[FairfieldLife] Modern Day Sanyasins?

[John]

To All:
 
In jyotish, there is a yoga for being sanyasins which may explain one 
of the reasons why some men don't marry as shown in the article below:

Men prefer being solo over a bad marriage: study
Mon Jun 2, 2008 1:26am EDT

By Belinda Goldsmith

SYDNEY (Reuters Life!) - Bachelor Carl Weisman got fed up of being 
classified as a playboy, a loser or a commitment-phobe so he set out 
to find out exactly why he and a growing number of eligible men were 
steering clear of marriage.

Weisman, 49, conducted a survey of 1,533 heterosexual men to research 
a book aiming to give women an insight into why some smart, 
successful men opted to stay single -- and help lifelong bachelors 
understand why they are still the solo man at parties.

He concluded that most men were not afraid of marriage -- but they 
were afraid of a bad marriage.

Men are 10 times more scared of marrying the wrong person than of 
never getting married at all, Weisman told Reuters in a telephone 
interview.

This is the first generation of people who have grown up with bad 
divorces. People assume there is something wrong if you don't marry 
but these are men who have made a different choice and not given in 
to social pressures.

The release of his book So Why Have You Never Been Married? - Ten 
Insights into Why He Hasn't Wed, comes amid a growing trend for more 
people to stay single, with less social or religious pressures on 
men -- and women -- to tie the knot.

Weisman said U.S. figures showed that in 1980 about 6 percent of men 
aged in their early 40s had never married but this number had now 
risen to 17 percent.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@
  wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ 
   wrote:
   
Three simple questions. You'll either deal with
them or you won't.
   
   correct. 
  
  You didn't. Your call.
 
 I most certainly did.

If you would like to believe that, Jim, I 
will allow you to do so. From my point of
view, you just rolled out some more Newage
(rhymes with sewage) bullshit, and not
terribly well. You would be laughed off
of the Newage talk circuit after your first
seminar.

But if you really think that your answers
were answers, and dealt with the questions,
I shall allow you the opportunity to expand
upon them. You know...the way someone who
was really enlightened might.

  So far, NOTHING you have mentioned about enlight-
  enment has been of ANY value to anyone but yourself.
  1. Are you comfortable with that?
 
 What? your assumption? No.

This is a non-answer evasion. If you are
claiming that anything you have said in
these discussions DOES have value for 
anyone but yourself, enumerate which of
your statements have value, to whom, and
what that value is. I'll wait.

  2. Do you feel that
  you, as someone who claims to be enlightened, have 
  any responsibilities to anyone else? 
 
 Aside from creating them, and having therefore total 
 responsibility for them as long as they exist?

Again, *enumerate* your responsibilities.
If you are enlightened, and someone you
encounter on the street (whom you egoically
believe that you have created) asks you
a question about enlightenment and why on
earth they should pursue it, what would
you tell them?

You have been SELLING the need for enlight-
enment very hard here, Jim, and in my opinion
very badly. Assume that you met someone who
was NOT like yourself, and who actually cares
about other people more than he cares about
himself. What would you tell such a person
to interest them in this need for enlight-
enment that you have been trying to sell
so hard? 

In other words, What's in it for others? (as
opposed to What's in it for me?, which is
the only thing you have talked about so far).

I think that the ONLY reason you are selling
the need for enlightenment is that if it 
were true, there might be a value in listening
to the ravings of people who claim to be
enlightened, such as yourself. If someone 
believes firmly, as I do, that there is NO
need to realize enlightenment, then you have
NOTHING to offer them. You become irrelevant,
just gums flapping in the wind. So AGAIN, what
you are saying is in terms of YOU, not in terms
of benefit for anyone else.

I guess what I'm saying is that as a salesman
of enlightenment and its potential value, you
are coming across kinda like an SUV salesman
whose entire sales pitch is, Well, if you buy 
this car, I make more money. So you should buy it.  :-)

 3. For that 
  matter, do you believe that anyone else actually 
  exists?
 
 I think I've answered this already. As you may recall we went 
 through this earlier. This is similar to the misatkes question. 
 Everyone creates their reality, just as you are creating me-- who I 
 am, what I believe, what you would like to add to your picture of 
 me. Everyone does this. Everyone, even you. You create me, and I 
 create you. 

And when we discussed this before, I went to 
great pains to explain to you the difference
between *perceiving* other people, and the world
around you, and creating those other people,
and the world. You obviously zoned out on the
entire discussion, and missed it.

If you think you created me, what color under-
wear am I wearing as I write this? Where am I
as I write it? Who will win the Presidential
election? Who will win the World Series?

In other words, put up or shut up. 

If you claim to create the world around you,
PROVE IT. Say something -- ANYTHING -- that
indicates that as an enlightened being who
created the world you know something --
ANYTHING -- about the nature of it. All you
have said so far is just badly-recycled, vague
Newage bullshit. 

I'll wait...

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Raja Barrett in Finland?

[Zoran Krneta]

In Croatian kupiti - to buy

2008/6/1 cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


  There might be a connection between those twain things, or, of
  course, then again, there mightn't. Be it as it may, I predicted
  that a couple of weeks ago or so, in a forum(?) of Kauppalehti
  (kauppa

 The word 'kauppa' (store, commerce, etc.) seems to be an
 Indo-Germanic loan word, cf. German 'kaufen', Islandic
 'kaupthing', Swedish 'köpa' [sic!] and stuff.

 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@
  wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ 
   wrote:
   
Three simple questions. You'll either deal with
them or you won't.
   
   correct. 
  
  You didn't. Your call.
 
 I most certainly did.

Jim, I'll try to say it another way. You write
and/or deliver training, right? Well, so do I.
If you had been a trainer in a corporation that
had hired you to talk to some of its employees
about the nature of enlightenment and why it
would be of value to them, you would have been
graded POOR, and never allowed to come back and
teach there again. Given the standards of the
companies I work with, and what they expect in
a trainer and in the level of his presentation
and knowledge of the subject, the corporation 
would have demanded a refund, and would have 
gotten it.

What I'm trying to do is to get you to up your
game a little, dude. You've been spouting lame
recycled Newage bullshit here for a while, seem-
ingly under the impression that you are talking
to people whose standards are as low as yours,
and whose gullibility is on the same level as
yours, and who thus will buy what you are saying
as profound. I am suggesting that, although you 
have clearly found a few people on that level 
(Nablus springs to mind), on the whole you have 
been guilty of not knowing your audience.

In all honesty, the people around me during my
first week on TM TTC could talk the talk of 
enlightenment better than you can, let alone
how they could talk it by the time the course
was over. And even compared to the lamest of the
folks on the NeoAdvaita circuit, you're a joke.

And the thing is, most of the people on Fairfield
Life get this. Unlike yourself, they have been
around the spiritual block a few times, and have
heard enough bullshit to know bullshit when they 
hear it. Most of them are not in the *market* for 
more. (Unless it's really entertaining bullshit,
like Lou's astrology predictions.)

As we have discussed before, you don't seem to
know the difference between comic books and actual
literature. What I am suggesting is that what you
say about enlightenment and even about your own
minor experiences, which you IMO mistake for 
enlightenment, is on a comic book level. And yet
you somehow expect others to react to them as if
they were great literature.

You may continue to toss out watered-down, largely
misunderstood versions of the enlightenment process
here if you'd like, but I don't think you are going
to impress too many people by doing so. My take
on the posters at Fairfield Life is that they sur-
passed your understanding, and in many cases your
experience level, decades ago. And you continue to
talk down to them as if they were children and you
were trying to educate them by telling them stories
that you read in a comic book.

The people you're trying to impress with comic book
language and explanations read actual *books*, dude.
They heard -- and in many cases outgrew -- bullshit
like the stuff you are peddling decades ago. 

You keep saying that people need to evolve to your
level before they can understand what you say about
enlightenment. I think you need to evolve to their 
level before you can understand how easily they can 
discern how little you know about enlightenment.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Dominates

[Peter]

Curtis, Lyoto is just holding back as you know because
if he truly unleashed his karate power the entire
planet would crack in half.


--- curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
 
  
  Time for some people to eat sh!t.
 

http://www.mmatko.com/wanderlei-silva-vs-keith-jardine-fight-video-ufc-84/
 
 Watch this guy.  He can finish a fight with
 striking.  Notice the lack
 of him running away from his opponent. Instead, he
 finishes the guy
 with strikes.  When Lyoto starts serving up some
 performances like
 this you can run the he's the greatest routine.
 
 PS please note the lack of a second or third round
 or the need to
 resort to a judge's decision due to lack of
 finishing the fight in the
 ring. 
 
  
 
 
  
  My man, Lyoto - humble Shotokan expert - hammers
 the UFC goon, Tito
  Ortiz.
  
 

http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=fighter.detailPID=519
 

http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=fighter.detailPID=519
  
  OffWorld
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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]
 
 
 



  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Vaj]

On Jun 1, 2008, at 9:36 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:


Vaj wrote:

...instead of energy or bliss or shakti,
etc. radiating from them or to the
listeners, there was a very simple,
plain presence.


[snip]


The first time I met the Dalai Lama, he
came up to me and grabbed my hands and
shook me (he was laughing so hard) and
suddenly stopped and just stared into
my eyes.


Maybe so, but you have just described a
case of 'energy or bliss or shakti' in a
'very simple, plain presence', radiating.



Having experienced both, no this was not shaktipat. Actually nothing  
like it.


Just because Curtis insists on wasting posts on you doesn't mean you  
should be out from under your bridge.


Now get back where you belong.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Vaj]

On Jun 2, 2008, at 4:53 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Jim, I'll try to say it another way. You write
and/or deliver training, right? Well, so do I.
If you had been a trainer in a corporation that
had hired you to talk to some of its employees
about the nature of enlightenment and why it
would be of value to them, you would have been
graded POOR, and never allowed to come back and
teach there again. Given the standards of the
companies I work with, and what they expect in
a trainer and in the level of his presentation
and knowledge of the subject, the corporation
would have demanded a refund, and would have
gotten it.



Two key things I've noticed in highly realized beings is that 1) they  
don't tell you they're enlightened, as it's usually plainly obvious  
to those who can benefit and 2) one of the reasons for 1 is it causes  
confusion the arise in those who could otherwise benefit. Highly  
realized beings typically aren't interested in fostering confusion,  
usually the opposite. Witness the bad action and confusion that has  
arisen from the Rev. Ego's pronouncements. This is the opposite of  
enlightened action IMO. Go to almost any neoadvaita satsang like ones  
I've witnessed in New England or FF and you'll see a well of  
confusion--but they all think it's the greatest thing. But in general  
they just seem to be brewing ground for confusion and delusion and  
ego. Almost all are still at the state of talking about experiences,  
they still have not transcended that basic need: no Self Referral  
just self referral (i.e. ego referral). These groups may be good in a  
support group kind of way, and have a potential feel good vibe, which  
ego reinforcement can temporally bring, but the samsaric patterns are  
really quite obvious.


The problem with self referral (small s), when you are mutually  
reinforcing ego, you always get a good grade, because egotists love  
to have their egos massaged and reinforced. It's really a kind of  
baby awakening codependent support system where they confuse  
meditative experiences for realization.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Two key things I've noticed in highly realized beings is 
 that 1) they don't tell you they're enlightened...

And they find a way to do *that* while not 
implying that they are. Remember *that* act
from TM?

Some newb would ask a TM teacher in a lecture,
Are you enlightened?, and the teacher's 
response would be to say, We don't talk 
about our experiences, followed by a kind
of shy blush and a nudge-nudge-wink-wink-
know-what-I-mean set of gestures.

I was sitting with Jerry Jarvis once when we
saw some TM teacher do that, and Jerry turned
to me and stuck his finger down his throat, as
if to throw up. We both cracked up. 

By contrast, on the one occasion I saw Jerry
asked that question, his reply was, Get real,
followed by a laugh.

 Highly  
 realized beings typically aren't interested in fostering confusion,  
 usually the opposite. Witness the bad action and confusion that has  
 arisen from the Rev. Ego's pronouncements. This is the opposite of  
 enlightened action IMO. 

My point exactly. I honestly think that the
issue in Jim's case is that he's never had to
be on the front lines as a *representative*
of what he claims to represent. You learn a
little humility and *responsibility* when you
have to do that.

I don't think I'm off base in referring to his
presentation as the comic book version of 
enlightenment. Even if one considered the *TM*
presentation of enlightenment as non-comic book
(and I don't), his version of the TM enlighten-
ment rap sounds as if he is trying to remember 
stuff from talks he mainly spaced out during. 
No *TM teacher* I know would be impressed with 
his rap, much less those who have been exposed
to more precise enlightenment traditions.

 Go to almost any neoadvaita satsang like ones  
 I've witnessed in New England or FF and you'll see 
 a well of confusion--but they all think it's the 
 greatest thing. 

I think that the reason for this is that the
essential message of NeoAdvaita is valid, that
there is nowhere to go and nothing to become
to realize one's enlightenment. That is a relief
to those who have been told for decades that they
have to release stress or resolve karmas to
get enlightened. What has been missing from 
any satsangs I have attended, however, is any 
suggestion as to *how* to realize it.

 But in general  
 they just seem to be brewing ground for confusion and 
 delusion and ego. Almost all are still at the state of 
 talking about experiences, they still have not transcended 
 that basic need...

The thing I noticed most was that NONE of the
experiences Jim talks about have anything to
do with other people. They are ALL in terms of
himself. Whenever I try to get him to even 
talk about other people, he evades and dodges
the discussions.

No one I have ever met whom I might legitimately
suspect of having really realized their enlight-
enment would do that. *Most* of the things they
say, PERIOD, are about helping other people. 
They almost NEVER talk in terms of doing things
that would only benefit the individual seeker.

THAT is probably the biggest difference I see
between the TM dogma and that of other, more
established traditions. The only real benefit
to others ever talked about in TM is in terms
of the awesome woo-woo rays of TMers and butt
bouncers radiating outwards and affecting those
less fortunate. Could anything BE more self-
important and ego-bound?

Nothing about selfless service. Nothing about
actually CARING for the least among us. Nothing
about exercising a little mindfulness in one's
daily life to try to be a little kinder and more 
compassionate to others. All of these things are 
seen in TM as being side effects of trans-
cending. Yeah, right. 

There is a fellow I met a few times whom I would 
suspect of being enlightened because of the phen-
omena you spoke of yesterday. It's *not* shakti
(that's just cheap flash IMO), but something deeper,
having to do with the fact that when you are around 
him, there is no need to meditate to experience 
transcendence. You have no *choice* but to exper-
ience transcendence around him, eyes open or 
closed; it is just one of the attributes *of*
being around him. 

So what does this guy have to say about enlighten-
ment? He won't even discuss it. He doesn't think 
it's worth talking about. What IS worth talking 
about, in his opinion? The practical, everyday 
things we can do to relieve suffering in the people 
we meet and interact with on a daily basis. 

Compare and contrast to those who seem to believe
that *their* enlightenment is important enough
to talk about.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Richard J. Williams]

  Maybe so, but you have just described a
  case of 'energy or bliss or shakti' in a
  'very simple, plain presence', radiating.
 
 Having experienced both, no this was not 
 shaktipat. Actually nothing like it.

It was so - when I met the Dalai Lama, I got 
all kinds of shaktipat. Maybe you just missed
it because you thought he was laughing at you
for standing in that line for two hours in 
the rain. What an idiot! You waited all that
time and all you got was a pat on the head.

I guess you looked important in your robes
and beads and shaved head holding your begging
bowl and waving that silly metal trident. 

 Just because Curtis insists on wasting posts 
 on you doesn't mean you should be out from 
 under your bridge. Now get back where you 
 belong.

Yes, Sir.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Dominates

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , off_world_beings no_reply@
 wrote:
 
 
  Time for some people to eat sh!t.


http://www.mmatko.com/wanderlei-silva-vs-keith-jardine-fight-video-ufc-8\
4/
http://www.mmatko.com/wanderlei-silva-vs-keith-jardine-fight-video-ufc-\
84/

 Watch this guy.  He can finish a fight with striking.  Notice the lack
 of him running away from his opponent. Instead, he finishes the guy
 with strikes.  When Lyoto starts serving up some performances like
 this you can run the he's the greatest routine.

 PS please note the lack of a second or third round or the need to
 resort to a judge's decision due to lack of finishing the fight in the
 ring. 


Lyoto won the fight. Period. But American goons like brawn, not brains.

Go back to watching your stupid video game UFC goons.

Shotokan dominates

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] re: Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Patrick Gillam]

This thread reminded me of a recent email 
exchange I had with a friend whose spiritual 
group was visited by Jan Frazier, who has 
written a book called When Fear Falls Away. 
In it, Frazier describes her sudden and 
completely unexpected awakening into a state 
of profound contentment. Call it 'enlightenment' 
if you like, my friend wrote. He said this of 
Frazier's presentation:

Jan Frazier's talk was very good but very 
unassuming, understated.  Those of us on 
this side of the enlightenment experience 
want these 'big minds' to be all fireworks 
and inspiration, but of course the actual 
experience of awakening is simple, unadorned, 
immediate.

Here's the best part of the exchange, to my mind:

Someone asked her [Frazier] if she had been 
in touch with her guru, Gurumayi, since her 
awakening. She seemed surprised by the question.
She said, 'I didn't think to call Gurumayi. The 
experience isn't one of `winning' and wanting to 
call your mentor to give her the good news. It 
was more like `Duh…why didn't I get this earlier?'

Contrast this reaction to the title of this thread.

[FairfieldLife] Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[Vaj]

Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some history  
on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781

Link

Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were afraid  
to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of Muslim  
violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Richard J. Williams]

  There is only one enlightenment tradition,
 
 This can't be true?  
 
Well, it depends on how you define the
'enlightenment tradition'. 

The historical Buddha (circa 463 B.C) was the 
founder of the enlightenment tradition in India. 
He taught yoga, what Eliade terms introspective 
'enstasis'. Yoga was later systematized by
Patanjali (circa 200 B.C.). This all explained
in Eliade's definitive book on yoga cited below.
According to Eliade, the yoga system is unique
to South Asia.

However, you should not confuse the early
'Gnostic' sects with the South Asian
Enlightenment Tradition which was founded by
the Shakya, nor with the 'Age of Enlightenment' 
in European history.

Nor, according to Eliade, should you confuse
'shamanism' with the Yoga Tradition of South
Asia. Eliade has a rather different definition
of shamanism. Eliade was an authority on
the Yoga Tradition and Shamanism.
 
The key element here is the definition of
enlightenment: 

Shakya the Muni defined 'enlightenment' as the
dispelling of the illusion of the individual 
soul-monad. Patanjali pretty much agrees with 
this; Patanjali taught *isolation* of the 
Purusha from the prakriti by yogic means. 

Gaudapada and Shankara (circa 700 A.D.) adopted 
the yoga system and many Buddhist doctrines to 
explain 'moksha', that is, liberation from 
dualism. Shankara composed an important 
commentary on Vyasa's commentary on Patanjali's 
Yoga Sutras.

  Work cited:
  
  'Yoga : Immortality and Freedom'
  by Mircea Eliade
  Princeton University Press, 1970
  
  Other titles of interst: 
  
  'Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy'
  by Mircea Eliade
  Princeton University Press; 2004
  
  'The Yoga Tradition: Its History, Literature, 
  Philosophy and Practice'
  by Georg Feuerstein, Ken Wilbur
  Hohm Press, 2001

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 This thread reminded me of a recent email 
 exchange I had with a friend whose spiritual 
 group was visited by Jan Frazier, who has 
 written a book called When Fear Falls Away. 
 In it, Frazier describes her sudden and 
 completely unexpected awakening into a state 
 of profound contentment. Call it 'enlightenment' 
 if you like, my friend wrote. He said this of 
 Frazier's presentation:
 
 Jan Frazier's talk was very good but very 
 unassuming, understated.  Those of us on 
 this side of the enlightenment experience 
 want these 'big minds' to be all fireworks 
 and inspiration, but of course the actual 
 experience of awakening is simple, unadorned, 
 immediate.
 
 Here's the best part of the exchange, to my mind:
 
 Someone asked her [Frazier] if she had been 
 in touch with her guru, Gurumayi, since her 
 awakening. She seemed surprised by the question.
 She said, 'I didn't think to call Gurumayi. The 
 experience isn't one of `winning' and wanting to 
 call your mentor to give her the good news. It 
 was more like `Duh…why didn't I get this earlier?'
 
 Contrast this reaction to the title of this thread.



That her humility demands its own web site, nationally distributed book, 
personal bio and 
weekly events calendar is a bit of a stretch. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Vaj]

On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:08 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Go to almost any neoadvaita satsang like ones
I've witnessed in New England or FF and you'll see
a well of confusion--but they all think it's the
greatest thing.


I think that the reason for this is that the
essential message of NeoAdvaita is valid, that
there is nowhere to go and nothing to become
to realize one's enlightenment.


Yes, of course, but that is the POV of the nondual state from someone  
who has had that recognition. Different people may need considerable  
accomplishment or a damn good teacher to have that recognition  
(unless, of course, a person has certain predisposing factors).  
Consider both Ramana Maharishi and Nisargadatta who mastered samadhi  
and kundalini before their realization dawned. Few ever talk about  
that. Let's just skip that. Mention that to most neoadvaitin's and  
they'll fall back on nowhere to go and nothing to become crutch.


The only ones who don't notice them limping, is them.




But in general
they just seem to be brewing ground for confusion and
delusion and ego. Almost all are still at the state of
talking about experiences, they still have not transcended
that basic need...


The thing I noticed most was that NONE of the
experiences Jim talks about have anything to
do with other people. They are ALL in terms of
himself. Whenever I try to get him to even
talk about other people, he evades and dodges
the discussions.


No realization of interdependent origination.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Marek Reavis]

However, the historical Buddha apparently arrived at his awakening 
after (if not necessarily because of) the pursuit and practice of 
methods that were part of an already long-existing 
enlightenment/moksha tradition.  The Upanishads were already written 
and discussed among practitioners and seekers when Buddha was 
teaching his take on what realization was.  The enlightenment 
tradition didn't spring, full-blown from Buddha, but was articulated 
and renewed by him.

[From a Wikipedia entry discussing the meaning and entomology 
of Tathagata which was Buddha's preferred personal appelation.]
...
Interpretations
Since the word tath#257;gata is a compound of two parts, different 
interpretations arise depending on which two parts one separates the 
word into.

For example, if one takes tath#257;gata to be composed of Tat and #257;gata 
one may conclude the following: Tat (lit. 'that') has from time 
immemorial in India meant the absolute (in orthodox Hinduism called 
Brahman), as in the famous Upanishadic dictum: That thou art (Tat 
tvam asi) from the Chandogya Upanishad, a widely discussed spiritual 
document in the time of the Buddha. That here refers to which the 
muni, or sage, has reached at the pinnacle of his having fulfilled 
wisdom's perfection in the attainment of final liberation.

This interpretation, however, is not in accord with Sanskrit 
grammar, which clearly offers two possibilities for breaking up the 
compound: either Tath#257; and #257;gata or Tath#257; and gata.

Tath#257; means 'thus' in Sanskrit and Pali, and Buddhist thought takes 
this to refer to what is called 'reality as-it-is' (Yath#257;-bh#363;ta). 
This reality is also referred to as 'thusness' or 'suchness' 
(tathat#257;) indicating simply that it (reality) is what it is. A 
Buddha or Arhat is defined as someone who 'knows and sees reality as-
it-is' (yath#257; bh#363;ta ñ#257;na dassana).

Gata is the past passive participle of the verbal root gam (going, 
traveling). #256;gata adds the verbal prefix #256; which gives the 
meaning come, arrival, gone-unto. Thus in this interpretation 
Tath#257;gata means literally either (The one who has) gone to 
suchness or (The one who has) arrived at suchness.

Tath#257;gata is therefore a personal appellation of that very rare 
someone who has realized by experiential wisdom the nature of things 
just as they are.
...

If awakening is the realization of things just as they are then it 
seems likely that many individuals from all over the world may have 
come to that aha, aah realization whether or not they were active 
seekers or practitioners within the South Asia enlightenment 
tradition.

**


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   There is only one enlightenment tradition,
  
  This can't be true?  
  
 Well, it depends on how you define the
 'enlightenment tradition'. 
 
 The historical Buddha (circa 463 B.C) was the 
 founder of the enlightenment tradition in India. 
 He taught yoga, what Eliade terms introspective 
 'enstasis'. Yoga was later systematized by
 Patanjali (circa 200 B.C.). This all explained
 in Eliade's definitive book on yoga cited below.
 According to Eliade, the yoga system is unique
 to South Asia.
 
 However, you should not confuse the early
 'Gnostic' sects with the South Asian
 Enlightenment Tradition which was founded by
 the Shakya, nor with the 'Age of Enlightenment' 
 in European history.
 
 Nor, according to Eliade, should you confuse
 'shamanism' with the Yoga Tradition of South
 Asia. Eliade has a rather different definition
 of shamanism. Eliade was an authority on
 the Yoga Tradition and Shamanism.
  
 The key element here is the definition of
 enlightenment: 
 
 Shakya the Muni defined 'enlightenment' as the
 dispelling of the illusion of the individual 
 soul-monad. Patanjali pretty much agrees with 
 this; Patanjali taught *isolation* of the 
 Purusha from the prakriti by yogic means. 
 
 Gaudapada and Shankara (circa 700 A.D.) adopted 
 the yoga system and many Buddhist doctrines to 
 explain 'moksha', that is, liberation from 
 dualism. Shankara composed an important 
 commentary on Vyasa's commentary on Patanjali's 
 Yoga Sutras.
 
   Work cited:
   
   'Yoga : Immortality and Freedom'
   by Mircea Eliade
   Princeton University Press, 1970
   
   Other titles of interst: 
   
   'Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy'
   by Mircea Eliade
   Princeton University Press; 2004
   
   'The Yoga Tradition: Its History, Literature, 
   Philosophy and Practice'
   by Georg Feuerstein, Ken Wilbur
   Hohm Press, 2001

Re: [FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Vaj]

On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:08 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


I think that the reason for this is that the
essential message of NeoAdvaita is valid, that
there is nowhere to go and nothing to become
to realize one's enlightenment. That is a relief
to those who have been told for decades that they
have to release stress or resolve karmas to
get enlightened. What has been missing from
any satsangs I have attended, however, is any
suggestion as to *how* to realize it.


One thing many TMers don't realize--because they believed what they  
were told--is that the mechanics of mantra meditation are NOT for  
burning samskaras. Samadhi is for burning samskaras. Mantra  
meditation is intended as an intro to samadhi, which works by  
planting beneficial samskaras which will eventually help overshadow  
the negative ones, helping the mind become more sattvic and translucent.


In order to 'release stress' you'd have to actually have mastered  
samadhi--something I've never seen in most TMers. Of course you never  
can rule out people with exceptional predisposing factors  
(purvapunya), but TM by and large certainly has not shown any real  
signs of stabilized samadhi, either in research or in practice.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Dominates

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Curtis, Lyoto is just holding back as you know because
 if he truly unleashed his karate power the entire
 planet would crack in half.

Excellent! 

But how about that Wanderlei Silva fight!  



 
 
 --- curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
  off_world_beings no_reply@
  wrote:
  
   
   Time for some people to eat sh!t.
  
 

http://www.mmatko.com/wanderlei-silva-vs-keith-jardine-fight-video-ufc-84/
  
  Watch this guy.  He can finish a fight with
  striking.  Notice the lack
  of him running away from his opponent. Instead, he
  finishes the guy
  with strikes.  When Lyoto starts serving up some
  performances like
  this you can run the he's the greatest routine.
  
  PS please note the lack of a second or third round
  or the need to
  resort to a judge's decision due to lack of
  finishing the fight in the
  ring. 
  
   
  
  
   
   My man, Lyoto - humble Shotokan expert - hammers
  the UFC goon, Tito
   Ortiz.
   
  
 
 http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=fighter.detailPID=519
  
 
 http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=fighter.detailPID=519
   
   OffWorld
  
  
  
  
  
  
  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]
  
  
 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[new . morning]

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

 
 The thing I noticed most was that NONE of the
 experiences Jim talks about have anything to
 do with other people. They are ALL in terms of
 himself. Whenever I try to get him to even 
 talk about other people, he evades and dodges
 the discussions.
 
 No one I have ever met whom I might legitimately
 suspect of having really realized their enlight-
 enment would do that. *Most* of the things they
 say, PERIOD, are about helping other people. 
 They almost NEVER talk in terms of doing things
 that would only benefit the individual seeker.
 
 THAT is probably the biggest difference I see
 between the TM dogma and that of other, more
 established traditions. The only real benefit
 to others ever talked about in TM is in terms
 of the awesome woo-woo rays of TMers and butt
 bouncers radiating outwards and affecting those
 less fortunate. Could anything BE more self-
 important and ego-bound?
 
 Nothing about selfless service. Nothing about
 actually CARING for the least among us. Nothing
 about exercising a little mindfulness in one's
 daily life to try to be a little kinder and more 
 compassionate to others. All of these things are 
 seen in TM as being side effects of trans-
 cending. Yeah, right. 
 
 There is a fellow I met a few times whom I would 
 suspect of being enlightened because of the phen-
 omena you spoke of yesterday. It's *not* shakti
 (that's just cheap flash IMO), but something deeper,
 having to do with the fact that when you are around 
 him, there is no need to meditate to experience 
 transcendence. You have no *choice* but to exper-
 ience transcendence around him, eyes open or 
 closed; it is just one of the attributes *of*
 being around him. 

Good points. Parallel to the human virtures model. However,
correlation is not necessarily, in fact often is not, causation.

Its the ass-hole theory of enlightenment. Before E, chop wood, be an
asshole. Post E, chop wood, be an asshole.

Others, who by virtue of their nature, and cultured by family,
educational and moral traditions: Before E, chop wood, help others.
Post E, chop wood, help others.

Grow up in an arrogant, anti-analytical, anti-intellectual tradition
and guess what? Post E (or some degree of silence) one remains
arrogant, anti-analytical, anti-intellectual. 

Grow up with the Sisters of Charity and guess what? Post E (or some
degree of silence) one remains compassionate, dedicated to helping,
and independent of looking out for #1.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 This thread reminded me of a recent email 
 exchange I had with a friend whose spiritual 
 group was visited by Jan Frazier, who has 
 written a book called When Fear Falls Away. 
 In it, Frazier describes her sudden and 
 completely unexpected awakening into a state 
 of profound contentment. Call it 'enlightenment' 
 if you like, my friend wrote. He said this of 
 Frazier's presentation:
 
 Jan Frazier's talk was very good but very 
 unassuming, understated.  Those of us on 
 this side of the enlightenment experience 
 want these 'big minds' to be all fireworks 
 and inspiration, but of course the actual 
 experience of awakening is simple, unadorned, 
 immediate.
 
 Here's the best part of the exchange, to my mind:
 
 Someone asked her [Frazier] if she had been 
 in touch with her guru, Gurumayi, since her 
 awakening. She seemed surprised by the question.
 She said, 'I didn't think to call Gurumayi. The 
 experience isn't one of `winning' and wanting to 
 call your mentor to give her the good news. It 
 was more like `Duh…why didn't I get this earlier?'
 
 Contrast this reaction to the title of this thread.

Excellent-- yep, no need to win anything. 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
snip The people you're trying to impress with comic book
 language and explanations read actual *books*, dude.
 They heard -- and in many cases outgrew -- bullshit
 like the stuff you are peddling decades ago. 
 
 You keep saying that people need to evolve to your
 level before they can understand what you say about
 enlightenment. I think you need to evolve to their 
 level before you can understand how easily they can 
 discern how little you know about enlightenment.

You can rail and beat your chest and toss your insults around like a 
chimpanzee, Barry. I'll just say that I have been consistent from 
the beginning of my awakening, that I began talking about achievable 
permanent enlightenment for two reasons, and only two reasons:

1) To let others know that it is achievable, even by normal western 
householders like me. It is achievable in modern life, no longer 
enshrouded in the fog of the past and esoteric practice.

2) I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.

I have no interest in selling it, or convincing others of its value. 
Never have, and never will.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 You can rail and beat your chest and toss your insults around like a 
 chimpanzee, Barry. I'll just say that I have been consistent from 
 the beginning of my awakening, that I began talking about achievable 
 permanent enlightenment for two reasons, and only two reasons:
 
 1) To let others know that it is achievable, even by normal western 
 householders like me. It is achievable in modern life, no longer 
 enshrouded in the fog of the past and esoteric practice.
 
 2) I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.
 
 I have no interest in selling it, or convincing others of its value. 
 Never have, and never will.


-

I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.

Mr. Sandiego, Say I am interested, but I lack the necessary background to 
understand this 
thing you call enlightenment. From your perspective: what is enlightenment, and 
more 
importantly, why should I want it?

-

[FairfieldLife] God created the Universe

[do.rflex]

Image: http://tinyurl.com/4mwpyg 

[FairfieldLife] FW: Jyotish

[Rick Archer]

From: Blaine Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 8:58 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: Jyotish

 

This is from a talk Maharishi gave in 2003 on jyotish.  He doesn't translate
it but the term griha or graha means planet.  The griha shanti referred to
in the last paragraph refers to planetary yagyas.

 

So what a man produces from his action in the sun, in the moon, in the
galaxy, in the stars -- that has its connectedness with the individual.
There is a language to express all that: they are called Grihas. Griha
means that which grips.

 

So what grips the individual? His own doing, his own effect of his own
karma. It's a great detailed science of behavior, science of consciousness.
And this whole thing is dealt with as a part of the Veda. The part of the
Veda is called Vedanga. There are six divisions of the Veda; one of the
divisions of the Veda is Jyotish.

 

Jyotish considers this grip of the reaction that is going to be controlling
the doer. So all this language is in terms of the Grihas, and in every
action, (unless a man is fully enlightened, and is fully supported by
natural law) the man has freedom of action: in his freedom, he follows the
evolutionary channel, and sometimes he falters.

 

So there is positive, and there is negative doings by man. So positive doing
has a positive reaction; negative doing has a negative reaction. They are
called the positive and negative influences of the Grihas. There are nine
Grihas. This is a whole big science, dividing them into one, into three, and
three into nine, and nine into multiples of three, and three, three,
three... huge, enormous, unlimited we can say.

 

But majorly, the whole influence of every action is given in the channels of
the nine Grihas. Out of the nine Grihas, two-three Grihas are always very
good; two-three Grihas have some kind of medium influence; two-three Grihas
are negative. So there are pacifying performances, Vedic performances, which
will pacify the negative influence, so that the negative influence which is
the effect of one's own negative karma will not have to be faced by the man.
This is what is called Griha Shanti. Griha Shanti.

 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
wrote:
 
  You can rail and beat your chest and toss your insults around 
like a 
  chimpanzee, Barry. I'll just say that I have been consistent 
from 
  the beginning of my awakening, that I began talking about 
achievable 
  permanent enlightenment for two reasons, and only two reasons:
  
  1) To let others know that it is achievable, even by normal 
western 
  householders like me. It is achievable in modern life, no longer 
  enshrouded in the fog of the past and esoteric practice.
  
  2) I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.
  
  I have no interest in selling it, or convincing others of its 
value. 
  Never have, and never will.
 
 
 -
 
 I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.
 
 Mr. Sandiego, Say I am interested, but I lack the necessary 
background to understand this 
 thing you call enlightenment. From your perspective: what is 
enlightenment, and more 
 importantly, why should I want it?
 
 -

I am not the guy to be asked these questions. 

For one thing, it doesn't seem that someone reads something about 
enlightenment, as if choosing a new car, and then decidesyes, 
h, I'll go for it. Rather it is something that becomes known to 
the seeker after they have already shown interest in that direction.

For another, it is not a path for the faint of heart. Many people 
dabble with practices that may lead them closer to it, without 
making much progress. In my experience, there has to be a hunger for 
this knowledge, a fire burning within already, to drive the seeker 
to find out more about it.

There are many, many avenues to learn about enlightenment and its 
benefits. My recommendation would be to begin meditation or hatha 
yoga and take it from there.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ 
 wrote:
 snip The people you're trying to impress with comic book
  language and explanations read actual *books*, dude.
  They heard -- and in many cases outgrew -- bullshit
  like the stuff you are peddling decades ago. 
  
  You keep saying that people need to evolve to your
  level before they can understand what you say about
  enlightenment. I think you need to evolve to their 
  level before you can understand how easily they can 
  discern how little you know about enlightenment.
 
 You can rail and beat your chest and toss your insults around 
 like a chimpanzee, Barry. I'll just say that I have been 
 consistent from the beginning of my awakening, that I began 
 talking about achievable permanent enlightenment for two 
 reasons, and only two reasons:
 
 1) To let others know that it is achievable, even by normal 
 western householders like me. It is achievable in modern life, 
 no longer enshrouded in the fog of the past and esoteric 
 practice.
 
 2) I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.

Noble thoughts. My honest assessment, however, is 
that your second point would be more accurate and 
more honest if you replaced the final it with 
the word me.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 On Jun 2, 2008, at 4:53 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
 
  Jim, I'll try to say it another way. You write
  and/or deliver training, right? Well, so do I.
  If you had been a trainer in a corporation that
  had hired you to talk to some of its employees
  about the nature of enlightenment and why it
  would be of value to them, you would have been
  graded POOR, and never allowed to come back and
  teach there again. Given the standards of the
  companies I work with, and what they expect in
  a trainer and in the level of his presentation
  and knowledge of the subject, the corporation
  would have demanded a refund, and would have
  gotten it.
 
 
 Two key things I've noticed in highly realized beings is that 1) 
they  
 don't tell you they're enlightened, as it's usually plainly 
obvious  
 to those who can benefit and 2) one of the reasons for 1 is it 
causes  
 confusion the arise in those who could otherwise benefit. Highly  
 realized beings typically aren't interested in fostering 
confusion,  
 usually the opposite. Witness the bad action and confusion that 
has  
 arisen from the Rev. Ego's pronouncements. This is the opposite 
of  
 enlightened action IMO. Go to almost any neoadvaita satsang like 
ones  
 I've witnessed in New England or FF and you'll see a well of  
 confusion--but they all think it's the greatest thing. But in 
general  
 they just seem to be brewing ground for confusion and delusion 
and  
 ego. Almost all are still at the state of talking about 
experiences,  
 they still have not transcended that basic need: no Self 
Referral  
 just self referral (i.e. ego referral). These groups may be good 
in a  
 support group kind of way, and have a potential feel good vibe, 
which  
 ego reinforcement can temporally bring, but the samsaric patterns 
are  
 really quite obvious.
 
 The problem with self referral (small s), when you are mutually  
 reinforcing ego, you always get a good grade, because egotists 
love  
 to have their egos massaged and reinforced. It's really a kind of  
 baby awakening codependent support system where they confuse  
 meditative experiences for realization.

I can appreciate the need some like you have for placing 
enlightenment on a pedestal and feeling all special about it, with 
so many shoulds and shouldn'ts, but I personally think that it is 
perfectly valid to let others know that there isn't a man behind the 
curtain, that this state can be achieved by normal people, and that 
the need to obfuscate the attainment of permanent enlightenment 
behind a bunch of esoterica and fancy language serves nobody.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 I can appreciate the need some like you have for placing 
 enlightenment on a pedestal and feeling all special about it, with 
 so many shoulds and shouldn'ts, but I personally think that it is 
 perfectly valid to let others know that there isn't a man behind the 
 curtain, that this state can be achieved by normal people, and that 
 the need to obfuscate the attainment of permanent enlightenment 
 behind a bunch of esoterica and fancy language serves nobody.

Jim, I was going to leave you alone, but you keep
on so *completely* missing the point that I cannot.

Your whole approach to letting people know that
enlightenment is within their grasp is to say, over
and over, Look at me. I did it. Therefore you can,
too. 

Well, we ARE looking at you, and at how you conduct
yourself, and at the things you choose to focus on
as important in life, and at the things that you
give no importance to. And the bottom line for a
number of us is, If that's enlightenment, we
don't want it.

It's not *about* the way one talks the talk, Jim.
It's about how they walk the walk.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[ruthsimplicity]

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
   wrote:
   snip
I understand this well enough.  But to expand that concept
to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is
unwarranted in my mind.  Did anyone other than MMY promote
the unstressing concept?
   
   It's pretty well known that some people have
   negative side effects from psychotherapy;
   at a certain point, their symptoms may get
   worse.
   
   To the therapist, this may actually be a sign
   that something good is happening, that the
   patient's condition is improving. In many cases
   the patient wants to quit therapy, thinking it
   isn't helping, and the therapist has to convince
   them to stick with it, because they're finally
   getting to the core of their problems.
   
   Typically, if the patient does stay in therapy,
   while they may feel awful for a while, ultimately
   they come out the other side, having finally
   worked through their emotional difficulties.
  
  Could be.  Or it could be the ebb and flow of a troubled
  person's emotions.  They get upset, they feel better
  afterwards.  Or they get upset, and don't feel better
  afterwards. For example, angry people who vent get angrier.
 
 Yeah, that isn't what I'm talking about. A decent
 therapist can tell the difference.
 
  I don't much believe in catharsis in therapy, the process
  of cleansing or purification.  I also question catharsis
  or unstressing in TM.
 
 I wouldn't call TM's unstressing catharsis. In any
 case, your belief about the lack of value of catharsis
 in therapy doesn't affect the point I'm making, that
 a patient's mental/emotional state may get worse before
 it gets better, and that this may be an integral part
 of the healing process. All I'm saying is that this
 notion isn't unique to MMY.

But isn't the difference that in TM the unstressing is considered a
positive, part of the purification process?  That is why I mentioned
catharsis which is also considered a purification process, though the
process is entirely different from TM.  

The feeling worse before you get better seems like a different
concept, not a concept of purification but just a troubled person
feeling troubling emotions; not being purified at all, not getting rid
of bad stuff.  

[FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife membership now equal to TMorgs....

[BillyG.]

I noticed the MOU channel has also reached an all time high of two
listeners at one time as well!!  :-) Too bad MMY didn't listen to his
close advisors 'before' he came out with the Siddhis program, where he
could have used his market share of meditators to consolidate TM as
the premier meditation program in the World and become the Apple
computer of Ipods.  That opportunity has been squandered!

Now that he is gone and was in a hurry to achieve his World Wide
Mission of the rebirth of Vedic Culture, was he successful? Well I
guess the numbers speak for themselves and now he has to contend with
all the wannabes and look a likes he could have dispensed with in the
70's, so was he an all knowing saint? Did he even know what he was
doing? Were his ambitions Grandiose? or was he just a Hindu
fanatic..who knows, the shadow knows! :-)

P.S. We need a Raja for Iran, anybody seen him lately?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[authfriend]

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
  wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity 
no_reply@ 
wrote:
snip
 I understand this well enough.  But to expand that concept
 to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is
 unwarranted in my mind.  Did anyone other than MMY promote
 the unstressing concept?

It's pretty well known that some people have
negative side effects from psychotherapy;
at a certain point, their symptoms may get
worse.

To the therapist, this may actually be a sign
that something good is happening, that the
patient's condition is improving. In many cases
the patient wants to quit therapy, thinking it
isn't helping, and the therapist has to convince
them to stick with it, because they're finally
getting to the core of their problems.

Typically, if the patient does stay in therapy,
while they may feel awful for a while, ultimately
they come out the other side, having finally
worked through their emotional difficulties.
   
   Could be.  Or it could be the ebb and flow of a troubled
   person's emotions.  They get upset, they feel better
   afterwards.  Or they get upset, and don't feel better
   afterwards. For example, angry people who vent get angrier.
  
  Yeah, that isn't what I'm talking about. A decent
  therapist can tell the difference.
  
   I don't much believe in catharsis in therapy, the process
   of cleansing or purification.  I also question catharsis
   or unstressing in TM.
  
  I wouldn't call TM's unstressing catharsis. In any
  case, your belief about the lack of value of catharsis
  in therapy doesn't affect the point I'm making, that
  a patient's mental/emotional state may get worse before
  it gets better, and that this may be an integral part
  of the healing process. All I'm saying is that this
  notion isn't unique to MMY.
 
 But isn't the difference that in TM the unstressing is
 considered a positive, part of the purification process?

How is it different on that score? In psychotherapy,
it's sometimes the case that the patient feeling worse
is viewed (by the therapist) as something good is
happening, as I said to start with.

 That is why I mentioned catharsis which is also considered
 a purification process, though the process is entirely
 different from TM.  
 
 The feeling worse before you get better seems like a
 different concept, not a concept of purification but
 just a troubled person feeling troubling emotions; not
 being purified at all, not getting rid of bad stuff.

Maybe an example of what I'm talking about would help.
Let's say the patient seeks therapy for feelings of
anxiety, not disabling but problematic in daily life.
At a certain point, the patient begins to have really
severe panic attacks and tells the therapist he's
going to leave therapy because it's obviously making
him worse, not better.

The therapist notes that the panic attacks began right
around the time they were discussing the patient's
family life growing up, although the patient was
describing his childhood as happy and untroubled.

The therapist suspects that the patient isn't
remembering, or isn't acknowledging, some serious
trauma. She manages to convince the patient to stick
it out for a while. In the course of further
exploration of the patient's childhood, the patient
suddenly recollects a series of episodes of sexual
abuse by a family friend.

Now that it's out in the open, the therapist can
help the patient deal with the trauma, which had been
responsible for the generalized anxiety that led the
patient to seek treatment. The panic attacks had begun
to occur as the barriers the patient had put up to 
this recollection started to break down under the 
therapist's probing.

That's sort of a cartoon version, but it's the general
idea. Feeling worse is a sign, to the therapist, that
there's bad stuff to be dealt with, but it can't be
dealt with if the patient leaves therapy; the patient
has to be able, with the therapist's support, to 
tolerate feeling worse until the bad stuff is brought
to light.

Theoretically, in the TM context, the stress of the
sexual-abuse trauma, as it is released via meditation,
might be felt as generalized anxiety or even panic
attacks. The supposed advantage of TM is that there's
no need to bring the trauma to conscious memory; the
stress associated with it is released without the
person ever knowing what it was connected to. The
person may feel rotten for a while, but once all the
stress has been released, the trauma no longer has any
negative effects on the person's life.

It seems to me the two processes are pretty closely
parallel with regard to the concept of getting 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 
 
 Interesting discussion chaps.  Can I add a bit?
 
 I always thought that there were two components 
 to this, first is 'stress' that acts on the 
 nervous system. This could be anything that 
 makes you have to work harder either mentally 
 or physically. Can be either good or bad, which
 is largely down to unconscious personal 
 preference, some people thrive under pressure, 
 others... not so much.
 
 Secondly you have 'strain' which occurs when the
 nervous system can't take anymore without raising
 the natural anxiety background level, in MMY lingo
 it leaves a permanent imprint on the nervous sytem
 that only the deep relaxation of TM can release.
 interestingly, both good and bad can have an effect
 here, winning the lottery is very strainful, apparently.
 
 I think people in the TMO got so obsessed with 
 releasing stress that they forgot most of it wasn't
 negative in any way at all, like the people I meet who 
 never do more exercise than asanas in case they create
 stress in themselves that they will only have to 
 undo whilst meditating later.
 
 If the question is, does TM release strain? I would
 have to say sometimes, but it's in no way as good as
 it says on the tin and I doubt that just being 
 stress/strain free is all it takes to get one enlightened,
 it's a nice thought and I fell for it too but you have
 to look at the mechanism involved here.
 
 MMY claims that all stress/strain is a deviation 
 from normal functioning and that TM will release it,
 trouble is you could be suffering anxiety from 
 childhood trauma and the stress is caused by memory,
 hard-wired in. Is TM going to change that in any way? 
 I think not, the anxiety from strain like this will 
 stick around, TM may reduce the symptoms but you need
 to delve inside and change the way you react to memories.
 I can't see how any amount of meditation will change you
 that much.
 
 Which is another reason I think MMYs teaching can be 
 dangerous, as they promise a cure for everything and 
 may keep people away from help they need.

I generally agree with your points. I would like to step back a bit
before getting at the unstressing concept a bit more.  Stress is
simply the effect of any demand or agent upon the body or mind.  These
demands can be good or bad.  Running, walking, breathing, fighting an
infection, fighting cancer, all place demands upon the body and all
are stressors. So are emotions like love, anger, sadness, etc. Stress
is the response of the body to these demands. 

Now eustress comes from the word euphoria, does it not?  It is the
positive reaction to a stressor.  Distress is the negative reaction.
The stressors often are different (Curtis playing the guitar=eustress
vs. Curtis falling into a tub of ice wate=distress).  Or the
same (A doctor working 50 hours a week and then feeling satisfaction
from the work vs. a doctor working hard and feeling distressed all the
time from the hard work). Both kinds of stressors can be hard on you
but distress is worse for you than eustress. 

I have known some TM'er who try, as Hugo mentions, to avoid all
stress. Everything is good.  All is bliss.  Do not tell me something
bad.   I better eat bland food. I better not go to a gym and work out.
Don't argue with me.  (I can't accuse any TM'ers here of stress
avoidance :-))   Maybe the TM idea of getting rid of stress through
meditation and the concept unstressing has contributed to this feeling
of the need to avoid stressors.  

If you feel distress and you are a meditator, I think it is a mistake
to assume that the distress is unstressing and thus will go away and
all will be better after the impurities leave the system.  When?  30
years from now?  Next week?  I know, not all meditators make this
assumption, but the three meditators I have know the best either
assume distress is unstressing, or is do to something they should be
avoiding. 

Too much self analysis is bad.  A little is good.  If you suffer
distress, it is good to ask why.  It may be bad thinking patterns that
you can change.  It may be a bad marriage you need to work on.  It may
be because you have heart disease. It may be because you didn't rest
for 5 minutes after meditating.  

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
 I'm with Ruth on this one. I have seen no evidence
 that getting one's negative emotions out really
 gets them out. In fact, I have seen ample evidence
 that those who give expression to their negative
 emotions tend to keep on doing it, and with the
 *same* recurring emotions. So I think the Tibetan
 model is onto something.

Barry, I hate to disappoint you, but I'm afraid that
agreement with Ruth on this point does not constitute
disagreement with me.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[curtisdeltablues]

 It's not *about* the way one talks the talk, Jim.
 It's about how they walk the walk.


This is why I consider the concepts of enlightenment or awakening or
any internal state with a special name pretty worthless.

First of all people describe their internal experiences so
differently. I think we all found this out in our small group
experience meetings on courses.

Then we have the trouble with big fat juicy words that have such a
vague meaning as to be pretty useless.  A term like enlightenment is
a useless as a term like God.  There are just too many versions
depending on where the person gained the phrase.  Even here with our
uniform exposure to the TM model we are so often completely unable to
 relate to each other's internal experience.

Next we have all the variables of internal experiences themselves. 
There are many times in my life when my identity or self shifted in a
profound way that has been permanent, I call it growing up.  The
agitation of my 20's is gone and now I have a profound sense of peace
with the world.  If I was still into some path I'm sure I could whip
it all up in to a great story for my small group experience meeting.

So I conclude that people's internal state means nothing at all to me
which goes back to your point.  If someone presents themselves as
enlightened or as a spiritual guy, I just say, yeah I'm having a great
life too.  I don't assume that they are experiencing anything
differently than I am, or if they do, that I might want it.

There are plenty of states of dissociation that we are only beginning
to understand in physiology.  No one could distinguish them from any
of the language I have heard from spiritual traditions.  Spend a few
moments with a functional mentally ill person, as I did performing 
yesterday, and you get a kaleidescope of descriptions of internal
states as well as some interesting darshon-like effects on your own
functioning by hanging out with them and being in rapport. There are
people functioning really differently and it is fascinating to me. 

Internal states are s overrated in yoga traditions IMO.  But they
add some material to the party for modern pych thinkers to chew on. 
It seems very misguided to take them at face value without integrating
them with information we have gained about mental health today.
 


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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@
 wrote:
 
  I can appreciate the need some like you have for placing 
  enlightenment on a pedestal and feeling all special about it, with 
  so many shoulds and shouldn'ts, but I personally think that it is 
  perfectly valid to let others know that there isn't a man behind the 
  curtain, that this state can be achieved by normal people, and that 
  the need to obfuscate the attainment of permanent enlightenment 
  behind a bunch of esoterica and fancy language serves nobody.
 
 Jim, I was going to leave you alone, but you keep
 on so *completely* missing the point that I cannot.
 
 Your whole approach to letting people know that
 enlightenment is within their grasp is to say, over
 and over, Look at me. I did it. Therefore you can,
 too. 
 
 Well, we ARE looking at you, and at how you conduct
 yourself, and at the things you choose to focus on
 as important in life, and at the things that you
 give no importance to. And the bottom line for a
 number of us is, If that's enlightenment, we
 don't want it.
 
 It's not *about* the way one talks the talk, Jim.
 It's about how they walk the walk.

[FairfieldLife] Honesty in advertising!

[BillyG.]

TM is not a Religion!..that's just plain dishonest! If the TMorg
wanted to clean up its act it should say:

TM is not being 'taught' as
a Religion but has a religious component!  The origins of TM are the
Holy Scriptures of the Vedas and the Father of the current form of
meditation is none other than Maharishi Patanjali himself!  TM is just
teaching 6 limbs of Patanjali's 8 limbs of Yoga, the first two limbs
or means (as MMY calls them) are omitted in this teaching! 

PERIOD---hey! honesty in advertising! But I think TM has been
deceptive from the beginning  in order to teach TM as a Science, how
could you possibly start talking about chastity and honesty and still
call it a Science?

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
 mrfishey2001@ wrote:

  -
  
  I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.
  
  Mr. Sandiego, Say I am interested, but I lack the necessary 
 background to understand this 
  thing you call enlightenment. From your perspective: what is 
 enlightenment, and more 
  importantly, why should I want it?
  
  -
 
 I am not the guy to be asked these questions. 
 
 For one thing, it doesn't seem that someone reads something about 
 enlightenment, as if choosing a new car, and then decidesyes, 
 h, I'll go for it. Rather it is something that becomes known to 
 the seeker after they have already shown interest in that direction.
 
 For another, it is not a path for the faint of heart. Many people 
 dabble with practices that may lead them closer to it, without 
 making much progress. In my experience, there has to be a hunger for 
 this knowledge, a fire burning within already, to drive the seeker 
 to find out more about it.
 
 There are many, many avenues to learn about enlightenment and its 
 benefits. My recommendation would be to begin meditation or hatha 
 yoga and take it from there.


-

My apologies. I was under the mistaken impression you enjoyed discussing 
enlightenment 
with those interested. I am interested - having said as much. I wasn't aware of 
the 
evidentiary requirement; I practice yoga, which includes a form of meditation. 
While not a 
card-carrying vegetarian, I do eat well. I've read various books on eastern 
thought, and 
attended several lectures on the top of enlightenment. The arrival of summer 
will place me 
that much closer to my first spiritual retreat. Do you think it's here I'll 
find someone who 
enjoys … discussing it with those who are interested in it. - or will they as 
well ask for 
further proof?

--

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[TurquoiseB]

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  I wouldn't call TM's unstressing catharsis. In any
  case, your belief about the lack of value of catharsis
  in therapy doesn't affect the point I'm making, that
  a patient's mental/emotional state may get worse before
  it gets better, and that this may be an integral part
  of the healing process. All I'm saying is that this
  notion isn't unique to MMY.

 But isn't the difference that in TM the unstressing is considered 
 a positive, part of the purification process?  That is why I 
 mentioned catharsis which is also considered a purification 
 process, though the process is entirely different from TM.  
 
 The feeling worse before you get better seems like a different
 concept, not a concept of purification but just a troubled 
 person feeling troubling emotions; not being purified at all, 
 not getting rid of bad stuff.

I've been wanting to weigh in on this one, so I
finally will. It's interesting to me that Ruth's
take on the situation is so line with the take
of some Tibetan Buddhists. 

They don't believe that the experience of what 
they call the lesser emotions -- the things 
we're talking about here: outbursts of anger, 
strong and uncontrollable surges of emotion, 
etc. -- *can* be dissipated *by* experiencing 
them. In fact, they think that indulging the 
experience of these lesser emotions plants the 
seed for more such experiences.

The idea of catharsis is, as I understand it, 
that by allowing one of the lesser emotions 
such as anger to express itself, you will drain 
yourself of it, let it out.

The more Buddhist model is that anger is a state 
of attention. You choose to enter that state of
attention or you don't. If you do, there is no
*possibility* of draining it or letting it
all out. It is an infinite reservoir of anger; 
it can never be drained. In their view, the
perceiver isn't letting it out by indulging
in the anger and giving it free reing; he is 
allowing it in.

Their idea is that we have a CHOICE as to whether
to indulge in these lesser emotions. The more we
indulge, the more of them tend to fill our minds.
But the more of the lesser emotions we choose *not* 
to indulge in by choosing to focus on something 
else, the less of them tend to fill our minds. 
The process of choosing is called mindfulness.

I'm with Ruth on this one. I have seen no evidence
that getting one's negative emotions out really
gets them out. In fact, I have seen ample evidence
that those who give expression to their negative
emotions tend to keep on doing it, and with the
*same* recurring emotions. So I think the Tibetan
model is onto something. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[ruthsimplicity]

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
   wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
 wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity 
 no_reply@ 
 wrote:
 snip
  I understand this well enough.  But to expand that concept
  to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is
  unwarranted in my mind.  Did anyone other than MMY promote
  the unstressing concept?
 
 It's pretty well known that some people have
 negative side effects from psychotherapy;
 at a certain point, their symptoms may get
 worse.
 
 To the therapist, this may actually be a sign
 that something good is happening, that the
 patient's condition is improving. In many cases
 the patient wants to quit therapy, thinking it
 isn't helping, and the therapist has to convince
 them to stick with it, because they're finally
 getting to the core of their problems.
 
 Typically, if the patient does stay in therapy,
 while they may feel awful for a while, ultimately
 they come out the other side, having finally
 worked through their emotional difficulties.

Could be.  Or it could be the ebb and flow of a troubled
person's emotions.  They get upset, they feel better
afterwards.  Or they get upset, and don't feel better
afterwards. For example, angry people who vent get angrier.
   
   Yeah, that isn't what I'm talking about. A decent
   therapist can tell the difference.
   
I don't much believe in catharsis in therapy, the process
of cleansing or purification.  I also question catharsis
or unstressing in TM.
   
   I wouldn't call TM's unstressing catharsis. In any
   case, your belief about the lack of value of catharsis
   in therapy doesn't affect the point I'm making, that
   a patient's mental/emotional state may get worse before
   it gets better, and that this may be an integral part
   of the healing process. All I'm saying is that this
   notion isn't unique to MMY.
  
  But isn't the difference that in TM the unstressing is
  considered a positive, part of the purification process?
 
 How is it different on that score? In psychotherapy,
 it's sometimes the case that the patient feeling worse
 is viewed (by the therapist) as something good is
 happening, as I said to start with.
 
  That is why I mentioned catharsis which is also considered
  a purification process, though the process is entirely
  different from TM.  
  
  The feeling worse before you get better seems like a
  different concept, not a concept of purification but
  just a troubled person feeling troubling emotions; not
  being purified at all, not getting rid of bad stuff.
 
 Maybe an example of what I'm talking about would help.
 Let's say the patient seeks therapy for feelings of
 anxiety, not disabling but problematic in daily life.
 At a certain point, the patient begins to have really
 severe panic attacks and tells the therapist he's
 going to leave therapy because it's obviously making
 him worse, not better.
 
 The therapist notes that the panic attacks began right
 around the time they were discussing the patient's
 family life growing up, although the patient was
 describing his childhood as happy and untroubled.
 
 The therapist suspects that the patient isn't
 remembering, or isn't acknowledging, some serious
 trauma. She manages to convince the patient to stick
 it out for a while. In the course of further
 exploration of the patient's childhood, the patient
 suddenly recollects a series of episodes of sexual
 abuse by a family friend.
 
 Now that it's out in the open, the therapist can
 help the patient deal with the trauma, which had been
 responsible for the generalized anxiety that led the
 patient to seek treatment. The panic attacks had begun
 to occur as the barriers the patient had put up to 
 this recollection started to break down under the 
 therapist's probing.
 
 That's sort of a cartoon version, but it's the general
 idea. Feeling worse is a sign, to the therapist, that
 there's bad stuff to be dealt with, but it can't be
 dealt with if the patient leaves therapy; the patient
 has to be able, with the therapist's support, to 
 tolerate feeling worse until the bad stuff is brought
 to light.
 
 Theoretically, in the TM context, the stress of the
 sexual-abuse trauma, as it is released via meditation,
 might be felt as generalized anxiety or even panic
 attacks. The supposed advantage of TM is that there's
 no need to bring the trauma to conscious memory; the
 stress associated with it is released without the
 person ever knowing what it was connected to. The
 person may feel rotten for a while, but once all the
 stress 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
snip Jim, I was going to leave you alone, 

Either way is fine...

but you keep
 on so *completely* missing the point that I cannot.

Whose point? Oh, right, *your* point...
 
 Your whole approach to letting people know that
 enlightenment is within their grasp is to say, over
 and over, Look at me. I did it. Therefore you can,
 too. 

Exactly-- its that simple, whether you like me or not. Liking me has 
nothing to do with it.
 
 Well, we ARE looking at you, and at how you conduct
 yourself, and at the things you choose to focus on
 as important in life, and at the things that you
 give no importance to. And the bottom line for a
 number of us is, If that's enlightenment, we
 don't want it.
 
 It's not *about* the way one talks the talk, Jim.
 It's about how they walk the walk.

Nah, I'm calling bullshit on you-- its a convenient excuse for you. 
You get too close to the subject and create a big fuss to avoid 
facing it dead on. And therefore, because you cherry pick the way I 
conduct myself and the things I say, you are going to forego 
permanent liberation? I think the phrase that applies here is 
cutting off your nose to spite your face. 

Anyone saying the same things I am would run into the same truckload 
of crap from you.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
  mrfishey2001@ wrote:
 
   -
   
   I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.
   
   Mr. Sandiego, Say I am interested, but I lack the necessary 
  background to understand this 
   thing you call enlightenment. From your perspective: what is 
  enlightenment, and more 
   importantly, why should I want it?
   
   -
  
  I am not the guy to be asked these questions. 
  
  For one thing, it doesn't seem that someone reads something 
about 
  enlightenment, as if choosing a new car, and then 
decidesyes, 
  h, I'll go for it. Rather it is something that becomes known 
to 
  the seeker after they have already shown interest in that 
direction.
  
  For another, it is not a path for the faint of heart. Many 
people 
  dabble with practices that may lead them closer to it, without 
  making much progress. In my experience, there has to be a hunger 
for 
  this knowledge, a fire burning within already, to drive the 
seeker 
  to find out more about it.
  
  There are many, many avenues to learn about enlightenment and 
its 
  benefits. My recommendation would be to begin meditation or 
hatha 
  yoga and take it from there.
 
 
 -
 
 My apologies. I was under the mistaken impression you enjoyed 
discussing enlightenment 
 with those interested. I am interested - having said as much. I 
wasn't aware of the 
 evidentiary requirement; I practice yoga, which includes a form of 
meditation. While not a 
 card-carrying vegetarian, I do eat well. I've read various books 
on eastern thought, and 
 attended several lectures on the top of enlightenment. The arrival 
of summer will place me 
 that much closer to my first spiritual retreat. Do you think it's 
here I'll find someone who 
 enjoys … discussing it with those who are interested in it. - or 
will they as well ask for 
 further proof?
 
 --
Thanks for your response-- I'll give this another try:

what is enlightenment, and more importantly, why should I want it?

In a nutshell, enlightenment is lasting freedom, experienced 24 x 7. 
It is the abililty to experience anything in its totality, unmasked 
and unencumbered by any preconceptions. It is the ability to live 
skill in action, and by that I mean performing actions in as 
complete a way as possible, experiencing them as fully as possible. 
I could go on and on, because the state is one of living within the 
boundaries of Infinity (that5's a joke). Basically a state of 
everlasting and enduring freedom. 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  It's not *about* the way one talks the talk, Jim.
  It's about how they walk the walk.
 
 
 This is why I consider the concepts of enlightenment or awakening or
 any internal state with a special name pretty worthless.
 
Agreed-- as concepts, they are as worthless as any other concept. In 
other words, completely. Can't be concieved of conceptually anyway, so 
why bother? This asking for definitions of enlightenment is complete 
trash. Just live it-- why bother with the rest. Get on with it, or get 
over it, imo.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[ruthsimplicity]

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
  wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
  wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity 
  no_reply@ 
  wrote:
  snip
   I understand this well enough.  But to expand that concept
   to the concept of unstressing resulting from meditation is
   unwarranted in my mind.  Did anyone other than MMY promote
   the unstressing concept?
  
  It's pretty well known that some people have
  negative side effects from psychotherapy;
  at a certain point, their symptoms may get
  worse.
  
  To the therapist, this may actually be a sign
  that something good is happening, that the
  patient's condition is improving. In many cases
  the patient wants to quit therapy, thinking it
  isn't helping, and the therapist has to convince
  them to stick with it, because they're finally
  getting to the core of their problems.
  
  Typically, if the patient does stay in therapy,
  while they may feel awful for a while, ultimately
  they come out the other side, having finally
  worked through their emotional difficulties.
 
 Could be.  Or it could be the ebb and flow of a troubled
 person's emotions.  They get upset, they feel better
 afterwards.  Or they get upset, and don't feel better
 afterwards. For example, angry people who vent get angrier.

Yeah, that isn't what I'm talking about. A decent
therapist can tell the difference.

 I don't much believe in catharsis in therapy, the process
 of cleansing or purification.  I also question catharsis
 or unstressing in TM.

I wouldn't call TM's unstressing catharsis. In any
case, your belief about the lack of value of catharsis
in therapy doesn't affect the point I'm making, that
a patient's mental/emotional state may get worse before
it gets better, and that this may be an integral part
of the healing process. All I'm saying is that this
notion isn't unique to MMY.
   
   But isn't the difference that in TM the unstressing is
   considered a positive, part of the purification process?
  
  How is it different on that score? In psychotherapy,
  it's sometimes the case that the patient feeling worse
  is viewed (by the therapist) as something good is
  happening, as I said to start with.
  
   That is why I mentioned catharsis which is also considered
   a purification process, though the process is entirely
   different from TM.  
   
   The feeling worse before you get better seems like a
   different concept, not a concept of purification but
   just a troubled person feeling troubling emotions; not
   being purified at all, not getting rid of bad stuff.
  
  Maybe an example of what I'm talking about would help.
  Let's say the patient seeks therapy for feelings of
  anxiety, not disabling but problematic in daily life.
  At a certain point, the patient begins to have really
  severe panic attacks and tells the therapist he's
  going to leave therapy because it's obviously making
  him worse, not better.
  
  The therapist notes that the panic attacks began right
  around the time they were discussing the patient's
  family life growing up, although the patient was
  describing his childhood as happy and untroubled.
  
  The therapist suspects that the patient isn't
  remembering, or isn't acknowledging, some serious
  trauma. She manages to convince the patient to stick
  it out for a while. In the course of further
  exploration of the patient's childhood, the patient
  suddenly recollects a series of episodes of sexual
  abuse by a family friend.
  
  Now that it's out in the open, the therapist can
  help the patient deal with the trauma, which had been
  responsible for the generalized anxiety that led the
  patient to seek treatment. The panic attacks had begun
  to occur as the barriers the patient had put up to 
  this recollection started to break down under the 
  therapist's probing.
  
  That's sort of a cartoon version, but it's the general
  idea. Feeling worse is a sign, to the therapist, that
  there's bad stuff to be dealt with, but it can't be
  dealt with if the patient leaves therapy; the patient
  has to be able, with the therapist's support, to 
  tolerate feeling worse until the bad stuff is brought
  to light.
  
  Theoretically, in the TM context, the stress of the
  sexual-abuse trauma, as it is released via meditation,
  might be felt as generalized anxiety or even panic
  attacks. The supposed advantage of TM is that there's
  no need to bring the trauma to 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


  --
 Thanks for your response-- I'll give this another try:
 
 what is enlightenment, and more importantly, why should I want it?
 
 In a nutshell, enlightenment is lasting freedom, experienced 24 x 7. 
 It is the abililty to experience anything in its totality, unmasked 
 and unencumbered by any preconceptions. It is the ability to live 
 skill in action, and by that I mean performing actions in as 
 complete a way as possible, experiencing them as fully as possible. 
 I could go on and on, because the state is one of living within the 
 boundaries of Infinity (that5's a joke). Basically a state of 
 everlasting and enduring freedom.


--

Thank you. It would seem that enlightenment then, while lacking a reasonable 
description, does have some family of attributes. The few you've mentioned; 
lasting 
freedom, totality, something in possession of an everlasting character make 
enlightenment more than an appealing aim. 

I'll assume for the moment that these are your experiences. May I ask then: 
outside of the 
obvious subject comfort, what form do these attributes take in your daily life? 

---

Re: [FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Bhairitu]

sandiego108 wrote:
 Thanks for your response-- I'll give this another try:

 what is enlightenment, and more importantly, why should I want it?

 In a nutshell, enlightenment is lasting freedom, experienced 24 x 7. 
 It is the abililty to experience anything in its totality, unmasked 
 and unencumbered by any preconceptions. It is the ability to live 
 skill in action, and by that I mean performing actions in as 
 complete a way as possible, experiencing them as fully as possible. 
 I could go on and on, because the state is one of living within the 
 boundaries of Infinity (that5's a joke). Basically a state of 
 everlasting and enduring freedom. 
What I find amusing is how busy this topic is.  We can determine if 
anything else that FFL'ers love to intellectually masturbate on the 
subject of enlightenment.  The subject line should read: Look at me, my 
ego is worried about whether I'm enlightened or not!   Once one stops 
worrying about enlightenment then the progress towards it begins.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[ruthsimplicity]

I love the threads on enlightenment, though I do not participate much.
 I enjoy Sandiego's descriptions of what it means to him.  Especially
the parts about being the designer of his own world.

My little tastes of the infinite differ.  Instead of being the
designer of the world I feel as if I am a speck in the universe, but
being a speck is fine as I am part of it all. 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[tertonzeno]

---Right-on!  Neo-Advaitins make a big thing about not being attached 
to (say, Kundalini signs); but neither are ignorant people attached 
to those phenomena.  The point is, one has to go THROUGH the signs. 
How about the Radiant form of the Master? Challenge to Neo-Advaitins 
on this forum:  Which Master did you see the Radiant form of?


 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:08 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
 
  Go to almost any neoadvaita satsang like ones
  I've witnessed in New England or FF and you'll see
  a well of confusion--but they all think it's the
  greatest thing.
 
  I think that the reason for this is that the
  essential message of NeoAdvaita is valid, that
  there is nowhere to go and nothing to become
  to realize one's enlightenment.
 
 Yes, of course, but that is the POV of the nondual state from 
someone  
 who has had that recognition. Different people may need 
considerable  
 accomplishment or a damn good teacher to have that recognition  
 (unless, of course, a person has certain predisposing factors).  
 Consider both Ramana Maharishi and Nisargadatta who mastered 
samadhi  
 and kundalini before their realization dawned. Few ever talk about  
 that. Let's just skip that. Mention that to most neoadvaitin's 
and  
 they'll fall back on nowhere to go and nothing to become 
crutch.
 
 The only ones who don't notice them limping, is them.
 
 
  But in general
  they just seem to be brewing ground for confusion and
  delusion and ego. Almost all are still at the state of
  talking about experiences, they still have not transcended
  that basic need...
 
  The thing I noticed most was that NONE of the
  experiences Jim talks about have anything to
  do with other people. They are ALL in terms of
  himself. Whenever I try to get him to even
  talk about other people, he evades and dodges
  the discussions.
 
 No realization of interdependent origination.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
snip
 I see what you are saying and I understand the distress
 someone might feel when discussing bad stuff in their life
 and thinking they may leave therapy as a result. So yes,
 sometimes saying something forbidden out loud can be a
 positive step.  But it isn't always good to revisit the
 bad stuff.  The bad feelings may be reinforced.

That's why the TM version of the process, if it's
valid, might have a big advantage over therapy.
MMY disliked the idea of psychotherapy for exactly
the reason you stated (albeit he certainly had no
expert knowledge thereof).

Remember your original question was whether the
notion of unstressing as something good is
happening was unique to MMY.

snip
 Instead, the idea is to help people have different 
 reactions to stressors rather than feeling distress.  
 
 Therapy at best is a learning process rather than a 
 purification process,

I'm not sure there's a hard-and-fast distinction
between the two in this context. You could call
replacing negative reactions with neutral or
positive ones purification.


 so I don't think of bad feelings during therapy as unstressing.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[ruthsimplicity]

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@
 wrote:
 snip
  I see what you are saying and I understand the distress
  someone might feel when discussing bad stuff in their life
  and thinking they may leave therapy as a result. So yes,
  sometimes saying something forbidden out loud can be a
  positive step.  But it isn't always good to revisit the
  bad stuff.  The bad feelings may be reinforced.

 That's why the TM version of the process, if it's
 valid, might have a big advantage over therapy.
 MMY disliked the idea of psychotherapy for exactly
 the reason you stated (albeit he certainly had no
 expert knowledge thereof).

I think of therapy as work, as  an action plan to learn to ways to
identify bad thinking patters and learning coping strategies to help
deal with problematic symptoms as they arise.  Homework is often
required.  Practicing relaxation may be part of the homework if you
suffer from anxiety.  What MMY may have learned about therapy may have
been based on therapies that have been discredited or do not work. 
Taking a psychotic person and asking them to talk about their problems
doesn't make any sense and a psychotic break has nothing good happening,
only bad.  Instead, they need Risperdal.

One thing I originally believed about TM was that it was a partner with
science, not an opponent.  If there was a good medical therapy for a
medical problem, you used it.  If there was a psychological problem, and
there is a good therapy, you should use that as well.  Over the years it
became apparent to me that TM was more in opposition to science than I
originally thought.


 Remember your original question was whether the
 notion of unstressing as something good is
 happening was unique to MMY.

Yeah, we are moving a bit away from that question, but the discussion is
interesting.  I still have problems with the analogy as I don't really
think about bad feelings during therapy as unstressing.  But either way,
there can be bad feelings in therapy that disappear as a result of
therapy, so to that limited extent your analogy can apply.

 snip
  Instead, the idea is to help people have different
  reactions to stressors rather than feeling distress.
 
  Therapy at best is a learning process rather than a
  purification process,

 I'm not sure there's a hard-and-fast distinction
 between the two in this context. You could call
 replacing negative reactions with neutral or
 positive ones purification.


  This is a new subject, but really is the heart of the matter. What is
purification anyway?  Is there such a thing and how does it operate? 
Can purification truly be effortless or are new habits required beyond
meditation?  Special diets?  Special homes?   How does purification
relate to enlightenment?

[FairfieldLife] Graha Stuti cd Ameliorating negative effects of Nine Planets esp. Saturn

[sriswamijisadhaka]

Jaya Guru Deva Datta

A Guru guides the disciple to reach his goal.

His Holiness Sri Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji, Divinity personified,
is ever striving for the welfare of his disciples and devotees.

Sri Swamiji always devises novel methods to help his followers by
preaching the changeless, eternal tenets to suit the changing times.

As a part of such an effect, with a view to ward off the evil effects of
the nine planets in general; and those of  Shani in particular,
Sri Swamiji has rendered in his divine and soulful voice,   Graha
Stuti cd  comprised of  the highly acclaimed Navagraha stotra ,
Hanuman Anjana the 27 divine names of Lord Hanuman , and the rare
Shani stotra written by Pippalada Maharishi.
Also included are a powerful Ganapati nama song Ekadantaya, and
Malakamandalu  a beautiful meditation on Lord Dattatreya, the AdiGuru.

Parama Pujya Sri Swamiji says, listening to these sacred verses will
free the listener of all planetary evil effects and bestow peace and
tranquility of mind
Listen to this  Graha Stuti cd and experience the Divine energy.

This is available through this link.   http://www.yogasangeeta.org/ 
http://www.yogasangeeta.org/%20  go to online store.

Sri Guru Datta

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 ---Right-on!  Neo-Advaitins make a big thing about not being attached 
 to (say, Kundalini signs); but neither are ignorant people attached 
 to those phenomena.  The point is, one has to go THROUGH the signs. 
 How about the Radiant form of the Master? Challenge to Neo-Advaitins 
 on this forum:  Which Master did you see the Radiant form of?



Mr. Tertonzeno

So that I can pass through it (how, if you have the time) when encountered,  
just what is a 
radiant form? 

---

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
wrote:
 
 
   --
  Thanks for your response-- I'll give this another try:
  
  what is enlightenment, and more importantly, why should I want 
it?
  
  In a nutshell, enlightenment is lasting freedom, experienced 24 
x 7. 
  It is the abililty to experience anything in its totality, 
unmasked 
  and unencumbered by any preconceptions. It is the ability to 
live 
  skill in action, and by that I mean performing actions in as 
  complete a way as possible, experiencing them as fully as 
possible. 
  I could go on and on, because the state is one of living within 
the 
  boundaries of Infinity (that5's a joke). Basically a state of 
  everlasting and enduring freedom.
 
 
 --
 
 Thank you. It would seem that enlightenment then, while lacking a 
reasonable 
 description, does have some family of attributes. The few you've 
mentioned; lasting 
 freedom, totality, something in possession of an everlasting 
character make 
 enlightenment more than an appealing aim. 
 
 I'll assume for the moment that these are your experiences. May I 
ask then: outside of the 
 obvious subject comfort, what form do these attributes take in 
your daily life? 
 
 ---

Hard to say, because the experience of it is comprehensive; I don't 
believe it can ever be put into words, because it transcends 
everything. All of us have had that experience in meditation, any 
kind of meditation where we felt infinite, that we were no longer 
composed of boundaries, that although there was a sense of I, it 
had no boundaries to it, spreading to infinity in every direction, 
inwardly and outwardly. That is what the feeling is like, except 
that instead of only happening in here, it is also happening out 
there. 

As if a line could be drawn from the deepest part of myself, 
straight out to the further reaches of my known and even imagined 
universe, and there is nothing in the way, no concepts, no fears, no 
hinderances of any kind to prevent that line from being both 
intimately me and perfectly straight and clear. 

And so completely dynamic, so that when just quietly focusing on 
anything, the totality of the object is revealed. Not purely by 
discrimination, or intuition, or sensory input, but just by quietly 
focusing on the object. As if the silence in every object informs 
the silence within me, and through that process is gained total 
knowledge of the object. 

I hope that answers your question. I could write all day, every day, 
until there were no more days, and still not describe the totality 
of enlightenment.

Now, doesn't that sound like something appealing?
   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[authfriend]

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

 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@
  wrote:
  snip
   I see what you are saying and I understand the distress
   someone might feel when discussing bad stuff in their life
   and thinking they may leave therapy as a result. So yes,
   sometimes saying something forbidden out loud can be a
   positive step.  But it isn't always good to revisit the
   bad stuff.  The bad feelings may be reinforced.
 
  That's why the TM version of the process, if it's
  valid, might have a big advantage over therapy.
  MMY disliked the idea of psychotherapy for exactly
  the reason you stated (albeit he certainly had no
  expert knowledge thereof).
 
 I think of therapy as work, as  an action plan to learn to
 ways to identify bad thinking patters and learning coping 
 strategies to help deal with problematic symptoms as they
 arise.  Homework is often required.  Practicing relaxation
 may be part of the homework if you suffer from anxiety.
 What MMY may have learned about therapy may have been based
 on therapies that have been discredited or do not work.
 Taking a psychotic person and asking them to talk about their
 problems doesn't make any sense and a psychotic break has
 nothing good happening, only bad.  Instead, they need Risperdal.

My guess is that he was thinking of whatever he'd
heard or learned about Freudian-type psychoanalysis,
which certainly isn't as popular as it used to be,
but I'm not sure one could say it's been discredited.
Some of its ideas surely have been, but not all, and
not necessarily the overall approach.

I don't think I've ever heard anybody suggest, in any
context, taking a psychotic person and asking them to
talk about their problems as a valid form of therapy,
at least not prior to the psychosis being controlled
by medication, so I'm not sure where that came from.

 One thing I originally believed about TM was that it was
 a partner with science, not an opponent.  If there was a
 good medical therapy for a medical problem, you used it.
 If there was a psychological problem, and there is a good
 therapy, you should use that as well.  Over the years it
 became apparent to me that TM was more in opposition to
 science than I originally thought.

Yeah, I don't think you can base that case on MMY's
dislike of psychotherapy, or even include it in such
a case (and it's a little odd that you'd do that when
you've just expressed a dislike for exactly those
features of psychotherapy that MMY was opposed to!).

To make your case, you'd need to show that MMY was
opposed to aspects of science that have unequivocally
been demonstrated to be beneficial. Anecdotal cases
of TMers who have eschewed medical therapy because
they believed Maharishi Ayur-Veda was more effective,
for instance, can only be chalked up to
misunderstanding. Ayur-Veda is fundamentally
preventive; once you have detectable cancer, for
example, it's pretty much beyond the reach of
Ayur-Veda (at least according to Chopra when he was
promoting Maharishi Ayur-Veda under TMO auspices).

As to psychotherapy, it's important to remember that
one of the reasons TMers may have avoided it was
because the TMO didn't want people who *needed* it
to be participating in rounding and advanced courses,
which seems like a reasonable precaution. The
decision by someone who was having emotional problems
not to go into therapy because one might be barred
from courses is poor judgment on the part of the
individual.

With regard to all of this, the TMO tended to magnify
things MMY said and turn them into absolutes that
then became embedded in the culture in ways that MMY
may never have intended.

This is not to give MMY blanket exoneration from
anti-scientific ideas, it's just a caveat that things
may not be quite so cut-and-dried.

  Remember your original question was whether the
  notion of unstressing as something good is
  happening was unique to MMY.
 
 Yeah, we are moving a bit away from that question, but the
 discussion is interesting.  I still have problems with the
 analogy as I don't really think about bad feelings during
 therapy as unstressing.

I think the operative idea is something good is
happening (when you feel bad).

  But either way,
 there can be bad feelings in therapy that disappear as a result of
 therapy, so to that limited extent your analogy can apply.
snip
 
  I'm not sure there's a hard-and-fast distinction
  between the two in this context. You could call
  replacing negative reactions with neutral or
  positive ones purification.
 
   This is a new subject, but really is the heart of the
 matter. What is purification anyway?  Is there such a thing
 and how does it operate? Can purification truly be
 effortless or are new habits required beyond meditation?
 Special diets?  Special homes?   How does purification
 relate to enlightenment?

I'm going to 

[FairfieldLife] Sri Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji in London and USA

[sriswamijisadhaka]

Jaya Guru Deva Datta

For those in the Western Hemisphere who may be interested in seeing Sri
Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji, here is some information.

He will be in London from June 12th - 15th.
Along with public darshan,  He will be conducting NADA, Music of
Divinity a Healing and Meditation Concert there on the 14th, with His
Celestial Troupe and renowned violinist, Dr. L. Subramaniam.

link to pdf with London program details and maps:

http://www.dattapeetham.org/india/calendar/London_Jun08.pdf
http://www.dattapeetham.org/india/calendar/London_Jun08.pdf


For those living in USA, Sri Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji will be in
New Jersey for Guru Purnima Celebrations July 17th through the 20th.

Swamiji, will be performing Celestial Message 2008 a  Healing and
Meditation concert at the prestigious Lincoln Center in Manhattan, NYC
on Saturday  evening, July 19th.

Details of this program and concert tickets are at

www.yogasangeeta.org www.yogasangeeta.org

http://www.yogasangeeta.org/GuruPoornima2008.html
http://www.yogasangeeta.org/GuruPoornima2008.html

It seems that Swamiji will be in the states for three weeks.
Possible places to see Him:

Datta Retreat Center in West Sunbury, Pennsylvania

This place has some powerful healing rocks HUGE.
More info on DRC:
http://www.dycusa.org/drc/default.asp
http://www.dycusa.org/drc/default.asp

http://www.dattapeetham.org/india/tours/2007/europe2007/usa/drc.html
http://www.dattapeetham.org/india/tours/2007/europe2007/usa/drc.html

Datta Temple and Hall of Trinity in Baton Rouge, LA.

http://www.dattatemple.com/ http://www.dattatemple.com/

Hindu Temple Society of Mississippi in Brandon, MS. has been building a
new temple complex.
Sri Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji  will be overseeing and performing
pratishtha functions for the temple.
August 2-7th I think these dates are correct.

Sri Guru Datta

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 ---Right-on!  Neo-Advaitins make a big thing about not being 
attached 
 to (say, Kundalini signs); but neither are ignorant people attached 
 to those phenomena.  The point is, one has to go THROUGH the signs. 
 How about the Radiant form of the Master? Challenge to Neo-Advaitins 
 on this forum:  Which Master did you see the Radiant form of?
 
I don't know exactly what a neo advaitin is, sounds vaguely insulting, 
but the radiant form of the master I saw was guru dev, SBS. However 
this was about 15 years ago, long before I attained enlightenment. 
That is why I seriously doubt the linear progression of these signs 
you mention. They may well be indications of some purified sensory 
ability, but you cannot equate them to portals through which everyone 
must pass in their attainment of enlightenment. Seems instead like a 
waking state mind wanting to make the concept of enlightenment all 
comfy cozy. 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
 mrfishey2001@ wrote:
 
  --
 
  Thank you. It would seem that enlightenment then, while lacking a 
 reasonable 
  description, does have some family of attributes. The few you've 
 mentioned; lasting 
  freedom, totality, something in possession of an everlasting 
 character make 
  enlightenment more than an appealing aim. 
  
  I'll assume for the moment that these are your experiences. May I 
 ask then: outside of the 
  obvious subject comfort, what form do these attributes take in 
 your daily life? 
  
  ---

 
 Hard to say, because the experience of it is comprehensive; I don't 
 believe it can ever be put into words, because it transcends 
 everything. All of us have had that experience in meditation, any 
 kind of meditation where we felt infinite, that we were no longer 
 composed of boundaries, that although there was a sense of I, it 
 had no boundaries to it, spreading to infinity in every direction, 
 inwardly and outwardly. That is what the feeling is like, except 
 that instead of only happening in here, it is also happening out 
 there. 
 
 As if a line could be drawn from the deepest part of myself, 
 straight out to the further reaches of my known and even imagined 
 universe, and there is nothing in the way, no concepts, no fears, no 
 hinderances of any kind to prevent that line from being both 
 intimately me and perfectly straight and clear. 
 
 And so completely dynamic, so that when just quietly focusing on 
 anything, the totality of the object is revealed. Not purely by 
 discrimination, or intuition, or sensory input, but just by quietly 
 focusing on the object. As if the silence in every object informs 
 the silence within me, and through that process is gained total 
 knowledge of the object. 
 
 I hope that answers your question. I could write all day, every day, 
 until there were no more days, and still not describe the totality 
 of enlightenment.
 
 Now, doesn't that sound like something appealing?

-

Appealing perhaps, but hardly unique. I may need more hatha yoga to really 
comprehend 
the value of something so completely self-centered. To be honest, it all sounds 
a bit 
masturbatory. Now, I've nothing against a good self-inflicted rogering, but 
eventually 
something called the world appears. If memory serves me right, excessive self-
gratification usually leaves me wanting a sandwich and nap. 

But thank you anyway. 

-

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sri Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji in London and USA

[BillyG.]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sriswamijisadhaka
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Jaya Guru Deva Datta
 
 For those in the Western Hemisphere who may be interested in seeing Sri
 Ganapati Sachchidananda Swamiji, here is some information.
 
 He will be in London from June 12th - 15th.
 Along with public darshan,  He will be conducting NADA, Music of
 Divinity a Healing and Meditation Concert there on the 14th, with His
 Celestial Troupe and renowned violinist, Dr. L. Subramaniam.
 
 link to pdf with London program details and maps:
 
 http://www.dattapeetham.org/india/calendar/London_Jun08.pdf
 http://www.dattapeetham.org/india/calendar/London_Jun08.pdf

Anybody with fancy shoes like that is sure to be enlightened! I wonder
if he corresponds with Imelda Marcos?

[FairfieldLife] Re: FW: Jyotish

[bob_brigante]

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

 From: Blaine Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 8:58 AM
 To: undisclosed-recipients:
 Subject: Jyotish
 
  
 
 This is from a talk Maharishi gave in 2003 on jyotish.  He doesn't 
translate
 it but the term griha or graha means planet.  The griha shanti 
referred to
 in the last paragraph refers to planetary yagyas.
 
  
 
 So what a man produces from his action in the sun, in the moon, in 
the
 galaxy, in the stars -- that has its connectedness with the 
individual.
 There is a language to express all that: they are called 
Grihas. Griha
 means that which grips.
 
  
 
 So what grips the individual? His own doing, his own effect of 
his own
 karma. It's a great detailed science of behavior, science of 
consciousness.
 And this whole thing is dealt with as a part of the Veda. The part 
of the
 Veda is called Vedanga. There are six divisions of the Veda; one of 
the
 divisions of the Veda is Jyotish.
 
  
 
 Jyotish considers this grip of the reaction that is going to be 
controlling
 the doer. So all this language is in terms of the Grihas, and in 
every
 action, (unless a man is fully enlightened, and is fully supported 
by
 natural law) the man has freedom of action: in his freedom, he 
follows the
 evolutionary channel, and sometimes he falters.
 
  
 
 So there is positive, and there is negative doings by man. So 
positive doing
 has a positive reaction; negative doing has a negative reaction. 
They are
 called the positive and negative influences of the Grihas. There 
are nine
 Grihas. This is a whole big science, dividing them into one, into 
three, and
 three into nine, and nine into multiples of three, and three, three,
 three... huge, enormous, unlimited we can say.
 
  
 
 But majorly, the whole influence of every action is given in the 
channels of
 the nine Grihas. Out of the nine Grihas, two-three Grihas are 
always very
 good; two-three Grihas have some kind of medium influence; two-
three Grihas
 are negative. So there are pacifying performances, Vedic 
performances, which
 will pacify the negative influence, so that the negative influence 
which is
 the effect of one's own negative karma will not have to be faced by 
the man.
 This is what is called Griha Shanti. Griha Shanti.


**

English word grab is derived from Sanskrit gra-ha:

http://pages.citebite.com/x5a4y3d5rkgp

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[bob_brigante]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some history  
 on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:
 
 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
 
 Link
 
 Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were afraid  
 to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of Muslim  
 violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.




When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare and 
exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and other 
peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any more 
violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than Christians or 
Jews.

Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter of an 
entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[yifuxero]

---The notion of experiencing actions as fully as possible seems to 
indicate something relative. So, you're saying that E. people are 
incapable of experiencing half-baked undertakings?  How about MMY? 


 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
 mrfishey2001@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 
sandiego108@ 
 wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
   mrfishey2001@ wrote:
  
-

I enjoy discussing it with those who are interested in it.

Mr. Sandiego, Say I am interested, but I lack the necessary 
   background to understand this 
thing you call enlightenment. From your perspective: what is 
   enlightenment, and more 
importantly, why should I want it?

-
   
   I am not the guy to be asked these questions. 
   
   For one thing, it doesn't seem that someone reads something 
 about 
   enlightenment, as if choosing a new car, and then 
 decidesyes, 
   h, I'll go for it. Rather it is something that becomes 
known 
 to 
   the seeker after they have already shown interest in that 
 direction.
   
   For another, it is not a path for the faint of heart. Many 
 people 
   dabble with practices that may lead them closer to it, without 
   making much progress. In my experience, there has to be a 
hunger 
 for 
   this knowledge, a fire burning within already, to drive the 
 seeker 
   to find out more about it.
   
   There are many, many avenues to learn about enlightenment and 
 its 
   benefits. My recommendation would be to begin meditation or 
 hatha 
   yoga and take it from there.
  
  
  -
  
  My apologies. I was under the mistaken impression you enjoyed 
 discussing enlightenment 
  with those interested. I am interested - having said as much. I 
 wasn't aware of the 
  evidentiary requirement; I practice yoga, which includes a form 
of 
 meditation. While not a 
  card-carrying vegetarian, I do eat well. I've read various books 
 on eastern thought, and 
  attended several lectures on the top of enlightenment. The 
arrival 
 of summer will place me 
  that much closer to my first spiritual retreat. Do you think it's 
 here I'll find someone who 
  enjoys … discussing it with those who are interested in it. - 
or 
 will they as well ask for 
  further proof?
  
  --
 Thanks for your response-- I'll give this another try:
 
 what is enlightenment, and more importantly, why should I want it?
 
 In a nutshell, enlightenment is lasting freedom, experienced 24 x 
7. 
 It is the abililty to experience anything in its totality, unmasked 
 and unencumbered by any preconceptions. It is the ability to live 
 skill in action, and by that I mean performing actions in as 
 complete a way as possible, experiencing them as fully as possible. 
 I could go on and on, because the state is one of living within the 
 boundaries of Infinity (that5's a joke). Basically a state of 
 everlasting and enduring freedom.

Re: [FairfieldLife] And They're Off and Running...

[Bhairitu]

I have modified the program to look for messages beginning at 0 hours 
GMT (or UTC) on Saturdays.   Currently that for Fairfield would be 7 PM 
CDT the Friday before and 5 PM PDT.  When you go to the Fairfield Life 
web page without logging in you will get the UTC time for the message.  
When logged in you get the time adjusted to your zone.

If the start time was 0 hours Saturdays Central Time it is a little 
difficult to adjust the program for users in different parts of the 
world.  The GMT starting time is much easier and more consistent.  It 
should be easier to remember too.

The program will only work if the mbox file has messages delineated 
using HTML.  I have found a few Yahoo Groups that weren't for some 
reason delivering messages in HTML (your client just displays the text 
if you have it set for text only).  The mbox file format is a bit stupid 
but when the message is delineated with the html open and close tags 
then it is less prone to error when parsing.

Bhairitu wrote:
 I can do that.  I want to tweak this a little more to get a more 
 accurate post time.  Then I'll make the executables and source 
 available.  It should work with any client that uses the mbox file 
 format to store messages.

 Rick Archer wrote:
   
 Bhairitu, if you feel like running this a few times a week (or every day if
 you wish) and posting the results, it would be a nice service and I wouldn’t
 count those posts towards your total.

  
   
 


 

 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




   




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

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

* Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

* To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

* To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
  mrfishey2001@ wrote:
  
   --
  
   Thank you. It would seem that enlightenment then, while 
lacking a 
  reasonable 
   description, does have some family of attributes. The few 
you've 
  mentioned; lasting 
   freedom, totality, something in possession of an everlasting 
  character make 
   enlightenment more than an appealing aim. 
   
   I'll assume for the moment that these are your experiences. 
May I 
  ask then: outside of the 
   obvious subject comfort, what form do these attributes take in 
  your daily life? 
   
   ---
 
  
  Hard to say, because the experience of it is comprehensive; I 
don't 
  believe it can ever be put into words, because it transcends 
  everything. All of us have had that experience in meditation, 
any 
  kind of meditation where we felt infinite, that we were no 
longer 
  composed of boundaries, that although there was a sense of I, 
it 
  had no boundaries to it, spreading to infinity in every 
direction, 
  inwardly and outwardly. That is what the feeling is like, except 
  that instead of only happening in here, it is also 
happening out 
  there. 
  
  As if a line could be drawn from the deepest part of myself, 
  straight out to the further reaches of my known and even 
imagined 
  universe, and there is nothing in the way, no concepts, no 
fears, no 
  hinderances of any kind to prevent that line from being both 
  intimately me and perfectly straight and clear. 
  
  And so completely dynamic, so that when just quietly focusing on 
  anything, the totality of the object is revealed. Not purely by 
  discrimination, or intuition, or sensory input, but just by 
quietly 
  focusing on the object. As if the silence in every object 
informs 
  the silence within me, and through that process is gained total 
  knowledge of the object. 
  
  I hope that answers your question. I could write all day, every 
day, 
  until there were no more days, and still not describe the 
totality 
  of enlightenment.
  
  Now, doesn't that sound like something appealing?
 
 -
 
 Appealing perhaps, but hardly unique. I may need more hatha yoga 
to really comprehend 
 the value of something so completely self-centered. To be honest, 
it all sounds a bit 
 masturbatory. Now, I've nothing against a good self-inflicted 
rogering, but eventually 
 something called the world appears. If memory serves me right, 
excessive self-
 gratification usually leaves me wanting a sandwich and nap. 
 
 But thank you anyway. 
 
 -

Whatever you need-- its really not at all the way you interpret it-- 
the problem with trying to put it into words-- the self is no longer 
experienced the same way so all the self referencing is actually 
expansive, not contracting.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Richard J. Williams]

Marek wrote:
 However, the historical Buddha apparently 
 arrived at his awakening after (if not 
 necessarily because of) the pursuit and 
 practice of methods that were part of an 
 already long-existing enlightenment/moksha 
 tradition.  

Actually, the historical Buddha seems to have
rejected most of the systems prevalent in his
time: asceticism, skepticism, materialism, and
nihilism, and theism, as well as most of the 
conclusions of the Vedic rishis. He also 
rejected the notion of the indvidual soul 
monad espoused by the Upanishadic thinkers.

 The Upanishads were already written and 
 discussed among practitioners and seekers 
 when Buddha was teaching his take on what 
 realization was.  The enlightenment tradition 
 didn't spring, full-blown from Buddha, but 
 was articulated and renewed by him.

It has not been established that the Upanishads 
were composed before the advent of the 
historical Buddha. History in India begins with 
the historical Buddh - everything before that 
is considerd to be pre-history, and is mostly 
pure conjecture. 

All I can say is that if the Upanishads had 
been composed before the Shakya, he would 
have mentioned them by name and author, but 
he did not, although he enumerated almost 
all the prevelanet systems of his time.

We may safely assume however, that the yoga
system was pre-Vedic, since the Vedas do not
mention any yoga techniques. Where it came
from is still disputed, but I suspect it
came out of what is now southern India.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Richard J. Williams]

Marek wrote:
 If awakening is the realization of things 
 just as they are then it seems likely that 
 many individuals from all over the world may 
 have come to that aha, aah realization 
 whether or not they were active seekers or 
 practitioners within the South Asia 
 enlightenment tradition.

Maybe so, but 'enlightenment' in the context 
of South Asian yoga praxis isn't concerned 
with the theoretical notion of 'seeing things 
as they really are'. Yoga has to do with 
experiential introverted enstasis; techniques 
for obtaining enstatic ecstasy. For the yoga 
advocates, the things and events of this 
world are an illusion, not real - they are 
Maya, appearance only.

Realizing 'things just as they are' means 
that the individual has realized the 
illusionary character of things and events, 
not that things and events are real. But 
even if you admit that enlightenment is 
'seeing things as they really are' you 
would have to come to the same conclusion 
as Kapila, Shakya, Gaudpada, and Shankara 
- that existence is marked by suffering, 
lamentation, and grief - something to be 
avoided.  

In original Buddhism, enlightenment was 
termed *Nirvana*, the extinguishing of the 
notion of the individaul soul monad. This 
is true not only of original Buddhism, but 
also of the systems of Patanjali, Gaudapada,
and Shankara. All these systems have to do 
with realizing the illusory nature of things 
and events and the realization of the 
*non-dual* nature of the absolute. That's 
what enlightenment is in the context of 
South Asia.

But in fact, most other traditions have to 
do with shamanism, dualism, materialism, 
nihilism, or theism. Enlightenment in the 
South Asian tradition has nothing to do with 
any of these notions. That's my point.

But the point made by Eliade is that only 
the Yoga tradition of South Asia has to do 
with actual *techniques* of introverted 
ecstasy in order to *isolate* the real from 
the unreal. Nirodha is 'cessation'; Nirvana 
is 'blowing out'; Moksha is 'liberation'.

[FairfieldLife] Jefferson County Supervsor Primary June 3

[yermama472]

I hope everyone will take advantage of the opportunity to elect some
progressive minded people to the Jefferson County Board of Supervisors
tomorrow, Tuesday, June 3.  I urge people to study each candidate's
platform and make a choice based on their own thoughts about local
county government.

AND I hope folks will look beyond the meditator/non-meditator
context  of the candidates.  A recent email that is being widely
forwarded from Dr. Joseph Boxerman carries the subject line: VERY
IMPORTANT: Elect 2 Sidhas for Jefferson County Supervisor on Tues June
3   

Hopefully people will look beyond that divisive context and vote for
the people who they think are most qualified.  Electibility may want
to factor into folk's vote too.

Voting tip:  If there is any ONE particular candidate you wish to see
elected, it is recommended that you vote for only one (despite the
fact you may vote for two people) to give your single candidate a
proportional advantage. 

 


 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Jefferson County Supervsor Primary June 3

[Rick Archer]

Which ones are most opposed to CAFOs?

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
 mrfishey2001@ wrote:

  -
  
  Appealing perhaps, but hardly unique. I may need more hatha yoga 
 to really comprehend 
  the value of something so completely self-centered. To be honest, 
 it all sounds a bit 
  masturbatory. Now, I've nothing against a good self-inflicted 
 rogering, but eventually 
  something called the world appears. If memory serves me right, 
 excessive self-
  gratification usually leaves me wanting a sandwich and nap. 
  
  But thank you anyway. 
  
  -
 
 Whatever you need-- its really not at all the way you interpret it-- 
 the problem with trying to put it into words-- the self is no longer 
 experienced the same way so all the self referencing is actually 
 expansive, not contracting.




I have no argument with what you've written. I'd simply like to know if, as a 
result of this 
encounter, your lived experience has changed. Is the expressed content of your 
life 
somehow different? You'd have to agree that the ability to experience anything 
in its 
totality must in some sense leave a mark. What does your life, the one you 
live in lasting 
freedom look like? 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:


 
 what is enlightenment,

If the last suutra of Patañjali's Yoga-shaastra(?) defines
enlightenment (kaivalyam), his answer is rather boring, IMO:

svaruupapratiSThaa of citi-shakti (...svaruupapratiSThaa [vaa]
citi-shakter [iti]) 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Jefferson County Supervsor Primary June 3

[yermama472]

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

 Which ones are most opposed to CAFOs?

Curtis Hanson, Earl Shepard, and Will Richards, with Hanson having the
highest electibility quotient.  Hanson is well respected across the
ENTIRE community with great credentials, and a progressive stance on
almost all topics.  The local Dem Party has been trying to get Hanson
to run for years.

[FairfieldLife] Nomen est omen?

[cardemaister]

In Sanskrit, rodham would be the accusative (objective) 
singular from rodha (cf. who - *whom*):

2rodha  2 m. (for 1. see above , col. 1) the act of stopping ,
checking , obstructing , impeding ; suppressing , preventing ,
confining , surrounding , investing , besieging , blockading MBh.
Ka1v. c. ; obstruction of the bowels , costiveness Car. ; attacking ,
making war upon (gen.) R. ; a dam , bank , shore Ra1jat. Sus3r. (cf.
%{rodhas}) ; an arrow L. ; a partic. hell VP. ; N. of a man g. %{zivA7di}.

Bonus word (ni-rodha):

nirodha m. confinement , locking up , imprisonment (%{-tas} Mn. viii
, 375) ; investment , siege Cat. ; enclosing , covering up Var. Ka1v.
c. ; restraint , check , control , suppression , destruction Mn. MBh.
c. ; (in dram.) disappointment , frustration of hope Das3ar. ; (with
Buddh.) suppression or annihilation of pain (one of the 4 principles)
Lalit. MWB. 43 , 56 , 137 c. ; a partic. process to which minerals
(esp. quicksilver) are subjected Cat. ; hurting , injuring (=
%{ni-graha}) L. ; aversion , disfavour , dislike W. ; N. of a man
Lalit. ; %{-jJAna} n. (with Buddh.) one of the 10 kinds of knowledge
Dharmas. 93 ; %{-lakSaNa} (%{Na-vivaraNa}) , %{-varNana} n. %{-vivRti}
f. N. of wks.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
  mrfishey2001@ wrote:
 
   -
   
   Appealing perhaps, but hardly unique. I may need more hatha 
yoga 
  to really comprehend 
   the value of something so completely self-centered. To be 
honest, 
  it all sounds a bit 
   masturbatory. Now, I've nothing against a good self-inflicted 
  rogering, but eventually 
   something called the world appears. If memory serves me 
right, 
  excessive self-
   gratification usually leaves me wanting a sandwich and nap. 
   
   But thank you anyway. 
   
   -
  
  Whatever you need-- its really not at all the way you interpret 
it-- 
  the problem with trying to put it into words-- the self is no 
longer 
  experienced the same way so all the self referencing is actually 
  expansive, not contracting.
 
 
 
 
 I have no argument with what you've written. I'd simply like to 
know if, as a result of this 
 encounter, your lived experience has changed. Is the expressed 
content of your life 
 somehow different? You'd have to agree that the ability 
to experience anything in its 
 totality must in some sense leave a mark. What does your life, 
the one you live in lasting 
 freedom look like? 
 
 

I'll answer this generally, so as to spare both of us numerous 
examples. I was always an introvert, and still am by some 
definitions (the definition I think suits my nature best is that an 
introvert enjoys the company of others, but recharges his batteries 
alone), however all of my social, familial and work relationships 
are quite good. I am more prosperous. I have no fear of death 
(although I'd really prefer not to die violently, if at all 
possible). I have lost all of my convictions about the future (good 
and bad, including previous beliefs in life after death, and 
reincarnation-- who cares?). I no longer carry stories about 
regarding others- I let them live their life and I live mine. I 
don't believe in much of anything any more and am much happier for 
it. My intuition has improved, as has my creativity, and my 
precision too. 

No reflection on your question, but I am tired of talking about me, 
so I will leave it at that. 

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 ---The notion of experiencing actions as fully as possible seems 
to 
 indicate something relative. So, you're saying that E. people are 
 incapable of experiencing half-baked undertakings?  How about MMY? 

Oh no-- I wouldn't go that far. E. people experience life in total 
freedom-- as MMY used to say, all possibilities. He could look as 
messed up or more so as anyone else.
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[sgrayatlarge]

I guess you can include the violence of Hinduism as well Bob re: 
MahaBharta, how many died in that great battle? 

You also forgot to mention why Moses the slaughter. Balaam was a 
swell guy now wasn't he?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
 
  Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some 
history  
  on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:
  
  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
  
  Link
  
  Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were 
afraid  
  to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of 
Muslim  
  violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.
 
 
 
 
 When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare and 
 exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and other 
 peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any more 
 violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than Christians 
or 
 Jews.
 
 Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter 
of an 
 entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:
 
 http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html

[FairfieldLife] Satsang Fairfield

[dhamiltony2k5]

Making the rounds of discussion:

Subject: relief from the perception of time


This is dense, but gorgeous..
 
With incorporation into daily life, a spiritual practice can take the
form of the continuous surrendering of Volition, which then emerges 
into
autonomous witnessing and effortless observation. These capacities 
will then be
discovered to be qualities of consciousness, and not personal. 
Concentrated
spiritual focus is like a 'mind set' by which spiritual processing 
becomes
prioritized. Eventually, the illusion of a distinct, separate, 
personal 'I' that
is 'doing' the processing drops away. The phenomenon is then 
witnessed to be
happening spontaneously of its own. A fast track to this 
effortless state is
provided by the simple technique of focused relinquishment of 
resisting the
perception/experiencing of the passage or duration of time. This is a
surprisingly simple yet very powerful technique, and the reward is a 
sudden
relief from the constant unconscious pressure of 'time', which subtly
contextualizes and colors the experiencing of
worldly life. Breaking the dominance of the illusion of time is very 
doable. It
is then discovered that time is a projection from consciousness and 
only a
belief system out which the ego 'time tracks' the witnessing of the 
emergence of
phenomena. With release from dominance, there is a great sense of 
freedom and
inner joy. 
- Dr. David R. Hawkins

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[bob_brigante]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 I guess you can include the violence of Hinduism as well Bob re: 
 MahaBharta, how many died in that great battle? 
 
 You also forgot to mention why Moses the slaughter. Balaam was a 
 swell guy now wasn't he?
 



The warfare in the Mahabharata was between warriors on the huge 
battlefield on the plains of Kurukshetra, not the slaughter of 
innocent civilians. The only difference between Moses and the 
Israelis now killing civilians in Lebanon and wherever they can is 
that Moses liked to keep fresh young virgin girls around (not that 
Jews are any more or less disposed to slaughter than other peoples).

Of course, you don't have enough brains to distinguish between 
killing a bad guy like Balaam and slaughtering an entire people, as 
if the existence of one bad guy could in any way justify the killing 
of defenseless women and children.

You are at large, all right, but a mentality like yours, like other 
beastly proponents of slaughter of innocents, belongs in a cage at 
the zoo.



 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
  
   Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some 
 history  
   on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:
   
   http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
   
   Link
   
   Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were 
 afraid  
   to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of 
 Muslim  
   violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.
  
  
  
  
  When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare 
and 
  exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and 
other 
  peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any 
more 
  violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than 
Christians 
 or 
  Jews.
  
  Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter 
 of an 
  entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:
  
  http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html
 

[FairfieldLife] Spiritually Hot in FF, Kundalini Shakti

[dhamiltony2k5]

FW:
Dear All,

 

You are invited to two great presentations on Kundalini Shakti, by 
Joan Shivarpita Harrigan, PhD., director of the Patanjali Kundalini 
Yoga Care center in Knoxville, Tennessee.  She is the designated 
successor in the lineage of Traditional Kundalini Science specialists 
represented by Swami Chandrasekharanand Saraswati, and author of 
Kundalini Vidya: the Science of Spiritual Transformation.

 

Lecture June 5::  Kundalini Shakti: Experiencing the Divine Within

 

Date:  Thursday, June 5

Time:  7:30 p.m.

Place: Fairfield Public Library

There is no charge for this lecture

 

Seminar June 7:   Understanding and Guiding Spiritual Development 
according to Traditional Kundalini Science 

 

Date:  Saturday, June 7

Time:  10 am to 5 pm

Place: Revelations (upstairs meeting room)

Cost:   $75 (or $60 for students and those over 65)

 

The seminar will provide an overview of the following: 

Kundalini: The Divine Power Within, Source of Spiritual Life 
Subtle Body Physiology: The Koshas, Nadis, Chakras and Vayus 
Characteristics and Dynamics of Kundalini Arousal, Release and 
Risings 
Types of Kundalini Risings: Partial, Deflected, Intermediate,
Full, Complete, Advanced 
Supporting and Improving the Kundalini Process and Spiritual Life 
For more information or to get a copy of Joan Harrigan's book in 
advance of her visit, visit the website www.kundalinicare.com or call 
472-7148.  

 

Thank you.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[tertonzeno]

--Radiant form of the Master: one of the important signs of Kundalini 
awakening (specifically the 3-rd eye center) that is especially 
important in the Surat Shabda Yoga tradition (Sant Mat, Radhaswami, 
Ruhani Satsang, etc); but also found as a marker of progress toward 
Self-Realization in a few other traditions. To quote from a Sant Mat 
website:


As you look within, you will see a sky, or blue sky: If you look 
minutely into it, you will find it studded with stars, or you may see 
pinpoints of Light. If so, try to locate the big star out of them, 
and fix your whole attention on that. Then you may see the inner sun 
or moon. If so, focus all your attention into the middle; it will 
break into pieces, and you will cross it. Beyond you will see the 
radiant form of the Master or his Master... 



- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno tertonzeno@ 
wrote:
 
  ---Right-on!  Neo-Advaitins make a big thing about not being 
attached 
  to (say, Kundalini signs); but neither are ignorant people 
attached 
  to those phenomena.  The point is, one has to go THROUGH the 
signs. 
  How about the Radiant form of the Master? Challenge to Neo-
Advaitins 
  on this forum:  Which Master did you see the Radiant form of?
 
 
 
 Mr. Tertonzeno
 
 So that I can pass through it (how, if you have the time) when 
encountered,  just what is a 
 radiant form? 
 
 ---

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[Vaj]

On Jun 2, 2008, at 5:21 PM, bob_brigante wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some history
on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781

Link

Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were afraid
to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of Muslim
violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.





When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare and
exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and other
peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any more
violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than Christians or
Jews.

Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter of  
an

entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html



The thing I came away from in this movie was not really about warfare  
or violence, but more about societal engineering in old style Islam.  
For example I never knew that it is a Koranic injunction that when  
there is a battle, say over a particular piece of land, that you can  
never surrender. You can have a cease fire, but this is only to  
regroup and then re-assert yourselves. And once land is majority  
Islamic, it is to remain so till the whole world is consumed. That is  
the definition of peace: world domination. It was filled with all  
sorts of root reasons that they do what they do--and it's frightening;  
it's as if it's a religious virus living in the modern age, imported  
from a completely different stage of human growth--certainly compared  
to the west. Very borg like.

[FairfieldLife] Post Counts

[Bhairitu]

297 messages

Member   Posts

authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]  33
TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]26
sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED]21
Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]   20
shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20
off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]  19
curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED]  17
Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED]   15
Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED]15
Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED]13
ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED]8
bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED]  7
cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]  7
mrfishey2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED]  7
Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED]6
dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED]6
Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5
boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED]4
Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3
artkonrad [EMAIL PROTECTED]3
sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED]  3
tertonzeno [EMAIL PROTECTED]  3
yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED]  3
BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED]  3
nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2
do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2
Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED]2
new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2
sriswamijisadhaka [EMAIL PROTECTED]2
yermama472 [EMAIL PROTECTED]2
gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1
amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED]   1
Brian Horsfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]  1
R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
Dick Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED]   1
wayback71 [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
seekliberation [EMAIL PROTECTED]  1
okpeachman2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com1
lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]  1
Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1
Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
Richard M [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1
george_deforest [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
John [EMAIL PROTECTED]1
Zoran Krneta [EMAIL PROTECTED]  1
Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED]   1
posters: 48

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[Stu]

I don't understand why if one group has a particularly amoral
foundation of their religious philosophy how that justifies another
groups poor foundation.

Most modern people have denounced the ancient links to slavery and
violence that dominated thinking.  Many Muslims have as well. 
Unfortunately a huge percentage of the Arab world not only have links
to violent ideologies, they revel in it and make it the focus of their
lives.  This has led to a tragedy of a peoples steeped in poverty,
racism, sexism and illiteracy.  The clinging to ancient myth has
justified a cruel culture mired in medieval deeds.

Our work as post-moderns is to reflect on these myths and understand
their positive and negative natures.

s.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
 
  Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some history  
  on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:
  
  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
  
  Link
  
  Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were afraid  
  to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of Muslim  
  violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.
 
 
 
 
 When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare and 
 exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and other 
 peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any more 
 violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than Christians or 
 Jews.
 
 Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter of an 
 entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:
 
 http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Satsang Fairfield

[sandiego108]

Excellent! Perfect! This is it- Thanks for posting this.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Making the rounds of discussion:
 
 Subject: relief from the perception of time
 
 
 This is dense, but gorgeous..
  
 With incorporation into daily life, a spiritual practice can take 
the
 form of the continuous surrendering of Volition, which then 
emerges 
 into
 autonomous witnessing and effortless observation. These capacities 
 will then be
 discovered to be qualities of consciousness, and not personal. 
 Concentrated
 spiritual focus is like a 'mind set' by which spiritual processing 
 becomes
 prioritized. Eventually, the illusion of a distinct, separate, 
 personal 'I' that
 is 'doing' the processing drops away. The phenomenon is then 
 witnessed to be
 happening spontaneously of its own. A fast track to this 
 effortless state is
 provided by the simple technique of focused relinquishment of 
 resisting the
 perception/experiencing of the passage or duration of time. This 
is a
 surprisingly simple yet very powerful technique, and the reward is 
a 
 sudden
 relief from the constant unconscious pressure of 'time', which 
subtly
 contextualizes and colors the experiencing of
 worldly life. Breaking the dominance of the illusion of time is 
very 
 doable. It
 is then discovered that time is a projection from consciousness 
and 
 only a
 belief system out which the ego 'time tracks' the witnessing of 
the 
 emergence of
 phenomena. With release from dominance, there is a great sense of 
 freedom and
 inner joy. 
 - Dr. David R. Hawkins

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[bob_brigante]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 On Jun 2, 2008, at 5:21 PM, bob_brigante wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
 
  Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some 
history
  on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:
 
  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
 
  Link
 
  Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were 
afraid
  to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of 
Muslim
  violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.
 
 
  
 
  When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare 
and
  exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and 
other
  peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any more
  violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than 
Christians or
  Jews.
 
  Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter 
of  
  an
  entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:
 
  http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html
 
 


 The thing I came away from in this movie was not really about 
warfare  
 or violence, but more about societal engineering in old style 
Islam.  
 For example I never knew that it is a Koranic injunction that when  
 there is a battle, say over a particular piece of land, that you 
can  
 never surrender. You can have a cease fire, but this is only to  
 regroup and then re-assert yourselves. And once land is majority  
 Islamic, it is to remain so till the whole world is consumed. That 
is  
 the definition of peace: world domination. It was filled with 
all  
 sorts of root reasons that they do what they do--and it's 
frightening;  
 it's as if it's a religious virus living in the modern age, 
imported  
 from a completely different stage of human growth--certainly 
compared  
 to the west. Very borg like.


***

Very borglike on the part of some Islamic fundies (although they are 
not by any means representative of all of Islam, just as Xtain 
fundies, numerous as they are, do not represent all of Christianity), 
just like European Christians who fought -- how many was it again? --
 There were many different crusades. The most important and biggest 
Crusades happened from the 11th century to the 13th century. There 
were 9 big Crusades in this time. They are numbered 1 through 9. 
There were also many smaller Crusades. Some crusades were even within 
Europe (for example, in Spain and France). The smaller Crusades 
continued to the 16th century, until the Renaissance and Reformation.

The word Crusade is related to the word Cross, and means a 
Christian holy war. There is also the Arabic word Jihad, referring 
to a holy war fought by Muslims. All sides (Christians, Muslims, and 
Jews) believed very much in their religions. They also had political 
reasons for fighting. The strong belief made people less able to 
understand other people during times when there was no peace. The 
Crusades and Jihads caused very much loss of life and property for 
all sides. Much of the conflict between religions today is still 
partly from the Crusades and Jihads. The Crusades led to the 
bloodshed of many innocent people and it affected peoples views 
forever 
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

If you don't think that there is a substantial strain of U.S. 
Christians who do not continue to believe in world domination as back 
in the Crusade days, think again. It's just couched in other terms, 
like the war on terror, or other nonsense -- Dumbya did in fact use 
the word crusade to describe his campaign:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Satsang Fairfield

[yifuxero]

--from http://skepdic.com   ...on Dr. Hawkins:

Some of the statements made by this otherwise kind and intelligent 
man are shocking, i.e., as to kinesiology. With the increased sales 
of his books and other materials, the concern I have is that this 
nonsense could become an insane tool for wrong. I have witnessed its 
wrongful and malicious use by those very close to the Dr. His 
followers use it to rank all sorts of things using the Map of 
Consciousness as a reference: people, countries, events, movies, 
music, etc. Before each lecture-performance, he tests the audience to 
see how on the Map of Consciousness they are as a group, i.e., how 
close to enlightenment and therefore how far from the spiritual-
dregs. Amazingly, the groups lectured to always start very high on 
this logarithmic scale. After the lecture, he retests the group 
(using his wife as the agent) and they always go up the scale five to 
ten points. His testing shows that very few humans climb the Map of 
Consciousness by more than five points in a lifetime. Thus, the 
lectures are a great investment! 

- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 Excellent! Perfect! This is it- Thanks for posting this.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 
 dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
 
  Making the rounds of discussion:
  
  Subject: relief from the perception of time
  
  
  This is dense, but gorgeous..
   
  With incorporation into daily life, a spiritual practice can take 
 the
  form of the continuous surrendering of Volition, which then 
 emerges 
  into
  autonomous witnessing and effortless observation. These 
capacities 
  will then be
  discovered to be qualities of consciousness, and not personal. 
  Concentrated
  spiritual focus is like a 'mind set' by which spiritual 
processing 
  becomes
  prioritized. Eventually, the illusion of a distinct, separate, 
  personal 'I' that
  is 'doing' the processing drops away. The phenomenon is then 
  witnessed to be
  happening spontaneously of its own. A fast track to this 
  effortless state is
  provided by the simple technique of focused relinquishment of 
  resisting the
  perception/experiencing of the passage or duration of time. This 
 is a
  surprisingly simple yet very powerful technique, and the reward 
is 
 a 
  sudden
  relief from the constant unconscious pressure of 'time', which 
 subtly
  contextualizes and colors the experiencing of
  worldly life. Breaking the dominance of the illusion of time is 
 very 
  doable. It
  is then discovered that time is a projection from consciousness 
 and 
  only a
  belief system out which the ego 'time tracks' the witnessing of 
 the 
  emergence of
  phenomena. With release from dominance, there is a great sense of 
  freedom and
  inner joy. 
  - Dr. David R. Hawkins
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[Vaj]

On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:00 PM, bob_brigante wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



On Jun 2, 2008, at 5:21 PM, bob_brigante wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:


Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some

history

on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781

Link

Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were

afraid

to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of

Muslim

violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.





When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare

and

exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and

other

peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any more
violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than

Christians or

Jews.

Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the slaughter

of

an
entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html







The thing I came away from in this movie was not really about

warfare

or violence, but more about societal engineering in old style

Islam.

For example I never knew that it is a Koranic injunction that when
there is a battle, say over a particular piece of land, that you

can

never surrender. You can have a cease fire, but this is only to
regroup and then re-assert yourselves. And once land is majority
Islamic, it is to remain so till the whole world is consumed. That

is

the definition of peace: world domination. It was filled with

all

sorts of root reasons that they do what they do--and it's

frightening;

it's as if it's a religious virus living in the modern age,

imported

from a completely different stage of human growth--certainly

compared

to the west. Very borg like.



***

Very borglike on the part of some Islamic fundies (although they are
not by any means representative of all of Islam, just as Xtain
fundies, numerous as they are, do not represent all of Christianity),
just like European Christians who fought -- how many was it again? --
There were many different crusades. The most important and biggest
Crusades happened from the 11th century to the 13th century. There
were 9 big Crusades in this time. They are numbered 1 through 9.
There were also many smaller Crusades. Some crusades were even within
Europe (for example, in Spain and France). The smaller Crusades
continued to the 16th century, until the Renaissance and Reformation.

The word Crusade is related to the word Cross, and means a
Christian holy war. There is also the Arabic word Jihad, referring
to a holy war fought by Muslims. All sides (Christians, Muslims, and
Jews) believed very much in their religions. They also had political
reasons for fighting. The strong belief made people less able to
understand other people during times when there was no peace. The
Crusades and Jihads caused very much loss of life and property for
all sides. Much of the conflict between religions today is still
partly from the Crusades and Jihads. The Crusades led to the
bloodshed of many innocent people and it affected peoples views
forever
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

If you don't think that there is a substantial strain of U.S.
Christians who do not continue to believe in world domination as back
in the Crusade days, think again. It's just couched in other terms,
like the war on terror, or other nonsense -- Dumbya did in fact use
the word crusade to describe his campaign:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html


Did you watch the movie from beginning to end?

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[Richard J. Williams]

  what is enlightenment,
 
Mullquist wrote:
 If the last suutra of Patañjali's 
 Yoga-shaastra(?) defines enlightenment 
 (kaivalyam), 

Well yes, that's what I have been saying;
enlightenment in the yoga tradition is
*isolation* kaivalyam; 

Isolating the Purusha from the prakriti,
which then allows the Purusha to stand
by itself. Purusha is the 'Transcendental
Person', standing alone, isolated from
the duality, free from samskaras and 
karma.

Yoga is freedom and immortality; freedom
from karmic actions, immortal because
there is the realization that the soul
monad is an appearance - not real, but 
relative only. Kaivalya is Moksha, that
is, liberation.

 his answer is rather boring, IMO:

Unlike mine, which is full of energized
enthusiasm!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Rising Insanity of the Age of Enlightment

[Richard J. Williams]

   But, TM in itself is just a very subtle
   form of stress, what Selye called 'eu-stress;
  
 Richard M wrote:
  ugh! This is making my semantic synapses give 
  me a headache!
 
 Do you balance periods of activity with times 
 of relaxation? Practice stretching and/or yoga. 
 
 Reference:
 
 Eustress at Whole Health Stress Management:
 http://tinyurl.com/6dk6cb

TM in itself is just a very subtle form of 
stress, what Selye called 'eu-stress; curative
stress.

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[mrfishey2001]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 I'll answer this generally, so as to spare both of us numerous 
 examples. I was always an introvert, and still am by some 
 definitions (the definition I think suits my nature best is that an 
 introvert enjoys the company of others, but recharges his batteries 
 alone), however all of my social, familial and work relationships 
 are quite good. I am more prosperous. I have no fear of death 
 (although I'd really prefer not to die violently, if at all 
 possible). I have lost all of my convictions about the future (good 
 and bad, including previous beliefs in life after death, and 
 reincarnation-- who cares?). I no longer carry stories about 
 regarding others- I let them live their life and I live mine. I 
 don't believe in much of anything any more and am much happier for 
 it. My intuition has improved, as has my creativity, and my 
 precision too. 
 
 No reflection on your question, but I am tired of talking about me, 
 so I will leave it at that.

-

Much appreciated Mr. Sandiego. Your experience of enlightenment holds value. 
Better 
relationships, intuition, and greater prosperity I understand. Live and let 
live – always 
sound advice. Greater precision - untold advantages. However, dissipation of my 
beliefs  
may take a few more yoga classes. 

Enjoy your enlightenment.

---

[FairfieldLife] Look at me, I'm important! I know the Truth! (was Re: Shaken)

[sandiego108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mrfishey2001 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
wrote:
 
 
  I'll answer this generally, so as to spare both of us numerous 
  examples. I was always an introvert, and still am by some 
  definitions (the definition I think suits my nature best is that 
an 
  introvert enjoys the company of others, but recharges his 
batteries 
  alone), however all of my social, familial and work 
relationships 
  are quite good. I am more prosperous. I have no fear of death 
  (although I'd really prefer not to die violently, if at all 
  possible). I have lost all of my convictions about the future 
(good 
  and bad, including previous beliefs in life after death, and 
  reincarnation-- who cares?). I no longer carry stories about 
  regarding others- I let them live their life and I live mine. I 
  don't believe in much of anything any more and am much happier 
for 
  it. My intuition has improved, as has my creativity, and my 
  precision too. 
  
  No reflection on your question, but I am tired of talking about 
me, 
  so I will leave it at that.
 
 -
 
 Much appreciated Mr. Sandiego. Your experience of enlightenment 
holds value. Better 
 relationships, intuition, and greater prosperity I understand. 
Live and let live – always 
 sound advice. Greater precision - untold advantages. However, 
dissipation of my beliefs  
 may take a few more yoga classes. 
 
 Enjoy your enlightenment.
 
 ---

Thanks- enjoy those yoga classes.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Satsang Fairfield

[sandiego108]

its hearsay-- some people are afraid of everything.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 --from http://skepdic.com   ...on Dr. Hawkins:
 
 Some of the statements made by this otherwise kind and 
intelligent 
 man are shocking, i.e., as to kinesiology. With the increased 
sales 
 of his books and other materials, the concern I have is that this 
 nonsense could become an insane tool for wrong. I have witnessed 
its 
 wrongful and malicious use by those very close to the Dr. His 
 followers use it to rank all sorts of things using the Map of 
 Consciousness as a reference: people, countries, events, movies, 
 music, etc. Before each lecture-performance, he tests the audience 
to 
 see how on the Map of Consciousness they are as a group, i.e., how 
 close to enlightenment and therefore how far from the spiritual-
 dregs. Amazingly, the groups lectured to always start very high on 
 this logarithmic scale. After the lecture, he retests the group 
 (using his wife as the agent) and they always go up the scale five 
to 
 ten points. His testing shows that very few humans climb the Map 
of 
 Consciousness by more than five points in a lifetime. Thus, the 
 lectures are a great investment! 
 
 - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
 wrote:
 
  Excellent! Perfect! This is it- Thanks for posting this.
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 
  dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
  
   Making the rounds of discussion:
   
   Subject: relief from the perception of time
   
   
   This is dense, but gorgeous..

   With incorporation into daily life, a spiritual practice can 
take 
  the
   form of the continuous surrendering of Volition, which then 
  emerges 
   into
   autonomous witnessing and effortless observation. These 
 capacities 
   will then be
   discovered to be qualities of consciousness, and not personal. 
   Concentrated
   spiritual focus is like a 'mind set' by which spiritual 
 processing 
   becomes
   prioritized. Eventually, the illusion of a distinct, separate, 
   personal 'I' that
   is 'doing' the processing drops away. The phenomenon is then 
   witnessed to be
   happening spontaneously of its own. A fast track to this 
   effortless state is
   provided by the simple technique of focused relinquishment of 
   resisting the
   perception/experiencing of the passage or duration of time. 
This 
  is a
   surprisingly simple yet very powerful technique, and the 
reward 
 is 
  a 
   sudden
   relief from the constant unconscious pressure of 'time', which 
  subtly
   contextualizes and colors the experiencing of
   worldly life. Breaking the dominance of the illusion of time 
is 
  very 
   doable. It
   is then discovered that time is a projection from 
consciousness 
  and 
   only a
   belief system out which the ego 'time tracks' the witnessing 
of 
  the 
   emergence of
   phenomena. With release from dominance, there is a great sense 
of 
   freedom and
   inner joy. 
   - Dr. David R. Hawkins
  
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[bob_brigante]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:00 PM, bob_brigante wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
 
 
  On Jun 2, 2008, at 5:21 PM, bob_brigante wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
 
  Full length English version now on Google Video. Learn some
  history
  on the Religion of Peace in this controversial documentary:
 
  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
 
  Link
 
  Everything you've always wanted to know about Islam but were
  afraid
  to ask. The feature documentary that discovers the basis of
  Muslim
  violence in the Koran and the life of Muhammad.
 
 
  
 
  When you consider the centuries and centuries of brutal warfare
  and
  exploitation by so-called Christians against other Xtians and
  other
  peoples, it's ridiculous to characterize Muslims as being any 
more
  violent, either in scripture or in historical fact, than
  Christians or
  Jews.
 
  Read the Bibles' Numbers 31, in which Moses ordered the 
slaughter
  of
  an
  entire group, allowing only the virgin girls to live:
 
  http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html
 
 
 
 
  The thing I came away from in this movie was not really about
  warfare
  or violence, but more about societal engineering in old style
  Islam.
  For example I never knew that it is a Koranic injunction that 
when
  there is a battle, say over a particular piece of land, that you
  can
  never surrender. You can have a cease fire, but this is only to
  regroup and then re-assert yourselves. And once land is majority
  Islamic, it is to remain so till the whole world is consumed. 
That
  is
  the definition of peace: world domination. It was filled with
  all
  sorts of root reasons that they do what they do--and it's
  frightening;
  it's as if it's a religious virus living in the modern age,
  imported
  from a completely different stage of human growth--certainly
  compared
  to the west. Very borg like.
 
 
  ***
 
  Very borglike on the part of some Islamic fundies (although they 
are
  not by any means representative of all of Islam, just as Xtain
  fundies, numerous as they are, do not represent all of 
Christianity),
  just like European Christians who fought -- how many was it 
again? --
  There were many different crusades. The most important and 
biggest
  Crusades happened from the 11th century to the 13th century. There
  were 9 big Crusades in this time. They are numbered 1 through 9.
  There were also many smaller Crusades. Some crusades were even 
within
  Europe (for example, in Spain and France). The smaller Crusades
  continued to the 16th century, until the Renaissance and 
Reformation.
 
  The word Crusade is related to the word Cross, and means a
  Christian holy war. There is also the Arabic word Jihad, 
referring
  to a holy war fought by Muslims. All sides (Christians, Muslims, 
and
  Jews) believed very much in their religions. They also had 
political
  reasons for fighting. The strong belief made people less able to
  understand other people during times when there was no peace. The
  Crusades and Jihads caused very much loss of life and property for
  all sides. Much of the conflict between religions today is still
  partly from the Crusades and Jihads. The Crusades led to the
  bloodshed of many innocent people and it affected peoples views
  forever
  http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
 
  If you don't think that there is a substantial strain of U.S.
  Christians who do not continue to believe in world domination as 
back
  in the Crusade days, think again. It's just couched in other 
terms,
  like the war on terror, or other nonsense -- Dumbya did in fact 
use
  the word crusade to describe his campaign:
 
  http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html
 


 Did you watch the movie from beginning to end?



*

I'm afraid you're not getting the point. This movie is 
right/fundie/zionist propaganda, designed to show the necessity of 
pounding the Islamic world into submission. Prominently featured on 
the google video site is a link to World Ahead Publishing, a fundie 
extreme rightist group with a number of hysterical titles like their 
panic attack over Canada and Mexico:

The Late Great U.S.A
The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada
By Dr. Jerome Corsi 
WND Books 


Newsflash: Late Great USA is a New York Times best-seller 


The proposed Senate immigration reform bill is a travesty that has 
millions of Americans asking, why are we giving so many concessions 
to those who have knowingly broken our laws? A better question might 
be, why is Teddy Kennedy's dream bill giving Mexico complete control 
over our southern border? Think a merger between the U.S, Mexico and 
Canada is just a pipe dream? Think again. As best-selling author Dr. 
Jerome Corsi proves, our nation's sovereignty is under attack like 
never before. (read more) 

[FairfieldLife] 'China brings John Lennon's Imagine to Olympics'

[Robert]

http://quigleyblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/


  

[FairfieldLife] Imagine in China- (corrected link)

[Robert]

nbsp;http://quigleyblog.blogspot.com/


  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Satsang Fairfield

[yifuxero]

--Fear, no; but concern about bogus practices and flim-flam artists 
such as Hawkins, yes. From wiki:

However, many studies of Applied Kinesiology have failed to show 
clinical efficacy. For example, muscle testing has not been shown to 
distinguish a test substance from a placebo under double-blind 
conditions, and the use of applied kinesiology to evaluate nutrient 
status has not been shown to be more effective than random guessing. 
Some scientific studies have shown that applied kinesiology tests are 
not reproducible.[22][23][24][25][26] A review of several scientific 
studies have shown that AK-specific procedures and diagnostic tests 
concluded that When AK is disentangled from standard orthopedic 
muscle testing, the few studies evaluating unique AK procedures 
either refute or cannot support the validity of AK procedures as 
diagnostic tests. The evidence to date does not support the use of 
[manual muscle testing] for the diagnosis of organic disease or 
pre/subclinical conditions.[3] Another concluded that There is 
little or no scientific rationale for these methods. Results are not 
reproducible when subject to rigorous testing and do not correlate 
with clinical evidence of allergy.[27]





- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

 its hearsay-- some people are afraid of everything.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero yifuxero@ 
 wrote:
 
  --from http://skepdic.com   ...on Dr. Hawkins:
  
  Some of the statements made by this otherwise kind and 
 intelligent 
  man are shocking, i.e., as to kinesiology. With the increased 
 sales 
  of his books and other materials, the concern I have is that this 
  nonsense could become an insane tool for wrong. I have witnessed 
 its 
  wrongful and malicious use by those very close to the Dr. His 
  followers use it to rank all sorts of things using the Map of 
  Consciousness as a reference: people, countries, events, movies, 
  music, etc. Before each lecture-performance, he tests the 
audience 
 to 
  see how on the Map of Consciousness they are as a group, i.e., 
how 
  close to enlightenment and therefore how far from the spiritual-
  dregs. Amazingly, the groups lectured to always start very high 
on 
  this logarithmic scale. After the lecture, he retests the group 
  (using his wife as the agent) and they always go up the scale 
five 
 to 
  ten points. His testing shows that very few humans climb the Map 
 of 
  Consciousness by more than five points in a lifetime. Thus, the 
  lectures are a great investment! 
  
  - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ 
  wrote:
  
   Excellent! Perfect! This is it- Thanks for posting this.
   
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 
   dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
   
Making the rounds of discussion:

Subject: relief from the perception of time


This is dense, but gorgeous..
 
With incorporation into daily life, a spiritual practice can 
 take 
   the
form of the continuous surrendering of Volition, which then 
   emerges 
into
autonomous witnessing and effortless observation. These 
  capacities 
will then be
discovered to be qualities of consciousness, and not 
personal. 
Concentrated
spiritual focus is like a 'mind set' by which spiritual 
  processing 
becomes
prioritized. Eventually, the illusion of a distinct, 
separate, 
personal 'I' that
is 'doing' the processing drops away. The phenomenon is then 
witnessed to be
happening spontaneously of its own. A fast track to this 
effortless state is
provided by the simple technique of focused relinquishment of 
resisting the
perception/experiencing of the passage or duration of time. 
 This 
   is a
surprisingly simple yet very powerful technique, and the 
 reward 
  is 
   a 
sudden
relief from the constant unconscious pressure of 'time', 
which 
   subtly
contextualizes and colors the experiencing of
worldly life. Breaking the dominance of the illusion of time 
 is 
   very 
doable. It
is then discovered that time is a projection from 
 consciousness 
   and 
only a
belief system out which the ego 'time tracks' the witnessing 
 of 
   the 
emergence of
phenomena. With release from dominance, there is a great 
sense 
 of 
freedom and
inner joy. 
- Dr. David R. Hawkins
   
  
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
 I'm afraid you're not getting the point. This movie is 
 right/fundie/zionist propaganda, designed to show the necessity of 
 pounding the Islamic world into submission.

Vaj has been posting hate material here against
Islam and other non-Christian religions for
some time; I don't know why anybody should be
surprised that he doesn't get the point.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Islam: What the West Needs to Know

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Very borglike on the part of some Islamic fundies (although they are 
 not by any means representative of all of Islam, just as Xtain 
 fundies, numerous as they are, do not represent all of Christianity), 
 just like European Christians who fought -- how many was it again? --
  There were many different crusades. The most important and biggest 
 Crusades happened from the 11th century to the 13th century. There 
 were 9 big Crusades in this time. They are numbered 1 through 9. 
 There were also many smaller Crusades. Some crusades were even within 
 Europe (for example, in Spain and France). The smaller Crusades 
 continued to the 16th century, until the Renaissance and 
 Reformation.

The thing you are leaving out, Bob, is that two
of these Crusades were against *fellow Christians*,
the Cathars. The two Albigensian Crusades were for
the specific purpose of practicing genocide against
fellow Christians who deviated from the Roman dogma
and refused to acknowledge Rome as authority. Not
to mention conquest of territory and theft of their
property. The Crusaders and the Inquisition killed 
an estimated 250,000 of them in the name of God. 

The three things promised to Crusaders -- their
enlistment bonus, as it were -- were: 1) guaranteed
Heaven...nothing they had done previously in life or
for the rest of their lives would be considered a sin;
2) they could keep anything they could steal; and 
3) while any member of their family was on Crusade,
none of their debts could be collected. The last
promise was the reason that most families in Europe
signed up one or more of their sons for the Crusades;
they were in hock up to their eyeballs, and were
anxious for those debts not to be collected.

I'm not arguing with your premise that Christians have
as bad or worse a history of warfare and genocide as
Muslims and Jews; I'm merely pointing out a detail, 
that their real *reasons* for the genocide and warfare 
were neither altruistic nor limited to one opposing 
religion. It was a case of us vs. them, with them 
being anyone who stood in the way of us getting what 
they wanted.

 The word Crusade is related to the word Cross, and means a 
 Christian holy war. 

See above. How holy were the Crusades in reality?