[FairfieldLife] Re: Shemp -- how'd ya do that?...be my teacher

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" shempmcgurk@
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> > >
> > > Shemp,
> > >
> > > How did you get Girish's photo to show up, online, in your post.
> I
> > > used the standard HTML tags but got nowhere. Perhaps I have to
> post
> > > from my email software instead of the online interface?
> > >
> > > Edg
> >
> >
>
>
> > 1) Rich-Text Editor mode;
> >
> > 2) clicked on the link you provided to the photo;
> >
> > 3) highlighted the photo;
> >
> > 4) right-click copied;
> >
> > 5) pasted.
> >
> > Perhaps you made it too complicated than it had to be...
> >
>
>
> ***
>
> Shemp emailed his post into FFL, which is why the photo showed up.
> Posting at the web site won't cut it for this purpose.

Not necessary to e-mail it to FFL, just paste into Rich Text Editor from
website, and follow the instructions. You must highlight the photo on a
website first --- ie. drag across it so that it darkens, then copy.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:11 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG."  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > Maybe he really wasn't a yogi. Is that a possibility here?
> > > >
> > > > Yes!
> > >
> > > Be interesting to hear a definition of "yogi"
> > > from both of you.
> > 
> > "CC" type attainment as a minimum--the slightly dualistic  
> > turiyatita--"beyond the forth" being what I'd refer to in a TM-
> style  
> > context.
> > 
> > But there are non-dual and other yogis as well, so it is good to  
> > specify what "style" of yogi you mean when you make some sort of  
> > declaration. It's not a monolithic thing. I'm always glad to 
> specify  
> > if people are sensitive enough to even ask.
> > 
> > Most aren't.
>
> and those that know the truth about this sort of thing aren't 
> either. Go home pretender. This notion that you have of their being 
> a never ending path of signs and symbols and sciences and levels of 
> accomplishment is all designed to mollify the fear of complete 
> dissolution, of your own death. Nothing more. 
> 
> All who talk in these terms seek to keep those listening in bondage, 
> keep them seeking outward for what is each of our spontaneous and 
> wholly owned birthright, that of eternal freedom. Some of the 
> trappings of these rituals of Maya are beautiful, but that doesn't 
> make them liberating. 
> 
> There are just two kinds of existence, 1) bound and segregated, and 
> 2) free and integrated. To make a fundamentalist science as you do 
> of all of these gradations and other things keeps the mind busy so 
> that it can believe in something other than its own naturally 
> available annihilation. Just more fear and idiocy dancing with Maya.

Everything Jim says here boils down to, "I know
the truth, and you don't." 

As far as I know, *that* is Narcissistic Personality 
Disorder, in a nutshell. With a dash of being not
terribly smart or original thrown in.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] Meeting Maharishi (by Gotham Chopra)

[Robert]

Meeting Maharishi (by Gotham Chopra)  One of the more interesting parts of 
"growing up Chopra," was the range of people my sister and I were exposed 
to--from celebrities to heads of state to Nobel laureates and all the rest. As 
a teenager growing up in Boston, the emotional response to these experiences 
ranged from titillation (Madonna) to indifference (Elizabeth Taylor), to total 
fascination (Michael Jackson). But the most memorable was the little Indian 
Guru who over the years became a symbol of something very primordial to my 
whole family.
  I remember the first time my parents dragged my sister and I to meet 
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is some rural outpost in India outside of New Delhi. I 
was about 11 years old and I hated them for it. "Drag" is the literal case here 
because it was 1986 and the Boston Celtics (my boyhood favorite team) were on 
the run to the NBA Championship. Alas my parents decided that we needed to 
travel to the old country to see our grandparents and visit the ashram of some 
old Beatles Guru that they had become enamored with. This caused considerable 
family friction: if Larry Bird was my Luke Skywalker, the dude known as 
Maharishi had literally just become my Darth Vadar. 
  In those days, India was not the bustling land of plenty and opportunity it 
is today. Getting to India in the first place was a hell of an ordeal. Getting 
to Noida where Maharishi's ashram was involved taking a convoy out to what 
appeared to be the sticks. The upshot was that almost since my father's first 
encounter with Maharishi, he had been mysteriously seemingly anointed "the 
chosen one" by the "movement" that surrounded the Guru and hence we were 
treated with an overt sense of deference and importance. In India this meant 
getting an escort of Maruti cars from Delhi to Noida almost upon landing at the 
airport in the middle of the night.
  That was just the beginning of the mysterious journey. Once we we arrived in 
the ashram, a quiet compound awash with candlelight and the fragrance of fresh 
flowers, we were sequestered to a room where we waited, and waited, and waited. 
It was truly an exercise in patience and endurance, to wait for hour on end in 
pursuit of an encounter that meant nothing to me.
  Finally, about nine hours in, I was handed an ice cream cone by one of the 
movement handlers and we were escorted into a massive auditorium where a few 
thousand people seemed to be seated. At the head, atop an flower covered 
pedestal sat the diminutive Maharishi. As the VIPS that we were, we were 
ushered to the front row and seated in full view of "his holiness." He seemed 
to be midstream on a long dissertation about the meaning of life which to my 
11-year-old brain, really didn't register as highly important. He didn't as 
much as blink upon our entrance, take an extra breath or make an aside glance 
to acknowledge our presence. He just droned on.
  But then, a moment later, he stopped. And he stared down at the four of us, 
my parents, sister, and I. It was as if he had stopped mid-sentence, 
mid-thought even. And he just stared at me. And pointed at me. Despite my 
11-year-old hubris, I was shrewd enough to know that this was a big deal and 
all of a sudden the glare of the spotlight burned right through me. Maharishi 
paused and spoke into his microphone, "come here, you can?"
  I stared at my father unsure what to do. "Go, go..." He urged.
  I gestured to my older sister Mallika to come with me and she just shook her 
head. "Go dummy," she whispered.
  So with the hushed glared of a thousand eyes on my back I staggered forward 
awkwardly.
  After a seeming eternity, I stood in front of the great Maharishi. I knew 
from the Indian comic books that I collected that you were supposed to bow down 
and touch the feet in a show of respect to these old sadhus. Not sure what else 
to do, I started to get down to my knees, balancing my ice cream cone in my 
hands.
  Maharishi laughed and reached out and stopped me. "No...no...no..." he 
giggled. "Americans do not bow down at the feet of anyone," he said.
  I stared at him awkwardly not sure how to respond, holding my ice cream cone 
tenuously. "Um, I'm not really American..." I divulged the great discomfort of 
my upbringing as the son of a an immigrant raised in America, the only brown 
Celtics fan I really knew.
  "Indian?" Maharishi giggled back at me.
  "Not really..." the flip side of my identity conflict was now out in the open 
for everyone to see.
  Maharishi nodded slowly. I looked in his eyes. There was a gentleness to 
them, something very comfortable that put you at ease.
  "Then what are you?" He inquired.
  "Um..." I stammered. "Um, I don't know. I guess I am...I'm just uh. I guess I 
just am...?"
  And he started to laugh again, this sweet innocent infectious laugh.
  "All these years," he started to speak. "I have meditated and studied," he 
giggled even louder, "to come upon this revelation that you already know!"
  "We ju

[FairfieldLife] Growing Up with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (by Mallika Chopra)

[Robert]

Growing Up with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (by Mallika Chopra)  I learned 
transcendental meditation when I was 9. I think I met Maharishi Mahesh Yogi for 
the first time when I was 13, and for the next decade he was a major influence 
in my life. I remember sitting for endless hours with Maharishi – sometimes 
crowds of thousands of people, others times just with my parents and brother. 
Because of my father’s (Deepak Chopra) relationship with him, Maharishi was 
someone we knew, rather than someone we idolized.
  When you were with Maharishi, it truly was like time did not exist. There was 
a sense of connection to something deeper. Maharishi was a visionary. He always 
spoke in grand, universal, mythic terms. Numbers were always infinite, 
possibilities endless, nothing too difficult to accomplish. He would talk about 
changing the world in sweeping terms, and then suddenly, focus on some minute 
detail. Since people from so many walks of life came to Maharishi, those 
endless hours were full of individuals who did different things, who came from 
every corner of the earth. Maharishi spoke a universal language that resonated 
with all of them. His language touched people’s souls. You could tune in and 
out of what he said, and still feel like you were experiencing something truly 
monumental. 
  As a young girl, I did not understand most of what was talked about, but I 
wanted to be there. I felt inspired, energetic, motivated and at peace. When we 
left him, I would run and shyly give him a rose, and he would give me a smile 
that always made me laugh.
  Maharishi would talk with his sweet voice and then giggle – a giggle that 
then erupted into a wave of laughter that tickled those in his presence at 
their very souls. I will always remember the laughter around Maharishi. Around 
him, I felt happy and free and timeless. Even though I was shy, I could laugh 
with abandon – a laughter that was so uplifting.
  I remember very clearly the evening my mother called me to tell me that she 
and my father had left Maharishi – for good. I was a senior at Brown 
University, and to me it was quite devastating because his presence had, in 
many ways, formed my identity. But, upon reflection, it was the natural step in 
a mythical relationship between a guru (Maharishi) and his disciple (my 
father). The comic books that my brother and I had read growing up had the same 
theme over and over again. At some time, the guru says good-bye, and the 
disciple moves on.
  That evening, I went and got a red rose and headed to the local TM Center in 
Providence. The people there had always welcomed me as a daughter, and it had 
proved to be a quiet haven for me throughout college. I sat in the meditation 
room, the rose in my hand, and meditated for over an hour. When I came out of 
my meditation, I felt a tremendous sense of strength and peace. 
  I realized in that moment the wonderful gift that Maharishi had given me – 
the ability to connect to myself, to love myself, to laugh and feel connected 
to something universal.
  Yesterday, when my father called to say that Maharishi had left, I felt that 
peace again. It has been more than 10 years since I last saw him, but his gift 
is still with me. When my father taught my elder daughter to meditate last 
summer, Maharishi’s gift was passed on to her. 
  Today, I plan to spread rose petals around my house with my two little girls. 
To honor Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, we will meditate and cuddle and play. And, most 
importantly, we will smile and laugh and celebrate.

   
-
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Although I am sure this will be hard to relate to for some...
> 
> I got a lot of peace from the article in the Skeptical Inquirer 
> in 89 or 90 that compared these personality traits [Narcissistic
> Personality Disorder] with popular gurus.  

I think it's a valid way to see many of the teachers
in today's spiritual world, and possibly in the whole
history of spirituality. It's not the most *flattering*
way to see them, and so of course the True Believers
are going to react to the non-flattering-ness of it
and not be able to see how *accurate* the description
of NPD is when applied to most spiritual teachers. But
I think it's a *very* valuable way of looking at things.

> I know this seemed horrible to people who may view him as a "real"
> messiah...

For what it's worth, Curtis, I see all "real" Messiahs
as suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder as
well. The fact that they became more famous than other
people who suffered from the same fantasies doesn't
mean that they're not fantasies.

> ...but for me it gave me some insight for compassion for
> Maharishi. It helped me understand how he operated the way he did,
> and even the odd feeling he would give off when I interacted with 
> him. It explained how he could use and discard people as he unfolded
> his "mission."  I don't see this as a putdown.  It is an alternate
> explanation to the idea that he proposed that he was the most
> important human in history.  

And a far more realistic one. :-)

The reaction of most of the world to news of the
death of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is, "Who?"

> Why would someone believe such a thing
> about themselves?  

I think we're seeing it here on this group.
There are quite a few people here whose way
of reacting to grief at the loss of their
teacher is to GET INTO ARGUMENTS. 

Why? So they can declare themselves "right"
about something, and try to assert themselves
as "more right" than someone else, and get
other people to focus on them. It's how they
have consistently reacted for years here.

What I'm suggesting is that this tendency
was learned from their teacher, Maharishi.
Everything always came down to *him* as the
ultimate authority, *him* as the person who
"knows the truth." How could a bunch of 
students, having seen this in their teacher
for over 40 years, not pick up on the trait
themselves? 

> Either he was or he was not, but it requires an
> explanation.  At least it did for me.  

For me as well. 

> So for me he remains a fascinating guy with 
> or without this disorder.  

As, for me, does Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz,
another spiritual teacher whom I would class
as being a *classic* example of Narcissistic
Personality Disorder. 

The whole role of the "guru" as proposed by
many if not most spiritual traditions, IMO, 
has been a process of putting Narcissistic 
Personality Disorder up on a pedestal and
glorifying it, as if it were a good thing.

> One piece of evidence I submit that perhaps he was 
> mislead about the power of his teaching are the 
> closest people to him that he left behind, presumably 
> his most advanced pupils.  

Indeed. There is not a single person among
them who is going to be remembered by history
in five years, much less 100.

> I think we have a pretty good idea that his optimism 
> about his programs exceeded his results. 
> 
> Or is that just me being negative on King Tony and Bevan? 

I don't think so. Of course, that could just be
*me* being negative. :-)

I've been around the spiritual smorgasbord a bit,
and have looked at and interacted with a LOT of
different spiritual trips. I would have to say
that the *primary* characteristic of a TMer (as
opposed to seekers in other traditions) is that
tendency to believe and announce, "We know the 
truth and no one else does."

This is a trait you do NOT find in other trad-
itions as much as you find it in members of the
TMO. And I think it's related to Narcissistic 
Personality Disorder. *That* set of personality
traits describes very accurately how Maharishi
related to the world and to his students for
forty years. *That* set of personality traits
describes how many of the students themselves
have come to act. *That* set of traits is IMO
the "legacy" of the TMO, almost more than the
TM technique.

Just my opinion...

[FairfieldLife] An account of Astral plane of existence....

[Rama Krishna]

Paramhansa Yogananda's guru Sri  Yukteshwar Giri shed his mortal body in 
January 1936. After a few  months in June 1936 Guru Yukteshwar Giri appeared 
before disciple Paramhansa Yogananda's  in an astral form. The  Guru -disciple 
dialogue as it appears in the book " The Autobiography of a Yogi " is given 
below. In this dialogue the Guru describes the astral body , the astral beings 
and experiences in  astral plane of existence. :
   
  http://www.ananda.org/inspiration/books/ay/43.html
   
   Some excerpts :
   
  "As prophets are sent on earth to help men work out their physical karma, so 
I have been directed by God to serve on an astral planet as a savior," Sri 
Yukteswar explained. "It is called Hiranyaloka or 'Illumined Astral Planet.' 
There I am aiding advanced beings to rid themselves of astral karma and thus 
attain liberation from astral rebirths. The dwellers on Hiranyaloka are highly 
developed spiritually; all of them had acquired, in their last 
earth-incarnation, the meditation-given power of consciously leaving their 
physical bodies at death. No one can enter Hiranyaloka unless he has passed on 
earth beyond the state of sabikalpa samadhi into the higher state of nirbikalpa 
samadhi."
   
  "God encased the human soul successively in three bodies-the idea, or causal, 
body; the subtle astral body, seat of man's mental and emotional natures; and 
the gross physical body. On earth a man is equipped with his physical senses. 
An astral being works with his consciousness and feelings and a body made of 
lifetrons. A causal-bodied being remains in the blissful realm of ideas. My 
work is with those astral beings who are preparing to enter the causal world."
   
  "The astral universe, made of various subtle vibrations of light and color, 
is hundreds of times larger than the material cosmos. The entire physical 
creation hangs like a little solid basket under the huge luminous balloon of 
the astral sphere. Just as many physical suns and stars roam in space, so there 
are also countless astral solar and stellar systems. Their planets have astral 
suns and moons, more beautiful than the physical ones. The astral luminaries 
resemble the aurora borealis-the sunny astral aurora being more dazzling than 
the mild-rayed moon-aurora. The astral day and night are longer than those of 
earth."
   
  "The astral body is not subject to cold or heat or other natural conditions. 
The anatomy includes an astral brain, or the thousand-petaled lotus of light, 
and six awakened centers in the sushumna, or astral cerebro-spinal axis. The 
heart draws cosmic energy as well as light from the astral brain, and pumps it 
to the astral nerves and body cells, or lifetrons. Astral beings can affect 
their bodies by lifetronic force or by mantric vibrations."
   
  "Physical desires are rooted in egotism and sense pleasures. The compulsion 
or temptation of sensory experience is more powerful than the desire-force 
connected with astral attachments or causal perceptions." 
   
  "Astral desires center around enjoyment in terms of vibration. Astral beings 
enjoy the ethereal music of the spheres and are entranced by the sight of all 
creation as exhaustless expressions of changing light. The astral beings also 
smell, taste, and touch light. Astral desires are thus connected with an astral 
being's power to precipitate all objects and experiences as forms of light or 
as condensed thoughts or dreams. "
   
  "Causal desires are fulfilled by perception only. The nearly-free beings who 
are encased only in the causal body see the whole universe as realizations of 
the dream-ideas of God; they can materialize anything and everything in sheer 
thought. Causal beings therefore consider the enjoyment of physical sensations 
or astral delights as gross and suffocating to the soul's fine sensibilities. 
Causal beings work out their desires by materializing them instantly.Those who 
find themselves covered only by the delicate veil of the causal body can bring 
universes into manifestation even as the Creator. Because all creation is made 
of the cosmic dream-texture, the soul thinly clothed in the causal has vast 
realizations of power. "

   
-
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> The DSM-IV elements of narcissistic PD are at least five of the
> following:
> 1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
> 2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
> brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
> 3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
> 4. requires excessive admiration
> 5. has a sense of entitlement
> 6. is interpersonally exploitative
> 7. lacks empathy
> 8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious 
> of him or her
> 9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

Exactly. Thanks for posting this, Ruth.

I think that people (if you consider Judy 'people')
are reacting to the term 'Disorder.' It's a descrip-
tion of a known set of behaviors and beliefs, grouped
into a convenient category for describing a certain
type of human being.

IMO Maharishi Mahesh Yogi fits ALL of the criteria
above to a "T." IMO so does the other teacher I studied
with for a long time, Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz and a 
host of other popular gurus and teachers in the modern
world.

> Now of course, just because you believe you are special, 
> doesn't mean you aren't special.

Exactly again. The people who think like this *might*
be right. It's just that most of the time they aren't.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[george_deforest]

> curtisdeltablues wrote:
>
> I got a lot of peace from the article in the Skeptical Inquirer
> in 89 or 90 that compared these personality traits with popular 
> gurus...
> 
> It explained how he could use and discard people as he unfolded
> his "mission."  I don't see this as a putdown.
> 
> One piece of evidence I submit that perhaps he was mislead about
> the power of his teaching are the closest people to him that he
> left behind, presumably his most advanced pupils. 
> 
> I think we have a pretty good idea that his optimism
> about his programs exceeded his results. 
> Or is that just me being negative on King Tony and Bevan? 

King Tony always struck me as not really wanting the king job,
put playing along, just to keep M happy out of reverence.
Which means he might give up the crown soon, now that he can.

But its Bevan im more worried about.

Bevan's whole life has been as Maharishi's defender, kind of 
like a cosmic body guard. But with M gone, Bevan might just
unravel and go bonkers. i hope im wrong, hope he can hang tough!

i have had my own issues with Bevan, but i dont wish him ill.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[srijim1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 7, 2008, at 6:18 AM, srijim1 wrote:
> 
> > I bet old "Deep-Pockets" Chopra is probably kicking himself now... it
> > could have been all his. Ha! Tough luck Deepak, you had your chance.
> 
> 
> Actually Chopra's an interesting case and point. He has his own Neo- 
> Vedic Science mega-church now--but needs to kiss up since his song  
> and dance is derived from his ex-teacher's. So he's been making up  
> new stories to secure that cash, uh, I meant lineage. :-)
> 
> If he doesn't try to make his teacher look legit, it makes him look  
> illegitimate. So the stories flow.
> 
> Have you seen the 6-year old "Mahasamadhi" picture? Very clever!
>
Vaj, I'm delighted to see there is someone else on this forum who has an 
irreverent sense 
of humor. As you've noticed, I don't have much respect for these 
self-proclaimed holy 
men from India. After The Beatles made Mr. Varma the first guru superstar, the 
US was 
literally flooded with these characters. Why? because that's where the big 
money was. 
It's as simple as that. The guru con is one of the oldest cons in India, right 
up there with 
the begging cartels. The USA was the mother-lode of spiritual suckers then and 
it still is. I 
guess what I find so offensive about the self-proclaimed Maharishi is that he 
didn't even 
try to disguise his con... he started out almost immediately trying to turn a 
profit. First, he 
side-stepped the "have-nots" and charged $35 to the "haves". And when he didn't 
think 
the "Haves" were lucrative enough, he marketed spirituality exclusively to the 
"Have-
Mores." The guy was completely shameless in his greed and ruined the lives a 
lot of 
sincere good people with all his vedic smoke & mirrors. Flying technique?... 
give me a 
break. The Shankara lineage in India was absolutely appalled by the man. And, 
the TM 
Movement has evolved into nothing less than a fascist spiritual tyranny run by 
a group of 
self-serving megalomaniacs. Chopra & Pundit Ravi Shankar are cut from the same 
cloth. 
They didn't feel they were getting their share of the Maharishi pie and saw 
their chance to 
set up their own little spiritual money machines. The transparency is 
laughable. And yet, 
sincere people are continually taken in by this obvious con. It's truly tragic. 
But, what can 
you do? People believe what they want to believe no matter how ridiculous. 
There is no 
waking these zombies out of their spiritual fog with reason, so maybe a little 
humor will 
help laugh them out of it. We're all victims of our own folly to an extent. 
There is no shame 
in seeing that. Selling/buying enlightenment for a million dollars is funny. 
Even his royal 
highness, Nader Rum-Dum can't disguise the absurdity of that. Hopefully not, 
anyway. 
What I wonder, is that now Mr. Varma is dead... are the rank & file going to 
keep putting 
up with this TM Monarchy nonsense? Only time will tell and I truly wish them 
the best.

[FairfieldLife] Re: important Sage of a New Generation quotation

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "at_man_and_brahman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is paraphrased, but Maharishi was asked
> at the end of this film from the early '70s for 
> what he would like to be remembered. Maharishi
> looked a million miles into the distance and
> then said, disarmingly, "Nothing."
> 
> "Nothing?"
> 
> "Nothing."
> 
> "But you will be remembered!"
> 
> "That will be up to those who will remember me!"
> 
> (laughter)
> 
> 
> That beautiful moment
> --->>faster forward--->>
> Maharishi asking the rajas days before his death
> for a memorial, yielding plans for Towers of 
> Immortality "here, there, and everywhere."
> 
> Of all the things that saddens me about Maharishi's
> death, that saddens me the most. It's so Citizen Kane.


Well said.

That's it exactly, the sad, sad King Lear
egoness of his last few years and days.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:34 PM, sandiego108 wrote:
> 
> > No, better yet, continue to lose yourself in your layers and signs
> > and Ways and Views...that's the ticket. Arduously discover a
> > glimpse, a painful elicited glimmer of the one true self, no wait,
> > The One True Self Of Compassion--- Hilarious!!! You crack me up Vaj
> > Rant...
> 
> 
> Every "thing" is a symbol: learn, love and live! Enjoy your own  
> mandala. No self or Self necessary!


What crap. Useless information.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:30 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:04 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:12 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  
> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I've spoken to a number of psychologist and psychiatrist
> > > > > > > > friends on this one.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Most point to "Narcissistic Personality Disorder"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ROTFL!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Judy, do tell!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What was your DSM IV guess???
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't make DSM-IV guesses. Neither do responsible
> > > > > psychologists or psychiatrists make them about people
> > > > > they haven't at least interacted with.
> > > >
> > > > For deceased persons?
> > > >
> > > > Yes they do.
> > >
> > > And you've spoken to all these psychologist
> > > and psychiatrist friends to get their diagnosis
> > > of MMY just since Tuesday afternoon, right?
> > 
> > Of course not. It was over time Dear Editor.
> 
> So it *wasn't* "for a deceased person."
> 
> You're getting rattled again, Vaj, as you always
> do when someone calls you on one of your more
> ludicrous pronouncements.
> 
> Observe Vaj's explanation of the circumstances
> under which professionals supposedly make such
> a diagnosis:
> 
> > > > Keep in mind, death (irregardless of whether or not it's seen as
> > > > significant) is like a final stamp on a bank account or
> > > > administrators account. The "stamp" has fallen. Based on the
> > > > evidence between Mahesh Srivistava Varma's creation and death we
> > > > can (and will) look at evidence for a certain personality type
> > > > (or pathos).
> 
> But now he informs us it *wasn't* the "falling of the
> stamp" that enabled his friends to make this diagnosis.
> 
> 
> > > Plus which, any professional who would trust *you*
> > > to give an accurate enough account of MMY to do a
> > > long-distance diagnosis is incompetent anyway.
> 
> Vaj's furious backpedaling notwithstanding, the
> applies whatever the situation.
> 
> > > Professionals do sometimes attempt speculative
> > > diagnoses of historical figures years after they
> > > die when they have spent considerable time studying
> > > the records. *Responsible* professionals don't come
> > > up with such diagnoses on a dime the day after
> > > a person with whom they have no familiarity has died,
> > > on the basis of a single person's account (least of
> > > all someone as unreliable as to facts and as highly
> > > biased as you).
> > 
> > And of course, another "Judy's Golem" --a strawman and monstrous  
> > distortion with no resemblance whatsoever to my intentions.
> 
>  See above. Of course, my purported
> "straw man" was based precisely on what Vaj
> had said.


Vaj is the classic ego nerd who read a book somewhere and thinks he
knows more than all the saints.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:57 PM, do.rflex wrote:
> 
> > > > > Regarding early TMO pundits and "teachers": 'they certainly
> > > > weren't no
> > > > > Acharyas'. :-)
> > > >
> > > > Brahmachari Satyanand, whom I referred to, had spent many years  
> > with
> > > > Guru Dev as a disciple. After Guru Dev's 'death' he later went  
> > on to
> > > > assist Maharishi spreading Transcendental Meditation, as I  
> > understand
> > > > it, until he died himself. I attended a course he conducted at  
> > Lake
> > > > Arrowhead in the early 70s and spoke with him individually and
> > > > privately at least three times, one of which was to receive an
> > > > advanced technique. I say this mainly to indicate that Satyanand  
> > was
> > > > directly involved with Guru Dev and Maharishi both.
> > >
> > >
> > > IME it's not a guarantee that these people are completely and
> > > holistically trained in these sciences. I really, honestly, see most
> > > of them as naive.
> >
> > Fact is, you haven't seen Guru Dev or Brahmachari Satyanand at all.
> 
> But I do have lineal transmission of Samaya Sri Vidya directly from  
> his line (Guru Dev's). So I base my View on his same transmission. And  
> I do know that transmission. (So can anyone).


What the hell is "same transmission"? 

> 
> Satyanand? Only stories. Some flattering. Some less so. An acharya?
> 
> No.


You're playing your name games there, fella. The only thing you have
is book learning and opinion, no experience.


> 
> Brahmanand Saraswati?
> 
> Emphatically YES. And a yogi with ram (fire) siddhi (at very least).


You wouldn't really know. Your information is only because you've
'heard' about them. I knew Satyanand and I experience Swami
Brahmananda Saraswati practically daily.

I also spent a considerable amount of time with Maharishi, including
TTC which he conducted himself.

Again, you wouldn't know.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
> > Fortunately, in a couple of weeks the
> > posting limits will be back, and he'll 
> > be gone again.
 
> TurquoiseB, are the posting limits a Yahoo thing 
> or a TM Movement directive?

Neither. They're a local thing, to keep
assholes from dominating the conversations
here by posting hundreds of times per week
It used to happen, with some regularity.
The three biggest offenders -- the *reasons*
that the normal posting limit of 50 per week
was originated -- were three posters who go
by the IDs of 'authfriend', 'shempmcgurk',
and 'sparaig.' Each of them used to flood
this forum with their posts, and when asked
politely to refrain from doing so, they
refused.

Therefore the posting limits were adopted.
During normal times, if anyone goes over 50
posts per week (Friday midnight Fairfield
time through the next Friday midnight), they
get banned for a week.

Can't WAIT for them to be in effect again...


Just FYI, Funeral Gawker, Judy is right...you're
making an ass of yourself. MOST of the people
here are NOT believers in all the stuff you
think they are. The person being an idiot is you.

[FairfieldLife] Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[TurquoiseB]

Ruth earlier posted the DSM-IV definition of 
Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

The DSM-IV elements of narcissistic PD are at least five of the 
following:
   1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
   2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
  brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
   3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
   4. requires excessive admiration
   5. has a sense of entitlement
   6. is interpersonally exploitative
   7. lacks empathy
   8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious 
  of him or her
   9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes


I'm not a shrink, just an observer of the 
smorgasbord of spiritual practice, but I see
these descriptions/categorizations as fairly
significant, because they accurately describe 
a LOT of spiritual teachers, and a LOT of 
their students.

I might add a tenth criterion, one that IMO
is important to recognize when dealing with
products of the TM movement:

  10. has difficulty knowing the difference between "this
  is the truth" and "this is how I see it."

To me, that's probably THE most defining aspect
of narcissism -- the *assumption* that how one
sees things *equals* how things really are.

And that's one of the most recurring themes here 
on Fairfield Life with regard to the TM TB (True 
Believer) phenonmenon, and with regard to occas-
ional claims of enlightenment.

Nabby and some of the other rare TBs who appear
here seem incapable of seeing that there is any
*possible* way of seeing things other than the way
that they see it. It's probably the characteristic
that defines them the most. Any way other of seeing 
things than the way they see things is by definition 
wrong.

Some of those who have claimed enlightenment on
this forum have trotted out the same assumption:
if they perceive it or believe, it's not only true, 
it's TRUTH. Because they are enlightened (or consider
themselves enlightened), they *assume* that all
of their perceptions are true. When it is pointed
out to them that many of them are factually not true, 
they just "tune out" and descend into insults and 
"You'll understand when you're as high as I am" 
spiritual oneupsmanship language. It's as if they 
CAN'T conceive of their perceptions as being anything
BUT equivalent with "truth."

So what I'm suggesting is that when looking at the
issue of narcissism or Narcissistic Personality
Disorder in a spiritual context, this tenth criterion
is a Big One. If the spiritual group being studied
tends to *create* this tendency to believe that one's
own way of seeing things is the *only* way of seeing
things, or the only "right" way of seeing things, or 
the "truth," then I think it's safe to assume that
what's going on in that group is Narcissism Training.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > I'm just going to leave it at that, because
> > it's great fun to watch you spout off
> > thinking you know what you're talking about.

> I checked out of FFL for many months but took a look again 
> when MMY passed. And lo and behold, there's Judith on her 
> high horse running her ridiculous pompous mouth again. Some 
> things never change.

Even worse, Sparaig is back being an OCD 
defender of everything Maharishi again. 

In all this time away you'd have thought 
he might have learned to THINK before he 
posts, but nooo...

Fortunately, in a couple of weeks the
posting limits will be back, and he'll 
be gone again.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[srijim1]

 
> Fortunately, in a couple of weeks the
> posting limits will be back, and he'll 
> be gone again.
>

TurquoiseB, are the posting limits a Yahoo thing or a TM Movement directive?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > Hm, I guess you didn't bother to read the
> > post I was responding to. Bad idea. Makes
> > you look almost as silly as the poster.
> 
> Yeah sister, I did. The content doesn't matter. 
> It's your never ending condescending attitude 
> towards those you disagree with.


The DSM-IV elements of narcissistic PD are at least five of the following:
   1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
   2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, 
brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
   3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
   4. requires excessive admiration
   5. has a sense of entitlement
   6. is interpersonally exploitative
   7. lacks empathy
   8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious 
of him or her
   9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes


Have you ever SEEN a more classic embodiment of
Narcissistic Personality Disorder than Judy Stein?

That's what I've talking about this morning. If
the teacher embodies Narcissistic Personality
Disorder, SO DO HIS STUDENTS. It just goes 
with the territory.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pundit Ramanand Shastri’s predictions for 2008

[gigarm2003]

I know this Pundit performs Yagyas with his group.
Has anyone tried his Yagyas?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: From Bill Eberwein Re MMY death

[Peter]

--- lurkernomore20002000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> 
> Re: William W. Eberwein
> 
> Whoa, a Christian statment, not judging, not
> condeming, not preaching.
> Maybe this Age of Enlightenment thing has something
> to it.
> 
> Alex Stanley:
> 
> I sniffed around, and Eberwein is not a typical
> fundie Christian:
>  
>
http://eberweins.blogspot.com/2006/10/fresh-flowers.html
>

> 
> Maybe Bill Eberwein realized at some point that the
> way to win friends,
> and influence people is to walk the talk,  and not 
> beat people over the
> head with your beliefs.
> 
> BTW,  isn't it kind of funny the the next Vice
> President of the United
> States believes that the world was created in seven
> days,  and is only
> 5000 years old.

You mean it isn't? dude, I've got problems!





> 
> 
> 
> 



  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> [...]
> > But soon after, while I was very morose, sorrow, sad, entire world was
> > empty for me and I did not understand what to do without Guru Dev,
> > just a half a minute or two seconds after, a flash came and it
> > appeared to me that Guru Dev was scolding me;
> > 
> > 
> > "What a fool you are! You have been with me for all these many months
> > and years, and you heard my discourses too. Is it a moment of feeling
> > sorry? Why should you be sorry today? And you think that I am gone,
> > where am I gone? Till now whenever you wanted to meet me, you had,
> > you had to come to the place where I was, and today when I have
> > attained nirvana, I am everywhere, I am omnipresent. Where have I
> > gone? Very foolish for you to mourn on this occasion. I am with you,
> > here, there, everywhere. Why should you be sorry?"
> > 
> > 
> > And the moment this flash came, my face became very brilliant, I
> > became very cheerful. And when I raised my head, my friends who were
> > standing there, very anxious and held in suspense, they were upset to
> > see my brilliant and cheerful face. And then they said, "What has
> > happened to you?" I said, "No you can't understand, nothing has
> > happened to me, I am alright, now let me go back to the ashram and
> > make the necessary arrangements."
> >
> 
> 
> Where does it say that Guudev actually spoke to him?
> 
> "...and it appeared to me that Guru Dev was scolding me;"


Apparently you didn't read the monologue.



> Schizophrenics hear voices and think its someone talking to them.


Satyanand wasn't schizophrenic, Lawson. Did you ever meet him?


 Non-schizophrenics 
> recall the attitude and put it into words or simply remember the
sound of the person 
> saying the words, but don't say "Gurudev spoke these words to me
after he died."



Apparently you didn't read the monologue.



> Instead, they say "and it appeared to me that Guru Dev was scolding me."
> 
> Likewise, MMY received "direct inspiration from Gurudev" to do
something but didn't say 
> "Gurudev appeared in a vision and told me to do this."


You really haven't clearly defined "direct inspiration from Gurudev"
And you didn't really answer the question, Lawson. In my view, the
reason you didn't is because you don't want to consider any
possibility beyond that the "drop becomes the ocean" the end.

I have experienced Guru Dev visually and telepathically myself. Once I
'heard' him repeating something which I'd never heard before, I
believe it was in Sanskrit - as if an initiation or such. I know other
TM teachers who have had similar experiences. I'm not schizophrenic
and neither were they. And what we experience[d] isn't merely
'inspiration' from memories.

Re: [FairfieldLife] As a common bumpkin I did it my way ( MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt)

[Sal Sunshine]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Duveyoung wrote:


Sal,

Come on.  The TMO leaders merely did what all humans in power do.
They are commonly tawdry -- let's not aggrandize them as especially
good at it -- they didn't open up new territory, nor were the TBers
extra suckerish.


You're undoubtedly right, Edg.  I'm probably still too wrapped up in  
the whole thing to view it objectively.



  And the TMO poofy-boys are about to CLEARLY FAIL --
Maharishi's passing was like a train going by their dress-up party in
their house of cards.whoosh, poof, and the stunned look of the
leaders will be priceless.

The scam is used by all organizations.  "Going direct."  "Pink
Cadillac."  "Elder in the church."  "Tenured."  "Master Sergeant."

Always with the hierarchy -- such an old song and dance.

The banks just now are finishing up counting their 1/4-trillion-dollar
profits from scamming the poor with the sub-prime ploy -- that's
millions of lives stressed far beyond whatever the TMO was able to
leave in its wake, so what's the ruination of a few thousand TBers'
hopes and dreams and bank accounts?


If  you happen to be one of them, it's everything.


But I too confess to having these feelings of "how could they."

But, gasp, all along the way, time after time after time, there I'd be
dusting myself off and gleefully turning another cheek after each
incident wherein I would get this same boot imprint delivered
resounding to my face by sycophant after smarmy boob after bureaucrat
after 108 guy after "don't sit in cordoned off seats up front" after
"move to FF or the nukes will fall" after,


Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was responding to a thread initiated by a "true believer," Rick
> Archer, with the hope that I might stir up a dialog with either him
> or people who share his convictions. 

That is yet another incorrect assumption and example of why you would
do well to spend some serious time, reading the archives and getting
to know the participants here. Rick Archer is NOT a TM "true
believer". Rick Archer was kicked out of the dome. Rick Archer ditched
his TM mantra and instead uses a mantra given to him by Ammachi. Rick
Archer is the one who posted an email discussion about allegations
that MMY was sexually involved with women. These are all facts that
can be found in the FFL archives.

There's a reason why it's common netiquette for newbies to a forum to
lurk for a while and get a feel for the forum and its participants
before participating. You barged in here, completely ignorant of what
FFL is about and the people who post here, and started making a
complete ass of yourself. Barry's right: "You're clueless. Either shut
up and learn something, or go away."

[FairfieldLife] Re: L.B. Shriver a Gentleman in FF compiling a book on Guru Dev.from news reports

[off_world_beings]

Normally I would have to question the 'Gentleman' nomenclature, but 
in this case its true !

OffWorld



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The book is not out as yet. He has  over many years collected  
donations & 
> loans for the  publication of such but since 1999 to my  knowledge 
& perhaps 
> before that time. He expects to have such done soon he  states but 
soon since 
> 2001 is still not as yet. Many joyfully await it  publication & is 
some cases the 
> return on there loans for its  publication.Far more folks look to 
reading & 
> enjoying the actual  reading of the collected news paper reports &  
articles of 
> those  transcribed speeches & talks of Guru Dev. To date no time 
certain has 
> been  set for either actions. I believe he is still working to put 
such a 
> published  work in our hands. L. B. Shriver is an MUM graduate & 
scholar & has  
> been form time to time a responsible sounding board for MIU & later 
MUM to  grow 
> more free & liberal & even kinder to its treatment of mediators  & 
sidha's. 
> This had causes him at times to be banned from campus & even  
thwarted in his 
> activities in the town of Fairfield. I consider him to be a  friend 
of mine. I 
> also dearly hope for this publication of Guru Dev's talks  
published & 
> available to us all. Those talks were to my understanding  
transcribed from Hindi to 
> English by scholars in the pay of L. B. for us all to  then read. 
L. B. 
> Shriver also has a radio program in FF IA & is on air I  believe 
Wednesdays each 
> week. 
>  
>  
> In a message dated 2/8/2008 9:55:39 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> > ---  Angela Mailander wrote:
> >
> > Who's L. B. Shriver?
> 
> LB Trusty  Shriver (real name; no initials) 
> is a Fairfield writer and publisher who  
> was active on Fairfield Life a few years 
> ago, and checks in  occasionally yet.
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message  to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Or go to:  
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This  Group!' 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL 
Music. 
> (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?
NCID=aolcmp00300025
> 48)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Last hours of Maharishi

[Michael]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "gyselsvishnu" 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "gyselsvishnu" 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since he is a saint, he wil get Jala samadhi, immersion in
water in
> > > > a stone coffin, like his Master.
> > > 
> > > What is your source for that? Official communications from the TMO
> > > refer to a cremation ceremony.
> > >
> > 
> > It is written in the Dutch local press (from the province of Limburg).
> > It is true there are many unclear things. As you know it is
officially 
> > said that M. died in his sleep but other reports claim that he 
> > mentioned Gurudev on his deathbed.
> > Can anyone who was there tell the real full story objectively?
> >
> 
> I am now in Madanapalle, South India. I visited a function today in
> the Maharishi Mandir, which was constructed on his behalf in 1956.
> They said that there will be a cremation on Monday in Allahabad.
> Maharishis body will arrive on the 9th by direct plane from Amsterdam
> to Allahabad.
> 
> I got the news here through the local Maharishi Mandir who in turn
> informed Mother. I had had a conversation with her a week earlier, and
> told her that MMY had said he will soon go. She laughed and said,
> where will he go, to USA? sort of joking. I said no, not like this,
> leaving this plane. She said something to the effect that there is no
> going anywhere for the enlightened - he will be here. That was very
> consoling, I didn't ask further.
>
The reason given for that there will be a cremation is that Maharishi
was not a Swami, and Yogis are just cremated like everybody.  Even
though Maharishi is a great saint, he would have gone strictly by the
orders of his tradition. I spoke with the nephew of Narayan Ayer just
now, and he will accompany him to be there in Allahabad. I think many
Indian devotees will come.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Ben Gilberti
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:12 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here is a failure to
communicate."

 

Dear Srijim, 

 

They called me an asshole for a good while, they were right actualy, I was
also clueless.  I shut up and learned something.  We don't know yet if it
worked, however. 

 

It’s a rite of passage. A sort of virtual mustard belly.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

RE: [FairfieldLife] About L.B.Shriver (Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel)

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Duveyoung
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:42 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] About L.B.Shriver (Special Broadcast on Maharishi
Channel)

 

L.B. Shriver is one of the first of us zombies to come back to LIFE.

He published a few editions of "Survival in Paradise." (I think that
was the name.) In it were articles by about a dozen FF writers that
did not completely tow-the-TM-line. To the TMO he was a dangerous
gadfly that had to be banned from the MIU campus where L.B.
distributed his "newspaper" for free.

I would describe his skill-set as like 

-- Judy's for precision wording, 

-- Vaj's for sacred scholarship, 

-- Rick's for ecumenicality, 

-- Marek's for emotional control, 

-- Turq's for prolixity, and 

-- mine for absurdly believing that writing-something can help others.

Though I don't think he ever really liked me all that much, cuz I'm a
yapping moralistic puppy to his gnarled dog with steely gaze and low
growl snarl, I often recall his "general feel" with pleasure. 

Edg

Thanks for the vocabulary lesson. Had to look up a couple of those. I’ll
forward this to LB. Incidentally, while teaching the Desktop Publishing
program at MIU, I had the only large format laser printer in town. I used to
print the master copies of Survival in Paradise for LB. 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

RE: [FairfieldLife] About L.B.Shriver (Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel)

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Duveyoung
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:42 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] About L.B.Shriver (Special Broadcast on Maharishi
Channel)

 

L.B. Shriver is one of the first of us zombies to come back to LIFE.

P.S. Edg, I always used to enjoy your writing in “Survival.”


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 10:06 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> 
> > Scientology? ...or what? What qualifies you to determine and/or to
> > be a final arbiter of the validity of the saints, especially ones
> > you've never met or 'experienced'?
> 
> 
> No interest in scientology or being a "final arbiter". I've trained  
> and practiced in both Hindu and Buddhist mantrayana lines, including  
> practices for death and dying.


So how does that qualify you to give any legitimate definition to
Maharishi, Brahmachari Satyanand or Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, or
for that matter, Transcendental Meditation? You have ZERO direct
experience with any of those persons or the TM. What do you have more
than second hand information in that regard?

RE: [FairfieldLife] "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of srijim1
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 8:46 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] "What we have here is a failure to
communicate."

 

"What we have here is a failure to communicate."

I see your point and you are correct that I was under the impression that I
was 
corresponding with forum members currently living in Fairfield and involved
in the 
activities of the TM Movement. My initial response was to some guy named
Rick Archer 
and the subject of the thread was/and is: Special Broadcast on Maharishi
Channel. If you 
read my initial response, you should see that my response was in no way
directed towards 
people who had actually left the TM Movement. Quite to the contrary, I
applaud you for 
having the good sense to do so. When I read your responses, it was my
assumption that 
they were targeted to the thread subject matter as initiated by Mr. Archer.
The purpose of 
a subject line in a thread is to keep responses within an overall context in
order to stay on 
point. You actually sound like a pretty good guy, so I won't take serious
offense at you 
repeatedly calling me an asshole, but I don't mind pointing out that you are
actually the 
one responding on the wrong thread with regard to the subject topic and it's
initiation. It's 
an honest mistake on both of our parts. I was responding to a thread
initiated by a "true 
believer," Rick Archer, 

Hey Nabby, are you paying attention? I’ve been anointed a “true believer.”
Cool! Do I get a crown with that?

Jim, for the record, many things I post here are forwarded. I post them
because I consider them significant and potential stimulants for discussion.
They don’t necessarily reflect my opinions. People who’ve been around a
while know this, so I don’t preface every post with a disclaimer.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[boyboy_8]

This post raises a critical point and I'm quite sure it's been hashed 
over many times before, so bear with me.  

I am reminded of something that my favourite remote viewer guy, Ingo 
Swann has said.  He lamented that of the many impressions and images 
that a viewer will see in their career the one thing they all come 
away with after the event is the sad knowledge that until the day 
they have CONFIRMATION from some source, they have ZERO way 
of "KNOWING" what exactly they "SAW".  He was clear about this.  The 
person cannot ascertain on their own whether their so 
called 'perception' was a product of their imagination, ego, mind, 
who knows what else?  A clear vision of something, in the end, means 
only something on one level to the perceiver.  What it is in the 
ultimate realms of "truth" is quite something else.  

This takes me to the other point.  Prophets in any religion will 
always say that they have received information from a higher source 
and that you had just better trust them on this.  There is, after 
all, no other way other than "FAITH" to figure out if the words of 
the prophet are true, except for one thing.  In the Old Testatment 
many prophets appear.  One of the strictest criteria for whether we 
are supposed to 'believe' them is that for at least some of their 
prophecies, some of them have to come 'true' in their lifetime.  Some 
words of some of them were for far off events, such as the words of 
Daniel and others.  In other words, if they said that the Lord had 
said such and such as a prophecy, then the test was in the results.  
That was one criteria.  

So, if someone says that they had the experience of contact with Guru 
Dev or any other entity/intelligence, be it human or non-human, by 
what measure should we apply to ascertain whether the claim has any 
value?  If we too do not have the same experience and can verify it 
on some level, then the claim is just taken at face value and you 
either believe it or not.  If someone, say, for example my remote 
viewers, say that they had "contact" with an alien being, then unless 
we can verify it, we should just take it with a grain of salt.  Maybe 
a lot of salt.  The same criteria applies to anyone who has an 
expererience that is out of the ordinary day to day.  How do we test 
the claims?  Belief systems, religious systems are almost all set up 
this way.  People line up to believe and if the right guy comes along 
with horns of light, well you know, people are impressed.  

The difference between the charlatans and the real mccoy is not 
always easy to measure.  When the prophet Elijah challenged the 
priests of Baal to a duel, he won the day because of a supernatural 
event that convinced everyone on the spot that he had God's phone 
number in his back pocket and the priests of Baal were phoney.  

I'll leave off for now.

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Ben Gilberti]

Dear Srijim, 
   
  They called me an asshole for a good while, they were right actualy, I was 
also clueless.  I shut up and learned something.  We don't know yet if it 
worked, however. 
   
  -- Ben

TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> You actually sound like a pretty good guy, so I won't 
> take serious offense at you repeatedly calling me an 
> asshole...

You are incorrect on both counts. I am NOT
a good guy, and I call you an asshole because
you're acting like one. Your assessment of me
is as off as your initial assessment of who
Rick Archer is and what his intention was in
reposting an announcement.

You're clueless. Either shut up and learn 
something, or go away.



 

   
-
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 9:35 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 9:01 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 6:39 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > What the hell is "same transmission"?
> > > > >
> > > > > Transmission is just a translation of the Sanskrit word
> > > > > "agama" (Agama) --a transmission of the same teaching, in the  
> > same
> > > > > practice line as Guru Dev, from one of his students.
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't guarantee its legitimacy.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Satyanand? Only stories. Some flattering. Some less so. An
> > > > acharya?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You're playing your name games there, fella. The only thing  
> > you
> > > > have
> > > > > > is book learning and opinion, no experience.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually I have more "experience" than book reading!
> > > >
> > > > Which is?
> > >
> > > 40 years.
> >
> > 40 years of what?
> 
> Spiritual practice and for about 25 of that, training as well.


Scientology?  ...or what?  What qualifies you to determine and/or to
be a final arbiter of the validity of the saints, especially ones
you've never met or 'experienced'?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[Patrick Gillam]

> --- Angela Mailander wrote:
>
> Who's L. B. Shriver?

LB Trusty Shriver (real name; no initials) 
is a Fairfield writer and publisher who 
was active on Fairfield Life a few years 
ago, and checks in occasionally yet.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[Angela Mailander]

Who's L. B. Shriver?

- Original Message 
From: Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2008 1:02:12 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel









  



Srijim1,



Hmmm, L.B.Shriver had the same step-style formatting posting problem

-- are you using a Mac like L.B.?



If you can fix that, it would be good.



On the other hand, you "sound" like L.B., and that's good, or, hey,

new theory, maybe L.B.'s a jerk but stair stepping one's sentences

makes one sound wise.



Edg



--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, srijim1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .> wrote:

>

>  

> > Gal, actually.

> > 

> > If you're still confused, here's a hint:

> > Have a look at the posts from last week,

> > before MMY died. Or just about any week

> > before that.

> > 

> > You should be able to figure it out from

> > there.

> >

> 

> Judy, Judy, Judy,

> 

> Thanks for referring me to some other people's thoughts on the

matter. Forgive my 

> impertinence, but do you happen to have any original thoughts of

your own? or is that 

> asking too much. Why so shy in expressing your own opinion? Perhaps

that is frowned on 

> by his Majesty, but believe it or not it's a right guaranteed by the

Constitution of the 

> United States. And get this it is even okay for you to practice

different forms of spiritual 

> practice if you want. Not only that... if an employer tries to

hinder your religious freedom... 

> they can be prosecuted for it. I guess that part of the Constitution

hasn't reached Fairfield 

> yet, huh? Anyway Judy, only children hide behind the opinions of

others. If you have 

> anything to say that expresses your own experiential understanding,

I will be glad to read 

> it. Maybe when you find out what you actually think you will have

something valuable to 

> contribute to the discussion. Until then, you are simply taking up

space. There's an old 

> saying, "When everyone thinks the same there is no one thinking

at all." There appears 

> to be far too much of this happening in your neck of the woods...

and you appear to be a 

> prime example of the principle.

>






  























Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[srijim1]

 
> It has nothing to DO with your opinion of Maharishi
> and the TM movement. That's not what I'm talking
> about. It has to do with your opinion of the people
> you are speaking to on THIS forum.
> 
> You cruised into town with a big fucking elitism chip
> on your shoulder, assuming that everyone here believed
> the same things you think that TM True Believers believe.
> 
> They don't. Most of the folks here walked away from the
> TM movement years or decades ago. They come here to talk
> about it because here you can actually HAVE your own
> opinions on all that stuff. In the TM movement itself,
> you couldn't.
> 
> Bottom line, dude, is that you're being an asshole. You
> refuse to LISTEN. If you just shut the fuck up for a 
> little while and listened to what most of the people here
> are really saying, you'd realize that it has almost 
> nothing to do with your fantasies of what they're saying.
>
"What we have here is a failure to communicate."

I see your point and you are correct that I was under the impression that I was 
corresponding with forum members currently living in Fairfield and involved in 
the 
activities of the TM Movement. My initial response was to some guy named Rick 
Archer 
and the subject of the thread was/and is: Special Broadcast on Maharishi 
Channel. If you 
read my initial response, you should see that my response was in no way 
directed towards 
people who had actually left the TM Movement. Quite to the contrary, I applaud 
you for 
having the good sense to do so. When I read your responses, it was my 
assumption that 
they were targeted to the thread subject matter as initiated by Mr. Archer. The 
purpose of 
a subject line in a thread is to keep responses within an overall context in 
order to stay on 
point. You actually sound like a pretty good guy, so I won't take serious 
offense at you 
repeatedly calling me an asshole, but I don't mind pointing out that you are 
actually the 
one responding on the wrong thread with regard to the subject topic and it's 
initiation. It's 
an honest mistake on both of our parts. I was responding to a thread initiated 
by a "true 
believer," Rick Archer, with the hope that I might stir up a dialog with either 
him or people 
who share his convictions. Probably wishful thinking on my part. Instead, I was 
preaching 
to the choir without being aware of it. It's a shame really because right now 
TM Movement 
members have what appears to be a real opportunity to throw off the chains of 
tyranny 
people like you had the wisdom to recognize years and even decades ago. 

And to any other Ex-TMers out there, please understand that all of my postings 
have been 
directed to what I believed was a TM Movement yahoo group in the context of a 
TM 
Movement staff member's press release.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Brahmanand Saraswati?
> > > > 
> > > > Emphatically YES. And a yogi with ram (fire) siddhi (at very
> > > > least).
> > > 
> > > You wouldn't really know. Your information is only because you've
> > > 'heard' about them. I knew Satyanand and I experience Swami
> > > Brahmananda Saraswati practically daily.
> > 
> > Not to argue but to reinforce my point in post #163860,
> > John, aren't you assuming that your subject "experience"
> > of Brahmananda Saraswati "trumps" anything that Vaj
> > could possibly say, or that anyone else on *Earth*
> > could possibly say?
> > 
> > It's your experience; therefore it is true.
> > 
> > Thank you for providing such a perfect example of that
> > tenth criterion of Narcissistic Personality Disorder
> > that I was talking about.
> 
> Actually, you've got the context of what they're
> arguing about wrong, because you're more interested
> in dumping on John and preaching your standard
> sermons than in understanding what they're saying.
> 
> > ( For the record...what you experience COULD be true.
> > I don't know. My only point is that you don't either.
> > You only assume it's true because it's *your* subjective
> > experience. That is almost the classic definition of
> > narcissism. )
> 
> Uh, no, it isn't.
> 
> But it's kind of fun to go back and look at
> Barry's rants about how important it is to
> trust your own experience. For example:
> 
> "There are a few people here on FFL who have
> had such subjective experiences, whether it be
> of odd phenomena or their own subjective exper-
> iences of higher states of consciousness. I like
> dealing with them *because* I can identify with
> the changes that their subjective experiences and
> learning to trust them have put them through."
> 
> And even funnier:
> 
> "You'll notice that most of the people who *have*
> had interesting experiences of higher states of
> consciousness or of extraordinary phenomena
> rarely, if ever, talk about them any more. Jim's
> about the only one who dares to brave the boring,
> terrified turd-throwers any more. Rory's silent,
> Tom's mainly silent, and a few people have left
> altogether.
> 
> "The bottom line, as I see it, is that the wimps
> have WON, *especially* after the migration of a
> couple of compulsive-poster wimps from alt.m.t.
> Those two, together with anon_couscous and a
> few others who don't even have the balls to use
> their own names here, have made Fairfield Life
> a distinctly UNFRIENDLY environment in which to
> talk about one's own spiritual experiences."
> 
> One of the "compulsive-poster wimps from alt.m.t"
> Barry was referring to just happened to be do.rflex
> (John), the guy he's now dumping on because John
> trusts his experience of Guru Dev.


Ironically, "compulsive-poster wimp from alt.m.t" describes Barry to a T.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Last hours of Maharishi

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "gyselsvishnu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Since he is a saint, he wil get Jala samadhi, immersion in water in
> a stone coffin, like his Master.

What is your source for that? Official communications from the TMO
refer to a cremation ceremony.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1  wrote:

> > That's the beauty of democracy even assholes get to 
> > express their opinions. Since I evidently have a wrong 
> > opinion, in your view, with regard to the Maharishi & 
> > the TM Movement, perhaps you can enlighten me. 
> 
> It has nothing to DO with your opinion of Maharishi
> and the TM movement. That's not what I'm talking
> about. It has to do with your opinion of the people
> you are speaking to on THIS forum.
> 
> You cruised into town with a big fucking elitism chip
> on your shoulder, assuming that everyone here believed
> the same things you think that TM True Believers believe.
> 
> They don't. Most of the folks here walked away from the
> TM movement years or decades ago. They come here to talk
> about it because here you can actually HAVE your own
> opinions on all that stuff. In the TM movement itself,
> you couldn't.
> 
> Bottom line, dude, is that you're being an asshole. You
> refuse to LISTEN. If you just shut the fuck up for a 
> little while and listened to what most of the people here
> are really saying, you'd realize that it has almost 
> nothing to do with your fantasies of what they're saying.

It's actually understandable why he has the
wrong impression, having joined the group at
this point and seen all the various tributes
to MMY. That's why I urged him to have a look
at the traffic here from before MMY died, when
the posts were more typical.

His motive for coming here in the first place
after he heard about MMY's death wasn't exactly
admirable, given his misunderstanding about the
nature of the group. But the posts he saw have
tended to confirm that misunderstanding, so he
plowed right ahead in his mission to upset all
us True Believers by dumping on MMY as we were
mourning MMY's demise.

As you say, he's interpreting the responses to
his posts as objections to his opinions of MMY
rather than as attempts to set him straight about
the nature of this forum.

It's really pretty funny.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 6:39 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> 
> > What the hell is "same transmission"?
> 
> Transmission is just a translation of the Sanskrit word  
> "agama" (Agama) --a transmission of the same teaching, in the same  
> practice line as Guru Dev, from one of his students.


Doesn't guarantee its legitimacy.



> 
> >
> > >
> > > Satyanand? Only stories. Some flattering. Some less so. An acharya?
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > You're playing your name games there, fella. The only thing you have
> > is book learning and opinion, no experience.
> 
> Actually I have more "experience" than book reading!


Which is?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 7:33 AM, do.rflex wrote:


I have experienced Guru Dev visually and telepathically myself. Once I
'heard' him repeating something which I'd never heard before, I
believe it was in Sanskrit - as if an initiation or such. I know other
TM teachers who have had similar experiences. I'm not schizophrenic
and neither were they. And what we experience[d] isn't merely
'inspiration' from memories.



Unstressing.

Return to the mantra.

[FairfieldLife] Re: stillness

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ben Gilberti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 207 undercover agents freeze in place in New York City.

These people are fabulous. They've done all sorts
of stunts, and most (all?) of them have been
videotaped. Check out their Web site for more:

http://www.improveverywhere.com

They're based in NYC, but they encourage you to
form a similar group wherever you are.

   
>   http://youtube.com/watch?v=jwMj3PJDxuo

[FairfieldLife] Last hours of Maharishi

[gyselsvishnu]

  The Dutch local press writes that Maharshi was taken to the hospital of
Roermond nearby.

This happened probably also on last Tuesday.  However, he wanted to
return home to die in his own surroundings.

On a truck which could load a specially constructed coffin (with a
window on one side), the body of Maharishi sitting in lotus was brought
early this morning to the Schiphol airport.

Since he is a saint, he wil get Jala samadhi, immersion in water in a
stone coffin, like his Master.



Dirk Gysels, Brussels

[FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Duveyoung]

Sri Jim,

Hey, I've seen quite a few folks barge in here since, well, since I
barged in here about a year ago with my tude going full blast, and
just about all of the newbies have had to fight their way into this
gang.  Gotta take a thousand kicks from us -- that's how we see if you
go away or stick around and surrender to the abuse that is available
here -- it can be as much fun as snowball fighting, and as dangerous.

I post these long rants and lectures and sermons and get almost
nothing back, but I look at it as my archiving for posterity the
ruminations of a newage cud chewer.  I pride myself that as long as
the Internet lasts, I'll be googlable.  Scant immortality, but where
else can an ego invest these days?  

Prepare to have King Lear's feelings on a regular basis if you try to
lay down some truth here.  Points of view are mercilessly scathed and
I count it as a nice sandpapering of one's egoic sculpture to get a
group to refine one's projections.

That said, hey, I really like you.  I really really like you.  Keep
posting.  Something ya gots resonates over here.

If you post some biographical info, that sometimes mellows the folks
out -- otherwise, a stranger has come to town and we're all putting
our hands next to our holsters.

And get that damned stair-stepping format fixed.

Edg


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
> > You are incorrect on both counts. I am NOT
> > a good guy, and I call you an asshole because
> > you're acting like one. Your assessment of me
> > is as off as your initial assessment of who
> > Rick Archer is and what his intention was in
> > reposting an announcement.
> > 
> > You're clueless. Either shut up and learn 
> > something, or go away.
> >
> 
> TurquoiseB,  LOL!!! Okay, have it your way... you are a jerk and
probably a complete 
> asshole as well. I won't dispute that with you. I wanted to give you
the benefit of the 
> doubt... but, oh well. You say I'm clueless, while at the same time
offering absolutely 
> nothing to back up your statement. What do I have to do?... pay some
kind of initiation fee 
> to become privy to this secret knowledge you claim to possess.  Rick
Archer's posting of 
> that TM Movement superlative clap-trap seemed a bit moronic to me,
but if you possess 
> some higher wisdom on the subject hit me with your best shot.
I'm an adult... I can take 
> it. But, if all you can do is regurgitate insults and patronizingly
say, "Learn something" ... 
> then spare me. Who the hell made you pope of this thread... you
servile arrogant prick. 
> This is a public forum open to anyone who wants to participate. You
say you left the TM 
> Movement years ago... and yet you seem to exhibit the same kind of
haughty imperious 
> attitude the TM Movement is so famous for. What is it with you &
Judith? ... do you think 
> just because you hurl some supercilious insults in an intimidating
manner, I'm supposed 
> to take it on faith you have any clue what you're talking about?  I
certainly haven't seen any 
> evidence of it. All I've seen is some pompous guy who is verbose...
and yet does not 
> persuade. If you have a legitimate point of view that can be backed
up... state it like an 
> adult. If it has any merit, I'll listen. But, enough of this acerbic
nonsense you keep 
> spouting.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:13 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> >
> > I think that John has bought into the propaganda
> > spread by Nabby and others that you have never
> > practiced TM or been a TM teacher. His phrasing
> > above seems to imply that.
> >
> > If I'm not mistaken, neither is true. Like many
> > of us here, you both learned TM and spent some
> > time on the "front lines" as a TM teacher before
> > moving on to other studies, including some that
> > involved working with teachers in the *real*
> > Shankaracharya lineage.
> 
> 
> Oh, ok thanks. I'll just ignore his post then like Nabby's!
> 
> Life's too short.


Caught with his pants down the complainer runs. LOL!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:29 AM, srijim1 wrote:

Finally, someone who is actually willing to explain the situation  
without feeling the need to
insult me. Now, was that so difficult to accomplish? Rick, here I  
thought you were some
"true believer" and now it is apparent you are anything but. My  
apologies. I am obviously
in the wrong forum talking to the wrong people. You have your own  
thing happening here

and I'll intrude no further. Good luck to you all.



I believe most TB's avoid FFL or have even been told (in FF) that it  
is "off the program" to participate here. I suspect the only TMO TB's  
you'll find here are "lurkers". But there are a lot of TM/TMSP TB's  
here.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:52 AM, do.rflex wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:13 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> >
> > I think that John has bought into the propaganda
> > spread by Nabby and others that you have never
> > practiced TM or been a TM teacher. His phrasing
> > above seems to imply that.
> >
> > If I'm not mistaken, neither is true. Like many
> > of us here, you both learned TM and spent some
> > time on the "front lines" as a TM teacher before
> > moving on to other studies, including some that
> > involved working with teachers in the *real*
> > Shankaracharya lineage.
>
>
> Oh, ok thanks. I'll just ignore his post then like Nabby's!
>
> Life's too short.

Caught with his pants down the complainer runs. LOL!



Actually I'm still here, just not into playing games with naive  
assholes!

Re: [FairfieldLife] What are other groups saying about Maharishi?

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Duveyoung wrote:


I see that over at alt.buddha.short.fat.guy there was one thread about
Maharishi, "TM Founder Dies," with but four snide posts. I wudda
thunk there'd be a flood of stuff there.

Er, so, how are other groups handling this?

So, anyone who is reading other groups who can summarize the responses
please chime in.



On a large list of Buddhist scholars and practitioners it got a brief  
mention. One person shared their stories of people they had seen who  
had been damaged thru it's practice, leading to nervous breakdowns.  
The same guy, who had practiced TM in the 70's for a couple of years,  
said it seemed to make people "gullible", it's teachers seemed "numb"  
and compassion was lacking in them. He also had taught several ex-TM  
people Vipassana meditation. One sidha said 'after his instructions  
he finally began to understand what meditation actually was about.'

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Last hours of Maharishi

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Michael
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:39 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Last hours of Maharishi

 

I got the news here through the local Maharishi Mandir who in turn
informed Mother. 

Who is “Mother”?


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Last hours of Maharishi

[Michael]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "gyselsvishnu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "gyselsvishnu" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Since he is a saint, he wil get Jala samadhi, immersion in water in
> > > a stone coffin, like his Master.
> > 
> > What is your source for that? Official communications from the TMO
> > refer to a cremation ceremony.
> >
> 
> It is written in the Dutch local press (from the province of Limburg).
> It is true there are many unclear things. As you know it is officially 
> said that M. died in his sleep but other reports claim that he 
> mentioned Gurudev on his deathbed.
> Can anyone who was there tell the real full story objectively?
>

I am now in Madanapalle, South India. I visited a function today in
the Maharishi Mandir, which was constructed on his behalf in 1956.
They said that there will be a cremation on Monday in Allahabad.
Maharishis body will arrive on the 9th by direct plane from Amsterdam
to Allahabad.

I got the news here through the local Maharishi Mandir who in turn
informed Mother. I had had a conversation with her a week earlier, and
told her that MMY had said he will soon go. She laughed and said,
where will he go, to USA? sort of joking. I said no, not like this,
leaving this plane. She said something to the effect that there is no
going anywhere for the enlightened - he will be here. That was very
consoling, I didn't ask further.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity"
>  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > The DSM-IV elements of narcissistic PD are at least five of the
> > following:
> > 1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
> > 2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
> > brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
> > 3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
> > 4. requires excessive admiration
> > 5. has a sense of entitlement
> > 6. is interpersonally exploitative
> > 7. lacks empathy
> > 8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious 
> > of him or her
> > 9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
> 
> Exactly. Thanks for posting this, Ruth.
> 
> I think that people (if you consider Judy 'people')
> are reacting to the term 'Disorder.'

Basically, that's true. It's dicey to try to
pin a "disorder" label on people who are highly
unusual.

 It's a descrip-
> tion of a known set of behaviors and beliefs, grouped
> into a convenient category for describing a certain
> type of human being.

Note that the "certain type of human being" is
that of people who entered therapy because they
were having problems coping with ordinary life.

Moreover, the DSM-IV criteria for various 
disorders were determined on the basis of the
diagnoses of many therapy patients over time,
rather than the reverse. The criteria don't
exist in a vacuum; they aren't sets of rules
for diagnosing patients that have always 
existed.

With regard to narcissistic personality
disorder, for example, this is the appropriate
statement: Of those people who have entered
therapy and been diagnosed with the disorder at
the time of the publication of DSM-IV (or for
however many editions of DSM these criteria have
been listed), most have shown at least five of
the listed characteristics.

That does *not* mean that everyone who shows
at least five of the characteristics has
narcissistic personality disorder, especially
if they have never felt the need to seek
therapy, and *especially* on the basis of the
judgment of nonprofessionals.

It *does* mean that if a professional
determines that a patient in therapy has at
least five of the characteristics, a diagnosis
of narcissistic personality disorder should be
considered.

For people who have never sought therapy, and in
the judgment of nonprofessionals, it's no more
than idle speculation.

And as Ruth points out:

> > Now of course, just because you believe you are special, 
> > doesn't mean you aren't special.
> 
> Exactly again. The people who think like this *might*
> be right. It's just that most of the time they aren't.

Aren't "right"? Barry knows The Truth about who
is special and who isn't?? When he just got done
saying:

"10. has difficulty knowing the difference between 'this
is the truth' and 'this is how I see it.'

"To me, that's probably THE most defining aspect
of narcissism -- the *assumption* that how one
sees things *equals* how things really are."

Amazing.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Sal Sunshine]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think
that it's PERSONAL that Maharishi or any other
NPD spiritual teacher doesn't treat their
students with respect. My feeling is that they
barely even notice that the students are even
THERE.


Very perceptive, Barry.  While I never did take it personally, I  
didn't give up nor devote nearly as much (timewise or any other way)  
as many others.


Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 9:35 AM, do.rflex wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 9:01 AM, do.rflex wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 6:39 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> > >
> > > > What the hell is "same transmission"?
> > >
> > > Transmission is just a translation of the Sanskrit word
> > > "agama" (Agama) --a transmission of the same teaching, in the  
same

> > > practice line as Guru Dev, from one of his students.
> >
> > Doesn't guarantee its legitimacy.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Satyanand? Only stories. Some flattering. Some less so. An
> > acharya?
> > > > >
> > > > > No.
> > > >
> > > > You're playing your name games there, fella. The only thing  
you

> > have
> > > > is book learning and opinion, no experience.
> > >
> > > Actually I have more "experience" than book reading!
> >
> > Which is?
>
> 40 years.

40 years of what?


Spiritual practice and for about 25 of that, training as well.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[authfriend]

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

> Even worse, Sparaig is back being an OCD 
> defender of everything Maharishi again.

Actually, since he came back he's made 11 posts.

During the same period, you've made 27.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 3:29 AM, george_deforest wrote:
> 
> > > curtisdeltablues wrote:
> > >
> > > I got a lot of peace from the article in the Skeptical Inquirer
> > > in 89 or 90 that compared these personality traits with popular
> > > gurus...
> > >
> > > It explained how he could use and discard people as he unfolded
> > > his "mission."  I don't see this as a putdown.
> 
> Curtis, this is the main thing that has bothered me about MMY and 
> the TMO--how could he (they) do that?  How could they take the good 
> will and good intentions of so many really nice people and treat 
> them like that? I think I may spend a long time  pondering that 
> question. I look forward to any revelations along the way.

I can only pass along one of the things that I 
found comforting and "releasing" about looking 
at such actions by spiritual teachers in terms
of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

They really aren't *concerned* with how "other
people" may feel about being treated one way or
another because in a very real sense there ARE
no "other people" in their world. The NPD per-
sonalities lack empathy; they're locked inside 
themselves (or themSelves, if you feel that they 
really are enlightened), and these other people 
around them really have no reality at all. The 
only thing that DOES have any reality is the 
stuff going on inside the head of the NPD
personality.

So it's really not as if they're "dissing"
these people and their good intentions and
their many contributions, financial-wise and
trust-wise and devotion-wise or any other kind
of -wise. The NPD personalities just don't
FEEL these other people, AT ALL. They barely 
ever *exist* for the person whose life embodies
Narcissistic Personality Disorder...these
other people are little more than gnats flit-
ting around them. Gnats come and they go; the
only thing that is important to the NPD person-
ality is their "mission," the way they see
themselves (or themSelves).

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think
that it's PERSONAL that Maharishi or any other
NPD spiritual teacher doesn't treat their 
students with respect. My feeling is that they
barely even notice that the students are even 
THERE.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Special Broadcast on Maharishi Channel

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1  wrote:

> > TurquoiseB, are the posting limits a Yahoo thing 
> > or a TM Movement directive?
> 
> Neither. They're a local thing, to keep
> assholes from dominating the conversations
> here by posting hundreds of times per week
> It used to happen, with some regularity.

No, it didn't. On some occasions, around
100 posts a week, but never "hundreds of
times per week." And of course "dominating
the conversations" is absurd, since anybody
could post as much as they wanted.

> The three biggest offenders -- the *reasons*
> that the normal posting limit of 50 per week
> was originated -- were three posters who go
> by the IDs of 'authfriend', 'shempmcgurk',
> and 'sparaig.' Each of them used to flood
> this forum with their posts, and when asked
> politely to refrain from doing so, they
> refused.

That's not true either, actually.

[FairfieldLife] Re: An account of Astral plane of existence....

[Duveyoung]

Lurk,

You're right; the words below are triggers that amplify those faint
emotions from so long ago.and, hey, this is exactly what I was
saying about "it's all inside me BUZZING, and only needs the spotlight
of awareness."

I remember reading the Autobiography of a Yogi at TTC and getting
caught with the book by Ned Wynn.  He chided me gently that the book
was "okay but inferior to Maharishi's technique and teachings."  I had
already bought into that concept cuz of Wallace's oxygen consumption
reporting, but I still finished the book -- oh, I was a rebel!  Man, I
just tore off a "do not remove under penalty of law," tag from a seat
cushion on an old couch on the curb waiting for spring pick-up -- am I
a bad ass still or not!  Alright!  I'm the man!

Oops, I think I strained a tendon patting my own back.

Igor


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> It's so cool rereading this stuff, and getting transported to the
> feelings and emotions you had when you first read it.
> 
> 
> > Some excerpts :
> >
> > "As prophets are sent on earth to help men work out their physical
> karma, so I have been directed by God to serve on an astral planet as a
> savior," Sri Yukteswar explained. "It is called Hiranyaloka or
> 'Illumined Astral Planet.' There I am aiding advanced beings to rid
> themselves of astral karma and thus attain liberation from astral
> rebirths. The dwellers on Hiranyaloka are highly developed spiritually;
> all of them had acquired, in their last earth-incarnation, the
> meditation-given power of consciously leaving their physical bodies at
> death. No one can enter Hiranyaloka unless he has passed on earth beyond
> the state of sabikalpa samadhi into the higher state of nirbikalpa
> samadhi."
> >
> > "God encased the human soul successively in three bodies-the idea, or
> causal, body; the subtle astral body, seat of man's mental and emotional
> natures; and the gross physical body. On earth a man is equipped with
> his physical senses. An astral being works with his consciousness and
> feelings and a body made of lifetrons. A causal-bodied being remains in
> the blissful realm of ideas. My work is with those astral beings who are
> preparing to enter the causal world."
> >
> > "The astral universe, made of various subtle vibrations of light and
> color, is hundreds of times larger than the material cosmos. The entire
> physical creation hangs like a little solid basket under the huge
> luminous balloon of the astral sphere. Just as many physical suns and
> stars roam in space, so there are also countless astral solar and
> stellar systems. Their planets have astral suns and moons, more
> beautiful than the physical ones. The astral luminaries resemble the
> aurora borealis-the sunny astral aurora being more dazzling than the
> mild-rayed moon-aurora. The astral day and night are longer than those
> of earth."
> >
> > "The astral body is not subject to cold or heat or other natural
> conditions. The anatomy includes an astral brain, or the
> thousand-petaled lotus of light, and six awakened centers in the
> sushumna, or astral cerebro-spinal axis. The heart draws cosmic energy
> as well as light from the astral brain, and pumps it to the astral
> nerves and body cells, or lifetrons. Astral beings can affect their
> bodies by lifetronic force or by mantric vibrations."
> >
> > "Physical desires are rooted in egotism and sense pleasures. The
> compulsion or temptation of sensory experience is more powerful than the
> desire-force connected with astral attachments or causal perceptions."
> >
> > "Astral desires center around enjoyment in terms of vibration. Astral
> beings enjoy the ethereal music of the spheres and are entranced by the
> sight of all creation as exhaustless expressions of changing light. The
> astral beings also smell, taste, and touch light. Astral desires are
> thus connected with an astral being's power to precipitate all objects
> and experiences as forms of light or as condensed thoughts or dreams. "
> >
> > "Causal desires are fulfilled by perception only. The nearly-free
> beings who are encased only in the causal body see the whole universe as
> realizations of the dream-ideas of God; they can materialize anything
> and everything in sheer thought. Causal beings therefore consider the
> enjoyment of physical sensations or astral delights as gross and
> suffocating to the soul's fine sensibilities. Causal beings work out
> their desires by materializing them instantly.Those who find themselves
> covered only by the delicate veil of the causal body can bring universes
> into manifestation even as the Creator. Because all creation is made of
> the cosmic dream-texture, the soul thinly clothed in the causal has vast
> realizations of power. "
> >
> >
> > -
> > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 9:01 AM, do.rflex wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 6:39 AM, do.rflex wrote:
>
> > What the hell is "same transmission"?
>
> Transmission is just a translation of the Sanskrit word
> "agama" (Agama) --a transmission of the same teaching, in the same
> practice line as Guru Dev, from one of his students.

Doesn't guarantee its legitimacy.

>
> >
> > >
> > > Satyanand? Only stories. Some flattering. Some less so. An  
acharya?

> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > You're playing your name games there, fella. The only thing you  
have

> > is book learning and opinion, no experience.
>
> Actually I have more "experience" than book reading!

Which is?


40 years.

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 7, 2008, at 8:25 PM, sandiego108 wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:11 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG."  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > > Maybe he really wasn't a yogi. Is that a possibility here?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes!
> > > >
> > > > Be interesting to hear a definition of "yogi"
> > > > from both of you.
> > >
> > > "CC" type attainment as a minimum--the slightly dualistic
> > > turiyatita--"beyond the forth" being what I'd refer to in a TM-
> > style
> > > context.
> > >
> > > But there are non-dual and other yogis as well, so it is good to
> > > specify what "style" of yogi you mean when you make some sort of
> > > declaration. It's not a monolithic thing. I'm always glad to
> > specify
> > > if people are sensitive enough to even ask.
> > >
> > > Most aren't.
> > >
> > and those that know the truth about this sort of thing aren't
> > either. Go home pretender. This notion that you have of their being
> > a never ending path of signs and symbols and sciences and levels of
> > accomplishment is all designed to mollify the fear of complete
> > dissolution, of your own death. Nothing more.
> >
> > All who talk in these terms seek to keep those listening in bondage,
> > keep them seeking outward for what is each of our spontaneous and
> > wholly owned birthright, that of eternal freedom. Some of the
> > trappings of these rituals of Maya are beautiful, but that doesn't
> > make them liberating.
> >
> > There are just two kinds of existence, 1) bound and segregated, and
> > 2) free and integrated. To make a fundamentalist science as you do
> > of all of these gradations and other things keeps the mind busy so
> > that it can believe in something other than its own naturally
> > available annihilation. Just more fear and idiocy dancing with Maya.
> 
> 
> Uh, thanks, Jim.
> 
> I'll make sure I tell all the sages I meet.


I doubt you've ever met one.

[FairfieldLife] Re: What are other groups saying about Maharishi?

[Duveyoung]

Hmmm,

I wonder how much "coverage" we'd see posted here at FFL about the
deaths of other spiritual leaders.  Call me puffed up, but I think
we'd really dig into each incident and look for nutshellings that
brought closure.

I'd love to see the NY Times obits for those spiritual leaders still
working the crowds today.

Who's going to go next?  The Dali Lamaramadingdong?  DoubleSriHeeHee?
 Amahuggahuggaburninlovaji?  

See, now here's where all you astrologers out there could be a help --
that is, if your charts have any predictive powers at all to match the
fees you'd charge for a reading.

Anyone tracking which folks got closest to predicting Maharishi's
death day?  

Years ago, Silva Brown told the press/world/parents that that missing
kid was dead at a Mexican's hands -- she's never apologized for the
stress she flooded the nervous systems of the boy's family when years
later the kid shows up having been brainwashed and sequestered by a
pedophile.  

I went to about a dozen astrologers, and not a single one warned me
about anything ahead of time, nor could they read my present life's
past, but oh boy did they have stuff to say about me.  Did you know
that I was a famous sword fighter in France in my last lifetime? 
Wait, I also was a ship's captain in my last lifetime.  Wait, I was an
uptight Catholic woman who refused to marry my lifetime-love cuz HE
was divorced.  No, wait, I had an alien implant that was successfully
removed by a woman making strange sounds like the high whine of a fart
trying to escape Dick DeAngelis' folds.  No wait, I was born to be a
world-class teacher preacher with the chart of a king.

I paid for all those opinions, and publishing them here is my proper
punishment.

Anyone got a bridge to sell me?

Edg



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> 
> > I see that over at alt.buddha.short.fat.guy there was one thread about
> > Maharishi, "TM Founder Dies," with but four snide posts. I wudda
> > thunk there'd be a flood of stuff there.
> >
> > Er, so, how are other groups handling this?
> >
> > So, anyone who is reading other groups who can summarize the responses
> > please chime in.
> 
> 
> On a large list of Buddhist scholars and practitioners it got a brief  
> mention. One person shared their stories of people they had seen who  
> had been damaged thru it's practice, leading to nervous breakdowns.  
> The same guy, who had practiced TM in the 70's for a couple of years,  
> said it seemed to make people "gullible", it's teachers seemed "numb"  
> and compassion was lacking in them. He also had taught several ex-TM  
> people Vipassana meditation. One sidha said 'after his instructions  
> he finally began to understand what meditation actually was about.'
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Jai?

[at_man_and_brahman]

Hindi vs Sanskrit

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> In the Beatles' Across the Universe 'jai' is IMO
> pronounced so that it rhymes with 'high'. The most
> common pronunciation seems to rhyme with 'hey'.
> 
> I guess the first one might be the more "authentic"
> pronunciation.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: What are other groups saying about Maharishi?

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I see that over at alt.buddha.short.fat.guy there was one 
> thread about Maharishi, "TM Founder Dies," with but four 
> snide posts.  I wudda thunk there'd be a flood of stuff there.
> 
> Er, so, how are other groups handling this?
> 
> So, anyone who is reading other groups who can summarize the 
> responses please chime in.

Good question. I'm on a few "spiritual forums," and
on only one of them has Maharishi's name even come up.

That's what I was trying to get across to you the other
day when you implied that snowstorms happened because
"everyone was thinking about Maharishi." Just t'ain't 
so; his death has barely even made a ripple in the day-
to-day affairs of the world, or of these other spiritual 
groups. For the record, here is the one post I refer to 
above, on a forum that has to do with another spiritual 
teacher, and which has about a hundred active members. 
The only response, also reposted below, was mine:

> > Maharishi has left the building
> > 
> > A great many of X's students began Practice in 
> > this life using the Transcendental Meditation 
> > technique as taught by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. And, 
> > despite the snarky things X said about TM whenever 
> > he had the chance, there is no way to deny the major 
> > (yes, even positive) impact Maharishi has had on this 
> > world (e.g., John Gray, Deepak Chopra, and Howard Stern).
> > 
> > Peace be unto him.
> 
> It's interesting, since I was his student and one of 
> his teachers for a number of years, and had much face 
> time with him, that I feel absolutely nothing at 
> Maharishi's passing. Nada. Rien. Nichevo. Bupkus. 
> Go figure.
> 
> Then again, it's been over 30 years since I last saw 
> him or had any real feelings for him. That's a long time.
> 
> As for his impact on this world, I hardly think that any 
> of the three people you mentioned are part of that "impact." 
> All three will be forgotten by history long before *they* 
> "leave the building." :-)
> 
> IMO, the biggest impact Maharishi had on the world was to 
> make meditation a household word, and to take some of the 
> stigma it had developed in Western society off of it and 
> make it something that anyone could do, and benefit from. 
> That's no small accomplishment, and he deserves full 
> credit for that.
> 
> As you say, may his continuing journey be a peaceful one...

[FairfieldLife] What are other groups saying about Maharishi?

[Duveyoung]

I see that over at alt.buddha.short.fat.guy there was one thread about
Maharishi, "TM Founder Dies," with but four snide posts.  I wudda
thunk there'd be a flood of stuff there.

Er, so, how are other groups handling this?

So, anyone who is reading other groups who can summarize the responses
please chime in.

Edg

[FairfieldLife] Re: As a common bumpkin I did it my way ( MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt)

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> 
> > Sal,
> >
> > Come on.  The TMO leaders merely did what all humans in power do.
> > They are commonly tawdry -- let's not aggrandize them as 
especially
> > good at it -- they didn't open up new territory


I think this passing off as "only human" is what annoys me the most 
about the TM rulers and their apologists.

The whole point of a spiritual movement is that it operates in a more 
evolved way isn't it? 

Why did we forget to hold Maharishi and co to the enlightened 
standards they preach they are helping the world evolve to?

I don't think the ends justify the means, which is why I think the 
TMO will fail, and quickly now the glue that held it together has 
gone.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Ben Gilberti]

Rick.  I never heard the "mustard belly" reference before, but couldn't find a 
definition for it when I googled it.  What does it mean?
   
  -- Ben

Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  
  From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
Of Ben Gilberti
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:12 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here is a failure to 
communicate."


  
  Dear Srijim, 



They called me an asshole for a good while, they were right actualy, I was 
also clueless.  I shut up and learned something.  We don't know yet if it 
worked, however. 
  




  It’s a rite of passage. A sort of virtual mustard belly.


  No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008 
11:17 AM

  

 

   
-
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:13 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:



I think that John has bought into the propaganda
spread by Nabby and others that you have never
practiced TM or been a TM teacher. His phrasing
above seems to imply that.

If I'm not mistaken, neither is true. Like many
of us here, you both learned TM and spent some
time on the "front lines" as a TM teacher before
moving on to other studies, including some that
involved working with teachers in the *real*
Shankaracharya lineage.



Oh, ok thanks. I'll just ignore his post then like Nabby's!

Life's too short.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of srijim1
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 10:29 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here is a failure to
communicate."

 

Finally, someone who is actually willing to explain the situation without
feeling the need to 
insult me. Now, was that so difficult to accomplish? Rick, here I thought
you were some 
"true believer" and now it is apparent you are anything but. My apologies. I
am obviously 
in the wrong forum talking to the wrong people. You have your own thing
happening here 
and I'll intrude no further. Good luck to you all.

SriJim

I hope you stick around. I’m sure you’d have a lot to contribute. It’s often
a rough and tumble atmosphere here. Maybe those who make it that way like it
that way. If you don’t, don’t contribute to it, ignore those who insult you
and try to pull you into nastiness, and pick out the good stuff. In other
words, “Take what you need and leave the rest.”


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Why Does Allah create the human being?

[Ben Gilberti]

Dear Maryam, 
   
  I have much respect for Islam, as I do for all religions. 
   
  You mention that:
   
  "The human brain recognizes that the Creator of the universe is Knowledgeable 
and Wise."
   
  That is quite true.  And in the same way, Allah created the human brain to 
have an innate intuition about how to live and behave, if he simply takes a 
little time to get quiet enough to tune into it.   The "messengers" should 
really only be needed to "prime the pump" so to speak. 
   
  Love, 
   
  Ben
  

Maryam Hassan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 Why Does Allah create the human being?   
  

  


Does Allah create us in vain?   
The brain is aware of the existence of Allah Almighty by the use of the signs 
in the universe. The human brain recognizes that the Creator of the universe is 
Knowledgeable and Wise. Thus, it is quite impossible that He creates us in vain 
and without a special target. Otherwise, this fact would not be in tandem with 
His wisdom, Glory be to Him.



- {{ "Did you think that We had created you in play (without any 
purpose), and that you would not be brought back to Us?" . So Exalted be Allâh, 
the True King, Lâ ilâha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), 
the Lord of the Supreme Throne!!}}, (Holy Qur'an 23: 115-116). 

Though, we cannot know what does the Creator want from us, How to worship Him 
as He really wants us to do? How to thank Him? This is why He has sent to us 
messengers to tell us about Himself (Allah Almighty) and the reason He has 
created the universe. Why he has created us? What is the life-style He has 
depicted for us to follow? And what He has preserved to us whether it is a 
reward or a punishment?

{{ Messengers as bearers of good news as well as of warning in order that 
mankind should have no plea against Allâh after the Messengers. And Allâh is 
Ever All­Powerful, All­Wise. }}, (Holy Qur'an 4: 165)

The messengers, whom Allah has picked out from the best of His creatures, were 
under the custody and the protection of Allah. They have brought miracles from 
Allah Almighty to give evidence of their truthful message. Allah has sent down 
to them the procedure of life which must be performed by the humankind. As it 
is, he who has obeyed Allah and his messengers will be perfectly rewarded by 
Allah Almighty; and he has disobeyed Allah will be punished for sure.
{{ And whoso obeys Allâh and the Messenger (Muhammad), then they will be in the 
company of those on whom Allâh has bestowed His Grace, of the Prophets, the 
Siddiqûn (those followers of the Prophets who were first and foremost to 
believe in them.), the martyrs, and the righteous. And how excellent these 
companions are!. }},  (Holy Qur'an 4: 69).Furthermore, Allah Almighty has 
confirmed in the Holy Qur'an: {{ And whosoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger 
(Muhammad), and transgresses His limits, He will cast him into the Fire, to 
abide therein; and he shall have a disgraceful torment. }}, (Holy Qur'an 4:14 )

Allah Almighty has explained to us that the creation is certainly for specific 
wisdom:{{ And We created not the heaven and the earth and all that is between 
them without purpose! That is the consideration of those who disbelieve! Then 
woe to those who disbelieve (in Islâmic Monotheism) from the Fire! }}.(Holy 
Qur'an 38:27) 

Allah Almighty has made it clear to us to know the reason behind the creation 
of the humankind:{{ And I (Allâh) created not the jinns and humans except they 
should worship Me (Alone).}} (Holy Qur'an  51: 56 ). 
It goes without saying that worshiping Allah is not only praying, genuflecting, 
and fasting, but it contains also all the deeds and the behavior which Allah 
loves us to do. Taking care of the orphan is considered as worshipping. 
Visiting a sick person is part of worshipping. Taking away anything that might 
hurt the others in the road is a way of worshipping. Greeting the others is 
also worshipping….etc. 

Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah has confirmed: 
Worshipping is a name that is connected to everything Allah Almighty loves and 
agrees on whether it is related to sayings, interior and exterior deeds. 
Prayer, giving alms, fasting, doing the pilgrimage, saying the truth, loyalty, 
filial devotion, good contact with one's relatives, fulfillment of the pact, 
Ordering to work out kindness and avoiding badness, striving against the 
unbelievers and hypocrites, the philanthropy to the neighbors, orphans, 
indigent, vagabond, slaves, animals, invocation of Allah, reading…are all kinds 
of worshipping Allah Almighty. 

The love of Allah and His messenger, the fear of Allah, deputation to His 
Almighty, keeping loyalty to His religion, being patient to his orders, being 
thankful to His beneficence, the contentment towards His fate, the reliance on 
him, Beseeching His mercy and apprehending his excruciation, and the like are 
all kinds of worshipping Allah Almighty. 

http://www.islamtoday.com

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Ben Gilberti
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:56 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here is a failure to
communicate."

 

Rick.  I never heard the "mustard belly" reference before, but couldn't find
a definition for it when I googled it.  What does it mean?

 

-- Ben

I remember hearing once that when sailors crossed the equator for the first
time, they would undergo a hazing that sometimes involved spreading spicy
mustard on their bellies, among other unpleasant yet non-lethal things.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ignoring Judy's "Gotta Get Barry" episode, and
> dealing with the real issue at hand:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > One of the "compulsive-poster wimps from alt.m.t"
> > Barry was referring to just happened to be do.rflex
> > (John), the guy he's now dumping on because John
> > trusts his experience of Guru Dev.
> 
> I have NO PROBLEM with John trusting his 
> subjective experience of Guru Dev. I have
> NO PROBLEM with him talking about it. I 
> think it's *important* to learn to trust,
> to some extent, one's subjective experiences
> in life.
> 
> Declaring them "truth" is another thing
> entirely.

But he didn't. As I pointed out, you missed the
context completely because you were so eager to
dump on him and preach your standard sermon.

[FairfieldLife] L.B. Shriver a Gentleman in FF compiling a book on Guru Dev.from news reports

[WLeed3]

The book is not out as yet. He has  over many years collected  donations & 
loans for the  publication of such but since 1999 to my  knowledge & perhaps 
before that time. He expects to have such done soon he  states but soon since 
2001 is still not as yet. Many joyfully await it  publication & is some cases 
the 
return on there loans for its  publication.Far more folks look to reading & 
enjoying the actual  reading of the collected news paper reports &  articles of 
those  transcribed speeches & talks of Guru Dev. To date no time certain has 
been  set for either actions. I believe he is still working to put such a 
published  work in our hands. L. B. Shriver is an MUM graduate & scholar & has  
been form time to time a responsible sounding board for MIU & later MUM to  
grow 
more free & liberal & even kinder to its treatment of mediators  & sidha's. 
This had causes him at times to be banned from campus & even  thwarted in his 
activities in the town of Fairfield. I consider him to be a  friend of mine. I 
also dearly hope for this publication of Guru Dev's talks  published & 
available to us all. Those talks were to my understanding  transcribed from 
Hindi to 
English by scholars in the pay of L. B. for us all to  then read. L. B. 
Shriver also has a radio program in FF IA & is on air I  believe Wednesdays 
each 
week. 
 
 
In a message dated 2/8/2008 9:55:39 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> ---  Angela Mailander wrote:
>
> Who's L. B. Shriver?

LB Trusty  Shriver (real name; no initials) 
is a Fairfield writer and publisher who  
was active on Fairfield Life a few years 
ago, and checks in  occasionally yet.



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

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








**Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. 
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300025
48)

[FairfieldLife] Re: What are other groups saying about Maharishi?

[Richard J. Williams]

Duveyoung wrote:
> So, anyone who is reading other groups who can 
> summarize the responses please chime in.
> 
Here's my chime in: Hey, Ed, you'll love this guy's 
comments. 

"He was the BIGGEST LYING CON-MAN ever...
His stinking rotting carcass will thrown into the 
ground in Holland. No vedic ritual on the banks of 
GanagJi for MishMashy Mahesh Prasad Varmit!!" 

Read more:

Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
From: ColdBluIce
Date: Wed, Feb 6 2008 8:03 am
Subject: Re: Rest in Peace
http://tinyurl.com/29k9dm

"No matter, it was a pack of lies mostly -- TM has 
never delivered anything that anyone ever was 
promised by the marketing blurbs. For GAWD's sake 
just examine the minds of the wrecks that have 
ended up at Rick's party here -- where's the bliss?" 

Read more:

Newsgroups: Yahoo! Groups
From: Duveyoung
Date: Sat, Feb 7 9:10 am
Subject: David Lynch on Product Placement
http://tinyurl.com/3ah2rg

[FairfieldLife] Replay of Bevan's Wonderful Call Tomorrow Afternoon

[Dick Mays]

Bevan made such a wonderful call to us in Fairfield Wednesday night! 
To me it was the best of his that I've ever heard.  I've just learned 
it's going to be replayed tomorrow, Saturday afternoon in the Dome at 
2:15.  I'm checking to see if a current badge is also required.

[FairfieldLife] Mike Love and Al Jardine Tributes to Maharishi

[Dick Mays]

Mike Love's Statement on the Passing of Maharishi:

While in Paris participating in a UNICEF benefit 
show, the Beach Boys were introduced to Maharishi 
Mahesh Yogi. That was in December of 1967. Dennis 
Wilson, Carl Wilson, Alan Jardine and myself 
along with several family members learned the TM 
technique from Maharishi himself. Two months 
later, I made the journey to Rishi Kesh, India, 
where Donovan and the Beatles also attended a 
teacher’s training course. Alan and I both became 
teachers of TM a couple years later.


To say that what I have learned from Maharishi 
has been of great benefit to me is an 
understatement to be sure. Maharishi has designed 
a pathway of development of human potential, 
which includes transcendental mediation, the 
TM-Sidhi program, Maharishi Ayurveda, Jyotish, 
and Yagyas,--all derived directly from the 
Earth’s most ancient text, The Vedas.


No less a goal than that of world peace was 
Maharishi's life's work. For those of us who were 
fortunate enough to have been in his presence, 
his passing is profoundly sad. But I for one, am 
among the millions who are grateful for what he 
shared with us on this - The dawn of the Age of 
Enlightenment - on the way to the goal which 
Maharishi called "Heaven on Earth" We will miss 
you, but your great light will shine on.



Jai Guru Dev
Michael E. Love

also fwiw, this old tape of Mike Love on TM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ318QInrUg



Al Jardine's Statement on the Passing of Maharishi:

"I am saddened by this great man's passing. He 
helped to enlighten me and my family to the value 
of transcendental meditation. He hoped to 
enlighten the world, but said that it must start 
with each individual, the family, the community, 
and then entire nations.


"He would chastise me in a kind way if I stayed 
away too long, 'Where have you been?' And of 
course I could not think of a single good answer, 
because being in his presence made one feel like 
a complete idiot for staying away too long.


"He left me with a tool to deal with life and its 
complexities. For that I will always be grateful, 
and whenever I'm dipping into that 'pool of peace 
inside,' I will always think of him."


Jai Guru Dev,
Al Jardine

[FairfieldLife] Jai?

[cardemaister]

In the Beatles' Across the Universe 'jai' is IMO
pronounced so that it rhymes with 'high'. The most
common pronunciation seems to rhyme with 'hey'.

I guess the first one might be the more "authentic"
pronunciation.

Re: [FairfieldLife] the bathtub test

[Sal Sunshine]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:50 PM, Ben Gilberti wrote:

During a visit to the mental asylum, a visitor asked the Director  
how they determined whether or not a patient should be  
institutionalized.
'Well,' said the Director, 'we fill up a bathtub, then we offer a  
teaspoon, a teacup and a bucket to the patient and ask him or her  
to empty the bathtub.'
'Oh, I understand,' said the visitor. 'A normal person would use  
the bucket because it's bigger than the spoon or the teacup.'
'No.' said the Director, 'A normal person would pull the plug.  Do  
you want a bed near the window?'


LOL--funny, Ben!

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Fall of the Roman Empire, much like the USA today, why?

[Sal Sunshine]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Napoleon Lupei wrote:

I can say drought & water pollution did it. Somewhat like Global  
Warming.
Same thing for this--post #2 I think.  He's sending this to over 45  
groups.  Spam alert.


Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] islam in brief"attributes of God"

[Sal Sunshine]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Maryam Hassan wrote:


Attributes of God ( Allah )


Rick, isn't this like the 4th time this same post has appeared?

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
>  wrote:
> 
> > There are many who say some variant of "good works are not the
> > way to heaven."  I think that they are wrong, or at least wrong
> > in implying that good works are not a necessary part of the path.
> 
> Martin Luther said (paraphrased): Good works do not
> make a good person, but a good person will do good
> works. Which is pretty much Maharishi's perspective.
> ("Good person" = enlightened person; "good works" =
> spontaneous right action. By [his] definition, you
> can't do *spontaneous* right action if you aren't
> enlightened.)

Yes, I have heard this before.  I think that both can be true.  A good
person will do good works.  But a person can learn goodness by doing
good works.  Why do we teach our children to share?  To give?  To say
please and thank you?  We are teaching them to do good and to be good.
For people with intact empathy, doing good is rewarding and encourages
you to do more good. In the end, you are a good person. 

But for people without any empathy, doing "good" probably is just a
means to an end. 


> 
> Of course, it isn't always easy to know what "right
> action" or "good works" are. Some are obvious--feeding
> the poor, etc. Others may not be. Even the person doing
> them may not recognize them as such.


True.  Justice in particular is difficult to know.  The danger lies in
assuming that we know what is right in all circumstances.  Back to
narcissism or egoism again.  Instead, I consciously try to be
empathetic.  Putting myself in the other's position when I am making a
decision that effects someone else. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[Duveyoung]

I heard Maharishi actually say:  "All actions are done to the Self."

The meaning, in context, was very clear:  don't be deluded, even your
good intentions are impure if one is still thinking one is an ego.

My woman has the heart of Mother Mary and couldn't resist
giving/loving for a nanosecond -- it's so hard wired in her that my
low self-esteem simply writhes from her hot blue flames of love with
which she ceaselessly tsunamis me.  I'm a narcissist, so natch, I
welcome all forms of appreciation, but I'm here to tell ya that this
woman's adoration is agony -- the pain, the pain -- when she blows
past my egoic attachment to me-me-me with nary a sideways glance as
she hones in on my heart.  See?  She cheats!

Yet, even she is satisfying an inner need to manifest as a person -- a
loving person, but, still just a person, a mask for the soul.  She
gets off scott-free of course cuz she hardly adulterates the blasts of
light with faint pastels of ego, and most folks can't even look at
such love without sunglasses on.

I'm a dead duck over here.

Edg
  


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Judy you said "you always got your money's worth, as it were, from 
> doing good, in the form of feeling better (or less bad) about 
> yourself--there was always some reward, as you suggest, some element 
> of selfishness involved, no matter how profound one's capacity for 
> empathy."
> 
> Surely with altruism there is a polarity from the conscious, 
> calculated, devious intentionality on the one hand (I better do X so 
> as to benefit from Y) to the more spontaneous flow of good intentions 
> (X just is the appropriate thing to do, even if this means discomfort 
> or some personal sacrifice). The fact that the latter makes one 
> feel "good" does not invalidate altruism, surely.. The key point is 
> not that some "good feeling" reward contaminates the process but that 
> the good intention/action came NATURALLY, as an impulse (selfishness 
> is firstly an impulse which is then indulged in, in spite of our 
> better judgement).
> 
> Just a thought/reaction I thought I'd share. Not thoroughly thought 
> through, of course.. but something I've noticed within myself. What 
> one feels naturally, spontaneously that is "good" may well be 
> affected by all sorts of unconscious processes and defence mechanisms 
> which ultimitely might seem "selfish", but then it becomes 
> tautological - a denial of the possibility of goodness, just a world 
> view based on one permissable principle, of "badness"! It doesn't 
> have to be like that necessarily, in my view.. but the spontaneity 
> and naturalness of the emerging feeling is the key.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > There are many who say some variant of "good works are not the
> > > > > way to heaven."  I think that they are wrong, or at least 
> wrong
> > > > > in implying that good works are not a necessary part of the 
> > path.
> > > > 
> > > > Martin Luther said (paraphrased): Good works do not
> > > > make a good person, but a good person will do good
> > > > works. Which is pretty much Maharishi's perspective.
> > > > ("Good person" = enlightened person; "good works" =
> > > > spontaneous right action. By [his] definition, you
> > > > can't do *spontaneous* right action if you aren't
> > > > enlightened.)
> > > 
> > > Yes, I have heard this before.  I think that both can be true.
> > > A good person will do good works.  But a person can learn goodness
> > > by doing good works.  Why do we teach our children to share?  To 
> > > give?  To say please and thank you?  We are teaching them to do 
> > > good and to be good. For people with intact empathy, doing good 
> is 
> > > rewarding and encourages you to do more good. In the end, you are
> > > a good person.
> > > 
> > > But for people without any empathy, doing "good" probably is just 
> a
> > > means to an end. 
> > 
> > I don't know that it's quite so simple.
> > 
> > I remember in junior high school we had to write
> > an essay on altruism. I said I didn't think there
> > was such a thing; you always got your money's
> > worth, as it were, from doing good, in the form of
> > feeling better (or less bad) about yourself--there
> > was always some reward, as you suggest, some
> > element of selfishness involved, no matter how
> > profound one's capacity for empathy.
> > 
> > Obviously that doesn't mean doing good based on
> > empathy is a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as
> > "spontaneous right action" as long as there's some
> > expectation of a quid pro quo, even if it's just
> > getting to feel magnanimous.
> > 
> > Of course, when I wrote the essay I didn't know
> > anything about the nat

[FairfieldLife] YouTube appeal from MUM - please "vote"

[george_deforest]

MUM video among top favorites on YouTube



We discovered today that Peace from the Quantum Level

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsvEkPNitdQ 

is #20 on the Youtube's "All Time Top Favorites" list 
for Nonprofits & Activism.

[this video features David Lynch and John Hagelin]


The favorites are based on how many people 
have "favorited" the video. 
Our video has been favorited 584 times 
and the current #1 video has been favorited 2,278 times. 

We can quickly take the #1 slot for this remarkable video ... 
this would be great to announce on the M.U.M. website 
and publicize to the media.

Please watch this video -- and if you like it -- 
add it as a "favorite" by clicking on "Favorite" 
next to the red heart directly under the video.

Also, please invite your friends to watch it 
and select it as a favorite if they like it.

To select a favorite, a Youtube account (free) is needed ... 
which takes 15 seconds to create.

Many thanks!

Ron Barnett

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[curtisdeltablues]

 Curtis, this is the main thing that has bothered me about MMY and the  
> TMO--how could he (they) do that?  How could they take the good will  
> and good intentions of so many really nice people and treat them
like> that? 

You aren't the only one!  And think of how puzzling this behavior must
be for those closest to him that got unceremoniously dumped.Keeping
Jerry Jarvis out of the history of the movement book and exiling him
was pretty far out there IMO.  But as a TB I didn't give it much
thought.  The inconsistencies become problems only once you have
revoked Maharishi's enlightened-guys-can-do-anything pass."  That is
where information about how some people process their world so
differently helps me.  It allows me to reconcile that Maharishi may
have been sincere, but was functioning from a different play book and
set of ethical standards.  It is sort of like opposite world to the
TB's view of him as a magical person. But his uniqueness stays intact. 

Speculation using this model is similar to how people speculate that
Maharishi was living in a higher state of consciousness that includes
definitive knowledge about what happens to human consciousness when we
die.   We are all just guessing from outside with the tools we have.

Remember when we read the Sociopath Next Door?  That gave me much more
compassion and understanding about exploitive people.  I think the
narcissist definition is a better match, but both give an insight that
we need to know that some people are functioning fundamentally
differently.  And within that there can be a lot of gradations of good
and bad in their life.  Just because Maharishi might have had a
narcissistic personality disorder doesn't invalidate whatever good he
did accomplish or his own sincerity in accomplishing it.  It's just
means he is not a good guy to hand your PIN number to, or... like...
your whole life!




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 3:29 AM, george_deforest wrote:
> 
> >> curtisdeltablues wrote:
> >>
> >> I got a lot of peace from the article in the Skeptical Inquirer
> >> in 89 or 90 that compared these personality traits with popular
> >> gurus...
> >>
> >> It explained how he could use and discard people as he unfolded
> >> his "mission."  I don't see this as a putdown.
> 
> Curtis, this is the main thing that has bothered me about MMY and the  
> TMO--how could he (they) do that?  How could they take the good will  
> and good intentions of so many really nice people and treat them like  
> that?  I think I may spend a long time  pondering that question.  I  
> look forward to any revelations along the way.
> 
> Sal
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:52 AM, do.rflex wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:13 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think that John has bought into the propaganda
> > > > spread by Nabby and others that you have never
> > > > practiced TM or been a TM teacher. His phrasing
> > > > above seems to imply that.
> > > >
> > > > If I'm not mistaken, neither is true. Like many
> > > > of us here, you both learned TM and spent some
> > > > time on the "front lines" as a TM teacher before
> > > > moving on to other studies, including some that
> > > > involved working with teachers in the *real*
> > > > Shankaracharya lineage.
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh, ok thanks. I'll just ignore his post then like Nabby's!
> > >
> > > Life's too short.
> >
> > Caught with his pants down the complainer runs. LOL!
> 
> 
> Actually I'm still here, just not into playing games with naive  
> assholes!


Calling me a "naive asshole" is not a substitute for any relevant
credentials you need to have to justify the legitimacy of your
'opinions' about those who've been mentioned or the TM itself.

And it isn't "playing games" to expect you to give solid reasons for
anyone to believe what you say.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Vaj]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 10:06 AM, do.rflex wrote:


Scientology? ...or what? What qualifies you to determine and/or to
be a final arbiter of the validity of the saints, especially ones
you've never met or 'experienced'?



No interest in scientology or being a "final arbiter". I've trained  
and practiced in both Hindu and Buddhist mantrayana lines, including  
practices for death and dying.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[authfriend]

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

> There are many who say some variant of "good works are not the
> way to heaven."  I think that they are wrong, or at least wrong
> in implying that good works are not a necessary part of the path.

Martin Luther said (paraphrased): Good works do not
make a good person, but a good person will do good
works. Which is pretty much Maharishi's perspective.
("Good person" = enlightened person; "good works" =
spontaneous right action. By [his] definition, you
can't do *spontaneous* right action if you aren't
enlightened.)

Of course, it isn't always easy to know what "right
action" or "good works" are. Some are obvious--feeding
the poor, etc. Others may not be. Even the person doing
them may not recognize them as such.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[claudiouk]

Judy you said "you always got your money's worth, as it were, from 
doing good, in the form of feeling better (or less bad) about 
yourself--there was always some reward, as you suggest, some element 
of selfishness involved, no matter how profound one's capacity for 
empathy."

Surely with altruism there is a polarity from the conscious, 
calculated, devious intentionality on the one hand (I better do X so 
as to benefit from Y) to the more spontaneous flow of good intentions 
(X just is the appropriate thing to do, even if this means discomfort 
or some personal sacrifice). The fact that the latter makes one 
feel "good" does not invalidate altruism, surely.. The key point is 
not that some "good feeling" reward contaminates the process but that 
the good intention/action came NATURALLY, as an impulse (selfishness 
is firstly an impulse which is then indulged in, in spite of our 
better judgement).

Just a thought/reaction I thought I'd share. Not thoroughly thought 
through, of course.. but something I've noticed within myself. What 
one feels naturally, spontaneously that is "good" may well be 
affected by all sorts of unconscious processes and defence mechanisms 
which ultimitely might seem "selfish", but then it becomes 
tautological - a denial of the possibility of goodness, just a world 
view based on one permissable principle, of "badness"! It doesn't 
have to be like that necessarily, in my view.. but the spontaneity 
and naturalness of the emerging feeling is the key.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > There are many who say some variant of "good works are not the
> > > > way to heaven."  I think that they are wrong, or at least 
wrong
> > > > in implying that good works are not a necessary part of the 
> path.
> > > 
> > > Martin Luther said (paraphrased): Good works do not
> > > make a good person, but a good person will do good
> > > works. Which is pretty much Maharishi's perspective.
> > > ("Good person" = enlightened person; "good works" =
> > > spontaneous right action. By [his] definition, you
> > > can't do *spontaneous* right action if you aren't
> > > enlightened.)
> > 
> > Yes, I have heard this before.  I think that both can be true.
> > A good person will do good works.  But a person can learn goodness
> > by doing good works.  Why do we teach our children to share?  To 
> > give?  To say please and thank you?  We are teaching them to do 
> > good and to be good. For people with intact empathy, doing good 
is 
> > rewarding and encourages you to do more good. In the end, you are
> > a good person.
> > 
> > But for people without any empathy, doing "good" probably is just 
a
> > means to an end. 
> 
> I don't know that it's quite so simple.
> 
> I remember in junior high school we had to write
> an essay on altruism. I said I didn't think there
> was such a thing; you always got your money's
> worth, as it were, from doing good, in the form of
> feeling better (or less bad) about yourself--there
> was always some reward, as you suggest, some
> element of selfishness involved, no matter how
> profound one's capacity for empathy.
> 
> Obviously that doesn't mean doing good based on
> empathy is a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as
> "spontaneous right action" as long as there's some
> expectation of a quid pro quo, even if it's just
> getting to feel magnanimous.
> 
> Of course, when I wrote the essay I didn't know
> anything about the nature of "enlightenment," but
> I think my reasoning holds up with regard to those
> in "ignorance."
> 
> Luther, in any case, was thinking in terms of
> salvation, not just everyday "goodness." To him,
> a "good person" was one who had achieved
> "righteousness" through faith, and good works were
> an effect, not a cause. He even thought striving
> for righteousness through works was detrimental to
> salvation.
>

[FairfieldLife] the bathtub test

[Ben Gilberti]

  During a visit to the mental asylum, a visitor asked the Director how they 
determined whether or not a patient should be institutionalized. 
  'Well,' said the Director, 'we fill up a bathtub, then we offer a teaspoon, a 
teacup and a bucket to the patient and ask him or her to empty the bathtub.' 
  'Oh, I understand,' said the visitor. 'A normal person would use the bucket 
because it's bigger than the spoon or the teacup.' 
  'No.' said the Director, 'A normal person would pull the plug.  Do you want a 
bed near the window?'


   
-
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fall of the Roman Empire, much like the USA today, why?

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Napoleon Lupei wrote:
> 
> > I can say drought & water pollution did it. Somewhat like Global  
> > Warming.
> Same thing for this--post #2 I think. He's sending this to over 45  
> groups.  Spam alert.
 
Thing is, Napoleon Lupei has responded to posts, which means he's not
just a spammer. Rick seems to have a certain amount of patience for
canned material as long as the poster makes some effort to engage in
discussion. So, I'm gonna have to let Rick decide whether he stays or
goes.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Replay of Bevan's Wonderful Call Tomorrow Afternoon

[Larry]

Putting aside for a moment the content of Bevan's message, whoever
told Bevan (and Hagelin) to speak in that pasty puffy toad faced
limp-wristed fake tri-tone sissy style?  They come off like they could
benefit from being robbed at gun point - or getting the crap beat out
of them.  I never heard Maharishi speak like that.





 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bevan made such a wonderful call to us in Fairfield Wednesday night! 
> To me it was the best of his that I've ever heard.  I've just learned 
> it's going to be replayed tomorrow, Saturday afternoon in the Dome at 
> 2:15.  I'm checking to see if a current badge is also required.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[Richard J. Williams]

> Caught with his pants down the complainer runs. LOL!
>
Oh yeah!!! Caught with his pants down the complainer 
runs. LOL!

"I don't trust TM because I don't trust MMY. I feel 
that there is some weird stuff going on with him on 
the inner planes that is maybe evil.

Read more:  

Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
From: John Manning
Date: Wed, Nov 14 2001 6:32 pm
Subject: Re: Well John, no reply?
http://tinyurl.com/yvde5b

[FairfieldLife] More on Maharishi's India Memorial

[Rick Archer]

HYPERLINK "http://newspostindia.com/"News Post India


Mahesh Yogi's Body To Reach Allahabad For Cremation 


Friday 08th of February 2008
The body of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who popularised meditation across the
world, will be flown in here from the Netherlands Saturday for his
cremation.

An entourage of over 500 of his disciples is slated to accompany the guru's
body to attend his last rites in this city on the bank of the Ganga Monday.

The Indian guru, who took yoga and transcendental meditation to the world
outside India, died of natural causes Tuesday at his Dutch retreat of
Vlodrop. He was thought to be 91.

'Since Allahabad airport does not have customs facility, the plane would
first land at the international air terminal in Varanasi and then arrive
here at about 9.30 a.m.,' a spokesman of the Maharishi Ved Vidyapeeth here
told IANS.

The Vidyapeeth was set up by the Maharishi as a part of his mission to
promote Vedic teachings. Spread across a huge campus on the outer banks of
the Ganga, the Vidyapeeth has over 2,500 students pursuing a 'gurukul' type
of education. The boarding and lodging on the campus is absolutely free.

The Maharishi had studied at the K.P. Intermediate College here and later
completed his Masters in Physics from the Allahabad University.

Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) chief Ashok Singhal and retired High Court
Justice Shambhu Nath Srivastava have urged President Pratibha Patil to
accord state honours to the Maharishi.

'I have requested the president to accord a state funeral to Maharishi
Mahesh Yogi and I am hopeful that she would concede this request,' Singhal
told reporters.

'Thousands of sadhus from different parts of the country will be converging
in Allahabad to participate in the Maharishi's funeral,' he said.

Justice (retd) Srivatsava said: 'The Maharishi's body would be taken through
the city streets in a procession and kept initially at the ashram of swami
Vasudevanand in Alopi Bagh area on Saturday to enable people to pay their
homage.'

He added: 'The body will be shifted to the Vidyapeeth in the evening and
would be thrown open to public again on Sunday.'

The last rites, which were to be performed at the confluence of the Ganga,
Yamuna and the mythical Saraswati rivers, may now be held at the Vidyapeeth
on account of an ongoing festival at the banks.

 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1265 - Release Date: 2/7/2008
11:17 AM
 

[FairfieldLife] Why Does Allah create the human being?

[Maryam Hassan]

   Why Does Allah create the human being?  
  

  


Does Allah create us in vain?   
The brain is aware of the existence of Allah Almighty by the use of the signs 
in the universe. The human brain recognizes that the Creator of the universe is 
Knowledgeable and Wise. Thus, it is quite impossible that He creates us in vain 
and without a special target. Otherwise, this fact would not be in tandem with 
His wisdom, Glory be to Him.



- {{ "Did you think that We had created you in play (without any 
purpose), and that you would not be brought back to Us?" . So Exalted be Allâh, 
the True King, Lâ ilâha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), 
the Lord of the Supreme Throne!!}}, (Holy Qur'an 23: 115-116). 

Though, we cannot know what does the Creator want from us, How to worship Him 
as He really wants us to do? How to thank Him? This is why He has sent to us 
messengers to tell us about Himself (Allah Almighty) and the reason He has 
created the universe. Why he has created us? What is the life-style He has 
depicted for us to follow? And what He has preserved to us whether it is a 
reward or a punishment?

{{ Messengers as bearers of good news as well as of warning in order that 
mankind should have no plea against Allâh after the Messengers. And Allâh is 
Ever All­Powerful, All­Wise. }}, (Holy Qur'an 4: 165)

The messengers, whom Allah has picked out from the best of His creatures, were 
under the custody and the protection of Allah. They have brought miracles from 
Allah Almighty to give evidence of their truthful message. Allah has sent down 
to them the procedure of life which must be performed by the humankind. As it 
is, he who has obeyed Allah and his messengers will be perfectly rewarded by 
Allah Almighty; and he has disobeyed Allah will be punished for sure.
{{ And whoso obeys Allâh and the Messenger (Muhammad), then they will be in the 
company of those on whom Allâh has bestowed His Grace, of the Prophets, the 
Siddiqûn (those followers of the Prophets who were first and foremost to 
believe in them.), the martyrs, and the righteous. And how excellent these 
companions are!. }},  (Holy Qur'an 4: 69).Furthermore, Allah Almighty has 
confirmed in the Holy Qur'an: {{ And whosoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger 
(Muhammad), and transgresses His limits, He will cast him into the Fire, to 
abide therein; and he shall have a disgraceful torment. }}, (Holy Qur'an 4:14 )

Allah Almighty has explained to us that the creation is certainly for specific 
wisdom:{{ And We created not the heaven and the earth and all that is between 
them without purpose! That is the consideration of those who disbelieve! Then 
woe to those who disbelieve (in Islâmic Monotheism) from the Fire! }}.(Holy 
Qur'an 38:27) 

Allah Almighty has made it clear to us to know the reason behind the creation 
of the humankind:{{ And I (Allâh) created not the jinns and humans except they 
should worship Me (Alone).}} (Holy Qur'an  51: 56 ). 
It goes without saying that worshiping Allah is not only praying, genuflecting, 
and fasting, but it contains also all the deeds and the behavior which Allah 
loves us to do. Taking care of the orphan is considered as worshipping. 
Visiting a sick person is part of worshipping. Taking away anything that might 
hurt the others in the road is a way of worshipping. Greeting the others is 
also worshipping….etc. 

Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah has confirmed: 
Worshipping is a name that is connected to everything Allah Almighty loves and 
agrees on whether it is related to sayings, interior and exterior deeds. 
Prayer, giving alms, fasting, doing the pilgrimage, saying the truth, loyalty, 
filial devotion, good contact with one's relatives, fulfillment of the pact, 
Ordering to work out kindness and avoiding badness, striving against the 
unbelievers and hypocrites, the philanthropy to the neighbors, orphans, 
indigent, vagabond, slaves, animals, invocation of Allah, reading…are all kinds 
of worshipping Allah Almighty. 

The love of Allah and His messenger, the fear of Allah, deputation to His 
Almighty, keeping loyalty to His religion, being patient to his orders, being 
thankful to His beneficence, the contentment towards His fate, the reliance on 
him, Beseeching His mercy and apprehending his excruciation, and the like are 
all kinds of worshipping Allah Almighty. 

http://www.islamtoday.com

   
-
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[FairfieldLife] islam in brief"attributes of God"

[Maryam Hassan]

  Attributes of God ( Allah ) 
 
  

To Allah belong the most beautiful names. The Holy Qur'an says: {{" Say (O 
Muhammad): "Invoke Allâh or invoke the Most Beneficent (Allâh), by whatever 
name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names. And 
offer your Salât (prayer) neither aloud nor in a low voice, but follow a way 
between. }}, ) Holy Qur'an 17:110 (.
Sources of Islam give no less than ninety-nine different attributes to Allah 
Almighty. The Holy Qur'an refers to Allah as Ar-Rahman (Most Gracious), 
Ar-Raheem (Most Merciful) and Hakeem (All Wise) among many other names.

God does not take human form:
Many religions at some point believe, directly or indirectly, in the philosophy 
of anthropomorphism i.e. God is palatable to become a human. Their contention 
is that  God Almighty is so pure and holy to the extent that He is unaware ( It 
is true that Allah is not like us, but this does not mean that He is unaware of 
our situations!!!?- I would rather say: is far away) of the hardships, 
shortcomings and feelings of human beings. In order to set the rules for human 
beings, He came down to earth as a human. Let us now analyze this argument and 
see if it stands to reason. 
Suppose I manufacture a videocassette recorder (VCR). Do I have to become a VCR 
to know what is good or what is bad for the VCR? What do I do? I write a manual 
instruction. "In order to watch a video cassette, you should insert the 
cassette and press on the play button. In order to stop, press on the stop 
button. If you want to fast forward press on the FF button. Do not drop it from 
a height or it will get damaged. Do not immerse it in water or it will get 
ruined". These manual instructions list the various do’s and don’ts for the 
machine. Similarly, our Lord and Creator, Allah does not need to take the human 
form so as to know what is good or bad for the human being. He chooses to 
reveal the manual instructions. The last and final manual instruction that is 
sent down to the human beings is the Glorious Qur'an whose ‘do's’ and ‘don’ts’ 
are mentioned to the human beings through the Holy Verses. If you allow me to 
compare human beings with machines, I would say humans are
 more complicated than the most complex machines in the world. Even the most 
advanced computers, which are extremely complex, are pale in comparison to the 
physical, psychological, genetic, and social factors that affect individuals 
and collective human life. The more advanced the machine is, the greater the 
need for its manual instruction is. By the use of the same criteria, don't the 
human beings require a manual instruction by which it is easy to govern their 
own lives? 
Therefore, Allah does not come down personally to give the manual instruction. 
He chooses a man amongst men to deliver the message and communicates with him 
at a higher level through the medium of revelations. Such chosen men are called 
messengers and prophets of God. 

God does not perform ungodly acts: 
The attributes of Almighty God preclude any evil since God is the source of 
justice, mercy and truth. God can never be thought of as doing an ungodly act. 
Hence, we cannot imagine God telling a lie, being unjust, making a mistake, 
forgetting things, or having any such human failings. Similarly, God can do 
injustice if He chooses to, but He will never do it because being unjust is an 
ungodly act. The Holy Qur'an says: {{ Surely! Allâh wrongs not even of the 
weight of an atom (or a small ant) , but if there is any good (done), He 
doubles it, and gives from Him a great reward..}},( Holy Qur'an 4:40). God can 
be unjust if He chooses to be so, but the moment God does injustice, He ceases 
to be God. 

God does not make mistake:
God can make mistakes if He wants to, but He does not make mistakes, because 
making a mistake is ungodly act. The Holy Qur'an says: {{… My Lord is neither 
unaware nor He forgets, ".}},) Holy Qur'an 20:52). The moment God makes a 
mistake, he ceases to be God. 

God does not forget:
God can forget if He wants to. But God does not forget anything because 
forgetting is an ungodly act, which reeks of human limitations and failings. 
The Holy Qur'an says:
{{… My Lord is neither unaware nor He forgets, ".}},) Holy Qur'an 20:52).
 http://www.islamhouse.com
   
-
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.

Re: [FairfieldLife] the bathtub test

[Ben Gilberti]

Glad you enjoyed it, Sal.   

Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:50 
PM, Ben Gilberti wrote:

During a visit to the mental asylum, a visitor asked the Director how they 
determined whether or not a patient should be institutionalized.
  'Well,' said the Director, 'we fill up a bathtub, then we offer a teaspoon, a 
teacup and a bucket to the patient and ask him or her to empty the bathtub.'
  'Oh, I understand,' said the visitor. 'A normal person would use the bucket 
because it's bigger than the spoon or the teacup.'
  'No.' said the Director, 'A normal person would pull the plug.  Do you want a 
bed near the window?'


  LOL--funny, Ben!

Sal



  

 

   
-
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[Sal Sunshine]

On Feb 8, 2008, at 2:54 PM, authfriend wrote:


Was that before or after he said this, about witches:


Uh, Sal, I wasn't endorsing Luther. Take a breath.


Where did I say you were, Judy?  Non-sequitur.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a spiritual context

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > There are many who say some variant of "good works are not the
> > > > way to heaven."  I think that they are wrong, or at least wrong
> > > > in implying that good works are not a necessary part of the 
> path.
> > > 
> > > Martin Luther said (paraphrased): Good works do not
> > > make a good person, but a good person will do good
> > > works. Which is pretty much Maharishi's perspective.
> > > ("Good person" = enlightened person; "good works" =
> > > spontaneous right action. By [his] definition, you
> > > can't do *spontaneous* right action if you aren't
> > > enlightened.)
> > 
> > Yes, I have heard this before.  I think that both can be true.
> > A good person will do good works.  But a person can learn goodness
> > by doing good works.  Why do we teach our children to share?  To 
> > give?  To say please and thank you?  We are teaching them to do 
> > good and to be good. For people with intact empathy, doing good is 
> > rewarding and encourages you to do more good. In the end, you are
> > a good person.
> > 
> > But for people without any empathy, doing "good" probably is just a
> > means to an end. 
> 
> I don't know that it's quite so simple.
> 
> I remember in junior high school we had to write
> an essay on altruism. I said I didn't think there
> was such a thing; you always got your money's
> worth, as it were, from doing good, in the form of
> feeling better (or less bad) about yourself--there
> was always some reward, as you suggest, some
> element of selfishness involved, no matter how
> profound one's capacity for empathy.
> 
> Obviously that doesn't mean doing good based on
> empathy is a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as
> "spontaneous right action" as long as there's some
> expectation of a quid pro quo, even if it's just
> getting to feel magnanimous.
> 
> Of course, when I wrote the essay I didn't know
> anything about the nature of "enlightenment," but
> I think my reasoning holds up with regard to those
> in "ignorance."
> 
> Luther, in any case, was thinking in terms of
> salvation, not just everyday "goodness." To him,
> a "good person" was one who had achieved
> "righteousness" through faith, and good works were
> an effect, not a cause. He even thought striving
> for righteousness through works was detrimental to
> salvation.
>
Maybe our difference is that I do not know that I believe in
spontaneous right action.   The problem with spontaneous right action
is one another poster pointed out.  You don't know it was right until
you die.   I sometimes shudder when I hear the words because I have
heard people who firmly believe that what they are doing is right and
good because they had a vision, or just came back from a course, or
whatever.  Certitude can be dangerous.  

Vaj, I think, said he trusts his experience.  I take the opposite
view. I have seen in the course of my life many people whose
experiences have led them astray.  Serendipity happens and suddenly it
is a sign and all subsequent experiences are interpreted in that
context.  Feedback is vital. 

I think maybe children do good things in large part because they are
rewarded for it, maybe first directly from positive feedback and then
through feeling good about it.  I think one sign of being an adult is
that you do good whether or not there is a perceptible reward.  Even
if there is a touch of selfishness in altruism, I don't think it is
the primary driver of altruism in adults.  After all, some die for
others.  You could argue even that is selfish as it may preserve your
genes (in the case of family) or preserve the social order.  But, at
least today, I am not inclined to take evolutionary biology that far.  

I strongly disagree with Martin Luther that striving for righteousness
through works is detrimental to salvation.  

A hypothetical:  If Hitler instead of committing suicide began
meditating, could he have reached enlightenment in this life? I say
no. I say that he was incapable of spontaneous right action and
incapable of good. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: What are other groups saying about Maharishi?

[hyperbolicgeometry]

---Used car salesman.  Would that be Werner Erhard of est fame? 



 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> TurquoiseB wrote:
> > I'm on a few "spiritual forums," and on only one of 
> > them has Maharishi's name even come up.
> > 
> Hey, Barry, you forgot to mention your other favorite 
> "spiritual" forum:
> 
> "It is a real blessing that now we can read the full 
> text of the self-serving little used-car salesman's 
> efforts to make a name for himself at the expense of 
> Guru Dev and everything good that Guru Dev once stood 
> for."
> 
> TM-Free Blog:
> http://tmfree.blogspot.com/
>

[FairfieldLife] Rare 16mm Maharishi Film

[Richard J. Williams]

"Age of Enlightenment Productions"
Rare 16mm Maharishi Film
Very good condition.  $1,000.00 US
ebay, Standard Flat Rate Shipping Service
   http://tinyurl.com/34bmdm 

  

[FairfieldLife] Re: "What we have here.... is a failure to communicate."

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijim1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You actually sound like a pretty good guy, so I won't 
> take serious offense at you repeatedly calling me an 
> asshole...

You are incorrect on both counts. I am NOT
a good guy, and I call you an asshole because
you're acting like one. Your assessment of me
is as off as your initial assessment of who
Rick Archer is and what his intention was in
reposting an announcement.

You're clueless. Either shut up and learn 
something, or go away.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Yoga Vasishta

[Richard J. Williams]

Ken Hassman wrote:
> I notice there is a new version of Yoga Vasishta, also 
> by Swami Venkatesananda, called Vasishta's Yoga. 
>
Maharishi with Swami Ventkatesananda:
http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/images/