[FairfieldLife] Dr. G. M.'s Idenity

[skypilot1958]

 The 'Dr. G.M.' they refer to is apparently Dr. Mahapatra at whose TM 
Center in Orissa I taught a TTC back in 1981.  I deduced his identity 
from the description they give below and from the webpage linked below 
where he is listed with his full name "Dr Gyanendra Mahapatra" as a 
member of the Advisory Board to Farrokh's Enlightened Sentencing 
Project.  It makes one wonder if we'll ever know the real truth, but I 
think this should be considered as balancing out Deepak's account:

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Another way of looking at it, George, is that
> Chopra *disagrees* with Maharishi's teaching.
> 
> That does not imply that he never understood it.
>

I recall a lecture that Chopra gave where he turned apologetically to John 
Hagelin while 
referring to his flawed explanations of Quantum Mechanics in his books.


It is possible that Chopra understood Maharishi and disagreed, but it would 
have been  out 
of character for him to not point out where the disagreements were when he 
spoke. In my 
opinion, he didn't "get" certain of MMY's teachings and didn't "get" that he 
didn't "get" 
them.


Of course, It is doubful  if I "get" them either, in many/most/all cases, so 
there you go.


Lawson

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Couple points:
> > That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular 
> mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there.  Shankara 
> made the term clear  long before MMY
> 
> MMY attributed his teaching on this to Shankara,
> Angela. He didn't pretend it was his own idea.
> 
> The "illusion" of maya isn't that the relative
> exists, but that the relative isn't Brahman.
> 
> MMY, as I recall, said "maya" meant "that which
> is not"--meaning the relative as not-Brahman, i.e.,
> maya is that which is not not-Brahman.
>

Maya is the perception that everything is ever-changing. Maya is the perception 
that 
nothing changes. The TRUE Reality is perception of the essential non-dualness 
of Duality.

Lawson

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mainstream20016" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> So, someone in the movement acknowledges that MMY in the 1990s had a
> serious illness that required an allopathic medicine intervention ?
> Its about time.  So many movement people died for bias against
> allopathic medical care. So many names that come to mind- you can fill
> in the blanks.  I think those deaths had a huge negative impact on the
> movement, which was busy was raking in mega bucks from products they
> sold as replacing modern healthcare. 
> So sad that people arrogantly denied the benefits of allopathic
> medicine, and died as a result. 
> 
> 

I wouldn't doubt for  a second that this is the case, but y'know, MMY always 
told people to 
stick to the religion they learned at their mother's knee and not try to become 
Hindu, and 
he resisted the call to Hinduize the TMO for a very long time after he made the 
initial 
decision to make it a non-denominational spiritual organization, and look how 
many 
American and European "Hindu" TM teachers there are. People want a "perfect" 
system, 
even while nodding sagely at teaching stories from said "perfect" system that 
spell out 
clearly that it isn't perfect and that all the advice of the ancient sages and 
gods of 
Ayurveda should be taken with a grain of salt.


Lawson

[FairfieldLife] Re: Antrim NH M-school to open with 50-75 students

[bob_brigante]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 50-75 students is a pretty wide range. If that many students are 
indefinite,
> I doubt that even 50 are definite.
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date: 
2/14/2008
> 6:35 PM
>

**

That number is probably based on the current capacity of the school 
without any new construction, and does not necessarily reflect 
confirmed enrollments for this fall. There were a number of 
acceptable-vastu bldgs left over from the college that used to be 
there, and evidently there is enough room for 50-75 students without 
sinking many millions into construction. I don't think it's a stretch 
to see the school having a couple hundred within a couple years, but 
it hardly matters -- it would be more efficient to interest existing 
private schools into incorporating TM into their curriculum, and that 
is in fact happening at a number of schools around the world.

 India is the big numbers place for M-schools, with 80K enrolled in 
143 schools:

http://www.maharishividyamandir.com/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Larry]

(Hopefully) One last blovial blast of hot air - - -  When observers
are gathered in His Name - aka gathered in TC, then they all have the
same initial distinction of Self - and therefore identical
distinctions of non self - then there is nothing but Truth, but they
won't agree on it by force of habit


As you may have heard, we (Madison WI) are expected to get 6-8 more
inches of snow on Sunday - - that will put us over 2x the average for
the whole season.  A few years back I picked up a used snowblower, my
plan is for it to have the heart attack before me.

L




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Matthew 18:18-20 (King James Version)
> King James Version (KJV)
> 
> 20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I
> in the midst of them.
> 
> Larry,
> 
> "What we have here is a failure to communicate."
> 
> Any egoic projection fits your views, below, but pure truth seemingly
> IS available whenever two or three are specifically gathered for the
> purpose of discovering it.  Not that they will find it, mind you, the
> promise is that it is there -- presumably those with deep intent can
> REALIZE it
> 
> H, let's see now, how many are gathered here today?
> 
> Edg
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Larry"  wrote:
> >
> > Thinking back now, I should have included a smily face, then it
> > wouldn't have come off as such a wild ass axiom - but too late now.
> > 
> > What I should have said was:  If you have two or more observers, you
> > can not have Truth.  
> > 
> > As each observer distinguishs self - what lies outside of that first
> > distinction is everything else, which includes the other observers. 
> > So, for each observer, what lies 'outside' that first distinction is
> > different because it includes the other observers.
> > 
> > Let's ask a basic question . . . is the car red?
> > 
> > Well, what makes the car red is exactly the same as what makes it not
> > red.  For example, we can pick out a candle because of its bundle of
> > properties, including the space it occupies.  We can make the
> > distinction of 'the candle' because there is a 'not candle' to
> > dintinguish it from.  The dintinction between the candle and 'not
> > candle' is the same distinction - it's the same boundary.
> > 
> > Sort of like my grandfather who used to bug me with questions like: 
> > Does the mortar keep the bricks apart, or does keep them together?
> > 
> > So getting back to the car . . two or more observers can not equally
> > dintguish the car, because the 'not car' distinction includes the
> > other observers . . so therefore, the distinction of the car will also
> > be different between observers.
> > 
> >  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Really?  How do you figure?
> > > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: UK Daily Mail Article on MMY/David Jones

[geezerfreak]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Thanks for posting that Geezer.  I am kind of fascinated about
> Maharishi's last 10 years in the bubble.  I wonder if he went a little
> Howard Hughes in his last decade?  Did he have tissue rituals and use
> tissue boxes for slippers? Inquiring minds want to know!
> 
> Was his health really so fragile in his early 80s that he couldn't
> meet with people personally?   My dad is about his age and he doesn't
> need to be isolated from everyone.  I wonder what that was really all
> about.  It sure is a long way from any concept of decent health that I
> can relate to, let alone perfect health. 
> 

He saved his urine in bottles. Does that mean anything?

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[Stu]

> 
> Interestingly enough, Stu, having been
> around the spiritual teacher block a few
> times in the 30 years since I last saw
> Maharishi, I would describe *him* the
> same way you describe Chopra. He had a
> few introductory concepts down and he 
> spent 50 years winging it and finding
> different ways of saying them. Compared
> to Tibetan teachers I've seen and the
> depth, clarity and precision of their 
> teaching, Maharishi doesn't even come 
> close.
> 
> Not a slam...it's how I really see him.
>
I am thinking of a one hit wonder who has a few really fantastic licks
and makes big.  Evan after 30 years they sound more or less the same.
Contrast this with someone like Dylan who is always coming up with
fresh approaches.

Deepak really knows how to draw in a crowd.  I remember after the last
time I saw him, I wrote some of his comments down because they didn't
seem correct.  After looking them up it I found he really was
covering.  Making up something that sounded good.

MMY did morph. The message shifted with time, and although it became
quite bizarre it was not a pure replay of the same song.  He was quite
brilliant at coming up with western jargon for eastern concepts. 
Cosmic Consciousness, Field of Being, and so on.  He was keen on
evolving TM into a deeper more encompassing experience.  To some
people he did achieve that.  In SBAL he touched on a way of living
life in harmony with spirit using TM to influence all aspects of
living.  Eventually his message was an evolution of that principal
with all the potions, herbs, building designs, politics, and education
projects.

We can agree or disagree that any of this was successful but I don't
think it comes off like he was stuck.

No doubt there are great spiritual teachers out there who take time to
focus on individuals and help each one along, customizing their
message for each poor slob who comes before them.  MMY was not that
sort of teacher.  He had his basic themes, he worked towards a sort of
assembly line process of moving those themes.  I am not sure, in the
context of the multitudes he taught he could made his message more
sophisticated.  This was non-dualism for the masses.

s.

[FairfieldLife] Re: UK Daily Mail Article on MMY/David Jones

[curtisdeltablues]

Thanks for posting that Geezer.  I am kind of fascinated about
Maharishi's last 10 years in the bubble.  I wonder if he went a little
Howard Hughes in his last decade?  Did he have tissue rituals and use
tissue boxes for slippers? Inquiring minds want to know!

Was his health really so fragile in his early 80s that he couldn't
meet with people personally?   My dad is about his age and he doesn't
need to be isolated from everyone.  I wonder what that was really all
about.  It sure is a long way from any concept of decent health that I
can relate to, let alone perfect health. 

 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> 
> 06/02/08 -
> 
> Lennon was right. The Giggling Guru was a shameless old fraud 
> By DAVID JONES
> 
> To his millions of dream-eyed devotees, he was the ultimate
spiritual leader; a masterful 
> guru whose meditation techniques could induce a state of euphoric
bliss, and even teach 
> them to defy gravity by "yogic flying".
> 
> To a sneering John Lennon, he was a money-grubbing, sex-obsessed
fraud who cynically 
> abused his influence over The Beatles and many other awed
celebrities who worshipped, 
> cross-legged, at his painted feet during the Flower Power era.
> 
> Scroll down for more...
> 
> So which one was the real Maharishi Mahesh Yogi? Was he the
enlightened saviour he 
> always proclaimed himself to be?
> 
> Or the woollybearded, flower-bedecked fraud portrayed in Lennon's
acid lyrics?
> 
> It's a debate that has lingered like the smell of burning incense
for 40 years, ever since the 
> Fab Four perplexed their fans by swopping flairs and kipper ties for
flowing robes and 
> love-beads.
> 
> And now that the Indian mystic's mortality has been proved with news
of his death, at the 
> approximate age of 91 (no one can be sure, for he dismissed
birthdays as "an 
> irrelevance"), it will doubtless resurface.
> 
> However, as the last writer to have been granted an audience with
the enigmatic Maharishi 
> - and, indeed, the only journalist to have been invited inside the
strange "alternative 
> nation" where he lived his final years in reclusion - I know who I
tend to believe.
> 
> My day with the man who probably did more than anyone else to make
traditional Eastern 
> beliefs fashionable in the West came in March 2006, when I visited
the so- called Global 
> Country of World Peace, in Vlodrop, southeastern Holland.
> 
> It must rank as the most bizarre day of my 30-year career.
> 
> Before I take you behind the high walls of this closely-guarded
community, however, it's 
> worth remembering how an obscure Indian civil servant's son rose to
control a vast 
> spiritual fiefdom, with its own ministers and laws, and even its own
currency, the Raam.
> 
> An empire, moreover, which became hugely lucrative thanks to the one
quality the 
> Maharishi never liked to publicise - his remarkable business acumen
- aligned to an 
> utterly shameless willingness to put aside his principles and
embrace the detested 
> "material world" when it suited his own ends.
> 
> He spent his early years in Jabalpur, where he was born, probably in
1917 or 1918.
> 
> Back then his name was plain Mahesh Prasad Varma, and, though his
family were devout 
> Hindus, there was nothing to suggest that he might become a
world-renowned leader.
> 
> A bright boy, he gained a maths and physics degree - a qualification
he would use with 
> great ingenuity later in life, when he impressed (and invariably
baffled) his followers by 
> "explaining" the ability of meditation to change people's
consciousness in complex 
> scientific terminology.
> 
> By all accounts, his life changed course radically in his late 20s,
when he met his great 
> mentor - a "swami" or Indian religious teacher, called Guru Dev.
> 
> He joined the ageing holy man on a lengthy retreat in the Himalayas,
where he was 
> introduced to a new form of meditation.
> 
> When he emerged, he called himself "Maharishi".
> 
> Unlike Guru Dev, who was content to wander, barefooted and in ragged
clothes, from 
> village to village and subsist on the simple charity of those he
taught, his pupil developed 
> more grandiose ideas.
> 
> Whether because he thought it his duty to spread his newfound
enlightenment to as many 
> people as possible, as he later claimed, or because he had an eye to
the main chance, in 
> 1958 he left India on his first "global tour".
> 
> For obvious reasons, though, he based himself in Los Angeles.
> 
> In those days, California was a Mecca for the Beat Generation, and
among these 
> forerunners of the hippies, a plausible, exotic young guru preaching
love and peace - and 
> offering a way of achieving a "natural high" without the need for
drugs - quickly became a 
> cult hero.
> 
> Soon his popularity spread among stressed business executives
seeking an alternative to 
> psychiatry, whose methods he scorned.
> 
> "You must learn to take life less seriously and to laugh," he told
them, chuckling as 

[FairfieldLife] Re Chopra's Writings

[Timothy]

Some recent posts have referred (sometimes disparagingly) to Chopra's 
books. I was surprised that nobody mentioned that Dr. Chopra's books 
were ghost-written. The author was a Pususha guy (sorry, don't remember 
his name) who got lots of $$$. After Dr Chopra became persona non grata 
with the TMO, the Purusha writer didn't feel comfortable producing 
spiritual/medical/self-help books. Since he (the ghost-writer) had to 
fulfill his contract with the publisher (for 2 or 3 more books), Dr 
Chopra suddenly "became" a fiction author!

[FairfieldLife] Re: youtube -- photo tribute to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

[geezerfreak]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> >
> > Off,
> > 
> > Don't quit -- your meds seem to be working today!
> > 
> > Edg >
> 
> That is so original old man.
> Get a life you useless crud, and stop spewing teenage jibes on the 
> internet that not even teenagers use anymore, but only old men like 
> you Turq and Curt.
> 
> I feel sorry for all you old watery semen old men that populate FFL.
> 
> Outta here.
> 
> And..oh yea...Curt...Shotokan DominatesJui Jitsu is just a way 
> win a a dumbass UFC bullshit contest without killing someone...which 
> a Shotakan master would do in a second if it were legal or 
> ethical...but it is not ethical , but you are way too dumb to 
> understand that.
> 
> OffWorld

"Useless crud"? Off, let no one tell you your creative juices aren't still 
flowing, old watery 
semen or not!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[geezerfreak]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu"  wrote:
> >
> > > 
> Stu, you've got an evil sense of humor on 
> you. If you were to join Curtis and Geez
> in Fairfield for their party-down I might 
> have to show up just to be able to share 
> a few beers with the bunch of you.
>
OK, Stu, now you have to come! Where do you live brother? I can't imagine this 
great  hang 
(careful Nabby) w/o Barry being there.

[FairfieldLife] Re: For a few laughs

[Stu]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu"  wrote:
> >
> > Here is a video I did for Vanityfair.com.  They put it up today.
> > 
> > In Memoriam
> > 
>  \
> > 00803>
> >
> 
> 
> I particularly liked the "Pretense of Objectivity" one.
>
Thanks.  That was one of mine.  Its subtle.  I am surprised you liked
it - I thought your abhorred Moore.

s.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[mainstream20016]

 I surmise that MMY's eccentric directions to his troops to perform actions 
without rational 
concern for the outcome of their actions didn't dominate his persona until the 
TM 
movement began its retreat from integration with the world, and became 
progressively 
insular. From 1957 to 1977, the focus was solely on promoting the basic TM 
technique as 
a means for every human nervous system on the planet to directly experience 
silence, and 
thereby improve the lives of every person. I think that when progress slowed on 
that front, 
and the movement became insular, MMY became cynical and played with the people 
around him by giving them useless activities  to do. 
Of course, MMY would have liked the basic TM technique and TM centers to have 
become 
as ubiquitous as Starbucks has become in the U.S., but when Benson declared the 
Relaxation response technique was effective as TM, the brilliance of TM was 
challenged.  
The public began to doubt the need to learn an authentic meditation technique. 
Why 
bother with TM, they reasoned, when they could get the same benefits from the 
RR 
technique, at a fraction of the cost, and without compromising any personal 
religious 
values that the puja and mantras might offend.
As the Merv wave subsided, cash flow problems appeared. MMY panicked, and 
rather 
than confront Benson with extensive research to counter Benson's claims, MMY 
began the 
course of exhausting the goodwill of already-satisfied TMers by selling the 
TM-Siddhi 
program at more than 100 X the price that many had paid to learn TM.   
Short-term cash 
flow problem solved, but the future of the TMO's revenues was irrevocably 
altered by that 
move.  From then on, the movement depended on their existing clientele to 
survive.
 Many were wise to the cynicism, and left. Those that remained rationalized 
that they were 
evolving by obeying ridiculous, arbitrary, whims.  Give me a break.  If the 
movement had 
continued to integrate the TM program with the larger world, such foolishness 
would have 
been  considered a waste of time and resources.
 I wasn't there, but it would be interesting to hear from those who worked 
closely with 
MMY during the movement's expansion phase on the topic.
-Mainstream  



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > > Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others)
> > > and M's constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and
> > > puts it all in context. Seen in this light, his binges were
> > > a most wonderful and creative dance over 40 years. And a 
> > > wonderful path for some who could keep up and withstand the
> > > craziness -- and enjoy inner fruit of the whole crazy exercise.
> > 
> > Doesn't this whole belief, which was so common among fulltimers,
> > really fly in the face of his whole teaching?  It is a relative
> > breaking of the connection with the fruits of action only and has
> > nothing to do with your state of consciousness being established
> > in being.  It sounds like the kind of traditional notion that 
> > Maharishi would devote a whole lecture dispelling.
> 
> Yes, in a sense it's moodmaking, but under the
> guidance of the guru, and in the context of
> vigorous activity rather than self-indulgent
> introspection.
> 
> Also in the context of surrender-to-the-guru,
> which operated only in MMY's direct sphere of
> influence among his most dedicated followers.
> 
> Their meditation program was working on them
> from the inside, and he was working on them
> from the outside, to the same end--dissolving
> attachment.
> 
> The guy at Asbury Park said it was like another
> technique, but an external one.
> 
> It's not something MMY would have recomended to
> rank-and-filers, because it wouldn't work in
> that context.
> 
> He didn't completely eschew certain kinds of
> moodmaking anyway. "What you put your attention
> on grows," for example; or keeping his behavioral
> rasayanas "lively in the mind"; or "Don't do what
> you think might be wrong." All those were in the
> relative, intentional manipulations of one's
> thinking.
> 
> But *none* of the above would do much for you if
> you weren't transcending regularly. They were
> designed to be applied in the context of, and to
> take advantage of, expanding consciousness.
> 
> My take, anyway.
>

[FairfieldLife] UK Daily Mail Article on MMY/David Jones

[geezerfreak]

06/02/08 -

Lennon was right. The Giggling Guru was a shameless old fraud 
By DAVID JONES

To his millions of dream-eyed devotees, he was the ultimate spiritual leader; a 
masterful 
guru whose meditation techniques could induce a state of euphoric bliss, and 
even teach 
them to defy gravity by "yogic flying".

To a sneering John Lennon, he was a money-grubbing, sex-obsessed fraud who 
cynically 
abused his influence over The Beatles and many other awed celebrities who 
worshipped, 
cross-legged, at his painted feet during the Flower Power era.

Scroll down for more...

So which one was the real Maharishi Mahesh Yogi? Was he the enlightened saviour 
he 
always proclaimed himself to be?

Or the woollybearded, flower-bedecked fraud portrayed in Lennon's acid lyrics?

It's a debate that has lingered like the smell of burning incense for 40 years, 
ever since the 
Fab Four perplexed their fans by swopping flairs and kipper ties for flowing 
robes and 
love-beads.

And now that the Indian mystic's mortality has been proved with news of his 
death, at the 
approximate age of 91 (no one can be sure, for he dismissed birthdays as "an 
irrelevance"), it will doubtless resurface.

However, as the last writer to have been granted an audience with the enigmatic 
Maharishi 
- and, indeed, the only journalist to have been invited inside the strange 
"alternative 
nation" where he lived his final years in reclusion - I know who I tend to 
believe.

My day with the man who probably did more than anyone else to make traditional 
Eastern 
beliefs fashionable in the West came in March 2006, when I visited the so- 
called Global 
Country of World Peace, in Vlodrop, southeastern Holland.

It must rank as the most bizarre day of my 30-year career.

Before I take you behind the high walls of this closely-guarded community, 
however, it's 
worth remembering how an obscure Indian civil servant's son rose to control a 
vast 
spiritual fiefdom, with its own ministers and laws, and even its own currency, 
the Raam.

An empire, moreover, which became hugely lucrative thanks to the one quality 
the 
Maharishi never liked to publicise - his remarkable business acumen - aligned 
to an 
utterly shameless willingness to put aside his principles and embrace the 
detested 
"material world" when it suited his own ends.

He spent his early years in Jabalpur, where he was born, probably in 1917 or 
1918.

Back then his name was plain Mahesh Prasad Varma, and, though his family were 
devout 
Hindus, there was nothing to suggest that he might become a world-renowned 
leader.

A bright boy, he gained a maths and physics degree - a qualification he would 
use with 
great ingenuity later in life, when he impressed (and invariably baffled) his 
followers by 
"explaining" the ability of meditation to change people's consciousness in 
complex 
scientific terminology.

By all accounts, his life changed course radically in his late 20s, when he met 
his great 
mentor - a "swami" or Indian religious teacher, called Guru Dev.

He joined the ageing holy man on a lengthy retreat in the Himalayas, where he 
was 
introduced to a new form of meditation.

When he emerged, he called himself "Maharishi".

Unlike Guru Dev, who was content to wander, barefooted and in ragged clothes, 
from 
village to village and subsist on the simple charity of those he taught, his 
pupil developed 
more grandiose ideas.

Whether because he thought it his duty to spread his newfound enlightenment to 
as many 
people as possible, as he later claimed, or because he had an eye to the main 
chance, in 
1958 he left India on his first "global tour".

For obvious reasons, though, he based himself in Los Angeles.

In those days, California was a Mecca for the Beat Generation, and among these 
forerunners of the hippies, a plausible, exotic young guru preaching love and 
peace - and 
offering a way of achieving a "natural high" without the need for drugs - 
quickly became a 
cult hero.

Soon his popularity spread among stressed business executives seeking an 
alternative to 
psychiatry, whose methods he scorned.

"You must learn to take life less seriously and to laugh," he told them, 
chuckling as if he 
were privy to some sublime cosmic joke.

"The highest state is laughter."

Along with the adulation came money, of course.

At first, the Maharishi asked for nothing and, like his mentor Guru Dev, he 
lived off 
donations, albeit more substantial amounts than he would have received in India.

As his renown grew, however, he began to charge "tuition fees", realising his 
affluent 
audience could easily afford to pay for his words of wisdom.

With a wink and a giggle, followers were also encouraged to contribute towards 
his 
"expenses": printing costs, transport rental, the hiring of halls and so on.

In 1961, one rich woman blithely wrote him a cheque for $100,000: her 
contribution to a 
new ashram he wished to build in India.

Another wealthy couple, accountant Roland Olson and his pu

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[gandalfaragorn]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Couple points:
> That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular
>mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there.  Shankara
>made the term clear  long before MMY by explaining that "illusion" in
>this context means "not real" in the sense that it is changing, not in
>the sense that it isn't really there.  He uses the example of the son
>of a barren widow, as I recall.  That boy has no existence.  Spencer
>Brown makes much the same point also when he says that "existence" is
>not the source of reality, as  20th century science tends to see it. 
 >This tendency to see existence as the source of reality  is at the
>heart of  the failure of 20th century science to really deal with the
>notion of causality at any depth, and it has other consequences on
>clear thinking.

Interesting thread. However, science is here to stay. Sometime this
year the new Large Hadron Collider (LHC), located
under the French-Swiss border, will be ready for a new round of
subatomic particle investigations at unprecedented energy scales (in
proton collisions). This is going to be big news, and will likely
garner Nobel prizes in coming years. This, and a contemplated
follow-on larger machine (International Linear Accelerator (ILC))
(electron-positron collisions) will be Maya on a grand scale
studying Maya at an almost unimaginable microscopic scale. 

This is going to make for an interesting few years in Physics, coming
at a time when the TM organization will be trying to define itself in
the aftermath of Maharishi's passing. For better or for worse, this is
the way life, and science is at this time, and it is up to the TMO to
find a niche, or otherwise reinvent itself, to keep current and in the
Public's eye. 

I have often felt that identifying a host of new particles does not
ease one's aches and pains, but rather results in a lot of tired
scientists and computer programmers. There is a small hope that it may
indicate to a few the futility of this being the only respected
mainstream approach to studying reality (expense of it, when does it
all end?, what does it mean to me when I lay dying?, and so on).
Perhaps the TMO can use this as an angle, along with good research, to
reach people. 

We should not forget that Maharishi spoke of 200% value of life. I,
for one, will be interested in the progress of the big machines
plumbing the depths of Maya, in parallel with my own subjective
explorations of inner reality.

GA
Lurker (hope you don't mind me butting in)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[curtisdeltablues]

> Don't forget Jennifer's comment, that Maharishi often derided the
Westerners
> as "gullible fools" for believing all the things he told them.
> 

That comment lends itself to the narcissistic personality disorder
theory of Maharishi.  It would be a characteristic of this type of
person to have contempt for his followers and enjoy toying with them
to see how far he could push them.  I think it shows up in some rock
stars and movie star types who live lives surrounded by sycophants.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
> 
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of curtisdeltablues
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:00 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link
> Between Fruit and Action
> 
>  
> 
> He allowed this belief to exist as a kind of implied teaching because
> it served his purposes. It kept people off center and running around
> all the time. He could play games making stuff up and watch everyone
> knock themselves out fulfilling his "desires." I don't think this was
> the most charming part of his personality. Some people gave up a lot
> to chase some of his bogus projects, ask Doug Henning. Oh yeah, we
can't.
> 
> Don't forget Jennifer's comment, that Maharishi often derided the
Westerners
> as "gullible fools" for believing all the things he told them.
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.6/1282 - Release Date:
2/15/2008
> 7:08 PM
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:32 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The
Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

 

--- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com"FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick
Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

My guess is that Deepak was telling the truth, with some embellishment 
and fuzziness do to lapse of time, and GM (Girish Momaya?) is trying to
whitewash it for posterity.

Thanks for revealing the source, who evidently was not stand up enough 
to speak on his own behalf. 

I don’t know for sure. That name matches the initials and I remember him as
being a hot shot in Noida, and possibly a doctor.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.6/1282 - Release Date: 2/15/2008
7:08 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Off Off

[Rick Archer]

Off World Beings unsubscribed. He’ll be back.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.6/1282 - Release Date: 2/15/2008
7:08 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[curtisdeltablues]

> My take, anyway.
>

And I think your take is accurate for what I lived particularly in
India for a few months but also in Sidhaland where we would get
directions to follow. So we certainly believed it as you presented
it.The trick was to fully engage with each project fully, even knowing
that the next day it would mean nothing.  That was not always easy. 
I'll be it was even tougher for the guys whose money he was burning up
on projects that never received follow through attention.  As an guy
in my 20's it wasn't too much of a stretch. 

But in retrospect is seems kind of odd to me.  And it certainly got
him off the hook for following through with things that might have
bored him, conveniently.  Looking at Maharishi as an enlightened guy
who knew what he was doing lends itself to your interpretation.  In my
view of him as a guy who was completely winging it, and who created a
situation where every whim was catered to, it comes out differently. 
I find my own comfort in thinking about him as a guy who, like a
lot of hight achievers, had a bit of ADD. 

Now I think that pursuing dreams with consistency shows the kind of
personal character I can relate to. Maharishi had a bit of both
working IMO. I guess he got the movement he wanted.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > > Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others)
> > > and M's constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and
> > > puts it all in context. Seen in this light, his binges were
> > > a most wonderful and creative dance over 40 years. And a 
> > > wonderful path for some who could keep up and withstand the
> > > craziness -- and enjoy inner fruit of the whole crazy exercise.
> > 
> > Doesn't this whole belief, which was so common among fulltimers,
> > really fly in the face of his whole teaching?  It is a relative
> > breaking of the connection with the fruits of action only and has
> > nothing to do with your state of consciousness being established
> > in being.  It sounds like the kind of traditional notion that 
> > Maharishi would devote a whole lecture dispelling.
> 
> Yes, in a sense it's moodmaking, but under the
> guidance of the guru, and in the context of
> vigorous activity rather than self-indulgent
> introspection.
> 
> Also in the context of surrender-to-the-guru,
> which operated only in MMY's direct sphere of
> influence among his most dedicated followers.
> 
> Their meditation program was working on them
> from the inside, and he was working on them
> from the outside, to the same end--dissolving
> attachment.
> 
> The guy at Asbury Park said it was like another
> technique, but an external one.
> 
> It's not something MMY would have recomended to
> rank-and-filers, because it wouldn't work in
> that context.
> 
> He didn't completely eschew certain kinds of
> moodmaking anyway. "What you put your attention
> on grows," for example; or keeping his behavioral
> rasayanas "lively in the mind"; or "Don't do what
> you think might be wrong." All those were in the
> relative, intentional manipulations of one's
> thinking.
> 
> But *none* of the above would do much for you if
> you weren't transcending regularly. They were
> designed to be applied in the context of, and to
> take advantage of, expanding consciousness.
> 
> My take, anyway.
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of curtisdeltablues
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:00 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link
Between Fruit and Action

 

He allowed this belief to exist as a kind of implied teaching because
it served his purposes. It kept people off center and running around
all the time. He could play games making stuff up and watch everyone
knock themselves out fulfilling his "desires." I don't think this was
the most charming part of his personality. Some people gave up a lot
to chase some of his bogus projects, ask Doug Henning. Oh yeah, we can't.

Don’t forget Jennifer’s comment, that Maharishi often derided the Westerners
as “gullible fools” for believing all the things he told them.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.6/1282 - Release Date: 2/15/2008
7:08 PM
 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of ultrarishi
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:38 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The
Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

 

And who is Dr. G.M.? Does he work with Drs. Subaru, Toyota and Ford,
or just B.M.W.?

The name Girish Momaya comes to mind.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.6/1282 - Release Date: 2/15/2008
7:08 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others)
> > and M's constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and
> > puts it all in context. Seen in this light, his binges were
> > a most wonderful and creative dance over 40 years. And a 
> > wonderful path for some who could keep up and withstand the
> > craziness -- and enjoy inner fruit of the whole crazy exercise.
> 
> Doesn't this whole belief, which was so common among fulltimers,
> really fly in the face of his whole teaching?  It is a relative
> breaking of the connection with the fruits of action only and has
> nothing to do with your state of consciousness being established
> in being.  It sounds like the kind of traditional notion that 
> Maharishi would devote a whole lecture dispelling.

Yes, in a sense it's moodmaking, but under the
guidance of the guru, and in the context of
vigorous activity rather than self-indulgent
introspection.

Also in the context of surrender-to-the-guru,
which operated only in MMY's direct sphere of
influence among his most dedicated followers.

Their meditation program was working on them
from the inside, and he was working on them
from the outside, to the same end--dissolving
attachment.

The guy at Asbury Park said it was like another
technique, but an external one.

It's not something MMY would have recomended to
rank-and-filers, because it wouldn't work in
that context.

He didn't completely eschew certain kinds of
moodmaking anyway. "What you put your attention
on grows," for example; or keeping his behavioral
rasayanas "lively in the mind"; or "Don't do what
you think might be wrong." All those were in the
relative, intentional manipulations of one's
thinking.

But *none* of the above would do much for you if
you weren't transcending regularly. They were
designed to be applied in the context of, and to
take advantage of, expanding consciousness.

My take, anyway.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[ultrarishi]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian  Governor 
> responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000 
>  pundits in India.  He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi instructor and 
>  teacher of Advanced Techniques.
> 
> Farrokh & Ruffina
> 
> 
> Dear Friends:
> 
> I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji's personal physician at 
> the time that Dr Deepak  Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in England, 
>

Well, this is the first "official" mention that MMY was sick and in
England at all by the movement,AFAICR.  What kept them from
acknowledging it so long.

Maybe Chopra is embellishing and romanticizing his role in this
affair, but I find it very disengenuous of the movement to suddently
speak out NOW.  Give me a break.

And who is Dr. G.M.?  Does he work with Drs. Subaru, Toyota and Ford,
or just B.M.W.?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blaine Watson: 1994

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In 1982 Maharishi asked us to make ourselves expert in Jyotish, 
the  
> Vedanga of astrology.  A few of us took the instruction to heart. 
For  
> me, this was the beginning of decades of complications in my  
> reputation and relationship with the administration of his 
movement.   
> It seems the administration had the instruction that no one  was 
to  
> be doing astrology, at least not us westerners and yet Maharishi 
had  
> told us to make ourselves expert in it and the only way to make 
one's  
> self expert was to do it.
> 
> In 1986 we were in Delhi for the yogi flying demonstrations there 
and  
> for weeks afterwards were meeting in Maharishi's garden in the  
> evenings with Maharishi and every other night, the Shankarachary 
who  
> had a most interesting affect on us in that the moment he started  
> speaking we would all fall asleep. Very strange.
> 
> One evening RD, from Canada, got on the mike and asked Maharishi 
what  
> the difference between free will and predestination was. Maharishi  
> said "They are the same thing."  This began an evening long  
> discussion on astrology.  At one point Maharishi asked if anyone  
> could see enlightenment in the chart.  All the friends around me  
> began to push me up to the front because that is what I had been  
> studying in recent weeks but I had nothing to offer by way of  
> explanation, only questions. I got on the mike and told Maharishi 
a  
> bunch of nonsense (a fairly typical experience for me) like you 
look  
> here and here and there and there and perhaps it's could to look 
here  
> too in the chart.  After finally running out of things to say i  
> stopped and Maharishi looked at me across the 3-4' that separated 
us  
> and said 'Perhaps more study is needed.'  This was not a surprise 
but  
> I was really hoping he would give us some clues as to what to be  
> looking for.
> 
> In 1994 we were in Holland after completing the Maharishi Jyotish  
> Teacher Training Course in Spain. Maharishi had called our course 
to  
> Vlodrop and wanted to meet with us. He kept us there for most of 
that  
> year working on various make work projects, curriculum for various  
> levels of education, a prashna course etc. Prashna is where you 
make  
> the horoscope for the moment a question is asked. Maharishi wanted 
us  
> to develop a course that could train people to answer the question  
> without a huge amount of learning time.  He was always looking for  
> the direct route to the heart of everything.
> 
> We were with him one afternoon and discussing with him a 
particular  
> prashna. He wanted to know what you would look at in the chart to 
see  
> if success could be predicted.  I, again, got on the mike and 
again  
> began to speak out a bunch of nonsense (this was a downright habit 
by  
> this time).  After some minutes of this I ran out of steam and  
> stopped. Now I had been wondering if he had remember his 
instruction  
> to me to study some more and this is what he said looking at me  
> across the room 'Seems the study has paid off.'
> 
> What we don't know to this day was whether he was being sarcastic 
or  
> not because my answer on the mike was total nonsense. He did give 
a  
> clue though as to how to answer the question of success so 
something  
> really good did come of it.
> 
> Some months later I was growing tired of being there in Vlodrop 
just  
> hanging out. The environment around Maharishi is always a little  
> intense and in many ways unnatural in that there are many people 
who  
> are very politically motivated wanting always to know who is 
seeing  
> Maharishi, and when and why and how often.  I had decided that I 
was  
> going to leave and go home and at lunch, told the people in my 
group  
> that i was planning on leaving.  Well one of them must have 
snitched  
> because later that afternoon while working on yet another project,  
> the phone rang.  Someone answered the phone, said ok, ok and then  
> hung up.  It had been Maharishi saying very simply 'No one should  
> leave. Everyone should stay.'  Busted
> 
> So ok.  I had to stay but after another month or 2 I had had 
enough.  
> This time i was smarter and didn't tell a soul. I went up to my 
room  
> when everyone was meditating, packed my bags and quietly came  
> downstairs to call a taxi from the pay phone in the hallway. As I 
was  
> on the phone, Girish Brahamchari came by looking like he was 
looking  
> for someone. He walked by the payphone once then came back and 
looked  
> inside more closely. He saw me there and motioned for me to open 
the  
> door which I did. He handed in to me a note saying Maharishi 
wanted  
> me to give this to you. The note said 'If you want to leave, you 
have  
> to meet with me personally and tell me why.'  After he saw that I 
had  
> read the note he took it back from me and left.
> 
> Well!!! Busted again 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RePosting Limitslet them snipe off line & go to the old30

[WLeed3]

 
In a message dated 2/15/2008 10:30:12 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

--- In  FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In  FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>  
> By my count Judy's at 170 and Barry at 117 for the week. My count may  
> be inflated because I've been getting duplicates of some posts via  
> email.
> 
> Same old, same old.
>


...and  114 of those 117 of Barry's posts are sniping at Judy...



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








**The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy 
Awards. Go to AOL Music.  
(http://music.aol.com/grammys?NCID=aolcmp0030002565)

[FairfieldLife] Re: youtube -- photo tribute to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Off,
> 
> Don't quit -- your meds seem to be working today!
> 
> Edg >

That is so original old man.
Get a life you useless crud, and stop spewing teenage jibes on the 
internet that not even teenagers use anymore, but only old men like 
you Turq and Curt.

I feel sorry for all you old watery semen old men that populate FFL.

Outta here.

And..oh yea...Curt...Shotokan DominatesJui Jitsu is just a way 
win a a dumbass UFC bullshit contest without killing someone...which 
a Shotakan master would do in a second if it were legal or 
ethical...but it is not ethical , but you are way too dumb to 
understand that.

OffWorld

 

> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > Curtis said: "You're a dick"
> > > 
> > > I said:
> > > "No, that would be you Curtis because only talentless people
> > > criticize non-profit innocent work. No-one with talent would do 
> > that.
> > > It is one thing to criticize professional work, but to act like 
an
> > > art-critic for simple expressions is just the sign of a 
complete 
> > has-
> > > been wannabe artist "
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This distinction is important to illustrate the difference in 
our
> > > world-view or actually people-view.  
> > > 
> > > I did not call you a "dick"  I said you were "being" one.>>
> > 
> > Good point.
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > It was a comment on your activity which was to use the pretense 
of
> > > being offending on behalf of someone else to take a personal 
shot at
> > > me.  It is an activity that you can stop.  But we both know 
that you
> > > will not stop.  Even so, I don't define your person by this 
> > obnoxious
> > > habit of creating an offense and then attacking me in a much 
more
> > > vicious way than the original statement.  Acting like a dick may
> > > become a habit, but it is not your identity.>>
> > 
> > 
> > It was not an attack on you, it was an attack on your behaviour 
(just 
> > like your logic above), from which you will learn to modify your 
> > behaviour. Job done. Period.
> > 
> > > 
> > > At the core of this behavior, which surfaces in almost every 
> > exchange
> > > we have, is your lack of ability to accept that I have chosen my
> > > opinions about Maharishi and the movement as carefully and
> > > thoughtfully as you have. >>
> > 
> > I don't give a flying fuck about your opinions of Maharishi...you 
are 
> > avoiding the issue. This had nothing to do with TM or Maharishi, 
but 
> > your insistance that it does shows a psychosis that if you allow 
it 
> > to develop will damage you in the long run. It had everything to 
do 
> > with your attitude to attack something -  JUST BECAUSE THE VIDEO 
WAS 
> > ABOUT TM, and no other reason !
> >  If it was about something else you would have ignored it or said 
> > something positive. This argument is not about my opinion of TM 
or 
> > MMY, but about your perverse psychology that makes you attack for 
no 
> > valid reason except it is your modus operandi and a sickness in 
your 
> > head. Don't worry you are nothing like on the level of Turq, Vaj 
and 
> > others, whose brains are developing into toxic dumps. You still 
have 
> > a chance to reverse this cynical old man that you will become if 
you 
> > avoid this chance to look at your own psychology about TM
> > 
> > 
> > > I also suspect that your inability to allow feedback  of any 
kind
> > > without going nuclear is a serious limitation on your own 
artistic
> > > growth.  >>
> > 
> > Lol, your the one that started calling people "dickheads", 
showing an 
> > unprecented inability to discuss or even argue coherently. 
> > You started this and supported geeserfreak when he called me 
> > and "asswipe" and "to get a life". You started this whole thing 
with 
> > attacks because you cannot take a joke.
> > 
> > Yawn, I'm done with this.
> > 
> > OffWorld
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Posting Limits

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> 
> By my count Judy's at 170 and Barry at 117 for the week. My count may 
> be inflated because I've been getting duplicates of some posts via 
> email.
> 
> Same old, same old.
>


...and 114 of those 117 of Barry's posts are sniping at Judy...

[FairfieldLife] Re: For a few laughs

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here is a video I did for Vanityfair.com.  They put it up today.
> 
> In Memoriam
> 
 00803>
>


I particularly liked the "Pretense of Objectivity" one.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  If indeed, MMY displayed a low level of expectation (but a high 
> level of creative motivation with this and that project), well, I'd 
> say it points to a relative failure at achieving some preconceived 
> results (an expectation).
>  And what was that? Simple: according to the set of oaths that 
> somebody was kind enough to post, one of the goals was to spread TM 
> to as many people as possible.
>  The results are miniscule, the espected and hoped for goal 
> unattained. Now what remains of the TM Movement is in the hands 
> of? 

I think we are not near a place yet to evaluate M's impact. Which,I
hold possible to be 0. And I have no indentity issues that wish it
more. (I do hope its more for humanitarian reasons).

The TMO is just begining a new phase. Almost as if the past 40 years
were gestation. And only NOW do we see the infant.

And I don't like the term TMO. It constrains things to see M's work
only in terms of the number of people who take the basic course each
weekend. The 60's-mid 70's model of the TMO. Many are still stuck in
that era and see nothing else, and will evaluate the "TMO" on that
singular metric. Not wise, IMO. I think "Maharish's Transcendental
Technologies (MTT) is a better term (tho far from good or complete).

Phase I of the MTT just ended. The school years. The kids are wet
behind the ears, but have a magnificent smile of naive optimism.
Diploma in hand, lets see how the kids do over their career. The next
40 years. Then we can look Phase III (the rest home, wheel chair
racing years). Some kids graduate and flop big time. Some quit, some
get up and try again. A few, often surprising choices, become the
leaders in everything: education, arts, science, business, politics.

The education was intense. A crazy wide wide through Maharishis
Insane-looking Mind Blowing University. See my prior posts on how
Maharishi's crazy binge phase can be viewed). The kids were so busy
learning, studying, partying, and being groomed well by their tutors
and mentors -- that they look like a wild crazy bunch. The patrons of
Animal House walking out the door on graduation day, drunk,
dishevelled, broke, clueless. Yet giddy, grinning from ear to ear,
making wild claims of future success -- the bravado that only
blooming, peaking shakti-bursting youth can bring.

NOW, for the first time in the lives,the kids hit the streets, joyful
to be free of the torturous routine and constant drills. It will be 5
years or so whether the kid is making ANY headway in his career. Or
has been fired 4 times, and is working at WalMart. And five years,
will be nothing compared to the 40 year view. Some great careers, some
flops. Who Knew!

But the kids have a huge crate of seed business plans and  short,
focuseed venture capital proposals that they have collected from ideas
of their professors over the years.  All seeds created by great minds
just framing and sketching out a business plan. Sketchy and vague.
More a book of dreams. 

And the kids got TALENT. And the kids got a vision. And the kids have
some good business plans. Who can say a Silicon Valley might spring
from one of them.

So, I think its WAY too early to evaluate Maharishi's impact. Which
may be Nada, or may in 40 years with all of us gasping, "Who Knew!".
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[curtisdeltablues]

> Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and M's
> constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it all in
> context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most wonderful and
> creative dance over 40 years. And a wonderful path for some who could
> keep up and withstand the craziness -- and enjoy inner fruit of the
> whole crazy exercise.

Doesn't this whole belief, which was so common among fulltimers,
really fly in the face of his whole teaching?  It is a relative
breaking of the connection with the fruits of action only and has
nothing to do with your state of consciousness being established in
being.  It sounds like the kind of traditional notion that Maharishi
would devote a whole lecture dispelling. 

But he never did and I'll offer a possible explanation why.  Because
he wasn't very good at follow through, he was an idea man.  Simple as
that, he was the typical entrepreneur who thought he could handle
parts of his business that he wasn't good at.

He allowed this belief to exist as a kind of implied teaching because
it served his purposes.  It kept people off center and running around
all the time.  He could play games making stuff up and watch everyone
knock themselves out fulfilling his "desires."  I don't think this was
the most charming part of his personality. Some people gave up a lot
to chase some of his bogus projects, ask Doug Henning.  Oh yeah, we can't.




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > WHY I don't agree is because of the real nature
> > of selfless service. It FREES you from having too
> > much attachment to any *expectations* regarding
> > the service performed. You do something nice for
> > someone, or for some charity or group you care
> > about, and you do it because it feels good JUST 
> > to do it. You don't need to believe that doing 
> > this good work is going to change the world; 
> > you just do the work.
> > 
> > And the cool part of all this is that if the
> > good work DOESN'T change the world, you don't 
> > feel that you have to bitch and moan and claim 
> > that your time was "wasted" 
> 
> An excellent point. 
> 
> It sparks in my mind part of the explanation for MMY's crazy project
> binges. They are not so crazy if MMY was doing, among other things,
> the following three things -- which I am certain he was. He even said
> "Hey! This is what I am doing..."
> 
> 1) breaking the link between fruit and action. Getting rid of the
> expectation. "Pititful is the man who lives for the fruit of action..." 
> 
> A Purusha, on a nice long beach walk told me of some the projects M
> had him and peers doing -- the buying huge old crumbling hotels,
> Blackstone, etc. He said doing such really breaks the above link. 
> 
> And an added part is that the project is begun with great haste, and
> urgency -- almost emergency -- its cast as the most important project
> in the world, and then after it got rolling and people got into it, M.
> would yank the rug out from under them, rip apart the act fruit link,
> by starting a new urgent project.
> 
> 
> 2) demonstrating the power of sankalpa -- what he explained in one of
> his last lectures (on MOU) that for a project, any big task, we can
> see the whole thing, like a flash IMO, at the beginning of the
> project. That lively glowing seed impulse. 
> 
> We don't see all of the small details because they are wrapped up in
> the seed. But we can feel the whole thing, see it in our minds eye, we
> "get it". This sankalpa,  this seed, is precious and nurturing it
> brings the whole thing to fruition easily. (not that we are living for
> that fruit.) This is what he taught the rajas to do, he said. This is
> the administering in silence. 
> 
> And M was a machine gun firing a massive barrage of sankalpa golden
> bullets -- every hour of everyday. Well begun is half done. Just
> acknowledging and seeing the sankalpa as it arises is the "begun" part. 
> 
> Well begun. He planted all of these seeds. The next 3-4 generations of
> rajas have the opportunity to nurture each of those "old crazy
> projects". If done, it would be amazing if all of those seeds sprouted
> and matured into huge trees. M was the Johnny Appleseed of spiritual
> transformation. 
> 
> 
> 3) expansive thinking. Related to 2) above, but goes to the style of
> thinking. Letting your mind and imagine soar with no limits. Like a
> child is apt to do, but doing this in an adult mind. He would say to a
> small group,  "just keep your mind going with mine". Go with his flow
> as his imagination and mind soar to vast heights and depths. an
> Anything is possibly spirit. Doing such breaks the boundaries of the
mind.
> 
> Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and M's
> constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it all in
> context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most wonderful and
> creative dance ove

[FairfieldLife] Curious in WI

[dhamiltony2k5]

>> > 
> > What's the buzz in FF?  Is Hagelin going to pull any of this off, 
> >or 
> > is the TMO quickly going to slip into the unmanifest?
> > 
> > Sign me,
> > Curious in WI
> > 
> > Also:
> > 
>

WI, It is going to be about shakti.  Take a look at this post 
(link).  It is how it goes here.  It is about shakti, spiritual 
experience with spiritual energy.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/160331

Watching people here with the different spiritual groups, there is a
shakti or a spiritual energy meter that people do run for
themselves. Is the experience in FF that people have of their own
experience with it. They are practiced at metering shakti. They
meter it & rate it. The Shakti meter, a different meter from the BS
meter.

FF folks after 20, 30 and 40 years of spiritual practice(s) have
their own experience with it and they certainly do meter shakti
accordingly. Between the different venues available they definitely
flow back and forth depending on the spiritual experience. It is the
collective FF experience & there is a lot of cultivated shakti in
Fairfield. If there is not shakti in a venue then folks go on to the
next one here where the spiritual energy is better. It is just the
experience here.

Jai Guru Dev, -doug in FF

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[yifuxero]

--Precisely, auth: being highly motivated to succeed can ONLY be 
measured (in the economic sense) via a quantifiable level of profits 
in some form. That's an expectation, is is not? This means one does 
her best to achieve a goal - (then don't mope about it); then go onto 
the next goal.
 The fact that one doesn't mope by no means detracts from the reality 
of true expectation. Whether or not one mopes, it's still an 
expectation of results.
 If indeed, MMY displayed a low level of expectation (but a high 
level of creative motivation with this and that project), well, I'd 
say it points to a relative failure at achieving some preconceived 
results (an expectation).
 And what was that? Simple: according to the set of oaths that 
somebody was kind enough to post, one of the goals was to spread TM 
to as many people as possible.
 The results are miniscule, the espected and hoped for goal 
unattained. Now what remains of the TM Movement is in the hands 
of? 

- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno"  
> wrote:
> >
> > ---The traditional "expectation" angle doesn't make much sense
> > in terms of the obvious economic laws. The bottom line: get
> > results or you're outta here. Expectation is an ingrained
> > behavior prevalent in all evolutionary pathways of sufficiently
> > advanced organisms. Can you feature a mountain lion chasing a 
> > coyote without expectation of results?
> 
> MMY was real clear in his Gita commentary on this
> point, though, that not having expectations doesn't
> mean you aren't highly motivated to succeed.
> 
> If the mountain lion doesn't catch the coyote, does
> it sit around being disappointed and beating up on
> itself, or does it immediately start looking for
> another coyote to chase?
> 
> MMY's take on this is one of the very juiciest parts
> of his Gita commentary, IMHO. I'll try to look it up
> later.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[new . morning]

Yes, you are correct.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> 
> > Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and
> > M's constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it
> > all in context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most
> > wonderful and creative dance over 40 years. And a wonderful path
> > for some who could keep up and withstand the craziness -- and
> > enjoy inner fruit of the whole crazy exercise.
> 
> Very nicely put. This is also what I heard once from
> the old-time TM teacher who used to run the Asbury
> Park TM facility; can't remember his name now. He was
> just reminiscing about his time with MMY some years
> previously, and he was very informal and funny, but
> you could sense the energy and opening he'd gotten
> from the experience.
> 
> My stay at that hotel facility for the summer of 1995--
> as a paying guest, not working for the TMO--was the
> closest I've ever come to getting sucked into the
> movement. From interacting and chatting with the
> teachers and lifers there, I got a really different
> perspective on so many of the things that had seemed
> totally nuts about the movement.
> 
> I think I've said before here of my Asbury Park
> experience that the problem was that these perspectives
> only made sense from *within the TM worldview*. And
> you couldn't keep one foot in the "real world" and one
> foot in the TM world, because the cognitive dissonance
> was too great. You had to commit totally to the TM
> world--at which point the "real world" appeared to be
> just as nuts as the TM world did from the outside--and
> I couldn't bring myself to take that leap. I stepped
> back and forth from one to the other all summer and
> finally stepped out again for good.
> 
> I'm glad I didn't decide to commit, but gee whiz, it
> was a fascinating, stretching experience.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> 
> > Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and
> > M's constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it
> > all in context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most
> > wonderful and creative dance over 40 years. And a wonderful path
> > for some who could keep up and withstand the craziness -- and
> > enjoy inner fruit of the whole crazy exercise.
> 
> Very nicely put. This is also what I heard once from
> the old-time TM teacher who used to run the Asbury
> Park TM facility; can't remember his name now. He was
> just reminiscing about his time with MMY some years
> previously, and he was very informal and funny, but
> you could sense the energy and opening he'd gotten
> from the experience.
> 
> My stay at that hotel facility for the summer of 1995--
> as a paying guest, not working for the TMO--was the
> closest I've ever come to getting sucked into the
> movement. From interacting and chatting with the
> teachers and lifers there, I got a really different
> perspective on so many of the things that had seemed
> totally nuts about the movement.
> 
> I think I've said before here of my Asbury Park
> experience that the problem was that these perspectives
> only made sense from *within the TM worldview*. And
> you couldn't keep one foot in the "real world" and one
> foot in the TM world, because the cognitive dissonance
> was too great. You had to commit totally to the TM
> world--at which point the "real world" appeared to be
> just as nuts as the TM world did from the outside--and
> I couldn't bring myself to take that leap. I stepped
> back and forth from one to the other all summer and
> finally stepped out again for good.
> 
> I'm glad I didn't decide to commit, but gee whiz, it
> was a fascinating, stretching experience.
>

Yes. I remember those posts. (on AMT maybe). They were nice. We are
talking the same thing. or similar.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[lurkernomore20002000]

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

My guess is that Deepak was telling the truth, with some embellishment 
and fuzziness do to lapse of time, and GM (Girish Momaya?) is trying to
whitewash it for posterity.

Thanks for revealing the source, who evidently was not stand up enough 
to speak on his own behalf.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[new . morning]

The point is I think is the realization that we have control over the
action only, not over the fruit. Whether we get the fruit or not is up
to any number of things.
 
I know entrepreneurs and those in service fields like real estate, who
never focus on the end result -- other than setting it in their sights 
initially. Its sort of "don't count your chickens before they are
hatched." And that the real thing is the journey, not the destination.

The mountain lions nature is to run and hunt. He excels at that. He
focuses on that. At the end of day, he may starve or feast. Thats not
up to him. 

In living for just the fruit, one misses the beauty of the journey.
And they are not satisfied in the moment. Their satisfaction is always
"out there". Others are totally in the NOW, satisfied in the NOW,
enjoying the journey as it passes. If they feast at the end of the
day, thats great to.

Its sort of parallel the motivations of posters. One poster threaten
not to read my post if I did not change some style element. (Are there
any other benefits?). I tried to explain, that I had little interest
in who or how many read my posts. That is not the fruit of writing
them. The fruit is in .figuring out some idea. To let a flash, a
sankalpa, a seed idea, develop. Thats it. If someone then also reads
the post, and we engage in a nice conversation, thats a good thing
too. An added benefit. But not the goal. I am happy with my process of
posting as a way to work out ideas. If no one reads it, I am still
fulfilled.

Its like a skier. The goal is not to get to the bottom of the
mountain. In fact thats an anti-climax. The goal, the fruit, is to
make your feet, heart, mind, whole body and soul feel real good, by
manipulating gravity a bit, in gorgeous and sometimes awesomely
extreme terrain. Its all about the process, the journey. Not the
anti-climax.
 
Anti-climax. You can see where I could go with that. The joy making
love is in the doing. Not the aftermath.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote: 
>
> ---The traditional "expectation" angle doesn't make much sense in 
> terms of the obvious economic laws. The bottom line: get results othr 
> you're outta here. Expectation is an ingrained behavior prevalent in 
> all evolutionary pathways of sufficiently advanced organisms.
>  Can you feature a mountain lion chasing a coyote without expectation 
> of results?
> 
>  In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> > >
> > > WHY I don't agree is because of the real nature
> > > of selfless service. It FREES you from having too
> > > much attachment to any *expectations* regarding
> > > the service performed. You do something nice for
> > > someone, or for some charity or group you care
> > > about, and you do it because it feels good JUST 
> > > to do it. You don't need to believe that doing 
> > > this good work is going to change the world; 
> > > you just do the work.
> > > 
> > > And the cool part of all this is that if the
> > > good work DOESN'T change the world, you don't 
> > > feel that you have to bitch and moan and claim 
> > > that your time was "wasted" 
> > 
> > An excellent point. 
> > 
> > It sparks in my mind part of the explanation for MMY's crazy project
> > binges. They are not so crazy if MMY was doing, among other things,
> > the following three things -- which I am certain he was. He even 
> said
> > "Hey! This is what I am doing..."
> > 
> > 1) breaking the link between fruit and action. Getting rid of the
> > expectation. "Pititful is the man who lives for the fruit of 
> action..." 
> > 
> > A Purusha, on a nice long beach walk told me of some the projects M
> > had him and peers doing -- the buying huge old crumbling hotels,
> > Blackstone, etc. He said doing such really breaks the above link. 
> > 
> > And an added part is that the project is begun with great haste, and
> > urgency -- almost emergency -- its cast as the most important 
> project
> > in the world, and then after it got rolling and people got into it, 
> M.
> > would yank the rug out from under them, rip apart the act fruit 
> link,
> > by starting a new urgent project.
> > 
> > 
> > 2) demonstrating the power of sankalpa -- what he explained in one 
> of
> > his last lectures (on MOU) that for a project, any big task, we can
> > see the whole thing, like a flash IMO, at the beginning of the
> > project. That lively glowing seed impulse. 
> > 
> > We don't see all of the small details because they are wrapped up in
> > the seed. But we can feel the whole thing, see it in our minds eye, 
> we
> > "get it". This sankalpa,  this seed, is precious and nurturing it
> > brings the whole thing to fruition easily. (not that we are living 
> for
> > that fruit.) This is what he taught the rajas to do, he said. This 
> is
> > the administering in silence. 
> > 
> > And M was a machine gun firing a massive barrage of sankalpa golden
> > bu

[FairfieldLife] Re: Posting Limits

[lurkernomore20002000]

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

By my count Judy's at 170 and Barry at 117 for the week. My count may 
be inflated because I've been getting duplicates of some posts via 
email.

Same old, same old.  
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Angela Mailander]

My earlier problem with your statement is that there is a distinction between 
truth and fact.  As you are using the word, you really mean "fact" not "truth." 
 So when I substitute "fact" then your statement makes total sense.



- Original Message 
From: Larry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 5:10:58 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The 
Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

Thinking back now, I should have included a smily face, then it
wouldn't have come off as such a wild ass axiom - but too late now.

What I should have said was: If you have two or more observers, you
can not have Truth. 

As each observer distinguishs self - what lies outside of that first
distinction is everything else, which includes the other observers. 
So, for each observer, what lies 'outside' that first distinction is
different because it includes the other observers.

Let's ask a basic question . . . is the car red?

Well, what makes the car red is exactly the same as what makes it not
red. For example, we can pick out a candle because of its bundle of
properties, including the space it occupies. We can make the
distinction of 'the candle' because there is a 'not candle' to
dintinguish it from. The dintinction between the candle and 'not
candle' is the same distinction - it's the same boundary.

Sort of like my grandfather who used to bug me with questions like: 
Does the mortar keep the bricks apart, or does keep them together?

So getting back to the car . . two or more observers can not equally
dintguish the car, because the 'not car' distinction includes the
other observers . . so therefore, the distinction of the car will also
be different between observers.

--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander
 wrote:
>
> Really? How do you figure?
> 
> - Original Message 
> From: Larry <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ..>
> To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:44:31 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
"The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can have a manifold relative world that works, or
you have one
> 
> with Truth, but you can't have both
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander
> 
>  wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > Well, we've got at least two versions of the events. This does not
> 
> tell us that either version corresponds to the facts, however. 
> 
> Medical records can be falsified--and I've seen this done on more than
> 
> one occasion. So the medical records would not necessarily tell us
> 
> the truth either. And if we can see how difficult it is to get at the
> 
> truth in this scenario, then what makes us think the "official"
> 
> version of history that we learn in school is "true?"
> 
> > 
> 
> > - Original Message 
> 
> > From: ruthsimplicity 
> 
> > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com
> 
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:20:47 PM
> 
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
> 
> "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Dick Mays
> 
>  wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> > >
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian Governor 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > pundits in India. He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi
instructor and 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > teacher of Advanced Techniques.
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Farrokh & Ruffina
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dear Friends:
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji' s personal
physician at 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > the time that Dr Deepak Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in
England, 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > as per his article entitled "The Maharishi Years - the Untold
Story". 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > inaccuracies. I was at Maharishiji' s side during the entire 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > incident. Some of the details of the article that I know to be 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > untrue are as follows:
> 
> > 
> 
> > > there was no blood transfusion from Dr Chopra;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Maharishi was not on a ventilator and was not pronounced dead as
> 
> > 
> 
> > claimed;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > he did not have kidney failure at all at that time;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr Chopra's father attended Maharishi in India, but not in London;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > there was no helicopter involved;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr Chopra did not carry Maharishiji in his arms into the hospital.
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr Chopra was handsomely paid for his services by the movement. 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > These facts can be corroborated by Prakash and Kirti from the
Indian 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > TM movement and Maharishiji

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> ---The traditional "expectation" angle doesn't make much sense
> in terms of the obvious economic laws. The bottom line: get
> results or you're outta here. Expectation is an ingrained
> behavior prevalent in all evolutionary pathways of sufficiently
> advanced organisms. Can you feature a mountain lion chasing a 
> coyote without expectation of results?

MMY was real clear in his Gita commentary on this
point, though, that not having expectations doesn't
mean you aren't highly motivated to succeed.

If the mountain lion doesn't catch the coyote, does
it sit around being disappointed and beating up on
itself, or does it immediately start looking for
another coyote to chase?

MMY's take on this is one of the very juiciest parts
of his Gita commentary, IMHO. I'll try to look it up
later.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[authfriend]

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

> Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and
> M's constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it
> all in context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most
> wonderful and creative dance over 40 years. And a wonderful path
> for some who could keep up and withstand the craziness -- and
> enjoy inner fruit of the whole crazy exercise.

Very nicely put. This is also what I heard once from
the old-time TM teacher who used to run the Asbury
Park TM facility; can't remember his name now. He was
just reminiscing about his time with MMY some years
previously, and he was very informal and funny, but
you could sense the energy and opening he'd gotten
from the experience.

My stay at that hotel facility for the summer of 1995--
as a paying guest, not working for the TMO--was the
closest I've ever come to getting sucked into the
movement. From interacting and chatting with the
teachers and lifers there, I got a really different
perspective on so many of the things that had seemed
totally nuts about the movement.

I think I've said before here of my Asbury Park
experience that the problem was that these perspectives
only made sense from *within the TM worldview*. And
you couldn't keep one foot in the "real world" and one
foot in the TM world, because the cognitive dissonance
was too great. You had to commit totally to the TM
world--at which point the "real world" appeared to be
just as nuts as the TM world did from the outside--and
I couldn't bring myself to take that leap. I stepped
back and forth from one to the other all summer and
finally stepped out again for good.

I'm glad I didn't decide to commit, but gee whiz, it
was a fascinating, stretching experience.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[tertonzeno]

---The traditional "expectation" angle doesn't make much sense in 
terms of the obvious economic laws. The bottom line: get results or 
you're outta here. Expectation is an ingrained behavior prevalent in 
all evolutionary pathways of sufficiently advanced organisms.
 Can you feature a mountain lion chasing a coyote without expectation 
of results?

 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > WHY I don't agree is because of the real nature
> > of selfless service. It FREES you from having too
> > much attachment to any *expectations* regarding
> > the service performed. You do something nice for
> > someone, or for some charity or group you care
> > about, and you do it because it feels good JUST 
> > to do it. You don't need to believe that doing 
> > this good work is going to change the world; 
> > you just do the work.
> > 
> > And the cool part of all this is that if the
> > good work DOESN'T change the world, you don't 
> > feel that you have to bitch and moan and claim 
> > that your time was "wasted" 
> 
> An excellent point. 
> 
> It sparks in my mind part of the explanation for MMY's crazy project
> binges. They are not so crazy if MMY was doing, among other things,
> the following three things -- which I am certain he was. He even 
said
> "Hey! This is what I am doing..."
> 
> 1) breaking the link between fruit and action. Getting rid of the
> expectation. "Pititful is the man who lives for the fruit of 
action..." 
> 
> A Purusha, on a nice long beach walk told me of some the projects M
> had him and peers doing -- the buying huge old crumbling hotels,
> Blackstone, etc. He said doing such really breaks the above link. 
> 
> And an added part is that the project is begun with great haste, and
> urgency -- almost emergency -- its cast as the most important 
project
> in the world, and then after it got rolling and people got into it, 
M.
> would yank the rug out from under them, rip apart the act fruit 
link,
> by starting a new urgent project.
> 
> 
> 2) demonstrating the power of sankalpa -- what he explained in one 
of
> his last lectures (on MOU) that for a project, any big task, we can
> see the whole thing, like a flash IMO, at the beginning of the
> project. That lively glowing seed impulse. 
> 
> We don't see all of the small details because they are wrapped up in
> the seed. But we can feel the whole thing, see it in our minds eye, 
we
> "get it". This sankalpa,  this seed, is precious and nurturing it
> brings the whole thing to fruition easily. (not that we are living 
for
> that fruit.) This is what he taught the rajas to do, he said. This 
is
> the administering in silence. 
> 
> And M was a machine gun firing a massive barrage of sankalpa golden
> bullets -- every hour of everyday. Well begun is half done. Just
> acknowledging and seeing the sankalpa as it arises is the "begun" 
part. 
> 
> Well begun. He planted all of these seeds. The next 3-4 generations 
of
> rajas have the opportunity to nurture each of those "old crazy
> projects". If done, it would be amazing if all of those seeds 
sprouted
> and matured into huge trees. M was the Johnny Appleseed of spiritual
> transformation. 
> 
> 
> 3) expansive thinking. Related to 2) above, but goes to the style of
> thinking. Letting your mind and imagine soar with no limits. Like a
> child is apt to do, but doing this in an adult mind. He would say 
to a
> small group,  "just keep your mind going with mine". Go with his 
flow
> as his imagination and mind soar to vast heights and depths. an
> Anything is possibly spirit. Doing such breaks the boundaries of 
the mind.
> 
> Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and M's
> constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it all in
> context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most wonderful and
> creative dance over 40 years. And a wonderful path for some who 
could
> keep up and withstand the craziness -- and enjoy inner fruit of the
> whole crazy exercise.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 
> --- Stu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > > I could be wrong of course, but I always felt
> > > > Deepak's writing showed a lack of understanding
> > of
> > > > Maharishi's teaching.
> > >
> > > Another way of looking at it, George, is that
> > > Chopra *disagrees* with Maharishi's teaching.
> > >
> > > That does not imply that he never understood it.
> > >
> > I have been to a number of Chopra's lectures.  After
> > a few one sees a
> > pattern.  He has a few concepts down pat and then he
> > wings it from
> > there.  He is an excellent public speaker and writer
> > and is able to hide
> > is lack of scholarly depth.
> > 
> > I think George is correct here.  Chopra lacks the
> > understanding.  He is
> > somewhere on my level.
> 
> I agree. In another post i noted that when ever i
> heard him speak when he was with the TMO it was clear
> that he did not truly understand what MMY was talking
> about. Some very core concepts were not understood.
> From time to time I'd see MMY correct him as he was
> speaking.

I have to agree. And it must have been pretty far
off if I sensed it, since I'm not a teacher.

[FairfieldLife] Selfless Service --- and Breaking the Link Between Fruit and Action

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> WHY I don't agree is because of the real nature
> of selfless service. It FREES you from having too
> much attachment to any *expectations* regarding
> the service performed. You do something nice for
> someone, or for some charity or group you care
> about, and you do it because it feels good JUST 
> to do it. You don't need to believe that doing 
> this good work is going to change the world; 
> you just do the work.
> 
> And the cool part of all this is that if the
> good work DOESN'T change the world, you don't 
> feel that you have to bitch and moan and claim 
> that your time was "wasted" 

An excellent point. 

It sparks in my mind part of the explanation for MMY's crazy project
binges. They are not so crazy if MMY was doing, among other things,
the following three things -- which I am certain he was. He even said
"Hey! This is what I am doing..."

1) breaking the link between fruit and action. Getting rid of the
expectation. "Pititful is the man who lives for the fruit of action..." 

A Purusha, on a nice long beach walk told me of some the projects M
had him and peers doing -- the buying huge old crumbling hotels,
Blackstone, etc. He said doing such really breaks the above link. 

And an added part is that the project is begun with great haste, and
urgency -- almost emergency -- its cast as the most important project
in the world, and then after it got rolling and people got into it, M.
would yank the rug out from under them, rip apart the act fruit link,
by starting a new urgent project.


2) demonstrating the power of sankalpa -- what he explained in one of
his last lectures (on MOU) that for a project, any big task, we can
see the whole thing, like a flash IMO, at the beginning of the
project. That lively glowing seed impulse. 

We don't see all of the small details because they are wrapped up in
the seed. But we can feel the whole thing, see it in our minds eye, we
"get it". This sankalpa,  this seed, is precious and nurturing it
brings the whole thing to fruition easily. (not that we are living for
that fruit.) This is what he taught the rajas to do, he said. This is
the administering in silence. 

And M was a machine gun firing a massive barrage of sankalpa golden
bullets -- every hour of everyday. Well begun is half done. Just
acknowledging and seeing the sankalpa as it arises is the "begun" part. 

Well begun. He planted all of these seeds. The next 3-4 generations of
rajas have the opportunity to nurture each of those "old crazy
projects". If done, it would be amazing if all of those seeds sprouted
and matured into huge trees. M was the Johnny Appleseed of spiritual
transformation. 


3) expansive thinking. Related to 2) above, but goes to the style of
thinking. Letting your mind and imagine soar with no limits. Like a
child is apt to do, but doing this in an adult mind. He would say to a
small group,  "just keep your mind going with mine". Go with his flow
as his imagination and mind soar to vast heights and depths. an
Anything is possibly spirit. Doing such breaks the boundaries of the mind.

Take these three things together (and perhaps a few others) and M's
constant crazy project binges make sense, IMO, and puts it all in
context. Seen in this light, his binges were a most wonderful and
creative dance over 40 years. And a wonderful path for some who could
keep up and withstand the craziness -- and enjoy inner fruit of the
whole crazy exercise.

[FairfieldLife] India and Beyond - Curious in WI

[dhamiltony2k5]

>
> FW:
> From, Curious in WI
> 
> 
> if Raja Hagelin actually DOES some of the things he's suggesting, 
>it 
> seems will pretty much prove that Maharishi was himself the primary 
> impediment to the revitalization of the movement and spread of TM 
> over the last 2 decades.  He had to die before anything interesting 
> could happen.  Odd, eh?


Doug in FF writing:
I would wager that there will be a doctrinal wing of the movement 
lead by Bevan, Conhaus and Benjamin Feldman types and then a more 
secular wing promulgated by Hagelin and quite a group of people drawn 
to that.  Both feeling they have Maharishi's knowledge.  The 
doctrinalists will tend to be more tyrannical and rigid 
administrators.  Like it has been for 30 years under Bevan.  

The secular TM-type will be more unifying and embracing in realistic 
pragmatic way. Dynamic.  The secular will be about meditating and 
consciousness-based education (MUM) and the doctrinals will tend to 
turn screws and be about faith and belief in Maharishi.  Loyalty 
testing.   The doctrinals & moodmaking will probably squeeze TM 
seculars out over time over loyalty to Maharishi & doctrinals end up 
occupying the institution of the TMmovement by default.  As it has 
gone.  

The seculars will probably give it a spirited go in the meantime and 
then through time go meditate quietly on their own, like Gnostics do 
for their own survival and peace of mind.  Hagelin is drawing a 
really good team of smart bright people around him right now.  His 
counter-attack was started from when Maharishi gave him America at 
the end of December.  It was unveiling the night that Maharishi died 
actually.  They are on hold and grieving and in re-group right now 
but the die was cast and set to go in early January before Maharishi 
had left.  This inner core of the TMmovement though very small in 
numbers now is not going to go away anytime soon.  I bet you'll be 
hearing from them one way or another.



> 
> What's the buzz in FF?  Is Hagelin going to pull any of this off, 
>or 
> is the TMO quickly going to slip into the unmanifest?
> 
> Sign me,
> Curious in WI
> 
> Also:
> 
> Dear Fellow Travelers in Curiosity,
> 
> "The 12 former rajas"?  What's that about?  Was there a coup?  Lese 
> majesty?  Did 12 pay a million each only to be dethroned?  
Dethroned 
> by whom?  There's got to be an interesting story here!
> 
> Still, curious in WI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: For a few laughs

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here is a video I did for Vanityfair.com.  They put it up today.
> 
> In Memoriam
>



Truly marvelous. I wept.

>From laughter.

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> > > I could be wrong of course, but I always felt
> > > Deepak's writing showed a lack of understanding of
> > > Maharishi's teaching.
> >
> > Another way of looking at it, George, is that
> > Chopra *disagrees* with Maharishi's teaching.
> >
> > That does not imply that he never understood it.
> 
> I have been to a number of Chopra's lectures.  After a 
> few one sees a pattern. He has a few concepts down pat 
> and then he wings it from there. He is an excellent 
> public speaker and writer and is able to hide
> his lack of scholarly depth.
> 
> I think George is correct here. Chopra lacks the 
> understanding. He is somewhere on my level.

Very possible. I have neither heard the
man speak nor read any of his books, and
probably won't. He just doesn't do it for
me. I was just presenting a possibility
that doesn't seem to have occurred to 
George. He seems to assume that if Chopra
had heard what Maharishi said "properly"
he'd be parroting it in his writing and
would still believe it. 

I heard what Maharishi said well enough 
that I was considered one of the better 
"advanced lecturers" on the West Coast TM 
circuit. But not much of Maharishi's
stuff has shown up in my writings, and
I believe very little of what he said.

Then again, that could just be because
I lack understanding...  :-)

Interestingly enough, Stu, having been
around the spiritual teacher block a few
times in the 30 years since I last saw
Maharishi, I would describe *him* the
same way you describe Chopra. He had a
few introductory concepts down and he 
spent 50 years winging it and finding
different ways of saying them. Compared
to Tibetan teachers I've seen and the
depth, clarity and precision of their 
teaching, Maharishi doesn't even come 
close.

Not a slam...it's how I really see him.

[FairfieldLife] For a few laughs

[Stu]

Here is a video I did for Vanityfair.com.  They put it up today.

In Memoriam

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[Stu]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> ---
> Cherry-picking statements as well as looking at the whole can be of
> value, depending upon one's intentions.  For example, if one
> says: "The Bible is the Inerrant Word of God", cherry-picking even a
> single obviously errant (misguided, a-dharmic) statement can disprove
> the premise. If we collect a few hundred statements unbecoming of a
> God-like Entity, then something's fishy, is it not?
>

Yes.   We are so far beyond these ancient myths.  These writings only
value is cultural historic.  We can look back at the past and see how
hunter-gatherers moved into monarchistic societies.  For the life of me
I don't see how anyone can open up these old books and find anything of
spiritual value.  This tribal patriarchal thinking is the surest way
towards hatred and death.  The last 2K years of "civilization" attests
to this.  Is it Chris Hitchens who says religion poisons everything it
touches?

If we are looking to the ancients for ethical/moral guidance we are far
better off looking to the Ancient Greeks  who put a price on rationality
rather than visions and magic.  May I suggest Aristotle's Ethics for
your reading pleasure.  It was a huge hit for Christian, Jewish and
Islamic scholars in the eleventh century. Changed the way we interpreted
the concept of soul and what it means to be human.  Took enlightenment
authors like Spinoza to really see the error in sinking one's faith in
dogma.


Barry said:
Stu, you've got an evil sense of humor on
you. If you were to join Curtis and Geez
in Fairfield for their party-down I might
have to show up just to be able to share
a few beers with the bunch of you.

Dang Barry, I would love to hang with you and the gang sometime.

s.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Peter]

--- Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My guess is that Deepak was telling the truth, with
> some embellishment and
> fuzziness do to lapse of time, and GM (Girish
> Momaya?) is trying to
> whitewash it for posterity.

Agreed. Notice how he doesn't offer anything other
than  corrections of Deepak's version. Love to have
Deepak react to this whitewash.


> 
>  
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 -
> Release Date: 2/14/2008
> 6:35 PM
>  
> 



  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[FairfieldLife] Selfless Service (was Re: Deepak Chopra)

[new . morning]

Wonderful quote. Thank you for posting. 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> The effort that is made according to the shaastra, that is puNya
> (meritous action) which gives rise to earthly advancement and mokSha
> (salvation).
> 
> However much purushhaartha (effort) is needed for a task, that much
> effort is to be made. However much puNya (meritous action) is needed
> in order to cross bhavasaagara (sea of experience), without that puNya
> it is not possible to get to the other side. If someone has a thirst
> for a sera of water then how can their thirst be quenched with a
> chhaTaaMka (a sixteenth sera) of water?
> 
> Certainly, by reading holy books you can become holy. Studying the
> Gita, the Ramayana etc gives puNya (merit). But by reading, the amount
> of puNya acquired is not enough to cross bhavasaagara (the ocean of
> experience).
> 
> I am not negating the value of reading holy books - you should read;
> but by studying alone one's duty is not finished, you should obtain
> its value. You should make an effort to apply what is written, in the
> form of work, only then can it be completely useful, and then abundant
> puNya will be accumulated. If you wish to be saved from downfall then
> escape from sin, don't make any effort to do anything contrary to the
> shaastra; escape from sin and do meritous action - this the way to
> progress.
> 
> 
> Guru Dev [Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita kaNa 43 of 108]
> http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/UA_Hindi.htm#kaNa_43
>

[FairfieldLife] Steeplejacking

[dhamiltony2k5]

"An unprecedented look inside the battle for religion in America"


A manuel for progressive Christians who want to reclaim the church from 
intolerant, extremist factions

http://www.igpub.com/steeplejacking.html

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[Peter]

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

> 
> > > I could be wrong of course, but I always felt
> > > Deepak's writing showed a lack of understanding
> of
> > > Maharishi's teaching.
> >
> > Another way of looking at it, George, is that
> > Chopra *disagrees* with Maharishi's teaching.
> >
> > That does not imply that he never understood it.
> >
> I have been to a number of Chopra's lectures.  After
> a few one sees a
> pattern.  He has a few concepts down pat and then he
> wings it from
> there.  He is an excellent public speaker and writer
> and is able to hide
> is lack of scholarly depth.
> 
> I think George is correct here.  Chopra lacks the
> understanding.  He is
> somewhere on my level.

I agree. In another post i noted that when ever i
heard him speak when he was with the TMO it was clear
that he did not truly understand what MMY was talking
about. Some very core concepts were not understood.
>From time to time I'd see MMY correct him as he was
speaking.





> 
> s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!' 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 



  

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

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> > Finally: I am not familiar just off the top of my tired brain what
> > part of Genesis talks about selling your daughter into sexual
> > slavery.  Can you quote the chapter/lines?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > [anip]
> 
> Life is too short to go through and transcribe stuff out of the OT.  I
> seem to remember it came either when Lot or Noah had some travelers over
> to his house and he offered up his daughter for their pleasure.
> 
> Here is a quote in the same tone.  I hope it will be as helpful to you
> as it has been to me.  I just never know what to do with my slaves:
> 
> 
> Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1:
> 
> Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them. When you
> buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he
> shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out
> single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If
> his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the
> wife and her children shall be her master's and he shall go out alone.
> But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my
> children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to
> God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost; and his master
> shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for life.
> 
> I am so happy we have the OT because it tells us how to live morally. 
> The trick is not to cherry pick g-d's word that would be making our own
> moral distinctions.  Better to take it as a whole.


Stu, you've got an evil sense of humor on 
you. If you were to join Curtis and Geez
in Fairfield for their party-down I might 
have to show up just to be able to share 
a few beers with the bunch of you.

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[Stu]

> > I could be wrong of course, but I always felt
> > Deepak's writing showed a lack of understanding of
> > Maharishi's teaching.
>
> Another way of looking at it, George, is that
> Chopra *disagrees* with Maharishi's teaching.
>
> That does not imply that he never understood it.
>
I have been to a number of Chopra's lectures.  After a few one sees a
pattern.  He has a few concepts down pat and then he wings it from
there.  He is an excellent public speaker and writer and is able to hide
is lack of scholarly depth.

I think George is correct here.  Chopra lacks the understanding.  He is
somewhere on my level.

s.

Re: [FairfieldLife] The C-word...uh...flap

[Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It?]

 To think, for decades the clitorati nazis
have viciously contentiously said that some,
many or all men talk through their dickheads ,
now we have vaginas talking to themselves.
 *Who'd've thunk it!*

If vaginas can conduct loquatious monologues
then for sure they can, and will, delight in
deeper reflection before a mirror and
proclaim in giddy frolic and vampish breath
"you look mahvilous!" 

We need more happy cuntries, like yours, Turquoise.



On Feb 15, 2008 2:10 PM, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Just to get back to the mundane, and to remind
> folks here what people in the world are talking
> about while we debate the fine points of Deepak
> Chopra's ethics, America is going four-letter-
> word crazy again.
>
> NBC is doing the apology dance because a guest
> on its "Today" show used what it calls a "vulgar
> slang term" on the air. They're beating the
> guest up one side and down the other for daring
> to use this horrible term. And, given that the
> guest in question was Jane Fonda, right-wingers
> who still hate her from the Vietnam era are
> denouncing her in the press. (Which I think is
> doubly funny, because they're demonizing her
> for using the same term they used to call her.)
>
> Anyway, the sheer Puritan absurdity of it, living
> as I do in a more civilized land, got me curious,
> so I looked up the clip in question, and discovered
> the rather innocent *context* in which Jane spoke
> the word:
>
> http://gawker.com/356442/jane-fonda-to-america-c-u-next-tuesday
>
> The whole thing makes me happy I live in a country
> where women can still safely call a coño a coño.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[tertonzeno]

---
Cherry-picking statements as well as looking at the whole can be of 
value, depending upon one's intentions.  For example, if one 
says: "The Bible is the Inerrant Word of God", cherry-picking even a 
single obviously errant (misguided, a-dharmic) statement can disprove 
the premise. If we collect a few hundred statements unbecoming of a 
God-like Entity, then something's fishy, is it not?

 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> > Finally: I am not familiar just off the top of my tired brain what
> > part of Genesis talks about selling your daughter into sexual
> > slavery.  Can you quote the chapter/lines?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > [anip]
> >
> Life is too short to go through and transcribe stuff out of the 
OT.  I
> seem to remember it came either when Lot or Noah had some travelers 
over
> to his house and he offered up his daughter for their pleasure.
> 
> Here is a quote in the same tone.  I hope it will be as helpful to 
you
> as it has been to me.  I just never know what to do with my slaves:
> 
> 
> Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1:
> 
> Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them. When 
you
> buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he
> shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go 
out
> single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with 
him. If
> his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the
> wife and her children shall be her master's and he shall go out 
alone.
> But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my
> children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him 
to
> God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost; and his 
master
> shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for 
life.
> 
> I am so happy we have the OT because it tells us how to live 
morally. 
> The trick is not to cherry pick g-d's word that would be making our 
own
> moral distinctions.  Better to take it as a whole.
> 
> s.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Always looking for more information

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Mr. Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or in the wake of Maharishi's passing will we see a solidifying of 
> this autocracy that in my possibly incorrect opinion, perpetuates 
> occult psuedo science and mind control?

Ed, Maharishi was very fond of monarchies and would heap praise on the
world's remaining monarchs. He even reorganized the leadership of the
TM organization into a monarchy, and not one of those for-show
monarchies where an elected Parliament holds the real power. My
advice: don't expect the autocracy to go away any time soon. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[Stu]

> Finally: I am not familiar just off the top of my tired brain what
> part of Genesis talks about selling your daughter into sexual
> slavery.  Can you quote the chapter/lines?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Fred
>
> [anip]
>
Life is too short to go through and transcribe stuff out of the OT.  I
seem to remember it came either when Lot or Noah had some travelers over
to his house and he offered up his daughter for their pleasure.

Here is a quote in the same tone.  I hope it will be as helpful to you
as it has been to me.  I just never know what to do with my slaves:


Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1:

Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them. When you
buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he
shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out
single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If
his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the
wife and her children shall be her master's and he shall go out alone.
But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my
children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to
God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost; and his master
shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for life.

I am so happy we have the OT because it tells us how to live morally. 
The trick is not to cherry pick g-d's word that would be making our own
moral distinctions.  Better to take it as a whole.

s.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Antrim NH M-school to open with 50-75 students

[Duveyoung]

Nablusoss the Fabulous,

Let's take a count.

How many here love Rick?

I love Rick.

See, Nab, almost everyone!

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> >
> > Rick,
> > 
> > After all these years, what don't you understand about "See?  Almost
> > everyone?"
> 
> Rick loves to "see". As long as he can keep his green glasses on that 
> is...
> :-)
> 
> 
> > 
> > Edg
> > PS Without posting limits, I can't help myself from cracking my gum,
> > snortsnarking and chortling at the back of the room.
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 50-75 students is a pretty wide range. If that many students are
> > indefinite,
> > > I doubt that even 50 are definite.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> > > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date:
> > 2/14/2008
> > > 6:35 PM
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Antrim NH M-school to open with 50-75 students

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Rick,
> 
> After all these years, what don't you understand about "See?  Almost
> everyone?"

Rick loves to "see". As long as he can keep his green glasses on that 
is...
:-)


> 
> Edg
> PS Without posting limits, I can't help myself from cracking my gum,
> snortsnarking and chortling at the back of the room.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > 50-75 students is a pretty wide range. If that many students are
> indefinite,
> > I doubt that even 50 are definite.
> > 
> > 
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date:
> 2/14/2008
> > 6:35 PM
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Antrim NH M-school to open with 50-75 students

[Duveyoung]

Rick,

After all these years, what don't you understand about "See?  Almost
everyone?"

Edg
PS Without posting limits, I can't help myself from cracking my gum,
snortsnarking and chortling at the back of the room.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 50-75 students is a pretty wide range. If that many students are
indefinite,
> I doubt that even 50 are definite.
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date:
2/14/2008
> 6:35 PM
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Antrim NH M-school to open with 50-75 students

[Rick Archer]

50-75 students is a pretty wide range. If that many students are indefinite,
I doubt that even 50 are definite.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date: 2/14/2008
6:35 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Behalf Of authfriend
>
> Angela Mailander 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Couple points:
> > That the material world is an illusion was understood in the
> > popular  mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really
> > there. Shankara made the term clear long before MMY
> 
> MMY attributed his teaching on this to Shankara,
> Angela. He didn't pretend it was his own idea.
> 
> The "illusion" of maya isn't that the relative
> exists, but that the relative isn't Brahman.
> 
> Not that the relative isn't Brahman, but that it's
> commonly mistaken as something other than Brahman.

Yes, that's what I was saying. That the relative
is something other than Brahman is the illusion.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Always looking for more information

[matrixmonitor]

---No. Mostly wrong. First, the Puja is a "necessary" part of TM 
since the Shakti energy which enlivens the mantra is conveyed in part 
through the Puja.  Taking away one part of the program after another 
results in a technique devoid of Shakti. One might as well just get 
the mantra from a book and practice on your own.
 Speaking of cults, do you mean as in Benjamin Creme's "Maitreya"?


 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Mr. Ed"  wrote:
> >
> >I just joined the FFL group today and just want to say I'm 
> > enjoying the posts and wide range of outlooks. 
> >I learned the TM technique off campus, no puja.
> 
> Very good, Puja is not necessary. 
> 
>  I just wanted to 
> > make sure I wasn't doing the contempt prior to investigation 
thing. 
> > Having spent a fair amount of time researching and practicing 
> various 
> > meditation styles (more 'buddhistic' usually) I can say from this 
> > outsiders very circumspect viewpoint that the benefits of TM are 
> very 
> > real and readily quantifiable and I would suggest learning TM to 
> > anyone.
> 
> Be careful, the Puja thingy is very tricky, they bow down to a 
Vedic 
> Master ! Buddhist should not bow down to anyone !
> 
>  I would though, and do, suggest to people that they learn off 
> > campus and avoid the Movement.
> 
> Very important, you are well adviced and wise.
> 
>  Sadly, I've seen at close range, 
> > people in my immediate social circles who've suffered from their 
> lack 
> > of caution.
> 
> Yes, what happened to them ? Became vegetarians probably. Started 
to 
> burn insence and wear shawls ? Very strange, even dangerous stuff !
> 
>  I get minimalization and denial from some of my favorite 
> > Ru friends when this is mentioned.so I worry a bit.
> 
> Don't worry, you are the sane person. They are lost to a cult.
> 
> 
> >No group, political ,social, or spiritual thats last for any 
> > amount of time goes without the need of reform.
> 
> Agreed. Reform is vital. Better turn things upside down every so 
> often. Gives a fresh outlook. Traditions are just a burden.
> 
>  I'd like to pose this 
> > question: is there within the autocracy of the TM movement any 
> > realization of the need for change...or is it just fringe 
> > people that are making noise about the dishonsty, the harm, the 
> > oppressive secrecy that are the definitive characteristics of the 
> TM 
> > organization as the rest of the world see's it?
> 
> You see, these are cult-people. They don't really care much about 
the 
> opinions of wise souls like yourself, representative of a very 
> strong, healthy society as you are. No, forget about them, they are 
> lost.
> 
> 
> >I'm a monotheist (of sorts) but I practice a combination of 
> > buddhist meditation and holosync meditation developed by Bill 
> Harris 
> > who left the movement some time ago.
> 
> Very good. Mix as many different techniques you can find ! Just 
blend 
> it all together. Then, and only then will you be able to have clear 
> experiences of your good nature.
> 
>  Being a rather adventurou seeker 
> > myself I have respect for any who come to TM to develope 
> spiritually.
> 
> But be careful. I'm sure some of your friends could become 
> interested. It's important that you stress that they should learn 
> from someone who is not connected to a cult, and does not perform 
any 
> kind of "Puja".
> 
>  
> > I LOVE Fairfield and I dearly love my meditator friends.
>  But I have 
> > concerns and would love to see the special community North of 
town 
> > become what many decent good hearted TM'ers would like it to.
> 
> What would that be ?
> 
>  
> >Or in the wake of Maharishi's passing will we see a 
solidifying 
> of 
> > this autocracy that in my possibly incorrect opinion, perpetuates 
> > occult psuedo science and mind control?
> 
> Probably both. Better stay away from it, it could be very dangerous 
> indeed !
> 
> 
> >I don't intend to be antagonistic, but this strikes me as 
group 
> > where I might get a variety of viewpoints, all of which I'd 
> > appreciate.
> 
> No doubt about that ! :-)
> 
>  I'd like to know what people think.  Thanks
> > 
> >Apologetic for any presumptousness,
> >Ed Raines
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Duveyoung]

Matthew 18:18-20 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)

20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I
in the midst of them.

Larry,

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

Any egoic projection fits your views, below, but pure truth seemingly
IS available whenever two or three are specifically gathered for the
purpose of discovering it.  Not that they will find it, mind you, the
promise is that it is there -- presumably those with deep intent can
REALIZE it

H, let's see now, how many are gathered here today?

Edg


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thinking back now, I should have included a smily face, then it
> wouldn't have come off as such a wild ass axiom - but too late now.
> 
> What I should have said was:  If you have two or more observers, you
> can not have Truth.  
> 
> As each observer distinguishs self - what lies outside of that first
> distinction is everything else, which includes the other observers. 
> So, for each observer, what lies 'outside' that first distinction is
> different because it includes the other observers.
> 
> Let's ask a basic question . . . is the car red?
> 
> Well, what makes the car red is exactly the same as what makes it not
> red.  For example, we can pick out a candle because of its bundle of
> properties, including the space it occupies.  We can make the
> distinction of 'the candle' because there is a 'not candle' to
> dintinguish it from.  The dintinction between the candle and 'not
> candle' is the same distinction - it's the same boundary.
> 
> Sort of like my grandfather who used to bug me with questions like: 
> Does the mortar keep the bricks apart, or does keep them together?
> 
> So getting back to the car . . two or more observers can not equally
> dintguish the car, because the 'not car' distinction includes the
> other observers . . so therefore, the distinction of the car will also
> be different between observers.
> 
>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
>  wrote:
> >
> > Really?  How do you figure?
> > 
> > - Original Message 
> > From: Larry 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:44:31 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
> "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > You can have a manifold relative world that works, or
> you have one
> > 
> > with Truth, but you can't have both
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander
> > 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > 
> > > Well, we've got at least two versions of the events.  This does not
> > 
> > tell us that either version corresponds to the facts, however. 
> > 
> > Medical records can be falsified--and I've seen this done on more than
> > 
> > one occasion.  So the medical records would not necessarily tell us
> > 
> > the truth either.  And if we can see how difficult it is to get at the
> > 
> > truth in this scenario, then what makes us think the "official"
> > 
> > version of history that we learn in school is "true?"
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > - Original Message 
> > 
> > > From: ruthsimplicity 
> > 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com
> > 
> > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:20:47 PM
> > 
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
> > 
> > "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > >   
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Dick Mays
> > 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > >
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian  Governor 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > >  pundits in India.  He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi
> instructor and 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > >  teacher of Advanced Techniques.
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > Farrokh & Ruffina
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > Dear Friends:
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji' s personal
> physician at 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > the time that Dr Deepak  Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in
> England, 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > as per his article entitled "The Maharishi Years - the Untold
> Story". 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > >  I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > inaccuracies.  I was at  Maharishiji' s side during the entire 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > incident.  Some of the details of the article that I know to be 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > untrue are as  follows:
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > there was no blood transfusion from Dr  Chopra;
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Larry]

Thinking back now, I should have included a smily face, then it
wouldn't have come off as such a wild ass axiom - but too late now.

What I should have said was:  If you have two or more observers, you
can not have Truth.  

As each observer distinguishs self - what lies outside of that first
distinction is everything else, which includes the other observers. 
So, for each observer, what lies 'outside' that first distinction is
different because it includes the other observers.

Let's ask a basic question . . . is the car red?

Well, what makes the car red is exactly the same as what makes it not
red.  For example, we can pick out a candle because of its bundle of
properties, including the space it occupies.  We can make the
distinction of 'the candle' because there is a 'not candle' to
dintinguish it from.  The dintinction between the candle and 'not
candle' is the same distinction - it's the same boundary.

Sort of like my grandfather who used to bug me with questions like: 
Does the mortar keep the bricks apart, or does keep them together?

So getting back to the car . . two or more observers can not equally
dintguish the car, because the 'not car' distinction includes the
other observers . . so therefore, the distinction of the car will also
be different between observers.

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Really?  How do you figure?
> 
> - Original Message 
> From: Larry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:44:31 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
"The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> You can have a manifold relative world that works, or
you have one
> 
> with Truth, but you can't have both
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander
> 
>  wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > Well, we've got at least two versions of the events.  This does not
> 
> tell us that either version corresponds to the facts, however. 
> 
> Medical records can be falsified--and I've seen this done on more than
> 
> one occasion.  So the medical records would not necessarily tell us
> 
> the truth either.  And if we can see how difficult it is to get at the
> 
> truth in this scenario, then what makes us think the "official"
> 
> version of history that we learn in school is "true?"
> 
> > 
> 
> > - Original Message 
> 
> > From: ruthsimplicity 
> 
> > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com
> 
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:20:47 PM
> 
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on
> 
> "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> >   
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Dick Mays
> 
>  wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> > >
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian  Governor 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000 
> 
> > 
> 
> > >  pundits in India.  He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi
instructor and 
> 
> > 
> 
> > >  teacher of Advanced Techniques.
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Farrokh & Ruffina
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dear Friends:
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji' s personal
physician at 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > the time that Dr Deepak  Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in
England, 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > as per his article entitled "The Maharishi Years - the Untold
Story". 
> 
> > 
> 
> > >  I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > inaccuracies.  I was at  Maharishiji' s side during the entire 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > incident.  Some of the details of the article that I know to be 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > untrue are as  follows:
> 
> > 
> 
> > > there was no blood transfusion from Dr  Chopra;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Maharishi was not on a ventilator and was not pronounced  dead as
> 
> > 
> 
> > claimed;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > he did not have kidney failure at all at that  time;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr Chopra's father attended Maharishi in India, but not in  London;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > there was no helicopter involved;
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr Chopra did not  carry Maharishiji in his arms into the hospital.
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr Chopra was  handsomely paid for his services by the movement. 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > These facts can be  corroborated by Prakash and Kirti from the
Indian 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > TM movement and Maharishiji' s medical records would bear this
out as 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > well.  There were two other Indian physicians involved, both of
whom 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > were instructed  in TM by Farrokh.  They can confirm the facts as 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > well.
> 
> > 
> 
> > > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > > Dr G. M.
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> > It is interesting to watch people writing history. The absence of
> 
> > 
> 
> > facts w

[FairfieldLife] Re: Always looking for more information

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Mr. Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I just joined the FFL group today and just want to say I'm 
> enjoying the posts and wide range of outlooks. 
>I learned the TM technique off campus, no puja.

Very good, Puja is not necessary. 

 I just wanted to 
> make sure I wasn't doing the contempt prior to investigation thing. 
> Having spent a fair amount of time researching and practicing 
various 
> meditation styles (more 'buddhistic' usually) I can say from this 
> outsiders very circumspect viewpoint that the benefits of TM are 
very 
> real and readily quantifiable and I would suggest learning TM to 
> anyone.

Be careful, the Puja thingy is very tricky, they bow down to a Vedic 
Master ! Buddhist should not bow down to anyone !

 I would though, and do, suggest to people that they learn off 
> campus and avoid the Movement.

Very important, you are well adviced and wise.

 Sadly, I've seen at close range, 
> people in my immediate social circles who've suffered from their 
lack 
> of caution.

Yes, what happened to them ? Became vegetarians probably. Started to 
burn insence and wear shawls ? Very strange, even dangerous stuff !

 I get minimalization and denial from some of my favorite 
> Ru friends when this is mentioned.so I worry a bit.

Don't worry, you are the sane person. They are lost to a cult.


>No group, political ,social, or spiritual thats last for any 
> amount of time goes without the need of reform.

Agreed. Reform is vital. Better turn things upside down every so 
often. Gives a fresh outlook. Traditions are just a burden.

 I'd like to pose this 
> question: is there within the autocracy of the TM movement any 
> realization of the need for change...or is it just fringe 
> people that are making noise about the dishonsty, the harm, the 
> oppressive secrecy that are the definitive characteristics of the 
TM 
> organization as the rest of the world see's it?

You see, these are cult-people. They don't really care much about the 
opinions of wise souls like yourself, representative of a very 
strong, healthy society as you are. No, forget about them, they are 
lost.


>I'm a monotheist (of sorts) but I practice a combination of 
> buddhist meditation and holosync meditation developed by Bill 
Harris 
> who left the movement some time ago.

Very good. Mix as many different techniques you can find ! Just blend 
it all together. Then, and only then will you be able to have clear 
experiences of your good nature.

 Being a rather adventurou seeker 
> myself I have respect for any who come to TM to develope 
spiritually.

But be careful. I'm sure some of your friends could become 
interested. It's important that you stress that they should learn 
from someone who is not connected to a cult, and does not perform any 
kind of "Puja".

 
> I LOVE Fairfield and I dearly love my meditator friends.
 But I have 
> concerns and would love to see the special community North of town 
> become what many decent good hearted TM'ers would like it to.

What would that be ?

 
>Or in the wake of Maharishi's passing will we see a solidifying 
of 
> this autocracy that in my possibly incorrect opinion, perpetuates 
> occult psuedo science and mind control?

Probably both. Better stay away from it, it could be very dangerous 
indeed !


>I don't intend to be antagonistic, but this strikes me as group 
> where I might get a variety of viewpoints, all of which I'd 
> appreciate.

No doubt about that ! :-)

 I'd like to know what people think.  Thanks
> 
>Apologetic for any presumptousness,
>Ed Raines
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] 9-11 Coincidences Video

[Angela Mailander]

Thanks Bhairitu.  When I hear things like "take from a story what you need" I 
think of the stories our official history books tell us.  Might there be a 
problem with "taking from a story" what who, exactly, needs?  No offense Turq.  
This is not against you, but it is about the statement you made, which may be a 
fine statement in some contexts, but not in others.  

- Original Message 
From: Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 3:43:39 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] 9-11 Coincidences Video









  



Interesting video on the "maintenance" that was performed on the 
twin 

towers before 9-11:

http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=NHJHAp49Lh8






  























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

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Obama= Much Better Theater'

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Obama offers much better theater,   
> In our living rooms, and world,
> For the next chapter.
> Kind of like Shakespere,
> Compared to The Daily News...

Well said. A vote for Hilary is a vote
for the status quo. Nothing will change.
You'll click the remote and get the same
old broadcast channels, full of the same
old soap operas and the same old ways
of doing things that have never worked
in the past and won't now.

Obama's like upgrading to cable and
discovering again what TV could be if
it had any vision.

Even if it's just television at least
it'll be worth watching.

[FairfieldLife] Always looking for more information

[Mr. Ed]

   I just joined the FFL group today and just want to say I'm 
enjoying the posts and wide range of outlooks. 
   I learned the TM technique off campus, no puja. I just wanted to 
make sure I wasn't doing the contempt prior to investigation thing. 
Having spent a fair amount of time researching and practicing various 
meditation styles (more 'buddhistic' usually) I can say from this 
outsiders very circumspect viewpoint that the benefits of TM are very 
real and readily quantifiable and I would suggest learning TM to 
anyone. I would though, and do, suggest to people that they learn off 
campus and avoid the Movement. Sadly, I've seen at close range, 
people in my immediate social circles who've suffered from their lack 
of caution. I get minimalization and denial from some of my favorite 
Ru friends when this is mentioned.so I worry a bit.
   No group, political ,social, or spiritual thats last for any 
amount of time goes without the need of reform. I'd like to pose this 
question: is there within the autocracy of the TM movement any 
realization of the need for change...or is it just fringe 
people that are making noise about the dishonsty, the harm, the 
oppressive secrecy that are the definitive characteristics of the TM 
organization as the rest of the world see's it?
   I'm a monotheist (of sorts) but I practice a combination of 
buddhist meditation and holosync meditation developed by Bill Harris 
who left the movement some time ago. Being a rather adventurou seeker 
myself I have respect for any who come to TM to develope spiritually. 
I LOVE Fairfield and I dearly love my meditator friends. But I have 
concerns and would love to see the special community North of town 
become what many decent good hearted TM'ers would like it to. 
   Or in the wake of Maharishi's passing will we see a solidifying of 
this autocracy that in my possibly incorrect opinion, perpetuates 
occult psuedo science and mind control?
   I don't intend to be antagonistic, but this strikes me as group 
where I might get a variety of viewpoints, all of which I'd 
appreciate. I'd like to know what people think.  Thanks

   Apologetic for any presumptousness,
   Ed Raines

[FairfieldLife] Selfless Service (was Re: Deepak Chopra)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The effort that is made according to the shaastra, that is puNya
> (meritous action) which gives rise to earthly advancement and mokSha
> (salvation).
> 
> However much purushhaartha (effort) is needed for a task, that much
> effort is to be made. However much puNya (meritous action) is needed
> in order to cross bhavasaagara (sea of experience), without that puNya
> it is not possible to get to the other side. If someone has a thirst
> for a sera of water then how can their thirst be quenched with a
> chhaTaaMka (a sixteenth sera) of water?
> 
> Certainly, by reading holy books you can become holy. Studying the
> Gita, the Ramayana etc gives puNya (merit). But by reading, the amount
> of puNya acquired is not enough to cross bhavasaagara (the ocean of
> experience).
> 
> I am not negating the value of reading holy books - you should read;
> but by studying alone one's duty is not finished, you should obtain
> its value. You should make an effort to apply what is written, in the
> form of work, only then can it be completely useful, and then abundant
> puNya will be accumulated. If you wish to be saved from downfall then
> escape from sin, don't make any effort to do anything contrary to the
> shaastra; escape from sin and do meritous action - this the way to
> progress.
> 
> Guru Dev [Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita kaNa 43 of 108]
> http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/UA_Hindi.htm#kaNa_43

Great quote, John. It brings to mind what George
was just saying about the student never quite
understanding the teachings of the teacher.

Then again, as I said to George, the difference
of opinion might merely indicate that the student
was disagreeing with the teacher.

[FairfieldLife] a flaw in Neo-Advaita

[tertonzeno]

Per http://www.spiritualteachers.org website, the origins of Neo-
Advaita may traced to to certain misinterpretations of Shankara; with 
some allegiance to the more nihilistic-oriented teachings and/or 
comments of Ramana Maharshi and Nisargadatta Maharaj.

A key point of most Neo-Advaitins (Ramesh Balsekar, Eckart Tolle, 
Byron Katie, Gangaji, Andrew Cohen**...etc) is that one should 
constantly question one's beliefs: an assertion obviously contrary to 
MMY's approach.  

A quote from Nisargadatta Maharaj:

"
I offer to you the following dialog from Nisargadatta Maharaj... 

Nisargadatta: "To go beyond the mind, you must have your mind in 
perfect order. You cannot leave a mess behind and go beyond. He who 
seeks Liberation must examine his mind by his own efforts, and once 
the mind is purified by such introspection Liberation is obtained and 
appears obvious and natural." 

Q: "Then why are sadhanas prescribed?" 

Nisargadatta: "Freedom to do what one likes is really bondage, while 
being free to do what one must, what is right, is real freedom." 

Q: "How can the absolute be the result of a process?" 

Nisargadatta: "You are right, the relative cannot result in the 
absolute. But the relative can block the absolute, just as the non-
churning of the cream may prevent butter from separating. It is the 
real that creates the urge; the inner prompts the outer and the outer 
responds in interest and effort." "You seem to want instant insight, 
forgetting that the instant is always preceded by a long preparation. 
The fruit falls suddenly, but the ripening takes time." 

"The way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To 
destroy the false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs."

** on Cohen, though he's in the Neo-Advaitin category (being a former 
disciple of HWL Poonja - the most notorious Father of Neo-Advaitins), 
Cohen has (along with Wilber) subscripted to a more progressive 
orientation called "Evolutionary Consciousness". The problem is that 
he hasn't come up with anything really new! 
 
My POV: as hinted at in the website, Neo-Advaitin-ism is a type of 
shell-game...for losers and easy marks.  Learn about it but don't get 
sucked into it.
t get. 

[FairfieldLife] Antrim NH M-school to open with 50-75 students

[bob_brigante]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2008/02/15/visio\
n_for_antrim_school_changed/

[FairfieldLife] 'Obama= Much Better Theater'

[Robert]

Obama offers much better theater,   In our living rooms, and world,
  For the next chapter.
  Kind of like Shakespere,
  Compared to The Daily News...
   

   
-
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.

[FairfieldLife] Selfless Service (was Re: Deepak Chopra)

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
> 
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of authfriend
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:50 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Selfless Service (was Re: Deepak Chopra)

[snip]

> Wrong hogwash. The point is not that there's 


The effort that is made according to the shaastra, that is puNya
(meritous action) which gives rise to earthly advancement and mokSha
(salvation).

However much purushhaartha (effort) is needed for a task, that much
effort is to be made. However much puNya (meritous action) is needed
in order to cross bhavasaagara (sea of experience), without that puNya
it is not possible to get to the other side. If someone has a thirst
for a sera of water then how can their thirst be quenched with a
chhaTaaMka (a sixteenth sera) of water?

Certainly, by reading holy books you can become holy. Studying the
Gita, the Ramayana etc gives puNya (merit). But by reading, the amount
of puNya acquired is not enough to cross bhavasaagara (the ocean of
experience).

I am not negating the value of reading holy books - you should read;
but by studying alone one's duty is not finished, you should obtain
its value. You should make an effort to apply what is written, in the
form of work, only then can it be completely useful, and then abundant
puNya will be accumulated. If you wish to be saved from downfall then
escape from sin, don't make any effort to do anything contrary to the
shaastra; escape from sin and do meritous action - this the way to
progress.


Guru Dev [Shri Shankaracharya UpadeshAmrita kaNa 43 of 108]
http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/UA_Hindi.htm#kaNa_43

[FairfieldLife] The C-word...uh...flap

[TurquoiseB]

Just to get back to the mundane, and to remind
folks here what people in the world are talking
about while we debate the fine points of Deepak
Chopra's ethics, America is going four-letter-
word crazy again.

NBC is doing the apology dance because a guest
on its "Today" show used what it calls a "vulgar
slang term" on the air. They're beating the 
guest up one side and down the other for daring
to use this horrible term. And, given that the
guest in question was Jane Fonda, right-wingers
who still hate her from the Vietnam era are
denouncing her in the press. (Which I think is
doubly funny, because they're demonizing her
for using the same term they used to call her.)

Anyway, the sheer Puritan absurdity of it, living 
as I do in a more civilized land, got me curious,
so I looked up the clip in question, and discovered
the rather innocent *context* in which Jane spoke 
the word:

http://gawker.com/356442/jane-fonda-to-america-c-u-next-tuesday

The whole thing makes me happy I live in a country
where women can still safely call a coño a coño.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of authfriend
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:49 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

 

--- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com"FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Couple points:
> That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular 
mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there. Shankara 
made the term clear long before MMY

MMY attributed his teaching on this to Shankara,
Angela. He didn't pretend it was his own idea.

The "illusion" of maya isn't that the relative
exists, but that the relative isn't Brahman.

Not that the relative isn’t Brahman, but that it’s commonly mistaken as
something other than Brahman. “All this is That.”


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date: 2/14/2008
6:35 PM
 

[FairfieldLife] MMY appreciation

[Angela Mailander]

One of the things that I appreciate Marshy for that hasn't been sufficiently 
appreciated (in my opinion) is that he was able to talk at the level of the 
absolutely unenlightened person who is completely overshadowed by small self 
and relative world as separate from Self.   I don't remember his exact words, 
but I remember the gist of it.   You can be at the goal without remembering the 
path--that would not make you a good teacher.  Such a teacher would shout 
descriptions of his surroundings to a poor student sitting at the foot of the 
mountain in a swamp and expect that student to get where the teacher is based 
on those descriptions.  MMY understood that this student needs, first of all, a 
reason to move from "the unity of ignorance."  And then he needs a path to 
follow.  

You can also be near the top and remember your own path, which may or may not 
be a suitable path for someone else, but you, being merely near the top, can't 
see that.  If you're completely at the top, however, you can see what all paths 
have in common and thus structure a path that is suitable for a larger number 
of folks.  

Marshy was, in other words, a change agent.  In Chemistry or physics a change 
agent partakes of both, the thing to be changed and the thing it is to be 
changed into.  Chopra hinted at that when he spoke of the dual nature of MMY.  
Without that dual nature, he could not have accomplished much. a



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

[FairfieldLife] 9-11 Coincidences Video

[Bhairitu]

Interesting video on the "maintenance" that was performed on the twin 
towers before 9-11:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHJHAp49Lh8

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >  I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and 
> > inaccuracies. 
> 
> Now this is getting really interesting!  One of these two is a big 
fat
> liar.  How can we figure out which it is?
> 
> Interestingly he doesn't refute the poison claim.  When Maharishi 
came
> to Fairfield in '75 I heard that a man ran up to him at the airport
> and asked "Are you the Maharishi?"  He said "yes" and the guy 
handed
> him a handful of straw instead of a flower. 

Maharishis DC3 blown up, arson in Manilla, armed gunman caught on 
the bridge to Kulm. 
Now we hear, a story from Chopra but still, that Maharishi was 
poisened.
Ask yourself who had the interest and resources to pull these sorts 
of things off. Nutcases ? Hardly.
 
Then we have the fellows, I know one of them personally and have 
been told there are a few others, who actually gave up their 
activities for different agencies and continue in the Movement, 
including Purusha, with Maharishis OK.
 
You may not like it, and Turq will continue to ridicule the idea 
until he dies, but it happened none the less.

[FairfieldLife] 'Dear Abby...My husband, Bill...'

[Robert]

Dear Abby:

 My husband is a liar and a cheat. He has cheated on me from the
beginning and, when I confront him, he denies everything. What's worse, 
everyone knows
that he cheats on me. It is so humiliating.

 Also, since he lost his job six years ago, he hasn't even looked for a
new one.  All he does all day is smoke cigars, cruise around and shoot the
breeze with his buddies while I have to work to pay the bills.

Since our daughter went away to college he doesn't even pretend to
like me and hints that I may be a lesbian. What should I do?

Signed:
Clueless
   
   
  
Dear
Clueless:

Grow up and dump him. Good grief, woman. You don't need him anymore!
You're a United States Senator from New York running for President of the
United States. Act like one!



   
-
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[Angela Mailander]

Thanks for the clarification.  I had read Shankara independently of MMY's 
teaching.

- Original Message 
From: authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:48:53 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak









  



--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander 

 wrote:

>

> Couple points:

> That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular 

mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there.  Shankara 

made the term clear  long before MMY



MMY attributed his teaching on this to Shankara,

Angela. He didn't pretend it was his own idea.



The "illusion" of maya isn't that the relative

exists, but that the relative isn't Brahman.



MMY, as I recall, said "maya" meant "that which

is not"--meaning the relative as not-Brahman, i.e.,

maya is that which is not not-Brahman.






  























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

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My guess is that Deepak was telling the truth, with some 
> embellishment and fuzziness do to lapse of time, and GM 
> (Girish Momaya?) is trying to whitewash it for posterity.

I have exactly the same guess.

Chopra's a sloppy storyteller with a shaky
relationship with the swap space of his
memory, but it feels to me like the basic
essence of the story is true. 

The nitpicky details don't matter a damn
to me. What was interesting about Chopra's
tale for me was hearing him speak about 
something I'd seen myself, how jealous 
Maharishi would get when someone was 
upstaging him.

On the other hand, rhe reactiveness and the
tone of the other doctor seems a tad too 
devotional for me to take it seriously. This
is not a doctor speaking about his patient,
not when he refers to him as Maharishiji. 
This is a disciple speaking about his master.
And disciples can justify saying all sorts
of stuff if they think it protects or
glorifies their master. 

It's like Angela said -- these are just two
points of view, neither being anything like
"the truth." They're just points of view.

And they're both just stories. You take what
you need from a story and you leave the rest.

Re: [FairfieldLife] What's right action? (Selfless Service (was Re: Deepak Chopra))

[Angela Mailander]

Edg, I love your story which is a vast and imaginative improvement over the 
usual "For want of a nail the shoe was lost, for want of a shoe the horse was 
lost, for want of a horse, the man was lost, for want of the man, the battle 
was lost...etc."  Ultimately, the war was lost.  The short name for that type 
of scenario is called "the butterfly effect."  

It's even more complicated than that.  The problem with that scenario is the 
assumption that the causal chain of events that leads to the war being lost is 
the only chain of events that could bring about this loss.  Now in the case of 
the war being lost, ultimately, for the want of a nail (which "want" had an 
infinite set of "causes" also), the problem is quite obvious.  But the same 
problem obtains in the most simple and apparently obvious set of "causal 
chains."  We think we know the "cause" of water boiling for instance.  In 
reality there are about 22 variables, and then, all we can really be sure of is 
that they work in our time (relatively speaking) on planet earth.  a

- Original Message 
From: Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:25:42 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] What's right action?   (Selfless Service (was Re: 
Deepak Chopra))









  



Angela Mailander wrote: "This debate about whether or not "good 
works" (in whose opinion are they good?) get you "there" is part of the 
Christian tradition also.  But if karma is indeed unfathomable (and it seems to 
be the case in principle) then how could we possibly know what does and what 
does not get anyone there?"

Edg:  Here's an exercise I constructed to show how complex these questions 
really are.

The following is a completely possible series of events.

You decide to walk somewhere, and just before you take your first step, you 
decide to pick which foot to start out on.  

You choose your left foot.  

You take your first step, and unbeknownst to you, your foot kills several 
extremely small dust mites that are living on your floor.  

One of these mites is crawling in a direction that would have taken it towards 
a small spider which is almost dying from starvation.  

The mite would have given it enough nourishment to live another week.  

The spider will die and will never get a chance to build a web in the corner of 
your room where a week from now a mosquito is "scheduled" to be captured by the 
spider.  

That mosquito is going to be carrying a deadly virus, and two weeks from now 
that mosquito, because it will not be eaten by the spider, will infect nine 
people with this virus.

Now, that's pretty straight forward -- we simply cannot know the results of 
action to any satisfaction -- it always gets more delicate and subtle and too 
"far into the future to see."

Here's some follow-up questions to ask after having read the above.

What would I say to one of the infected persons if by some happenstance it was 
completely proven to both of us that I could have prevented it from ever 
happening?

How do I feel about causing something quite negative to happen that is 
completely beyond ordinary human ability to foresee?  

What amount of vigilance must I maintain to feel free from any moral 
responsibility from being the start of a series of events that ends up 
negatively?  How far do I have to see into the future?

Do I take risks that are more easily foreseen that I would ordinarily not take 
if I thought a bit about it?

If I were ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that every time I took a long walk, something 
negative would occur after a very long chain of events (weeks later and dozens 
of events removed), would I still walk?

What is negative?  How do I decide if the persons that were infected did or did 
not "deserve" having the virus?

How do I know when to intervene with the destiny and fate of another person? 

I could be of some help to almost everyone I know, but I do not do so because 
there would not be any time left to do anything else; what is my criteria for 
overcoming this impasse?  How do things get to my "front burner"?

Why do I feel responsible for my actions when they are almost entirely created 
and carried out by automatic processes?  When I accidentally break something of 
someone, why do I say, "I''m sorry."?  Why do I feel "ownership" of my actions 
and their consequences in the short term but do not do so for the "longer" term?

Edg


--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander  
wrote:
>
> This debate about whether or not "good works" (in whose opinion are they 
> good?) get you "there" is part of the Christian tradition also.  But if karma 
> is indeed unfathomable (and it seems to be the case in principle) then how 
> could we possibly know what does and what does not get anyone there?  What 
> gets one person "there" might send another to hell.  This, of course, does 
> not mean that we couldn't generalize about a technique independent of "good" 
> and "bad" tha

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My guess is that Deepak was telling the truth, with some
> embellishment and fuzziness do to lapse of time, and GM 
> (Girish Momaya?) is trying to whitewash it for posterity.

How do you account for the year Chopra says MMY spent
away from the movement, Rick, ensconced in a country
home in England attended only by Chopra and the servants?

How could that be just "fuzziness due to lapse of time"?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

Not from what I've read.  From one small point of view you could use 
the word descend.  The awareness hovers over the M and then 
you "descend" into it, as if you were sort of slipping into a vehicle 
that was going to transport you.  It was a sort of metaphysical 
transport of types, I guess?  Not sure.  Not familiar with Magical 
net B practice.  

M technique took a lot of preperation and you really had to have a 
strong mind and great powers of self control.  It was also dangerous 
and you could sort of go wonkers or loose your mind, whatever that 
means.  Not for novices or the merely curious.

Fred




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Or descends. Sounds like Magical Net Buddhist practices.
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "boyboy_8" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:19 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D
> 
> 
> > Boyboy (Fred) knows of Merkabah.  The contemplative technique of 
the 
> > Merkavah was considered one of the most advanced and dangerous 
> > techniques and was eventually [almost] totally suppressed.  (Came 
about 
> > by a mystical reading of Ezekiel's prophecies). 
> > 
> > I think I once saw it in my mind.  It is used to attach one's 
awareness 
> > to as one ascends.
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk"  
wrote:
> >>
> >> boyboy know not merkabah?
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > 
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Couple points:
> That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular 
mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there.  Shankara 
made the term clear  long before MMY

MMY attributed his teaching on this to Shankara,
Angela. He didn't pretend it was his own idea.

The "illusion" of maya isn't that the relative
exists, but that the relative isn't Brahman.

MMY, as I recall, said "maya" meant "that which
is not"--meaning the relative as not-Brahman, i.e.,
maya is that which is not not-Brahman.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blaine Watson: 1994

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Wow.  What a story. I am unsure if your concluding perspective on 
> Jyotish is that it's all mumbo-jumbo or it has a valid basis for 
> being taken seriously?
 
A quick Google search gives me the impression that Blaine Watson is
now a professional Jyotishi. Of course, being a professional Jyotishi
doesn't rule out a belief that Jyotish is all mumbo-jumbo.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of ruthsimplicity
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:21 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The
> Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor
> 
>  
> 
> He says MMY's medical records would bear this out. I would be glad to
> take a look. :)
> 
> Are you in the medical or legal profession? Not attacking. Just
getting to
> know you better.
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date:
2/14/2008
> 6:35 PM
>


Was.  I am now a lobbyist on health care issues. 

[FairfieldLife] DEEPAK CHOPRA, MD

[suziezuzie]

http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/WLLQRYNA$LCEV2.QueryView?
P_LICENSE_NUMBER=51479&P_LTE_ID=789

[FairfieldLife] Re: making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[TurquoiseB]

First, George, thank you so much for expressing your
opinion of Chopra so clearly and so compassionately.
I didn't feel in your post a gram of the anger and 
hostility I've been talking about feeling in some 
other recent posts about him. Just one comment:

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "george_deforest"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Fwd: what I am thinking about 
> The Maharishi Years -- The Untold Story by Deepak Chopra
> 
> interesting ... I think Deepak was brilliant as a communicater, 
> but he did not fully understand M.s teaching, and his books 
> distorted it, altho he did inspire lots of initiations ...
> 
> I think M wanted him close so Deepak could rest and 
> learn better M's knowlege so he could present it accurately ...
> 
> even in this note Deepak says:  
> vedanta says  "the material world is an illusion" 
> 
> Maharishi says the expanded awareness sees that 
> relative is penetrated and permeated by the absolute 
> so in the profoundest sense, the relative is the carrier, 
> the dispenser of the absolute.
> 
> the absolute manifests via the relative ... so it is not 
> just an illusion. Seeing it simply as an illusion was 
> the superficiality of the understanding before Maharisi came.
> 
> I think Deepak never took SCI or teacher training, and tho 
> he might have had many personal conversations with Maharishi, 
> it seems to me from his writing that his understanding 
> of Maharishi's knowledge was very incomplete ... and 
> a little distortion can pervert the teaching.
> 
> I think that may be why Maharishi wanted to have Deepak 
> spend more time with him before he wrote more books, 
> so popular, but misrepresentative ...
> 
> In this message Deepak mentions surprise that 
> an enlightened person would be materialistic
> (M talks about 200% of life, does not promote asceticism )  
> 
> If I remember correctly, in his books Deepak was 
> a proponent of positive thinking as well ...
> (M said "if a poor man repeats over and over
> I am rich, I am rich, I am rich
> that does not make him a rich man") 
> 
> Also, M said, "but the mountain doesn't mve!! 
> when the faith of the mustard seed moving mountains story 
> came up ...
> 
> I could be wrong of course, but I always felt 
> Deepak's writing showed a lack of understanding of 
> Maharishi's teaching.

Another way of looking at it, George, is that
Chopra *disagrees* with Maharishi's teaching.

That does not imply that he never understood it.

[FairfieldLife] 'John McCain's Transcendent Challenge= Addiction to War'

[Robert]

John McCain's challenge is to transcend to value of war.
  Is war really the best value for Christians?
  How could this be?
  Jesus is called the 'Prince of Peace'
  Who best fits this description of all the candidates, I wonder?
  Certainly not another addicted war-monger...
  How in the world did any right-wing candidate;
  Ever become an advocate of Jesus' Teaching?
  John McCain is even more absurd than Bush...
  If that's possible.
   
  Robert Gimbel  Seattle,WA

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

[FairfieldLife] Selfless Service (was Re: Deepak Chopra)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This debate about whether or not "good works" (in whose 
> opinion are they good?) get you "there" is part of the 
> Christian tradition also.  But if karma is indeed 
> unfathomable (and it seems to be the case in principle) 
> then how could we possibly know what does and what does 
> not get anyone there?  

My reason for believing that "good works" CAN help
to get you there -- and in a big way -- comes from
personal experience with mindfulness.

Maharishi tended to speak about seven (or eight)
states of consciousness. Buddhists got him beat;
they got 10,000. :-) And that's just a metaphor
for "so many you can't count 'em." 

During a normal day you might cycle through 50
to 100 states of consciousness, all subsets of 
waking state, but all different from one another. 
I tend to believe that each of those states of 
consciousness has certain mental and physical 
attributes associated with it. If you're in that 
state of consciousness, you manifest those 
attributes in your thought and in your action. 

Thus when you are angry, you get to "wear" the
mental and physical correlates of the state of
consciousness of anger. Remember the last time
you were really, really angry? How did your body
feel? What were the kinds of thoughts that were 
going through your head? How did you treat the
people around you? Would you want to "wear" those 
physical and mental traits all the time?

Now think back to the last time you did some-
thing nice for someone, just for the fuck of it.
You didn't do it out of a sense of duty, or any
feelings that you needed to -- you just did it
because you got a wild hair up your ass and 
felt like doing something nice for someone. Got
that memory? So how did THAT one feel, physically
and mentally?

We have a CHOICE as to which of these states of
consciousness we dwell in. Just as easily as one
can shift the attention from daydreaming back to
the mantra, one can shift from the ugly, painful
state of consciousness of anger back to the shiny,
joyful state of consciousness of having done 
something nice for someone.

How?

Do something nice for someone. Perform good works.
Do selfless service. 

In my opinion selfless service really CAN help to 
"get you there," because of its karma. You do the
action, and the almost immediate result of that
action is that your state of consciousness shifts
back to that shiny, joyful place. The shiny, joy-
ful place happens as a direct *result* of doing 
the selfless service.

And as far as I can tell, the more of the moments
of your life you spend in shiny, joyful states of
consciousness, the closer you might just be getting
to living there 24/7.

Doing selfless service is practice for enlightenment.
And you know what they say about practice making
perfect.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Posting Limits- Back to 50/week as of midnight

[mainstream20016]

>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> 
> Nope. Back to 50/week as of midnight central tonight.
> 
(snip)

Thank you, Rick !  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[curtisdeltablues]

>  I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and 
> inaccuracies. 

Now this is getting really interesting!  One of these two is a big fat
liar.  How can we figure out which it is?

Interestingly he doesn't refute the poison claim.  When Maharishi came
to Fairfield in '75 I heard that a man ran up to him at the airport
and asked "Are you the Maharishi?"  He said "yes" and the guy handed
him a handful of straw instead of a flower.  Very nutty.  My point is
that I think if he was poisoned it was probably the act of a mentally
ill individual rather than some well thought out plot.  Famous people
are magnets for nutcases.  

Speaking of which Chopra comes out sounding a bit nutty if those
details are false.  He may have a problem distinguishing fact from
fantasy. He doesn't refute the claim that Chopra spent months with
Maharishi personally.

I love a good mystery!



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Please note that Dr G M is an outstanding Indian  Governor 
> responsible for single-handedly creating the first group of 8,000 
>  pundits in India.  He is a Maharishi-trained TM-Sidhi instructor and 
>  teacher of Advanced Techniques.
> 
> Farrokh & Ruffina
> 
> 
> Dear Friends:
> 
> I am an Indian physician who was Maharishiji's personal physician at 
> the time that Dr Deepak  Chopra was assisting Maharishiji in England, 
> as per his article entitled "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Story". 
>  I must inform you that his article is replete with untruths and 
> inaccuracies.  I was at  Maharishiji's side during the entire 
> incident.  Some of the details of the article that I know to be 
> untrue are as  follows:
> there was no blood transfusion from Dr  Chopra;
> Maharishi was not on a ventilator and was not pronounced  dead as
claimed;
> he did not have kidney failure at all at that  time;
> Dr Chopra's father attended Maharishi in India, but not in  London;
> there was no helicopter involved;
> Dr Chopra did not  carry Maharishiji in his arms into the hospital.
> 
> Dr Chopra was  handsomely paid for his services by the movement. 
> These facts can be  corroborated by Prakash and Kirti from the Indian 
> TM movement and Maharishiji's medical records would bear this out as 
> well.  There were two other Indian physicians involved, both of whom 
> were instructed  in TM by Farrokh.  They can confirm the facts as 
> well.
> 
> Dr G. M.
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Corrections to Dr Chopra's article on "The Maharishi Years - the Untold Stor

[Rick Archer]

My guess is that Deepak was telling the truth, with some embellishment and
fuzziness do to lapse of time, and GM (Girish Momaya?) is trying to
whitewash it for posterity.

 


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date: 2/14/2008
6:35 PM
 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Posting Limits

[Rick Archer]

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Duveyoung
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:08 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Posting Limits

 

So, just in case Rick is thinking of going back to 35 posts per week,
I add my vote for 50/week here.

Nope. Back to 50/week as of midnight central tonight.

Again, if Turq and Judy would JUST STOP THAT NOISE I would be willing
to give them each unlimited posting rights.

By my count Judy’s at 170 and Barry at 117 for the week. My count may be
inflated because I’ve been getting duplicates of some posts via email.

By my count others over 50 include

Me: 114

Curtis: 86

Geezerfreak: 55

You (Edg) and Nabby: 52

Everyone else is under 50.


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date: 2/14/2008
6:35 PM
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] making the rounds: another view of Deepak

[Angela Mailander]

Couple points:
That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular mind to 
mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there.  Shankara made the term 
clear  long before MMY by explaining that "illusion" in this context means "not 
real" in the sense that it is changing, not in the sense that it isn't really 
there.  He uses the example of the son of a barren widow, as I recall.  That 
boy has no existence.  Spencer Brown makes much the same point also when he 
says that "existence" is not the source of reality, as  20th century science 
tends to see it.   This tendency to see existence as the source of reality  is 
at the heart of  the failure of 20th century science to really deal with the 
notion of causality at any depth, and it has other consequences on clear 
thinking.

Here's what GSB says more fully:

"There is a tendency, especially today, to regard existence as the source of 
reality, and thus a as a central concept.  But as soon as it is formally 
examined existence is seen to be highly peripheral and, as such, especially 
corrupt (in the formal sense) and vulnerable.  The concept of truth is more 
central, although still recognizably peripheral.  If the weakness of 
present-day science is that it centres (sic) round existence, the weakness of 
present-day logic is that it centres (sic) round truth.

"Throughout the essay, we find no need of the concept of truth, apart from two 
avoidable appearances (true=open to proof) in the descriptive context.  At no 
point, to say the least, is it a necessary inhabitant of the calculating forms. 
 These forms are thus not only precursors of existence, they are also 
precursors of truth.

"It is, I am afraid, the intellectual block which most of us come up against at 
the points where, to experience the world clearly we must abandon existence to 
truth, truth to indication, indication to form, and form to void, that has so 
help up the development of logic and its mathematics."

I would add to that that the same problem he describes has held up the 
advancement of linguistics as well.  a



- Original Message 
From: george_deforest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:08:09 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] making the rounds: another view of Deepak









  



Fwd: what I am thinking about 

The Maharishi Years -- The Untold Story by Deepak Chopra



interesting ... I think Deepak was brilliant as a communicater, 

but he did not fully understand M.s teaching, and his books 

distorted it, altho he did inspire lots of initiations ...



I think M wanted him close so Deepak could rest and 

learn better M's knowlege so he could present it accurately ...



even in this note Deepak says:  

vedanta says  "the material world is an illusion" 



Maharishi says the expanded awareness sees that 

relative is penetrated and permeated by the absolute 

so in the profoundest sense, the relative is the carrier, 

the dispenser of the absolute.



the absolute manifests via the relative ... so it is not 

just an illusion. Seeing it simply as an illusion was 

the superficiality of the understanding before Maharisi came.



I think Deepak never took SCI or teacher training, and tho 

he might have had many personal conversations with Maharishi, 

it seems to me from his writing that his understanding 

of Maharishi's knowledge was very incomplete ... and 

a little distortion can pervert the teaching.



I think that may be why Maharishi wanted to have Deepak 

spend more time with him before he wrote more books, 

so popular, but misrepresentative ...



In this message Deepak mentions surprise that 

an enlightened person would be materialistic

(M talks about 200% of life, does not promote asceticism )  



If I remember correctly, in his books Deepak was 

a proponent of positive thinking as well ...

(M said "if a poor man repeats over and over

I am rich, I am rich, I am rich

that does not make him a rich man") 



Also, M said, "but the mountain doesn't mve!! 

when the faith of the mustard seed moving mountains story 

came up ...



I could be wrong of course, but I always felt 

Deepak's writing showed a lack of understanding of 

Maharishi's teaching. 






  























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

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[Kirk]

Or descends. Sounds like Magical Net Buddhist practices.

- Original Message - 
From: "boyboy_8" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D


> Boyboy (Fred) knows of Merkabah.  The contemplative technique of the 
> Merkavah was considered one of the most advanced and dangerous 
> techniques and was eventually [almost] totally suppressed.  (Came about 
> by a mystical reading of Ezekiel's prophecies). 
> 
> I think I once saw it in my mind.  It is used to attach one's awareness 
> to as one ascends.
> 
> Fred
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> boyboy know not merkabah?
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
>