stranger comes up and tells her that she's ugly and worthless. > What's a father to do? Well, serve up a big can of whoopass is what a > father is to do. > > It's one thing to stomp on a person's egoic concepts, and it is quite > another to stomp on their heart. Yes? > > I'm asking as seriously as possible: "Does anyone here want to show > Shemp a photograph of a loved one, a home you've spent two years > fixing up, a vintage car you've detailed and polished for a decade, a > love poem written on your wedding night, or a career's gold watch?" > > I don't, and I don't think anyone here would subject their "lovely > little symbols of ego" to such a monstrous abuser as Shemp is proving > himself to be here. > > When I challenged Shemp about global warming, he could have used his > skills to debate us all very effectively. The forces of evil on the > planet are paying very decent money to hire corrupt "weather experts" > into getting out there in the public and gainsaying a whole body of > science's hard earned truths, and they've done a pretty good job of > it. Shemp, if he has ever read anything at all about global warming, > should have been taught very well by these evil weather experts how to > obfuscate any issue and use all
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Aug 31, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > > > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > > > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > > > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > > > professional, and his word therefore carries much > > > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. > > > I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment as a diagnosis > > but a casual aside. You don't like Peter because he is critical of TM > > and so you jumped on him. That is your normal MO around here. > > Precisely. It is not a formal diagnosis anymore than Barry 1.0's > casual remarks on past events are historical research. > > For someone who claims to have a career in editing, it's pretty > strange when you can't distinguish one from the other on a consistent > basis. I am not sure i agree. To assert in one breath that one has the right and sanction to declare one "crazy" in Florida -- (re)establishing their credentials, and in the next (a few days later) to assert, on line, to a virtual stranger, that based on some posts that they are i) crazy, and ii) and recommending powerful psychotropic drugs, seems a bit unprofessional, IMO. But what do I know. Ask the Florida licensing board.
[FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ---You're overly intellectualizing what is a matter of experience. > Hsuan Hua clearly expressed his disapproval of Nichiren's Buddhism > and the Gohonzon, (to me, directly). That was the experience. His or yours? > What > does this have to do with "pratimoksha vows". Get out of your ivory > tower. > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim wrote: > > > > "Heresy" means to personally choose a particular belief in > opposition to some previously established orthodox > belief. "Heterodoxy" is simply to choose all on one's own without > regard to orthodoxy. > > > > Hsuan Hua was observing Chinese Buddhist monastic vinaya. Unless > you were a monk in full possession of the pratimoksha vows neither > you nor he could be in heretical antipathy to the other's practice. > > > > As far as differences and separations, you began your posted > comments with Buddhist versus Hindu so you edged yourself out of > discussing them in terms that were reflective of mutuality. "Tathata" > is Sanskrit for "thusness. "Entity" is Latin for "ens" - a being. > These are well established terms without a lot of mystery to > them. "Dai" means "Great" as in the Dai of Dainichi or the "Maha" in > mahayana and mahamudra. Gohonzon is an object of veneration. > > > > You apparently venerate the proclamation that the Lotus Sutra and > Nichiren are the same and in the same manner that Dharma and Buddha > are sometimes worshiped as the same. > > > > This means you are probably here to proselytize us at FFL for > SGI. > > > > yifuxero wrote: > > ---You're looking at differences and separations. The > Gohonzon > > integrates mutually agreeable M-fields and tends to demolish those > > getting in the way. True, Hsuan Hua didn't approve of the Gohonzon > > which I showed him once. Nichiren's Buddhism was heretical to him. > > However, his habit of eating only once per day before noon is > > heretical to me since I have low blood sugar and have to eat > > continually throughout the day. I had such pre-noon meals with him > > on a number of occasions. > > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim wrote: > > > > > > Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a > Japanese > > description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual > > identity between particulars in Indra's net). > > > > > > > > Recent Activity > > > > 4 > > New Members > > > > 1 > > New Photos > > > > 3 > > New Links > > > > Visit Your Group > > Search Ads > > Get new customers. > > List your web site > > in Yahoo! Search. > > > > Real Food Group > > Share recipes > > and favorite meals > > w/ Real Food lovers. > > > > Dog Fanatics > > on Yahoo! Groups > > Find people who are > > crazy about dogs. > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel > today! > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of authfriend > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 11:36 AM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda > > > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > professional, and his word therefore carries much > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. > > I'm not a doctor, so it's not unethical for me to say that I think he should > take every mind-numbing drug he can get his hands on. Maybe he should > dumpster-dive out behind Dr. Pete's office. While I am an advocate of well researched, well diagnosed, well prescribed pharmacuticals for helping to balance neurotransmitter and other imbalances -- if such modalities work -- in the "spiritual realm, SSRS, for example would say, perhaps, do deep breath kriya to purify the system, and do seva to balance it. I am slightly surprised your first recommendation would be mind-numbing drugs, jesting aside.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shemp and Off World
Oh joy! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Posting rights have been restored. > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: 8/31/2007 > 5:21 PM >
[FairfieldLife] Shemp and Off World
Posting rights have been restored. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: 8/31/2007 5:21 PM
[FairfieldLife] 'Group Intention & Manifestation'
The Bridge ~ Step 40 ~ The Tenth Intent ~ Synergize I see Humanity as One. I enjoy gathering with light-hearted people regularly. When we come together, we set the stage for Great Oneness to reveal Itself. We synergize. Now that we've formulated our vision of a better world and expanded it by sharing it with others, it's time to bring it into physical manifestation. To do this, we must come together. We must begin to make good use of the gifts that community has to offer. In the dozen years that I've been taking part in Intenders Circles across the country I've seen a lot of amazing things happen within the dynamics of a group. I've seen people who were introverted and frightened open up; I've seen my friends totally and utterly fulfilled; I've seen strangers recognize each other as long-lost soul family; I've seen tears of joy flow and laughter abound. But there is one thing that happens in our Intenders Circles that, to me, is better than all the rest. It's what I call Synergy and, if we do things right, and set the stage properly, a very special feeling - a feeling of Oneness - will engulf the room and everyone in it. When this happens, it's as if we've completely let go of our connection to the cares and worries of the day and melted into something larger than ourselves. That's what Synergy is - it's what occurs when the whole becomes something greater than the sum of its individual parts. Put another way, it's when you put things together and "something extra" that you may not have expected takes place. I have memories of a time, tens of thousands of years ago, when we were much more powerful than we are now. Groups of eight of us (or sometimes sixteen) would go into caves especially designed for their symmetry and we would sit in a perfect circle with giant crystals behind us which were connected to the crystalline benches we sat on. We agreed beforehand on a few specific objects that we intended to manifest, and then we would meditate and concentrate our imagination on those objects - and soon, sometimes instantaneously, they would materialize at a point in the exact center of the circle, floating in mid-air, right in front of us. What we found in our Intenders Circles is that we can set the stage for an experience of Synergy to occur by following The Oneness Formula. The Oneness Formula consists of six steps we go through after everyone has finished stating their gratitudes and intentions. They are: 1) Sitting or standing together in a circle; 2) Touching; 3) Inviting; 4) Turning; 5) Toning; and 6) Holding the Silence. We've discovered that when we follow these steps, the electricity, the magic, the Oneness, the special feeling which brings us closer to God usually happens. We have taken the adage: "Anywhere two or more are gathered in My Name (or for the Highest Good)," and put it to it's best use. After all, isn't that what people are supposed to do when they gather together for spiritual purposes? Wouldn't it be wise for us to explore the highest of experiences available to us whenever we come together? These are some of the questions we sought to answer as we began to tap into the power of the Intenders Circle . My intention for today is: I intend that I remember that in order to have peace, people must work together. - We encourage you to forward this message to your list of friends. If this message was sent to you from a friend, you can go to http://www.intenders.org to sign up free for The Intenders Bridge. - Create Your Own Community! Click Here to Find Out How to Start Your Own Intenders Circle. 105 Highland Avenue, Pagosa Springs, CO 81147 To unsubscribe or change subscriber options visit: http://www.aweber.com/z/r/?zMzMrEzstMwcjAwszCxs - Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dalai Lama on the practice of morality.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, quantum packet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There you go...morality as the *foundation* of spirituality, pretty much the same as Patanjali! Therefore, the path leading to liberation is comprised of the three higher trainings: the training of morality as the foundation, the training of meditative stabilization as the complementing factor, and the actual path which is the training of wisdom.
[FairfieldLife] Dalai Lama on the practice of morality.
Note: forwarded message attached. - Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. --- Begin Message --- Title: Snow Lion Publications Newsletter Dalai Lama Quote of the Week ...mistakenly apprehending inherent existence in all phenomena serves as the root of all other delusions... The opponent force powerful enough to eliminate the delusions should be a wisdom which combines calm abiding and special insight. In order to cultivate an advanced meditative stabilization that is free of both subtle mental sinking and mental excitement, first of all there should be a basis: the practice of morality, an abstaining from negative actions. Therefore, the path leading to liberation is comprised of the three higher trainings: the training of morality as the foundation, the training of meditative stabilization as the complementing factor, and the actual path which is the training of wisdom. By enhancing the practice of wisdom and by developing it to its fullest extent, you will be able to eliminate totally the delusions, particularly ignorance which misapprehends the mode of being of phenomena. --from The Path to Bliss by H.H. the Dalai Lama, translated by Geshe Thupten Jinpa, edited by Christine Cox, published by Snow Lion Publications * * * Dalai Lama quotes offer inspiration for all levels of Buddhist students--from beginner to advanced. We try to find quotes that fit, but you can also choose your own weekly quote from more than 200 archived messages by visiting our Dalai Lama Quotes Archives . SNOW LION PUBLICATIONS is dedicated to the preservation of Tibetan Buddhism and culture by publishing books about this great tradition. Tibetan culture is seriously endangered in its homeland and is striving to continue outside of Tibet. To support this effort, in addition to publishing and distributing books, Snow Lion offers a wide range of dharma items, purchased primarily from Tibetans in exile. These include visual art and ritual objects, statues and thangkas, videos, traditional music, and many gift items offered through our webstore and "Snow Lion Buddhist News & Catalog" (Newsletter)--over 2000 items--the largest selection anywhere. To browse the complete list go to www.snowlionpub.com and select any of the categories in left-hand margin. When you choose to purchase from Snow Lion you are directly supporting the large effort to publish more Buddhist texts and help the Tibetan people. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. You are receiving this announcement from Snow Lion Publications because you have previously subscribed on our website. To continue receiving messages, we recommend that you add [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your address book. If you'd like to change or cancel your subscription, please visit our subscription pages at www.snowlionpub.com/pages/lists.php, www.snowlionpub.com/pages/unsubscribe.php, or email us at [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Please note that these announcements are also available in plain text, if you are having trouble receiving them. THE PATH TO BLISS by H.H. the Dalai Lama,translated by Geshe Thupten Jinpa,edited by Christine Coxmore... Contact Us: N. America: (800) 950-0313 Worldwide: (607) 273-8519 By Mail: PO Box 6483, Ithaca, NY 14851 USA By Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the Web: www.snowlionpub.com New Items Available Online: New Books New Dharma Items On Sale! Gifts Calendars General Catalog: www.snowlionpub.com Sign Up: Receive Snow Lion's Weekly Quotes, Announcements, or Quarterly "Snow Lion Buddhist News & Catalog" at the List Management Center. Snow Lion Publications is happy to send you a weekly quote from various Tibetan Buddhist teachers. Visit our website for these related items: 20% OFF all Snow Lion Titles in our Library of Tibetan Buddhism & Culture Read the Latest Edition ofthe "Snow Lion Buddhist News
[FairfieldLife] faults of teachers, Dharma quote.
Note: forwarded message attached. - Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. --- Begin Message --- Title: Snow Lion Publications Newsletter Dharma Quote of the Week There is considerable ongoing debate regarding the traditional view of the guru-disciple relationship, which asserts that seeing the guru as Buddha, impeccable and without failings, is vital to ripen the disciple's potential to attain the fruits of the path. This is reinforced by the admonition that to see faults in one's own guru will result in karmic downfalls and future suffering for the disciple. Any faults in the teacher should be seen as the disciple's aberrations projected outside. The tantric teachings insist this pure view should be held at all times to protect the disciple from accruing negative karma. However, underlying this is also the need to preserve the integrity, authority, and status of the teacher. This leads to a great deal of confusion when students begin to see evident flaws in teachers, and it would be folly to explain them away as the students' impure perception. Consequently it has become necessary to cultivate a less dogmatic, more pragmatic view. A teacher may not be a perfect carrier of the projection, but this does not contradict the tantric view that essentially the guru, an inner phenomenon projected outside, is Buddha. If we literalize this principle of the teacher as the embodiment of perfection, we are in danger of blinding ourselves to the reality that most teachers are human, and therefore not perfect. An individual can have deep insights into the nature of reality and still have human failings, a shadow that has not been fully eradicated. According to the teachings on the Ten Grounds or Stages of the Bodhisattva, until the final ground is reached, there are still subtle obscurations to full enlightenment that can manifest in flawed behavior. Believing without question that the outer guru is Buddha also traps the teacher in an unrealistic, unconscious position. The Dalai Lama has commented that too much deference harms the teacher, because we never challenge him or her. When disciples become devoted to teachers, considerable power and authority is entrusted to them. While a teacher's role is to support and empower disciples to discover their own potential, sometimes this does not happen. Some teachers become caught in the powerful position they have been endowed with and are unaware of their own desire for power and authority. They may begin to enjoy their power too much and take advantage of it for their own needs. This keeps their disciples disempowered, and ultimately does not allow growth and individual responsibility to emerge. Teachers may be unconsciously afraid to empower their disciples and allow them to gain a sense of their own authority and autonomy. They may try to hold on to their disciples, when to genuinely empower them could lead to their leaving to engage in their own journey. --from The Psychology of Buddhist Tantra, by Rob Preece, foreword by Stephen Batchelor, published by Snow Lion Publications * * * Dharma teachings offer inspiration for all levels of Buddhist students--from beginner to advanced. We try to find quotes that fit, but you can also choose your own weekly quote from more than 200 archived messages by visiting our Dharma Quotes Archives. SNOW LION PUBLICATIONS is dedicated to the preservation of Tibetan Buddhism and culture by publishing books about this great tradition. Tibetan culture is seriously endangered in its homeland and is striving to continue outside of Tibet. To support this effort, in addition to publishing and distributing books, Snow Lion offers a wide range of dharma items, purchased primarily from Tibetans in exile. These include visual art and ritual objects, statues and thangkas, videos, traditional music, and many gift items offered through our webstore and newsletter--over 2000 items--the largest selection anywhere. To browse the complete list go to www.snowlionpub.com and select any of the categories in left-hand margin. When you choose to purchase from Snow Lion you are directly supporting the large effort to publish more Buddhist texts and help the Tibetan people. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. You are receivin
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
On Aug 31, 2007, at 2:06 PM, authfriend wrote: Vaj means to say, of course, "It's pretty strange for an editor to claim they're different." He's the one claiming there's no distinction between them. No, that's not what I'm claiming.
[FairfieldLife] Ruling briefly allows gay marriage in Iowa
Ruling briefly allows gay marriage in Iowa http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN3124032520070831?sp=true <http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN3124032520070831?sp=true> Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:22PM EDT By Kay Henderson DES MOINES (Reuters) - Gay couples lined up before dawn on Friday toapply for marriage licenses until an Iowa judge, who set off the rushto the altar by scuttling the state's law against same-sex marriage,put a halt to their bliss. Less than 24 hours after starting the marriage stampede, JudgeRobert Hanson of the Polk County District Court issued a stay to hisown ruling that had said Iowa's law restricting marriage to a man and awoman was unconstitutional. On Friday Hanson ordered that no more marriage licenses be issued togay couples at the request of a county prosecutor who wanted a haltuntil Iowa's Supreme Court can rule on the prosecutor's appeal. But two Iowa State University students, Sean Fritz, 24, and TimMcQuillan, 21, beat the judge's stay and got their license, with awaiver bypassing the usual three-day waiting period. Then they rushed off and found a Unitarian minister to unite them in a brief ceremony in the front yard of his Des Moines home. It was unclear immediately how the stay would affect their marriage and other couples who managed to submit their marriage licenseapplications. The gay marriage issue is a hot one politically at all levels.Twenty-six states have constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriage. Three states allow civil unions for gay couples -- with only Massachusetts permitting full same-sex marriage. New Hampshire will allow gay civil unions beginning in January. Fritz and McQuillan were among about a dozen couples waiting in a line that formed before dawn at the Polk County Courthouse. WEDDING RINGS Fritz said he proposed to McQuillan on Thursday night after hearing about the judge's ruling and then went to a store to buy wedding rings. "He instant messaged me over the Internet that this was going on,"McQuillan said. "When he picked me up around 9 o'clock he proposed tome on the spot. Besides the obvious shock, I still haven't recovered. Maybe it'll set in later this week." Fritz said the two did a "lot of double-checking everything on the Internet to make sure that we got all the paperwork filled outcorrectly the first time. We didn't want to get refused because we messed up a 't' somewhere." Fritz says he called McQuillan's mother in California to ask permission to marry her son. Not everyone was as happy. House Republican Leader Christopher Rants of the Iowa Legislaturecalled Thursday's ruling a "shocking" reversal of the will of thepeople of the state. He blamed Democrats, saying they had refused toback an amendment to the state constitution that would have cemented the ban. Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor who has been campaigning in Iowa, called the decision another example of a ruling by an activist court. He said it demonstrates theneed for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution outlawing gay marriages. Michelle Gardner of Ames, a neighbor of Fritz and McQuillan who served as a witness on their marriage application, said "I'm just so happy to be in Iowa for this and so happy to be a part of their wedding." Her 10-year-old daughter, Esther, clutching a bouquet, was the couple's flower girl. © Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. >>>>>>> Video of the event: Two men marry in Des MoinesTravis Graven/The RegisterTimMcQuillan and Sean Fritz, both students at Iowa State University, received their marriage license Friday morning. Rev Mark Stringer quickly married the couple in his front yard in Des Moines. McQuillan and Fritz then rushed to the Polk County administration building to officially file the marriage certificate. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070831/VID\ EO01/70831043/1001 <http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070831/VI\ DEO01/70831043/1001> --
[FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
---You're overly intellectualizing what is a matter of experience. Hsuan Hua clearly expressed his disapproval of Nichiren's Buddhism and the Gohonzon, (to me, directly). That was the experience. What does this have to do with "pratimoksha vows". Get out of your ivory tower. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Heresy" means to personally choose a particular belief in opposition to some previously established orthodox belief. "Heterodoxy" is simply to choose all on one's own without regard to orthodoxy. > > Hsuan Hua was observing Chinese Buddhist monastic vinaya. Unless you were a monk in full possession of the pratimoksha vows neither you nor he could be in heretical antipathy to the other's practice. > > As far as differences and separations, you began your posted comments with Buddhist versus Hindu so you edged yourself out of discussing them in terms that were reflective of mutuality. "Tathata" is Sanskrit for "thusness. "Entity" is Latin for "ens" - a being. These are well established terms without a lot of mystery to them. "Dai" means "Great" as in the Dai of Dainichi or the "Maha" in mahayana and mahamudra. Gohonzon is an object of veneration. > > You apparently venerate the proclamation that the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren are the same and in the same manner that Dharma and Buddha are sometimes worshiped as the same. > > This means you are probably here to proselytize us at FFL for SGI. > > yifuxero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---You're looking at differences and separations. The Gohonzon > integrates mutually agreeable M-fields and tends to demolish those > getting in the way. True, Hsuan Hua didn't approve of the Gohonzon > which I showed him once. Nichiren's Buddhism was heretical to him. > However, his habit of eating only once per day before noon is > heretical to me since I have low blood sugar and have to eat > continually throughout the day. I had such pre-noon meals with him > on a number of occasions. > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim wrote: > > > > Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a Japanese > description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual > identity between particulars in Indra's net). > > > > Recent Activity > > 4 > New Members > > 1 > New Photos > > 3 > New Links > > Visit Your Group > Search Ads > Get new customers. > List your web site > in Yahoo! Search. > > Real Food Group > Share recipes > and favorite meals > w/ Real Food lovers. > > Dog Fanatics > on Yahoo! Groups > Find people who are > crazy about dogs. > > > > . > > > > > > - > Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! >
[FairfieldLife] satyaM bruuyaat!
>From an advaita-vedaanta -forum: The Manu Smriti (4.138) says "satyaM brUyAt.h. priyaM brUyAnna brUyAt.h satyam-apriyam.h | priyaM cha nAnR^itaM brUyAdeshha dharmaH sanAtanaH ||" One should speak the truth, which is agreeable, not the truth which is disagreeable. One should not speak an untruth which is agreeable. This is the eternal dharma. - Card: One should speak (bruuyaat) the truth (satyam), which is agreeable (priyam), not (na) the truth (satyam) which is disagreeable (apriyam). One should not speak (na...bruuyaat) an untruth (anRtam?) which is agreeable (priyam). This is (eSa)the eternal (sanaatanaH) dharma (dharmaH). Exercise: try to find the words in the slightly different original transliteration. Note that sandhi changes the appearence of the words in a continuous text somewhat. Also note there are some "extra" words in the original text because of the, we guess, "double" meaning of the word 'apriyam'. We think it's used both as an adjective and a substantive.
[FairfieldLife] Zeitgeist Movie
This video is very well done. The first part explains where Christianity came from and why it is nothing new. http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ You can watch it there online or download the movie as torrent or purchase a DVD at $5 plus shipping. It's mostly "fair use" content but unlike many of the funky documentaries out there this one is well produced.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of nablus108 > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:04 AM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda > > > > Please remember that petersutphen is a "professional phcycological > ass". Perhaps an assistent of some sort ? Any reference to bodyparts > would be rude. Anyways he is fond of labeling people that he has > never met or hardly read. > > "Ass" on his resume page is short for Association. Still couldn't help smile when reading it :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
"Heresy" means to personally choose a particular belief in opposition to some previously established orthodox belief. "Heterodoxy" is simply to choose all on one's own without regard to orthodoxy. Hsuan Hua was observing Chinese Buddhist monastic vinaya. Unless you were a monk in full possession of the pratimoksha vows neither you nor he could be in heretical antipathy to the other's practice. As far as differences and separations, you began your posted comments with Buddhist versus Hindu so you edged yourself out of discussing them in terms that were reflective of mutuality. "Tathata" is Sanskrit for "thusness. "Entity" is Latin for "ens" - a being. These are well established terms without a lot of mystery to them. "Dai" means "Great" as in the Dai of Dainichi or the "Maha" in mahayana and mahamudra. Gohonzon is an object of veneration. You apparently venerate the proclamation that the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren are the same and in the same manner that Dharma and Buddha are sometimes worshiped as the same. This means you are probably here to proselytize us at FFL for SGI. yifuxero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---You're looking at differences and separations. The Gohonzon integrates mutually agreeable M-fields and tends to demolish those getting in the way. True, Hsuan Hua didn't approve of the Gohonzon which I showed him once. Nichiren's Buddhism was heretical to him. However, his habit of eating only once per day before noon is heretical to me since I have low blood sugar and have to eat continually throughout the day. I had such pre-noon meals with him on a number of occasions. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a Japanese description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual identity between particulars in Indra's net). Recent Activity 4 New Members 1 New Photos 3 New Links Visit Your Group Search Ads Get new customers. List your web site in Yahoo! Search. Real Food Group Share recipes and favorite meals w/ Real Food lovers. Dog Fanatics on Yahoo! Groups Find people who are crazy about dogs. . - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ---But it's also strange for an editor to banter back and forth > endlessly as in: [J = Judy, M = John Manning]: > > J: Yes you are! > M: No I'm not! > J: Yes you are! > M: No I'm not! > J: Yes you are! > M: No I'm not! > etc. I don't know where you get that. I happen to agree with Judy on this issue. > > endlessly, though it is rather amusing; I like it to a certain > extent, it's different. > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Aug 31, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > > > > > > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > > > > > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > > > > > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > > > > > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > > > > > professional, and his word therefore carries much > > > > > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. > > > > > > > I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment > > > > as a diagnosis but a casual aside. You don't like Peter > > > > because he is critical of TM and so you jumped on him. > > > > That is your normal MO around here. > > > > > > Precisely. It is not a formal diagnosis anymore than Barry 1.0's > > > casual remarks on past events are historical research. > > > > > > For someone who claims to have a career in editing, it's pretty > > > strange when you can't distinguish one from the other on a > > > consistent basis. > > > > Vaj means to say, of course, "It's pretty strange for > > an editor to claim they're different." He's the one > > claiming there's no distinction between them. > > > > But they aren't at all the same, and anyone who seriously > > believes they are needs their head examined. > > > > Especially if they claim to have some expertise in > > psychology. > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
---But it's also strange for an editor to banter back and forth endlessly as in: [J = Judy, M = John Manning]: J: Yes you are! M: No I'm not! J: Yes you are! M: No I'm not! J: Yes you are! M: No I'm not! etc. endlessly, though it is rather amusing; I like it to a certain extent, it's different. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 31, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > > > > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > > > > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > > > > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > > > > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > > > > professional, and his word therefore carries much > > > > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. > > > > > I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment > > > as a diagnosis but a casual aside. You don't like Peter > > > because he is critical of TM and so you jumped on him. > > > That is your normal MO around here. > > > > Precisely. It is not a formal diagnosis anymore than Barry 1.0's > > casual remarks on past events are historical research. > > > > For someone who claims to have a career in editing, it's pretty > > strange when you can't distinguish one from the other on a > > consistent basis. > > Vaj means to say, of course, "It's pretty strange for > an editor to claim they're different." He's the one > claiming there's no distinction between them. > > But they aren't at all the same, and anyone who seriously > believes they are needs their head examined. > > Especially if they claim to have some expertise in > psychology. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Aug 31, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > > > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > > > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > > > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > > > professional, and his word therefore carries much > > > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. > > > I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment > > as a diagnosis but a casual aside. You don't like Peter > > because he is critical of TM and so you jumped on him. > > That is your normal MO around here. > > Precisely. It is not a formal diagnosis anymore than Barry 1.0's > casual remarks on past events are historical research. > > For someone who claims to have a career in editing, it's pretty > strange when you can't distinguish one from the other on a > consistent basis. Vaj means to say, of course, "It's pretty strange for an editor to claim they're different." He's the one claiming there's no distinction between them. But they aren't at all the same, and anyone who seriously believes they are needs their head examined. Especially if they claim to have some expertise in psychology.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
Please take a breather Judy. You’re up to 37 posts by my count. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.0/980 - Release Date: 8/30/2007 6:05 PM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
On Aug 31, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > professional, and his word therefore carries much > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment as a diagnosis but a casual aside. You don't like Peter because he is critical of TM and so you jumped on him. That is your normal MO around here. Precisely. It is not a formal diagnosis anymore than Barry 1.0's casual remarks on past events are historical research. For someone who claims to have a career in editing, it's pretty strange when you can't distinguish one from the other on a consistent basis.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > > >> authfriend wrote: > >> > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > > wrote: > >>> > Dude, with all respect, you need to be back on your > Seroquel. I kid you not. You have symptoms of a mild > psychosis. > > >>> Unethical *in the extreme* for a mental health > >>> professional to publically attempt a diagnosis > >>> of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web > >>> forum, *especially* as a putdown. > >>> > >>> And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had > >>> been seriously concerned for the person's mental > >>> health, he could have communicated with him > >>> privately. > >>> > >>> This is utterly inexcusable. > >>> > >> Big deal! Everyone here knows Willie is a nutcase. You > >> should from all your years on AMT. > >> > > Well, no, I don't actually know if he has a psychosis, > > and neither does anybody else (including Peter). I'm > > strongly inclined to believe, in fact, that he does > > all the crazy-appearing stuff quite deliberately just > > to annoy everybody--i.e., he's a troll. I don't see > > any hint that he isn't fully in touch with consensus > > reality; he just likes to pretend the rest of us > > aren't in touch with it. It's a game with him. > > > > Being a total jerk doesn't necessarily mean you're > > psychotic. > > > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > > professional, and his word therefore carries much > > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. > > I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment as a > diagnosis but a casual aside. But telling someone they have psychotic symptoms can't be a "casual aside" coming from someone we all know is a professional, by definition. You may not have taken his diagnosis *seriously*, but he sure didn't go to any trouble to ensure everyone would know he was kidding--to the contrary. He tried to make it sound as though he *was* serious. You don't like Peter because he > is critical of TM and so you jumped on him. That is your normal > MO around here. That isn't why I don't like Peter. I agree with much of what he says about the movement. And I would object just as strenuously to what he did even if we were the greatest of pals. (You may remember I dumped on Michael Goodman awhile back for a nasty bit of hypocrisy in the way he had attacked Vaj. It may be comforting to think I have such a simplistic MO, but the record doesn't bear it out.) > If Willie is faking it then he has been wasting a lot of his > energy for years. Agreed. But apparently he gets something out of it. > But then I call this the Funny Farm Lounge and everyone must > be nuts here. Must be all those cell towers. :)
[FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
---You're looking at differences and separations. The Gohonzon integrates mutually agreeable M-fields and tends to demolish those getting in the way. True, Hsuan Hua didn't approve of the Gohonzon which I showed him once. Nichiren's Buddhism was heretical to him. However, his habit of eating only once per day before noon is heretical to me since I have low blood sugar and have to eat continually throughout the day. I had such pre-noon meals with him on a number of occasions. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a Japanese description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual identity between particulars in Indra's net). > I presume that the "true entity" is tathata or tathata-garbha if you prefer. Buddha sees nothing but Buddha. So you do dharani-s from and to the multi-form Buddha? > > By the way, didn't Nichiren call Zenji-s self-power devils? Don't think Hsuan Hua would agree. Also, I doubt Nichiren would approve of Padmasambhava - particularly, Vajrakila the Yidam which he gave as a first sadhana. > > Why don't you collapse your multiple identities here on FFL and give up the parade. Tell us about your background is so we can't understand the context of your dialog. > > Also - there no such thing as "Buddhist" tathata, as you know. These are all concepts, which you also know. Why make the separation except to be polemical? > > empty > > > > tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---empty bill, you are a very astute observer and have keen > insight!. How many? Ans: many!! - but all will be explained in due > time; but for now all I can say is that it's the power of the > GOHONZON which reflects many facets of the one hologram; into one > living organism, with no danger of the separate parts flying off into > separateness. Thus, one can reconcile the various parts without > conflictyet, the whole and relationship between the parts remain > Buddhist, not Hindu. There are certain advantages in Buddhism over > Hinduism, but the core nature of the advantage(s) can't be addressed > through the type of intellectual analysis going on in this forum. > (not to put such analysis down, but it's limited, not entering into > direct cognition of the Buddhist "true entity", represented by the > Gohonzon). ps. The foregoing is not intended to make sense. > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim wrote: > > > > So how many of you inhabit you? Please explain. > > > > > > Message #146579 August 15th, 2007 - > > --- Tertonzeno wrote: > > > > --Thanks, I'm a Buddhist and don't accept Patanjali as an > Authority. > > > > > > Message #145659 , August 16th, 2007 > > Tertonzeno wrote: > > > > ---Thanks, on Buddhist practice, I'll get more into this later. > I > > > practice TM but my Buddhist Guru is Hsuan Hua; whom I used to > visit > > > during the 70's: > > > > > > Message #147828, August 30, 2007 - Tertonzeno wrote: > > > > ---Thanks, Lahiri Mahasay is the lineage Uncle of my Kriya yoga > Guru > > (initiated me into Kriya yoga in 1982 - Swami Satyeswarananda). > > > > d. he could perform the Kriya of out of body travel at will > > (mentioned by Patanjani), involving the mudra of connecting his > > tongue to his uvula. > > > > > > - > > Luggage? GPS? Comic books? > > Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search. > > > > > > > > > - > Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. >
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 11:36 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting his frustration--because he's a credentialed professional, and his word therefore carries much more weight than anything the rest of us might say. I’m not a doctor, so it’s not unethical for me to say that I think he should take every mind-numbing drug he can get his hands on. Maybe he should dumpster-dive out behind Dr. Pete’s office. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.0/980 - Release Date: 8/30/2007 6:05 PM
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> authfriend wrote: >> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter >>> > wrote: > >>> >>> Dude, with all respect, you need to be back on your Seroquel. I kid you not. You have symptoms of a mild psychosis. >>> Unethical *in the extreme* for a mental health >>> professional to publically attempt a diagnosis >>> of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web >>> forum, *especially* as a putdown. >>> >>> And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had >>> been seriously concerned for the person's mental >>> health, he could have communicated with him >>> privately. >>> >>> This is utterly inexcusable. >>> >> Big deal! Everyone here knows Willie is a nutcase. You >> should from all your years on AMT. >> > > Well, no, I don't actually know if he has a psychosis, > and neither does anybody else (including Peter). I'm > strongly inclined to believe, in fact, that he does > all the crazy-appearing stuff quite deliberately just > to annoy everybody--i.e., he's a troll. I don't see > any hint that he isn't fully in touch with consensus > reality; he just likes to pretend the rest of us > aren't in touch with it. It's a game with him. > > Being a total jerk doesn't necessarily mean you're > psychotic. > > But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be > unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis > publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting > his frustration--because he's a credentialed > professional, and his word therefore carries much > more weight than anything the rest of us might say. I don't agree. I certainly didn't take Peter's comment as a diagnosis but a casual aside. You don't like Peter because he is critical of TM and so you jumped on him. That is your normal MO around here. If Willie is faking it then he has been wasting a lot of his energy for years. But then I call this the Funny Farm Lounge and everyone must be nuts here. Must be all those cell towers. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > > >> Dude, with all respect, you need to be back on your > >> Seroquel. I kid you not. You have symptoms of a mild > >> psychosis. > >> > > > > Unethical *in the extreme* for a mental health > > professional to publically attempt a diagnosis > > of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web > > forum, *especially* as a putdown. > > > > And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had > > been seriously concerned for the person's mental > > health, he could have communicated with him > > privately. > > > > This is utterly inexcusable. > > Big deal! Everyone here knows Willie is a nutcase. You > should from all your years on AMT. Well, no, I don't actually know if he has a psychosis, and neither does anybody else (including Peter). I'm strongly inclined to believe, in fact, that he does all the crazy-appearing stuff quite deliberately just to annoy everybody--i.e., he's a troll. I don't see any hint that he isn't fully in touch with consensus reality; he just likes to pretend the rest of us aren't in touch with it. It's a game with him. Being a total jerk doesn't necessarily mean you're psychotic. But even if he WERE psychotic, it would STILL be unethical for Peter to deliver that diagnosis publically, and ESPECIALLY for the purpose of venting his frustration--because he's a credentialed professional, and his word therefore carries much more weight than anything the rest of us might say.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Dude, with all respect, you need to be back on your >> Seroquel. I kid you not. You have symptoms of a mild >> psychosis. >> > > Unethical *in the extreme* for a mental health > professional to publically attempt a diagnosis > of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web > forum, *especially* as a putdown. > > And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had > been seriously concerned for the person's mental > health, he could have communicated with him > privately. > > This is utterly inexcusable. Big deal! Everyone here knows Willie is a nutcase. You should from all your years on AMT.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of nablus108 Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:04 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda Please remember that petersutphen is a "professional phcycological ass". Perhaps an assistent of some sort ? Any reference to bodyparts would be rude. Anyways he is fond of labeling people that he has never met or hardly read. “Ass” on his resume page is short for Association. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.0/980 - Release Date: 8/30/2007 6:05 PM
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > > > Dude, with all respect, you need to be back on your > > Seroquel. I kid you not. You have symptoms of a mild > > psychosis. > > Unethical *in the extreme* for a mental health > professional to publically attempt a diagnosis > of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web > forum, *especially* as a putdown. > > And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had > been seriously concerned for the person's mental > health, he could have communicated with him > privately. > > This is utterly inexcusable. Please remember that petersutphen is a "professional phcycological ass". Perhaps an assistent of some sort ? Any reference to bodyparts would be rude. Anyways he is fond of labeling people that he has never met or hardly read.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > > she seems to assume her view of Peter > > is "true" and that she has some sort of mantle of authority to > > make such an assement, but she does not have the credentials for > > such analysis of anyone. > > I suggest you check with any authoritative body > in the field of mental health as to whether what > Peter did is considered professionally ethical. > > > > When Judy says, > > > > "And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had been seriously > > concerned for the person's mental health, he could have communicated > > with him privately," > > > > obviously she is not listening to her own moral advice, nor does she > > inquire if Peter's "healing method" being "applied to Richard" is > > perhaps some new confrontational therapy that he's willing to > > continue until Richard is healed > > My problem isn't with the putdown per se. The problem > is with Peter having put his professional credentials > *behind* the putdown. > An it appears, drugs such as this, being powerful jojo, have some powerful possible side effects for which one needs some degree of monitoring. Recommendations / prescriptions of a powerful drug without adequate patient follow-up and monitoring seems odd. Thats one reason such drugs are not OTC. They need supervision. However, in my observation, such drugs can be powerfully beneficial. A family member benefited greatly from Zyprexia -- a cousin of Seroquel I believe. - "Elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis (having lost touch with reality due to confusion and memory loss) treated with this type of medicine are at an increased risk of death compared to placebo (sugar pill). SEROQUEL is not approved for treating these patients. Antidepressants have increased the risk of suicidal thoughts and actions in children and teenagers. All patients starting treatment should be watched closely for worsening of depression, suicidal thoughts or actions, unusual changes in behavior, agitation, and irritability. Families and caregivers should watch patients daily and report these symptoms immediately to their physician. SEROQUEL is not approved for patients under the age of 18. A rare, but potentially fatal side effect reported with SEROQUEL and medicines like it, is neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS). Tell your doctor if you have very high fever; rigid muscles; shaking; confusion; sweating; changes in pulse, heart rate, or blood pressure; or muscle pain and weakness because treatment should be stopped if you have NMS. Another serious side effect reported with SEROQUEL and medicines like it is tardive dyskinesia (TD): uncontrollable movements of the face, tongue, or other parts of the body. TD may become permanent, and the risk of TD is believed to increase as the amount of and length of time on these medications increase. While TD can develop in patients taking low doses for short periods, this is much less common. There is no known treatment for TD, but it may go away partially or completely if treatment is stopped. High blood sugar and diabetes have been reported with SEROQUEL and medicines like it. If you have diabetes or risk factors such as obesity or a family history of diabetes, ask your doctor about checking your blood sugar before starting SEROQUEL and throughout treatment. If you develop symptoms of high blood sugar or diabetes, such as excessive thirst or hunger, increased urination or weakness, contact your doctor. Complications from diabetes can be serious and even life threatening. An eye exam for cataracts is recommended at the beginning of treatment and every 6 months. Tell your doctor if you have a history of or are at risk for seizures. Since drowsiness has been reported with SEROQUEL, you should not participate in activities such as driving or operating machinery until you know that you can do so safely. Avoid drinking alcohol while taking SEROQUEL because it increases the effects of alcohol. Avoid becoming overheated or dehydrated while taking SEROQUEL. The most common side effects are dry mouth, drowsiness, sedation, dizziness, weakness, constipation, abdominal pain, sudden drop in blood pressure when standing, sore throat, weight gain, abnormal liver tests, upset stomach, and lethargy." --
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're here only to attempt to piss EVERYONE off. You're a bucket of > shit that has somehow become conscious enough to use a keyboard. > Interesting point in a thread about projection.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What leaders of the tmo say about "sweet truth" in public and what > they do in their daily life are two completely different things. > TMO leaders specialize in public superficial sweetness Exactly. This nauseates me when I see it, so obviously I'm going to strenuously avoid doing it myself. while privately > obsessing like secret police on who should or shouldn't be on their > black lists for being "off the program" in word, deed, or thought. > You can't use that one to get Judy or anyone else on the TB thing. > > She's probably right that a mental health professional shouldn't > make diagnosis comments in a post, though I don't think Peter was > actually making a serious diagnosis -- just being annoyed at willy, > which is the main reaction willy is trying to get anyway, so no > need to make a big deal about it. I think you're probably right that it wasn't a serious diagnosis (if it was, Peter isn't fit to practice). However, Peter did say, "with all respect" and "I kid you not" when he made it, which suggests at the least that he wasn't concerned that some *might* take it seriously, and perhaps even hoped they would. Delivering a professional opinion about a person's mental health is just too delicate and potentially damaging to risk possible misunderstanding. It isn't something to play around with--again, *especially* when the purpose behind it is to make a putdown. It's unfairly exploiting one's professional authority, which is why it's so unethical. That it's done out of pique makes it even more unethical.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The below is merely and only my opinion.
>
> I don't believe it, but it's been said that Judy is a True Believer
in TM.
>
> So why does she not practice the most basic "outside of meditation"
> "commandment" that Maharishi STRONGLY underlined and espoused, and,
> in fact, in most of his public appearances was an embodiment of --
> that is: "Speak the sweet truth."
As I've said numerous times, I think MMY has the
Indian sign, so to speak, concerning the nature
and mechanics of consciousness; but with regard
to externals like behavior and politics, I've
never regarded him as the be-all and end-all and
am thus not inclined to take his pronouncements
in those areas as gospel.
"Speaking the sweet truth," in my view, is nice
if one can do it *authentically*. Otherwise, it's
moodmaking and potentially hypocritical. Unless I
genuinely feel friendly toward someone, any attempt
to sweeten what I have to say is artificial and
insincere, and I just refuse to try to disguise how
I feel for the sake of appearing all spiritual and
holy.
> Judy puts down Peter for putting down Richard.
Uh, no. I pointed out that he was behaving
unethically in using his professional credentials
to lend authority to the putdown.
This is simple
> hypocrisy -- she is engaged in intellectual dishonesty and
> mean-spirited revenge upon Peter for past actions that seem to still
> be remembered by Judy.
Nope. I'd have pointed out that what he did was
unethical even if he had always been perfectly
sweet to me.
> She practices "vigilantism" in the name of a "protecting/defending
> Richard"
Nope, I wasn't defending anybody either.
> When Judy says:
>
> "for a mental health professional to publically attempt a
> diagnosis of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web forum,
> *especially* as a putdown," she shows that she feels herself to
> be above this moral value of "being discrete with the tender
> feeling levels of others" and proceeds to "put down" Peter
Nope, "being discrete [sic] with the tender feeling
levels of others" has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
> -- misspelling "publicly" while she doing so --
("Publically" is an accepted alternate spelling,
according to my dictionary. "Discrete" is not an
accepted alternate spelling of "discreet," however.)
> she seems to assume her view of Peter
> is "true" and that she has some sort of mantle of authority to
> make such an assement, but she does not have the credentials for
> such analysis of anyone.
I suggest you check with any authoritative body
in the field of mental health as to whether what
Peter did is considered professionally ethical.
> When Judy says,
>
> "And that's what it was, a putdown. If Peter had been seriously
> concerned for the person's mental health, he could have communicated
> with him privately,"
>
> obviously she is not listening to her own moral advice, nor does she
> inquire if Peter's "healing method" being "applied to Richard" is
> perhaps some new confrontational therapy that he's willing to
> continue until Richard is healed
My problem isn't with the putdown per se. The problem
is with Peter having put his professional credentials
*behind* the putdown.
If he weren't a mental health professional, I wouldn't
have a problem with his calling someone psychotic based
on the person's posts, even if I thought that was
inaccurate. An opinion from a nonprofessional doesn't
carry much weight.
And if Peter were to have exercised his professional
skills to do a bit of online psychotherapy with another
participant, that would be OK with me too. It's the
unsolicited public *diagnosis*, used as a putdown,
that's the problem. It's an abuse of his authority
as a professional.
Ask others here is they too have reached such
> levels of frustration from a troll getting under their skins. Peter
> is, after all, human, and when he shows his frustration, my first
> impulse is to say, "Brother, comrade, fellow traveler on this path
> of challenges, hail to thee, well met!"
Same here. No problem with Peter or anyone else
showing their frustration with a troll. But Peter, as a
mental health professional, has no damn business
showing his frustration by publically making an
unsolicited diagnosis based on the troll's postings.
It would be unethical for him to vent his
frustration at an annoying patient by telling them
they were psychotic in the context of a private
therapy session (even if the patient *was* psychotic).
How much more unethical to do so in public, in
the absence of a professional therapeutic
relationship, based merely on a person's postings!
> In sum, since I am not a psychologist, my analysis of Judy has
> little "probative value," but common sense in others here surely
> will agree
Actually, your "analysis" suffers far more from a
lack of common sense than from a lack of credentials
in psychology.
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
What leaders of the tmo say about "sweet truth" in public and what they do in their daily life are two completely different things. TMO leaders specialize in public superficial sweetness while privately obsessing like secret police on who should or shouldn't be on their black lists for being "off the program" in word, deed, or thought. You can't use that one to get Judy or anyone else on the TB thing. She's probably right that a mental health professional shouldn't make diagnosis comments in a post, though I don't think Peter was actually making a serious diagnosis -- just being annoyed at willy, which is the main reaction willy is trying to get anyway, so no need to make a big deal about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The below is merely and only my opinion. > > I don't believe it, but it's been said that Judy is a True Believer in TM. > > So why does she not practice the most basic "outside of meditation" > "commandment" that Maharishi STRONGLY underlined and espoused, and, in > fact, in most of his public appearances was an embodiment of -- that > is: "Speak the sweet truth." (In private too, I never saw Maharishi > break this rule; but, others testify to Maharishi's numerous instances > of yelling in a seemingly out of control manner, so maybe Judy thinks > that she too is justified.) > > One was said to achieve this sweet truth if one's speech was true, > sweet and NECESSARY. > > Judy's rebuke of Peter does not follow this "guideline," and, I, for > one, have yet to see her follow this principle. Ergo, she is directly > "going against" her Master's bidding, and, by the TM algorithms, she's > stressing her nervous system in some damaging way and to some extent > mitigating the benefits of the meditation's practice and binding > herself into conceptuality after having gained some freedom from it by > meditation. > > The frequency of her "being unsweet" in her posts here, could be > argued to entirely undo any healing that meditation could be said to > bring to her life. Indeed, after decades of being a spiritual > practitioner, here we can find her daily spewing some of the most > unsweet and untrue and UNNECESSARY clouds of angst in an environment > that aspires to have a "nice atmosphere for a chat." > > Maharishi also was very fond of "It takes a thorn to remove a thorn." > And perhaps this is Judy's rational for the abuse she heaps upon > Peter and anyone else who disagrees with her POV of the moment. After > probably decades of practicing TM, she does not have the emotional > control to speak the sweet truth, but neither, it seems has the > practice of TM given her intellect the breadth (wide angle) and > sharpness (point value) dynamics that are so necessary to "be a > thorn." Her heart fails her, her intellect fails her. > > Her lack of compassion for the "problem that Peter is dealing with," > signifies that she has not the breadth to see his entire matrix and to > understand it as yet another blindness equal to that which Peter is > suggesting that Richard J. Williams is a victim of. Nor, does she > have the point value acuity of intellect to give Peter a precise > instruction to remove or at least begin to remedy his dilemma of > having parochial judgments about the psychology of others. > > Judy puts down Peter for putting down Richard. This is simple > hypocrisy -- she is engaged in intellectual dishonesty and > mean-spirited revenge upon Peter for past actions that seem to still > be remembered by Judy. In fact, it seems she's dedicated to > amplifying in her nervous system the effects of such negative thinking > by indulging in regularly recalling these past "sins against Judy" and > therefore making them even more likely to be operative dynamics in her > other thought productions. > > She practices "vigilantism" in the name of a "protecting/defending > Richard" -- though she has no actual compassion for Richard it seems > and is using Richard's plight as her shield of empowerment to be > negative, angry, revengeful, spiteful, and as painful as an arrow into > the heart to anyone her merest whim targets. She left-handedly is > saying that Richard is, indeed, a poor soul in need of professional > help -- publicly and, go figure, thus agreeing with Peter! > > Using Judy's words as an "inadvertent confession," it is easy to see > that she is a classic case in need of some Byron Katie whoopass > turn-around-and-look-at-yourself-by-seeing-the-"true > you"-in-your-descriptions-of-others. > > When Judy calls Peter "Unethical *in the extreme*," she is showing > that she wants Peter to think extremely ill of himself. I know of no > psychologist who would ask folks to think ill of themselves. Judy, > didn't, but could have said, "Peter, if Richard is in need, can you > show us how to be even more kind and gentle than you were in your last > post to him? I'm hoping your training can teach us about this kind of > emoti
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It may be of greater value for you to look in the mirror with regard > to the same essentisl message you have just used to aim at Judy. [This > is my view and I do consider it to have significant value.] > John Manning, you fucking troll. Everyone projects all the time, and I take delight in it. At Fairfield Life, I've posted some of my "positivity," and I've posted some of my negativity. I am trying to be balanced! You almost always post only negativity, and the parts of me that "wants to harm others," THAT'S what I find so easily projected on you. The good-hearted parts of me are deeply desiring to find harmony and truth -- those parts are almost impossible to project on you. You're here only to attempt to piss EVERYONE off. You're a bucket of shit that has somehow become conscious enough to use a keyboard. Let's see you post anything that's positive from almost everyone's POV. I don't think you can do it. You seem to be a lost soul. Prove it otherwise, if you can. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The below is merely and only my opinion. > > I don't believe it, but it's been said that Judy is a True Believer in TM. > > So why does she not practice the most basic "outside of meditation" > "commandment" that Maharishi STRONGLY underlined and espoused, and, in > fact, in most of his public appearances was an embodiment of -- that > is: "Speak the sweet truth." (In private too, I never saw Maharishi > break this rule; but, others testify to Maharishi's numerous instances > of yelling in a seemingly out of control manner, so maybe Judy thinks > that she too is justified.) > > One was said to achieve this sweet truth if one's speech was true, > sweet and NECESSARY. > > Judy's rebuke of Peter does not follow this "guideline," and, I, for > one, have yet to see her follow this principle. Ergo, she is directly > "going against" her Master's bidding, and, by the TM algorithms, she's > stressing her nervous system in some damaging way and to some extent > mitigating the benefits of the meditation's practice and binding > herself into conceptuality after having gained some freedom from it by > meditation. > > The frequency of her "being unsweet" in her posts here, could be > argued to entirely undo any healing that meditation could be said to > bring to her life. Indeed, after decades of being a spiritual > practitioner, here we can find her daily spewing some of the most > unsweet and untrue and UNNECESSARY clouds of angst in an environment > that aspires to have a "nice atmosphere for a chat." > > Maharishi also was very fond of "It takes a thorn to remove a thorn." > And perhaps this is Judy's rational for the abuse she heaps upon > Peter and anyone else who disagrees with her POV of the moment. After > probably decades of practicing TM, she does not have the emotional > control to speak the sweet truth, but neither, it seems has the > practice of TM given her intellect the breadth (wide angle) and > sharpness (point value) dynamics that are so necessary to "be a > thorn." Her heart fails her, her intellect fails her. > > Her lack of compassion for the "problem that Peter is dealing with," > signifies that she has not the breadth to see his entire matrix and to > understand it as yet another blindness equal to that which Peter is > suggesting that Richard J. Williams is a victim of. Nor, does she > have the point value acuity of intellect to give Peter a precise > instruction to remove or at least begin to remedy his dilemma of > having parochial judgments about the psychology of others. > > Judy puts down Peter for putting down Richard. This is simple > hypocrisy -- she is engaged in intellectual dishonesty and > mean-spirited revenge upon Peter for past actions that seem to still > be remembered by Judy. In fact, it seems she's dedicated to > amplifying in her nervous system the effects of such negative thinking > by indulging in regularly recalling these past "sins against Judy" and > therefore making them even more likely to be operative dynamics in her > other thought productions. > > She practices "vigilantism" in the name of a "protecting/defending > Richard" -- though she has no actual compassion for Richard it seems > and is using Richard's plight as her shield of empowerment to be > negative, angry, revengeful, spiteful, and as painful as an arrow into > the heart to anyone her merest whim targets. She left-handedly is > saying that Richard is, indeed, a poor soul in need of professional > help -- publicly and, go figure, thus agreeing with Peter! > > Using Judy's words as an "inadvertent confession," it is easy to see > that she is a classic case in need of some Byron Katie whoopass > turn-around-and-look-at-yourself-by-seeing-the-"true > you"-in-your-descriptions-of-others. > > When Judy calls Peter "Unethical *in the extreme*," she is showing > that she wants Peter to think extremely ill of himself. I know of no > psychologist who would ask folks to think ill of themselves. Judy, > didn't, but could have said, "Peter, if Richard is in need, can you > show us how to be even more kind and gentle than you were in your last > post to him? I'm hoping your training can teach us about this kind of > emotional control when others present such strongly challenging POVs." > > When Judy says: > > "for a mental health professional to publically attempt a diagnosis of > psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web forum, *especially* as a > putdown," > > she shows that she feels herself to be above this moral value of > "being discrete with the tender feeling levels of others" and proceeds > to "put down" Peter -- misspelling "publicly" while she doing so -- > which is perhaps an indication of her being somewhat out of emotional > control, since her past postings show almost a "debilitating > obsession" with grammar, spelling and typos. Thus, she must have typed > her post and sent it off "fast" beca
[FairfieldLife] Re: An Inspiring Visit to Baba Muktananda
The below is merely and only my opinion. I don't believe it, but it's been said that Judy is a True Believer in TM. So why does she not practice the most basic "outside of meditation" "commandment" that Maharishi STRONGLY underlined and espoused, and, in fact, in most of his public appearances was an embodiment of -- that is: "Speak the sweet truth." (In private too, I never saw Maharishi break this rule; but, others testify to Maharishi's numerous instances of yelling in a seemingly out of control manner, so maybe Judy thinks that she too is justified.) One was said to achieve this sweet truth if one's speech was true, sweet and NECESSARY. Judy's rebuke of Peter does not follow this "guideline," and, I, for one, have yet to see her follow this principle. Ergo, she is directly "going against" her Master's bidding, and, by the TM algorithms, she's stressing her nervous system in some damaging way and to some extent mitigating the benefits of the meditation's practice and binding herself into conceptuality after having gained some freedom from it by meditation. The frequency of her "being unsweet" in her posts here, could be argued to entirely undo any healing that meditation could be said to bring to her life. Indeed, after decades of being a spiritual practitioner, here we can find her daily spewing some of the most unsweet and untrue and UNNECESSARY clouds of angst in an environment that aspires to have a "nice atmosphere for a chat." Maharishi also was very fond of "It takes a thorn to remove a thorn." And perhaps this is Judy's rational for the abuse she heaps upon Peter and anyone else who disagrees with her POV of the moment. After probably decades of practicing TM, she does not have the emotional control to speak the sweet truth, but neither, it seems has the practice of TM given her intellect the breadth (wide angle) and sharpness (point value) dynamics that are so necessary to "be a thorn." Her heart fails her, her intellect fails her. Her lack of compassion for the "problem that Peter is dealing with," signifies that she has not the breadth to see his entire matrix and to understand it as yet another blindness equal to that which Peter is suggesting that Richard J. Williams is a victim of. Nor, does she have the point value acuity of intellect to give Peter a precise instruction to remove or at least begin to remedy his dilemma of having parochial judgments about the psychology of others. Judy puts down Peter for putting down Richard. This is simple hypocrisy -- she is engaged in intellectual dishonesty and mean-spirited revenge upon Peter for past actions that seem to still be remembered by Judy. In fact, it seems she's dedicated to amplifying in her nervous system the effects of such negative thinking by indulging in regularly recalling these past "sins against Judy" and therefore making them even more likely to be operative dynamics in her other thought productions. She practices "vigilantism" in the name of a "protecting/defending Richard" -- though she has no actual compassion for Richard it seems and is using Richard's plight as her shield of empowerment to be negative, angry, revengeful, spiteful, and as painful as an arrow into the heart to anyone her merest whim targets. She left-handedly is saying that Richard is, indeed, a poor soul in need of professional help -- publicly and, go figure, thus agreeing with Peter! Using Judy's words as an "inadvertent confession," it is easy to see that she is a classic case in need of some Byron Katie whoopass turn-around-and-look-at-yourself-by-seeing-the-"true you"-in-your-descriptions-of-others. When Judy calls Peter "Unethical *in the extreme*," she is showing that she wants Peter to think extremely ill of himself. I know of no psychologist who would ask folks to think ill of themselves. Judy, didn't, but could have said, "Peter, if Richard is in need, can you show us how to be even more kind and gentle than you were in your last post to him? I'm hoping your training can teach us about this kind of emotional control when others present such strongly challenging POVs." When Judy says: "for a mental health professional to publically attempt a diagnosis of psychopathology via someone's posts on a Web forum, *especially* as a putdown," she shows that she feels herself to be above this moral value of "being discrete with the tender feeling levels of others" and proceeds to "put down" Peter -- misspelling "publicly" while she doing so -- which is perhaps an indication of her being somewhat out of emotional control, since her past postings show almost a "debilitating obsession" with grammar, spelling and typos. Thus, she must have typed her post and sent it off "fast" because she wanted so badly to "harm Peter." She is, thus, being what she projects on Peter when she attempts to correct him by putting him down in public as she accuses Peter of doing to Richard, and she seems to assume her view of Peter is "true" and that sh
[FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a Japanese description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual identity between particulars in Indra's net). I presume that the "true entity" is tathata or tathata-garbha if you prefer. Buddha sees nothing but Buddha. So you do dharani-s from and to the multi-form Buddha? By the way, didn't Nichiren call Zenji-s self-power devils? Don't think Hsuan Hua would agree. Also, I doubt Nichiren would approve of Padmasambhava - particularly, Vajrakila the Yidam which he gave as a first sadhana. Why don't you collapse your multiple identities here on FFL and give up the parade. Tell us about your background is so we can't understand the context of your dialog. Also - there no such thing as "Buddhist" tathata, as you know. These are all concepts, which you also know. Why make the separation except to be polemical? empty tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---empty bill, you are a very astute observer and have keen insight!. How many? Ans: many!! - but all will be explained in due time; but for now all I can say is that it's the power of the GOHONZON which reflects many facets of the one hologram; into one living organism, with no danger of the separate parts flying off into separateness. Thus, one can reconcile the various parts without conflictyet, the whole and relationship between the parts remain Buddhist, not Hindu. There are certain advantages in Buddhism over Hinduism, but the core nature of the advantage(s) can't be addressed through the type of intellectual analysis going on in this forum. (not to put such analysis down, but it's limited, not entering into direct cognition of the Buddhist "true entity", represented by the Gohonzon). ps. The foregoing is not intended to make sense. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So how many of you inhabit you? Please explain. > > > Message #146579 August 15th, 2007 - > --- Tertonzeno wrote: > > --Thanks, I'm a Buddhist and don't accept Patanjali as an Authority. > > > Message #145659 , August 16th, 2007 > Tertonzeno wrote: > > ---Thanks, on Buddhist practice, I'll get more into this later. I > > practice TM but my Buddhist Guru is Hsuan Hua; whom I used to visit > > during the 70's: > > > Message #147828, August 30, 2007 - Tertonzeno wrote: > > ---Thanks, Lahiri Mahasay is the lineage Uncle of my Kriya yoga Guru > (initiated me into Kriya yoga in 1982 - Swami Satyeswarananda). > > d. he could perform the Kriya of out of body travel at will > (mentioned by Patanjani), involving the mudra of connecting his > tongue to his uvula. > > > - > Luggage? GPS? Comic books? > Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search. > - Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
[FairfieldLife] 'Colorado Commander Trumped by Bush Image Machine'
Image fears, cost halt energy beam Washington - Saddam Hussein had been gone just a few weeks, and U.S. forces in Fallujah, west of Baghdad, were already being called unwelcome invaders. One of the first big anti-American protests of the war escalated into shootouts that left 18 Iraqis dead and 78 wounded. It would be a familiar scene in Iraq's next few years: Crowds gather, insurgents mingle with civilians. Troops open fire, and innocents die. All the while, according to internal military correspondence obtained by the Associated Press, U.S. commanders were telling Washington that many civilian casualties could be avoided by using a new non-lethal weapon developed over the past decade. Military leaders repeatedly and urgently requested - and were denied - the device, which uses energy beams instead of bullets and lets soldiers break up unruly crowds without firing a shot. It's a ray gun that neither kills nor maims, but the Pentagon has refused to deploy it out of concern that the weapon itself might be seen as a torture device. Perched on a Humvee or a flatbed truck, the Active Denial System gives people hit by the invisible beam the sense that their skin is on fire. They move out of the way quickly and without injury. On April 30, 2003, two days after the first Fallujah incident, Gene McCall, then the top scientist at Air Force Space Command in Colorado, typed out a two-sentence e-mail to Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "I am convinced that the tragedy at Fallujah would not have occurred if an Active Denial System had been there," McCall told Myers, according to the e-mail obtained by AP. The system should become "an immediate priority," McCall said. Myers referred McCall's message to his staff, according to the e-mail chain. McCall, who retired from government in November 2003, remains convinced the system would have saved lives in Iraq. "How this has been handled is kind of a national scandal," McCall said. A few months after McCall's message, in August 2003, Richard Natonski, a Marine Corps brigadier general who had just returned from Iraq, filed an "urgent" request with officials in Washington for the energy-beam device. The device would minimize what Natonski described as the "CNN Effect" - the instantaneous relay of images depicting U.S. troops as aggressors. A year later, Natonski, by then promoted to major general, again asked for the system, saying a compact and mobile version was "urgently needed," particularly in urban settings. Senior officers in Iraq have continued to make the case. One December 2006 request noted that as U.S. forces are drawn down, the non-lethal weapon "will provide excellent means for economy of force." The main reason the tool has been missing in action is public perception. With memories of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal still fresh, the Pentagon is reluctant to give troops a space-age device that could be misconstrued as a torture machine. "We want to just make sure that all the conditions are right, so when it is able to be deployed the system performs as predicted - that there isn't any negative fallout," said Col. Kirk Hymes, head of the Defense Department's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate. Reviews by military lawyers concluded it is a lawful weapon under current rules governing the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a Nov. 15 document prepared by Marine Corps officials in western Iraq. Private organizations remain concerned, however, because documentation that supports the testing and legal reviews is classified. There's no way to independently verify the Pentagon's claims, said Stephen Goose of Human Rights Watch in Washington. Another issue for the weapon is cost. The Pentagon has spent $62 million developing and testing the system over the past decade, a scant amount compared to other high-profile, multibillion-dollar military programs. Still, officials say the technology is too expensive, although they won't say what it costs to build. They cite engineering challenges as another obstacle, although one U.S. defense contractor says it has a model ready for production. For now, there's no firm schedule for when the system might be made and delivered to troops. Richard LardnerAssociated Press Thursday, August 30, 2007 - Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids.
[FairfieldLife] Well, done Venezuela!
> > Venezuela's hero of private education makes Consciousness-Based > Education available to 40,000 students > by Global Good News staff writer > > Global Good News Translate This Article > 26 August 2007 > > Great praise and admiration are due to Mr Richard Tucker, one of > the world's leading educators. Vice-Chancellor of Venezuela's > private Iutirla University with 40,000 students on 24 campuses in > 13 towns throughout Venezuela, Mr Tucker has personally organized > the official introduction of Consciousness-Based Education into the > curriculum of the university. > > Mr Tucker, whose father and grandfather started and built up > Venezuela's largest private university, says he wants to provide > the students in his care with everything they need to meet the > challenges of today's world. He sees Consciousness-Based Education > as the system that will do this most effectively. > > The news that Mr Tucker had signed an agreement with the Global > Country of World Peace was reported on the Maharishi Channel on 20 > August by Dr Jose Luis Alvarez Roset, Raja of Latin America. > > Raja Luis explained that Venezuela has a population of 29 million > and thus requires around 500 Yogic Flyers to crown the nation with > invincibility. The country is also favoured by nature in that it > has the Angel Falls, the largest waterfalls in the world, and a > large coastline to the north. Water bodies to the north or east are > auspicious and bring favourable influences, according to Vastu > Vidya, or the science of orientation and placement embodied in > Maharishi Sthapatya Veda. > > Mr Tucker, a man of great foresight and insight, has personally > designed the publicity materials to bring Consciousness-Based > Education to his students' attention. He also takes every > opportunity to personally recommend the programme to them. This new > addition to the curriculum will be an option that students can > take, and will supplement a wide range of vocational and academic > courses offered by the university. > > Students at all campuses opting into Consciousness-Based Education > will receive instruction simultaneously by videoconference. This > will ensure that there is no delay in the maximum number of > students starting to practise the Transcendental Meditation and TM- > Sidhi Programme, including Yogic Flying, which is the technology at > the core of this most advanced educational system. > > Mr Tucker is also the President of the Private Education School > Association in Venezuela, which has 250,000 students under its > care. The uptake of Consciousness-Based Education in the country, > therefore, is potentially very much greater even than at present. > > So great is Mr Tucker's appreciation of the programmes of Maharishi > Mahesh Yogi, and their ability to create invincibilitya state of > 'all good for everyone, and non-good for no one'that he has also > donated a prime plot of land in a beautiful residential area of the > capital, Caracas, to the Global Country of World Peace. > > The plot, which Mr Tucker has had for some time without knowing > what purpose he wished to put it to, will now be adorned with a > magnificent, white marble clad Tower of Invincibility. > > Mr Tucker, Raja Luis concluded, is truly a great and successful > leader who will bring huge benefits to his country, and indeed, to > the world. On hearing of these developments in Venezuela, Maharishi > Mahesh Yogi commented that Mr Tucker had placed his country 'on a > golden path'. > > Copyright © 2007 Global Good News(sm) Service. > > Global Good News comment: > > For information about Maharishi's seven-point programme to create a > healthy, happy, prosperous society, and a peaceful world, please > visit: Global Financial Capital of New York. >
