[FairfieldLife] Re: The Sutras of Carlsen 1
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IOW, a major troll by Vaj which sucked in many people for many posts. Exactly. The thing I liked the most, doing my skim the replies for idiocy in two seconds before pressing the Next key thing, was when someone said that they preferred Carlsen's stuff because it made more sense to them. Well duh...that's why they liked Maharishi's stuff...he dumbed it down for people too lazy to learn the real terms for the things they pretend to know about and too lazy to read the real sources that the stuff that Maharishi was dumbing down came from. :-) I stayed out of it because such discussions do not interest me in the least. IMO Carlsen was a lightweight, Maharishi was a lightweight, and many of the scholars Vaj holds as authoritative were lightweights. They all spent hours and hours trying to come up with definitive sutras about their subjective experiences, glorifying them according to their own beliefs about how important those experiences made them personally, but at the same time forgetting the rule of discussing subjective experiences as defined so well by Curtis. That was, to paraphrase, It's like listening to someone talk about their dream. They're really into it, but there is nothing in in their description of the dream that in any way conveys the experience of the dream. So their rap *just isn't interesting* because it wasn't your dream. All you can do is hope that they'll stop talking about it soon.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Accidental autograph
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just posted two photos of a bird crash smudge found on one of my garden windows this morning. They're in the miscellaneous folder in the photos link. Don't know how long it's been there because it's invisible except that I was dawdling this morning before heading out to the beach and, with the late-morning light raking across the window at just the right angle it illuminated the smudge that appears in the middle of the window in the longview and more clearly seen in the close up. Very cool. The bird was probably after your darshan, Marek. I know I've certainly missed it around here. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The point is that it is so curious that this group of people � the most active posters � tolerates and promotes and even seems to thrive on a style of communication that is, to me, so much at odds with any recognizable process of community-building, mutual discovery, or a generous sharing of diversity. It's a case of the bad posters driving away the good people. There are a lot of people like you who have ideas which they can express with eloquence and conviction. But they don't lead anywhere. No one in the TMO wants to hear thoughts from outside the box, and everyone here is so well versed in the problems of the TMO that it gets repetitive to go over that ground again. Which doesn't leave much room for creative, entertaining and sometimes insightful posting. With nothing much to say that hasn't already been said it leaves the ground open to those who don't have anything useful to say and are keen to make sure everyone knows about it. The way to redress the balance is to increase the quantity of posts that are worth reading, which makes more people read, and hopefully more people write other intelligent tracts. WELL SAID. That's really the issue. Many of the people who talk -- or really, shout -- on this forum the most are shouting about the same old same old, over and over and over and over. And the real reason is that they don't HAVE anything else to talk about. They haven't had any experiences of their own to talk about in decades, so they argue incessantly about other peoples' exper- iences. They don't have anything going on in their personal lives, so they try to start arguments about politics, or even more boring, sexual politics. That's why I was trying to taunt/challenge Tom to stick around and not limit his remarks to a drive by hooting. He at least seems to have something to say that is out of the ordinary and new. Whatever he has to say, it's got to be better than the stuff posted by those who have spent 50 posts a week for months or years proving that they DON'T have anything new or interesting to say.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's really the issue. Many of the people who talk -- or really, shout -- on this forum the most are shouting about the same old same old, over and over and over and over. And the real reason is that they don't HAVE anything else to talk about. They haven't had any experiences of their own to talk about in decades, so they argue incessantly about other peoples' exper- iences. They don't have anything going on in their personal lives, so they try to start arguments about politics, or even more boring, sexual politics. That's why I was trying to taunt/challenge Tom to stick around and not limit his remarks to a drive by hooting. He at least seems to have something to say that is out of the ordinary and new. Whatever he has to say, it's got to be better than the stuff posted by those who have spent 50 posts a week for months or years proving that they DON'T have anything new or interesting to say. Just to follow up -- because this subject makes a great troll in itself, and the people I'm talking about will reply to it in *exactly* the way I'm describing them -- the problem on FFL really IS boredom. Vaj's Carlsen posts, on one level, really were trolls. On another, however, he was again hoping for some -- any -- intelligent discussion about the differences in the points of view (not to mention View) being discussed. Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a bash Vaj session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. So they had fun bashing Vaj. Even sparaig wisely stayed out of this time, as did pretty much everyone else except Curtis, who weighed in to provide some balance, as he often does. So what's the alternative to having to wade through post after post after post of this garbage, the *same* garbage every time? What might the thing be that would actually entice lurkers to come out of their closets and join in? Well, IMO it's original thought. As guyfawkes said so well, who CARES who the Mistress Of Unorig- inal Thought is bashing this week to cover her lack of original thought? For that matter, who CARES what Maharishi said on some subject? He's dead, and we've been over it a thousand times already. Me, I'd like to hear a little something different. Some original experiences, told *as they happened*, and without trying to link them to some exper- ience in the past in some scripture or lecture. I'd like to hear *happy* stuff, stuff that really turns you on. (One of the reasons it was great to see Marek's name again was that I used to love his descriptions of surfing and what it meant to him; they were the most *alive* posts I've ever seen on this forum. Those and when Curtis talks about his music. And WHY are those experiences fun to read, while the Vaj-bashing and the Barry-bashing and the tired old reruns of the same old same old are not? Because they're HERE AND NOW. Someone is *having* those experiences, in real time. And that makes them *alive*, something that other alive people can participate in and derive joy from reading about. The chronic same old same olders don't HAVE any such experiences to share. That's why they dredge up the same old same old every week. I say it's about time for those on this forum who actually HAVE lives to write about them a little, to remind those who don't what they're missing, and to remind those of us who also have lives that we could be writing about them, too. Instead of this tired old shit that *everyone* is tired of except a few who really don't have anything else going on for them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
All we have to do is get rid of the ankle-biting pundits who post lies to get attention! No, that's not possible. More people need to post more thoughtful messages. Eventually if enough thoughtful discussion takes place on this group there will be a phase transition ;-) and it'll flip over into a more restrained tone. People emulate each other, and they like to think they're getting some sort of cred from the groups they're in. Even if it's back to front cred from people responding emotively to one's posts. If it becomes apparent that there's no cred to be gained from emotionally charged yet information free posting it'll die out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: YTU and jumping like a frog?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone's got a translation of YogatattvopaniSat (yoga-tattva-upanishad)? These shlokas (or whatever) seem to describe YF as and inevitable(?) result of some praaNaayaama's (kevala-kumbhaka): tato.api dhaaraNaadvaayoH krameNaiva shanaiH shanaiH . kampo bhavati dehasya aasanasthasya dehinaH .. 52.. tato.adhikataraabhyaasaaddaardurii svena jaayate . yathaa cha darduro bhaava utplunyotplutya gachchhati .. 53.. padmaasanasthito yogii tathaa gachchhati bhuutale . tato.adhikatarabhyaasaadbhuumityaagashcha jaayate .. 54.. padmaasanastha evaasau bhuumimutsR^ijya vartate . atimaanushhacheshhTaadi tathaa saamarthyamudbhavet.h .. 55.. Here is one, and then some: 50-53. By thus retaining the breath as long as he likes, Kevala Kumbhaka (cessation of breath without inspiration and expiration) is attained. When Kevala Kumbhaka is attained by one and thus expiration and inspiration are dispensed with, there is nothing unattainable in the three worlds to him. In the commencement (of his practice), sweat is given out; he should wipe it off. Even after that, owing to the retaining of the breath, the person practising it gets phlegm. Then by an increased practice of Dharana, sweat arises. 54. As a frog moves by leaps, so the Yogin sitting in the Padma posture moves on the earth. With a (further) increased practice, he is able to rise from the ground. 55. He, while seated in Padma posture, levitates. There arises to him the power to perform extraordinary feats. 56. He does (or should) not disclose to others his feats of great powers (in the path). Any pain small or great, does not affect the Yogin. 57. Then excretions and sleep are diminished; tears, rheum in the eye, salivary flow, sweat and bad smell in the mouth do not arise in him. 58-60. With a still further practice, he acquires great strength by which he attains Bhuchara Siddhi, which enables him to bring under his control all the creatures that tread this earth; tigers, Sarabhas (an animal with eight legs), elephants, with bulls or lions die on being struck by the palm of the Yogin. He becomes as beautiful as the god of love himself. 61-62. All females being taken up with the beauty of his person will desire to have intercourse with him. If he so keeps connection, his virility will be lost; so abandoning all copulation with women, he should continue his practice with great assiduity. By the preservation of the semen, a good odour pervades the body of the Yogin.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Sutras of Carlsen 1
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: IOW, a major troll by Vaj which sucked in many people for many posts. Exactly. The thing I liked the most, doing my skim the replies for idiocy in two seconds before pressing the Next key thing, was when someone said that they preferred Carlsen's stuff because it made more sense to them. Well duh...that's why they liked Maharishi's stuff...he dumbed it down for people too lazy to learn the real terms for the things they pretend to know about and too lazy to read the real sources that the stuff that Maharishi was dumbing down came from. :-) Me old friend, Anoop Chandola, a reasonably well-respected Sanskrit scholar (one of his former students heads the U of Virginia's Sanskrit dept) indicated that he thought MMY was speaking from experience, rather than from a book. YMMV of course. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All we have to do is get rid of the ankle-biting pundits who post lies to get attention! No, that's not possible. More people need to post more thoughtful messages. Eventually if enough thoughtful discussion takes place on this group there will be a phase transition ;-) and it'll flip over into a more restrained tone. People emulate each other, and they like to think they're getting some sort of cred from the groups they're in. Even if it's back to front cred from people responding emotively to one's posts. If it becomes apparent that there's no cred to be gained from emotionally charged yet information free posting it'll die out. That's really the issue. If you're so bored that you bite on obvious trollbait and respond to it *in exactly the way that the troll hopes you will*, you are perpetuating the trolling. I say learn a little something from the way that a few of the obvious Trolls With Nothing To Say react when a lot of people *ignore* what they post for a while. They freak out, and melt down. And then their first response is to troll *more*, and try to start arguments with new people, since the old ones aren't falling for it any more. But the second response is to try to post something that actually has some interest quotient to it, and is flame-free and troll-free. True, they only resort to this when they're *really* freaked out about being ignored, but they do it. So those who are smart should take advantage of these freakout moments in the trolls and respond only to the moments in which the trolls are so worried about losing their audience that they resort to being human beings to try to preserve it.
[FairfieldLife] American college students and professors interviewed about Canada
And one wonders why some people don't realize how dumb Sarah Palin is: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=n-M06kWJetofeature=related
[FairfieldLife] 'A New Thought Movement'
I read this in another group, and thought it was uplifting and well written, so passing it along... The New Thought Movement — not to be confused with New Age — is more than a century old, and is practically oriented spirituality that promotes fullness of all aspects of living, through positive thinking, meditation, affirmative prayer, and other ways of realizing the presence of God. New Thought includes Unity, Religious Science (Science of Mind), Divine Science, and other groups and individuals. A common saying in New Thought is Change Your Thinking, Change Your Life. New Thought is not a cult or a religion, rather a way of Life that is practical, universal spirituality. It believes that the Divine called by many names — God, Goddess, Great Spirit, Allah, Jehovah — is personal to each person and lives within each of us. It does not have a gender necessarily and some choose not to refer to God as He or She. New Thought honors the divinity and wisdom in each religion and spiritual tradition. New Thought believes there were — and are — many great teachers — Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed — and that each of us has this capacity. New Thought is not, as many believe, a name or expression employed to define any fixed system of thought, philosophy, or religion, but is a term used to convey the idea of growing or developing thought. New Thought is the result or creation of perpetually advancing mind. Change and growth are the silent mandates of divinity. Back of all, unseen yet all powerful, is the one universal law or cosmic urge, forever pushing and projecting man forward into higher physical, mental, and spiritual development. Through spiritual evolution are we led to God. No two individuals are alike or think alike. Duplicates have never been discovered in all the broad domain of nature. Scientists tell us that even the molecules of which our bodies are composed differ one from the other. No two men in creation think alike, No two men in creation look alike, No two men in creation are alike, No worlds or suns or heavens, but are distinct and wear a separate beauty.'' Language, either written or spoken, is but a symbol, and at best an imperfect vehicle to convey thought. … Thought is deeper than speech; feeling deeper than thought; souls to souls can never teach what to themselves is taught. As each morning bathes the earth in new light, so each returning day and every recurring season bring new meanings and understandings to the soul. The greatest gift from God to man is a growing mind, one that expands from day to day as the light of truth breaks upon it. As man renews his mind and reaches out for larger conceptions of truth, his understanding is enlarged, he gains new viewpoints, his expanded thought is translated and externalized into life, he grows, he advances, he comes into a closer union with God. We all live, move and have our being in an atmosphere of truth; truth is only assimilated by the individual. Principles and laws are changeless, but our understanding of them changes as our minds gain new conceptions of truth and as they grow and develop. Only as the mind dwells on principles can it advance to a larger understanding of truth and higher conceptions of life. … To gain higher conceptions of the principles and laws underlying the universe is the real work of man. Man is either progressing or receding; spiritually and mentally he cannot stand still. Man can grow into a knowledge of his relationship with God and reach out toward the divine goal, only as he renews his mind, only as he enlarges his conception of what is within his consciousness, only as he presses forward into a higher spiritual and mental development. Man grows only as he enlarges his thoughts. How can his thoughts be enlarged except as he takes on the new? By no other process can he enlarge his conceptions and understanding of life. As his ideals expand he comprehends more truth, he moves forward, he extends his visions, he grows, he sees beauty, harmony, and law in all created things. Hence New Thought is a synonym for growth, for development, for perpetual and eternal progress. It recognizes the superior and excellent in man; it deals not with limitations; it sets no bounds to the soul's progress, for it sees in each soul transcendental faculties as limitless as infinity itself. New Thought may be said to possess one fixed creed, that of an eternal search for truth. It is anchored to that one thought. … It realizes that attainment of truth is a process of evolution, growth, and development. Man can acquire truth only as he is mentally and spiritually prepared to receive it. New Thought is anchored to the idea of finding the good and the beautiful in life, the development of latent possibilities in man, and that law reigns supreme in the universe. Anchored to these principles, New Thought moves forward in its quest for more truth, in its search for greater light that leads upward and onward toward a unity
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Unfortunately the movement often pushed meditating when people should have stopped for a while because they were burning out. Stopping would have allowed more progress. A crucial but often missed insight.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of guyfawkes91 Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:27 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife The way to redress the balance is to increase the quantity of posts that are worth reading, which makes more people read, and hopefully more people write other intelligent tracts. I agree. Limiting the weekly posts to 50 was effective because it change the proportions of the mix. More constructive, substantive contributions will naturally change the ratio of useful posts to those which involve petty bickering.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:43 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife That's why I was trying to taunt/challenge Tom to stick around and not limit his remarks to a drive by hooting. He at least seems to have something to say that is out of the ordinary and new. Whatever he has to say, it's got to be better than the stuff posted by those who have spent 50 posts a week for months or years proving that they DON'T have anything new or interesting to say. But you see Barry, you're part of the problem insofar as you ended your post with an implicit dig at Judy. If you did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to egg her on, and COMPLETELY IGNORED all attempts she might make to engage you in an argument, the whole Barry/Judy thing might fizzle out once and for all. Just think of yourself has being one of those Hindu gods with lots of heads, and therefore plenty of cheeks. Keep turning them no matter what she does and see what happens.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:18 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a bash Vaj session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I'm giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Sutras of Carlsen 1
On Nov 24, 2008, at 4:22 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IOW, a major troll by Vaj which sucked in many people for many posts. Exactly. The thing I liked the most, doing my skim the replies for idiocy in two seconds before pressing the Next key thing, was when someone said that they preferred Carlsen's stuff because it made more sense to them. Well duh...that's why they liked Maharishi's stuff...he dumbed it down for people too lazy to learn the real terms for the things they pretend to know about and too lazy to read the real sources that the stuff that Maharishi was dumbing down came from. :-) I stayed out of it because such discussions do not interest me in the least. IMO Carlsen was a lightweight, Maharishi was a lightweight, and many of the scholars Vaj holds as authoritative were lightweights. What scholars would that be? They all spent hours and hours trying to come up with definitive sutras about their subjective experiences, glorifying them according to their own beliefs about how important those experiences made them personally, but at the same time forgetting the rule of discussing subjective experiences as defined so well by Curtis. That was, to paraphrase, It's like listening to someone talk about their dream. They're really into it, but there is nothing in in their description of the dream that in any way conveys the experience of the dream. So their rap *just isn't interesting* because it wasn't your dream. All you can do is hope that they'll stop talking about it soon. RWC was typical in many ways to the spate of enlightened TMers in that he could gab endlessly on the details of his largely MMY conditioned dream. The only reason his writings are remarkable in the least is because once you've heard what he had to say (and he had WAY too much to say) all the flapping you hear from the latest batches of allegedly enlightened TMers sounds stale; been there, done that. You realize it's the same spiel of the same dream, parsed in the same SCI terminology but rarely expressing anything new and fresh. After all there's nothing more boring that regurgitated SCI. But it's also a cautionary tale as we'll see in the next sutras which tend to highlight his downfall.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of guyfawkes91 Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:31 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife All we have to do is get rid of the ankle-biting pundits who post lies to get attention! No, that's not possible. More people need to post more thoughtful messages. Eventually if enough thoughtful discussion takes place on this group there will be a phase transition ;-) and it'll flip over into a more restrained tone. People emulate each other, and they like to think they're getting some sort of cred from the groups they're in. Even if it's back to front cred from people responding emotively to one's posts. If it becomes apparent that there's no cred to be gained from emotionally charged yet information free posting it'll die out. Well put Guy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Unfortunately the movement often pushed meditating when people should have stopped for a while because they were burning out. Stopping would have allowed more progress. A crucial but often missed insight. Also, it is not to be overlooked that the *reason* the only advice the TMO gave was Something good is happening and Keep meditating, or Meditate more is that they had *no other advice to give*. There was no mechanism in place (or even, as far as I could tell) with dealing with issues that commonly arise among meditators. The reason there was no such mechanism is that the dogma promoted about TM (that it was 100% life supporting and could not *possibly* have any neg- ative side effects) made it counter-intuitive to have any remedy when those statements were proven false. The reason no such advice *would* have been offered is that *everything* in the meditator support arsenal was aimed at *keeping the meditator meditating*. That was the be all and end all* of the TM credo. It would have been seen as heresy to suggest that they stop the thing that seemed to be causing the problems for a while, because everyone knew that TM couldn't possibly be the cause. It must have been something that the person having the issues was doing wrong. Vaj, I, and several others here have been part of groups that DID have effective means at their dis- posal for dealing with issues that come up along the spiritual path. The reason they had them is that they had no dogma in place claiming that they couldn't come up. And these means often worked to ease the symptoms that people were experiencing, or to give them a slightly different path to follow for a while. (This also wasn't possible with TM because they really had only one product. They couldn't very well tell a student to switch to walking meditation for a while, or focus on selfless service for a while, or just do something else; there *was* no else. Instead, the approach used by far too many TM teachers was to do the Nabby thing and tell them to get a checking, during which procedure it was clear that the TM teacher had no interest in hearing what the problem might actually be. Students were discouraged from even talking about it. Instead, it was assumed that the magical checking procedure would fix what- ever it was that *the student* was doing wrong.
[FairfieldLife] Amma on MMY
BTW, I understand that you asked Amma about MMY. Could you share, off the record if necessary, what she said? Vaj asked me this in a private email. I can share on the record. I didn't ask Amma about MMY specifically, but I asked her why so many famous gurus are eventually discovered to have been doing things that are considered unethical even in an ordinary man? Isn't there supposed to be a correlation between higher consciousness and ethical development? Is it that they're not enlightened or is it that it's possible to be enlightened yet undeveloped in some aspects of one's personality? Amma refuses to comment specifically on any guru and is careful not to make general comments that might be construed as applicable to particular gurus, but the first part of her answer was to ask whether I had benefitted from my association with my former guru. I said that I definitely had. She said that if you find a diamond in some excrement, you clean it off and keep it. You fail to appreciate it just because of where you found it. I'll have to think and maybe ask my wife about some of the other details of her answer, and I have to start my day now, but that point was the one that stayed with me most clearly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Behalf Of TurquoiseB That's why I was trying to taunt/challenge Tom to stick around and not limit his remarks to a drive by hooting. He at least seems to have something to say that is out of the ordinary and new. Whatever he has to say, it's got to be better than the stuff posted by those who have spent 50 posts a week for months or years proving that they DON'T have anything new or interesting to say. But you see Barry, you're part of the problem insofar as you ended your post with an implicit dig at Judy. If you did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to egg her on,and COMPLETELY IGNORED all attempts she might make to engage you in an argument, the whole Barry/Judy thing might fizzle out once and for all. With all due respect, Rick, get real. Judy *lives* to wreak her imagined revenge for the imagined affronts done to her. You've seen how she reacts anytime Andrew Skolnick's name comes up here, or John Knapp's, and they haven't been a part of her life for years, in Skolnick's case for over a decade. I've tried to lay low, and will continue to do so, BUT IT WON'T CHANGE A THING. Judy will continue to try to demonize me and to recruit others into her demonization club because that is JUST WHAT SHE DOES. She doesn't have any other speed on the dial of who and what she is. Just think of yourself has being one of those Hindu gods with lots of heads, and therefore plenty of cheeks. Keep turning them no matter what she does and see what happens. That might work if I imagine that the cheeks I'm turning to her are somewhat further south in my anatomy than the ones on my face. :-) Seriously, Rick, I get what you're saying and I will do my best to try to ignore her attempts to suck me back into the only game she knows how to play. But it really IS the only game she knows how to play, and for that reason alone it will never stop. If I manage to ignore her presence for ten more years she will still react the same way whenever my name comes up then that she does when Skolnick's name comes up. Judy will die just as angry at me and the other people on this forum who refuse to take her ser- iously as she is today. And she knows that, which only makes her angrier. Us ignoring her is only going to make that anger stronger.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 7:51 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Seriously, Rick, I get what you're saying and I will do my best to try to ignore her attempts to suck me back into the only game she knows how to play. If you do that, and even if she devotes 100% of her posts to trashing you, the percentage of good stuff in your posts will be higher, and thus the overall mix in the stew will be more palatable. I'm just picking on you because when most of us think of bickering on FFL, we think of the eternal Barry/Judy dance. It may take two to tango, but you don't have to be one of the two if you so choose. Let her dance with others or solo, if no others accept her invitation. Maybe then she'll get tired of the dance too.
[FairfieldLife] 'Mika Maka Mooka...'
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofilefriendid=370683785
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Seriously, Rick, I get what you're saying and I will do my best to try to ignore her attempts to suck me back into the only game she knows how to play. If you do that, and even if she devotes 100% of her posts to trashing you, the percentage of good stuff in your posts will be higher, and thus the overall mix in the stew will be more palatable. I'm just picking on you because when most of us think of bickering on FFL, we think of the eternal Barry/Judy dance. It may take two to tango, but you don't have to be one of the two if you so choose. Let her dance with others or solo, if no others accept her invitation. Maybe then she'll get tired of the dance too. OK, I'll give it another shot. But do me a favor and keep a mental track of the number of posts she spends trashing Barry over the next few months. It won't ever be 100%, but it'll consistently be 20-40% of the total, as it has been now for years. That's a lot of cheek turning and mooning ahead of me. I might as well take my pants off now and leave them off. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
On Nov 24, 2008, at 8:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Unfortunately the movement often pushed meditating when people should have stopped for a while because they were burning out. Stopping would have allowed more progress. A crucial but often missed insight. Also, it is not to be overlooked that the *reason* the only advice the TMO gave was Something good is happening and Keep meditating, or Meditate more is that they had *no other advice to give*. There was no mechanism in place (or even, as far as I could tell) with dealing with issues that commonly arise among meditators. The reason there was no such mechanism is that the dogma promoted about TM (that it was 100% life supporting and could not *possibly* have any neg- ative side effects) made it counter-intuitive to have any remedy when those statements were proven false. And this is the danger of canned meditation checking procedures, they ignore the fact that everything changes. So the minute you set it into stone, it's already on the path to being obsolete. While canned or mechanical learning can often cover a majority of student meditators, there will always be a subset who could miss the correct instruction. Less important when you're teaching just a few people, but vitally important when your goal is to mass-produce meditators who keep meditating. It's also the reason there is an advantage to learning from an experienced meditation master or someone with a lot of experience: they don't need to give pat answers from a memorized list, they give answers based on the road they've already travelled. I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition. It was probably the most impressive basic meditation instruction I've ever witnessed as the teacher was a 30+ year veteran who spoke from his own considerable experience. They operate under the basic assumption that intro meditation is the most difficult to teach so the Shambhala people only authorize their most advanced teachers for the first level. For a weekend starting with an open friday night lecture with breakfast Saturday and Sunday, lunch on Saturday, afternoon tea and a reception gourmet feast on graduation Sunday the course was only 100 dollars. Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog. Lots of time to interview privately with the teacher(s) and small group discussions as well as along with the whole group.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
TurquoiseB wrote: Vaj, I, and several others here have been part of groups that DID have effective means at their dis- posal for dealing with issues that come up along the spiritual path... Well, I guess so. The Three Village Herald reports that 33-year-old Lacey Brinn, who was found at Lenz's mansion, said Lenz had taken 150 tablets of the sedative and she had taken 50: Two months and six days after his death, the Suffolk County Police Department has released a cause of death for Frederick Lenz, aka Rama Lenz, the yuppie guru. According to the Suffolk County Medical Examiners' office, the 48-year-old rama's death was a suicide by drowning with drugs a contributing factor. 'Frederick Lenz dead at 48' The Three Village Herald, June 24, 1998
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:18 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a bash Vaj session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. Sucked into?? By whom, Rick? Not by me. *Most* of Barry's Judy-bashing posts are de novo, not in response to anything I've said about him. That's the case with all four of the Judy-bashing posts he's made this morning. I'm giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does If you really think that, you haven't been paying attention. Plus which, you don't say a word, again, about his incredibly unfair and simply untrue bash above of enlightened_dawn, who has posted far more original stuff since she's been here than Barry has in that period. There's something horribly wrong with your sense of fairness where Barry is concerned. The ratio of his bashing to nonbashing posts--and not just those bashing me--is way higher than anybody else's here. From a subsequent post of Barry's, his fourth this morning bashing me: Judy *lives* to wreak her imagined revenge for the imagined affronts done to her. You've seen how she reacts anytime Andrew Skolnick's name comes up here, or John Knapp's, and they haven't been a part of her life for years, in Skolnick's case for over a decade. Rick, seriously, do you realize how utterly absurd this claim is? Or are you sitting there nodding your head thinking, Yes, that's right? If the latter, I'll be happy to explain to you why it's so wildly off base. I've tried to lay low, and will continue to do so, BUT IT WON'T CHANGE A THING. Barry has not tried to lay low, to the contrary. How can you read that, Rick, and not be appalled by the fantasy quotient? Do you think he's simply forgotten all his boasts about how his posts are designed to evoke a response from me or one of his other favorite targets? The only sense in which he could be said to be laying low is that he doesn't respond *directly* to my or his other targets' posts. Judy will continue to try to demonize me and to recruit others into her demonization club because that is JUST WHAT SHE DOES. She doesn't have any other speed on the dial of who and what she is. Barry's right that I'll continue to criticize him as long as he continues to behave the way he has for the 12 years I've known him. But if you can't recognize the ludicrousness of his assertion that I have no other speed on my dial, you're as sunk in unreality as Barry is. BTW, there's a big difference between my bashing of Barry and Barry's bashing of me and others: mine is accurate and truthful, and his almost never is. That's another huge blind spot you and others have, the notion that there's a moral equivalency between my bashing and his bashing. Part of your problem, I think, is that you don't bother to read his or my bashes. That's understandable, but it also means you aren't in any position to evaluate the situation overall.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
Vaj wrote: I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition... The notorious case involving Trungpa ... was given all sorts of high explanations by his followers, none of whom got the correct one: Trungpa made an outrageous, inexcusable, and completely stupid mistake, period. - Ken Wilber Read more: 'Eye to Eye' by Ken Wilber Shambhala, 2001 He had women bodyguards in black dresses and high heels packing automatics standing in a circle around him while they served saké and invited me over for a chat. It was bizarre. - Gary Snyder Read more: 'Shoes Outside the Door' by Michael Downing Counterpoint Press, 2001
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: That's really the issue. Many of the people who talk -- or really, shout -- on this forum the most are shouting about the same old same old, over and over and over and over. The extraordinary irony of *Barry* making such a statement is, as usual, completely lost on him. Everybody else here knows it. But I'm the only one who will point it out. And the real reason is that they don't HAVE anything else to talk about. They haven't had any experiences of their own to talk about in decades, so they argue incessantly about other peoples' exper- iences. They don't have anything going on in their personal lives, so they try to start arguments about politics, or even more boring, sexual politics. Barry mysteriously knows everything there is to know about the lives of those he's talking about. Does anybody else find this odd? I've said it before, I'll say it again: In all his elaborate fantasizing about my personal life, Barry has not *once* gotten it right. snip Just to follow up -- because this subject makes a great troll in itself, and the people I'm talking about will reply to it in *exactly* the way I'm describing them -- the problem on FFL really IS boredom. How bored does one have to be to not only make trolling posts but then boast endlessly about how one is doing so? Vaj's Carlsen posts, on one level, really were trolls. On another, however, he was again hoping for some -- any -- intelligent discussion about the differences in the points of view (not to mention View) being discussed. Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a bash Vaj session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. Says He Who Claims Not to Read My Posts. snicker Of course, Barry seems *not* to have read the post in which I attempted to start a discussion with Vaj about the differences in point of view of the Carlsen material, to no response from Vaj. Barry didn't do so and still hasn't. Instead, he's so bored that he's written three different posts about how bored and unoriginal he imagines me to be. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. Actually she has posted more original thoughts than Barry has since she arrived here. snip Well, IMO it's original thought. As guyfawkes said so well, who CARES who the Mistress Of Unorig- inal Thought is bashing this week to cover her lack of original thought? Um, that's not what he said, of course. For that matter, who CARES what Maharishi said on some subject? He's dead, and we've been over it a thousand times already. Barry's fourth post this morning was a MMY-bashing post, a repetition of things he's already said many times. snip And WHY are those experiences fun to read, while the Vaj-bashing and the Barry-bashing And Judy-bashing by Barry. Three different Judy- bashing posts from Barry since he got up this morning, plus two more in response to Rick. snip The chronic same old same olders don't HAVE any such experiences to share. Or choose not to share them, since experience posts typically invoke more bashing than anything else, especially from Barry. From another Judy-bashing post of Barry's this morning: I say learn a little something from the way that a few of the obvious Trolls With Nothing To Say react when a lot of people *ignore* what they post for a while. They freak out, and melt down. And then their first response is to troll *more*, and try to start arguments with new people, since the old ones aren't falling for it any more. But the second response is to try to post something that actually has some interest quotient to it, and is flame-free and troll-free. You really have to laugh at the transparency of Barry's tactic. He's claiming that any non- bashing posts from the folks he's demonizing *are a response to being ignored*. Talk about trying to have it both ways!
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition. It was probably the most impressive basic meditation instruction I've ever witnessed as the teacher was a 30+ year veteran who spoke from his own considerable experience. They operate under the basic assumption that intro meditation is the most difficult to teach so the Shambhala people only authorize their most advanced teachers for the first level. The same has been true in several Tibetan groups I have encountered. And in several martial arts dojos. Followup training on some new technique may be handled by and monitored by the upper-ranking black belts in the dojo, but the initial instruction was always given by the head teacher, someone who had been practicing it for 20-40 years. For a weekend starting with an open friday night lecture with breakfast Saturday and Sunday, lunch on Saturday, afternoon tea and a reception gourmet feast on graduation Sunday the course was only 100 dollars. I have actually encountered beginning meditation weekend seminars with similar schedules and similar amounts of munchies that were offered for free. But that was partly because these groups had a facility of their own and didn't have to pay for rental of a room somewhere. They paid for all the food and goodies themselves because they got off on doing so. Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog. Lots of time to interview privately with the teacher(s) and small group discussions as well as along with the whole group. In other words, the way things should be done.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Accidental autograph
Thanks, Turq, I'm sure I'll get back in the habit of posting sooner or later. For now (and for some time) other areas in my life have claimed my time. But the bird thing was just too cool not to share (or so I felt). Marek ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavismarek@ wrote: Just posted two photos of a bird crash smudge found on one of my garden windows this morning. They're in the miscellaneous folder in the photos link. Don't know how long it's been there because it's invisible except that I was dawdling this morning before heading out to the beach and, with the late-morning light raking across the window at just the right angle it illuminated the smudge that appears in the middle of the window in the longview and more clearly seen in the close up. Very cool. The bird was probably after your darshan, Marek. I know I've certainly missed it around here. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
Vaj wrote: Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog... TurquoiseB wrote: In other words, the way things should be done. Finally, others stripped voluntarily and Trungpa, apparently satisfied, said 'Let's dance'. And so they did. And that, kiddies, is what they call 'authentic Tibetan Buddhism.' Read more: 'Stripping the Gurus' http://tinyurl.com/672yjo
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 24, 2008, at 8:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Unfortunately the movement often pushed meditating when people should have stopped for a while because they were burning out. Stopping would have allowed more progress. A crucial but often missed insight. Also, it is not to be overlooked that the *reason* the only advice the TMO gave was Something good is happening and Keep meditating, or Meditate more is that they had *no other advice to give*. There was no mechanism in place (or even, as far as I could tell) with dealing with issues that commonly arise among meditators. Actually, that's not true. It's true that the standard bottom-line advice is to keep meditating, but there certainly are mechanisms to deal with individual issues. *By far* the largest portion of the checking notes, just for one example, have to do with such issues, contained within an incredibly complex algorithm for determining which advice was applicable to which meditator. And I never had any problem getting individual attention from a teacher outside the context of checking. snip While canned or mechanical learning can often cover a majority of student meditators, there will always be a subset who could miss the correct instruction. Less important when you're teaching just a few people, but vitally important when your goal is to mass-produce meditators who keep meditating. But this is a catch-22, isn't it? If your goal is to mass-produce meditators, there's no way you can give each one individual attention. Your only option is to devise a mechanical method of instruction and follow-up that will work for as great a percentage of meditators as possible. It's also the reason there is an advantage to learning from an experienced meditation master or someone with a lot of experience: they don't need to give pat answers from a memorized list, they give answers based on the road they've already travelled. Duh. *Of course* that's an advantage. But again, it's not possible when you're mass-producing meditators. What MMY did was to devise a method simple enough that most could learn it easily from mass-produced teachers, and effective enough that it would yield positive results for most. And he wouldn't have been able to mass-produce teachers in the first place if the method itself weren't pretty darned effective. People wanted to become teachers because they'd had such good results themselves. You can argue that mass-production is a bad idea in and of itself, but it's pretty difficult to argue that MMY's *approach* to mass-production was seriously flawed. Nobody, of course, had ever tried such a thing. Maybe in the future somebody will figure out an even better way to do it, but his was and is remarkably effective given the inherent disadvantages of the mass-production concept. The biggest flaw is the inability to keep people from dropping out. This is largely a function of the hands-off policy, of letting meditators go off on their own to practice after the basic course, and only provide additional instruction and advice if the meditators seek it out. But hands-on policies have their own disadvantages, especially when you're doing mass-production in which most meditators have not begun to practice out of a deep commitment to a spiritual path but are simply looking for a basic tool to enrich their everyday lives. Even more are likely to drop out if they feel pressured, so again it's a bit of a catch-22.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 9:02 AM, Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 7:51 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Seriously, Rick, I get what you're saying and I will do my best to try to ignore her attempts to suck me back into the only game she knows how to play. If you do that, and even if she devotes 100% of her posts to trashing you, the percentage of good stuff in your posts will be higher, and thus the overall mix in the stew will be more palatable. I’m just picking on you because when most of us think of bickering on FFL, we think of the eternal Barry/Judy dance. It may take two to tango, but you don’t have to be one of the two if you so choose. Let her dance with others or solo, if no others accept her invitation. Maybe then she’ll get tired of the dance too. Since most email programs have very easy rules or scripting to allow you to file emails, that may be the perfect solution. All I have to do is pick the name appearing in the email and then choose where I want it to go, like for example, the trash, or perhaps a folder of posters I'm fond of. You never see the posts from the whacky posters, they go straight to the trash!
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:28 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife But do me a favor and keep a mental track of the number of posts she spends trashing Barry over the next few months. It won't ever be 100%, but it'll consistently be 20-40% of the total, as it has been now for years. That's a lot of cheek turning and mooning ahead of me. I might as well take my pants off now and leave them off. :-) Think of yourself as Kevin Costner in Dances with Wolves where he rides back and forth in front of the Confederate troops, hoping to be shot, but they all miss him and exhaust their ammunition, allowing the Union troops to charge and defeat them.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:45 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. Sucked into?? By whom, Rick? Not by me. Agreed. Sucked in by his own habit patterns. *Most* of Barry's Judy-bashing posts are de novo, not in response to anything I've said about him. That's the case with all four of the Judy-bashing posts he's made this morning. Again agreed. I'm giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does If you really think that, you haven't been paying attention. You're both guilty. I get the impression that Barry may be better able to break the cycle, but please prove me wrong. Plus which, you don't say a word, again, about his incredibly unfair and simply untrue bash above of enlightened_dawn, who has posted far more original stuff since she's been here than Barry has in that period. Haven't been following that discussion closely. There's something horribly wrong with your sense of fairness where Barry is concerned. The ratio of his bashing to nonbashing posts--and not just those bashing me--is way higher than anybody else's here. Could be. I don't like the bashing whoever's doing it. Nobody's innocent. I was just looking for a possible way to stop it. Part of your problem, I think, is that you don't bother to read his or my bashes. That's understandable, but it also means you aren't in any position to evaluate the situation overall. True. In fact, I just snipped a bunch of stuff without reading it, because it was getting too long and I have to get to work.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Behalf Of TurquoiseB But do me a favor and keep a mental track of the number of posts she spends trashing Barry over the next few months. It won't ever be 100%, but it'll consistently be 20-40% of the total, as it has been now for years. That's a lot of cheek turning and mooning ahead of me. I might as well take my pants off now and leave them off. :-) Think of yourself as Kevin Costner in Dances with Wolves where he rides back and forth in front of the Confederate troops, hoping to be shot, but they all miss him and exhaust their ammunition, allowing the Union troops to charge and defeat them. I'll do it if it means that I get to shack up with Mary McDonnell like Costner did in that movie. She's always been one of my faves. Heck, I'd rather shack up with her character Laura Roslin in Battlestar Galactica than with Tricia Helfer's Number Six, that's how much of a fave she is. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
TurquoiseB wrote: The same has been true in several Tibetan groups I have encountered. These facts seem to go beyond the limits of even tantra or crazy wisdom and into the realm of pure exploitation and hypocrisy. Read more: 'The Double Mirror' A Skeptical Journey into Buddhist Tantra by Stephen Butterfield North Atlantic Books, September 13, 1994 http://tinyurl.com/5h6mkc
Re: [FairfieldLife] Alan Ginsberg arguing(?) with Maharishi - LIFE: Maharishi Guru (Maharishi Mahesh Yogi) - Hosted by Google
On Nov 23, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Rick Archer wrote: http://images.google.com/hosted/life/f?q=Maharishi+Mahesh+Yogi +source:lifeimgurl=db8de2203c869aa4 Allen spent some time talking to Mahesh to see if he was legit or not. This may be him interviewing Mahesh for his article The Maharishi and Me. http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dg6n6657_59c8ftjw
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I’m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 8:38 AM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:18 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Of course, none of that happened. Instead, some- one who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a bash Vaj session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I’m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Sutras of Carlsen 1
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: IOW, a major troll by Vaj which sucked in many people for many posts. Exactly. The thing I liked the most, doing my skim the replies for idiocy in two seconds before pressing the Next key thing, was when someone said that they preferred Carlsen's stuff because it made more sense to them. Well duh...that's why they liked Maharishi's stuff...he dumbed it down for people too lazy to learn the real terms for the things they pretend to know about and too lazy to read the real sources that the stuff that Maharishi was dumbing down came from. :-) I stayed out of it because such discussions do not interest me in the least. IMO Carlsen was a lightweight, Maharishi was a lightweight, and many of the scholars Vaj holds as authoritative were lightweights. They all spent hours and hours trying to come up with definitive sutras about their subjective experiences, glorifying them according to their own beliefs about how important those experiences made them personally this wasn't waht i was talking about. it was whether or not someone coming onto the subject with an open mind would be able to understand the subject matter based on the explanation provided. i wasn't discussing motive. , but at the same time forgetting the rule of discussing subjective experiences as defined so well by Curtis. That was, to paraphrase, It's like listening to someone talk about their dream. They're really into it, but there is nothing in in their description of the dream that in any way conveys the experience of the dream. So their rap *just isn't interesting* because it wasn't your dream. All you can do is hope that they'll stop talking about it soon. the rule of discussing subjective experiences here is what it has always been- if no one is interested, not much discussion will ensue. if the person reading about an experience hasn't had that same experience, they won't have much to share or relate to, regardless of the topic. you are attempting to conflate a lack of interest in the listener with a lack of substance in what the poster is saying, hence your example of curtis's analogy to someone talking about a dream of theirs. that is kind of a heavy handed interpretation, based more on your personal preferences than a broader interpretation, and i don't agree with it.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:39 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I?m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don't have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: someone who long ago proved that she is pretty much incapable of having an original thought tried to turn it into a bash Vaj session, and tried to suck in anyone stupid enough to join in. She actually found one this time, a newb who IMO has not posted a single original thought since she arrived here. So they had fun bashing Vaj. -snip- i made it clear i was not bashing vaj. i expressed some strong, original-lol-, thoughts about what he has written, and though my language was strong i was being constuctive based on my experience. isn't that what we should do here? if we disagree with someone, at least make it constructive and honest. there is no need to bash or insult anyone here. i know you see it differently and frequently insult others and call them awful names. but that is your choice B. it isn't mine.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
It's also the reason there is an advantage to learning from an experienced meditation master or someone with a lot of experience: they don't need to give pat answers from a memorized list, they give answers based on the road they've already travelled. Duh. *Of course* that's an advantage. But again, it's not possible when you're mass-producing meditators... I studied with a guy who could turn huge rooms in convention centers gold, to the point where even the security guards saw it, but that never made me think he was enlightened, only that he could do cool things with light. - Barry Wright
[FairfieldLife] Clinton critics being purged from Obama administration
Independent, UK - Before Hillary Clinton has been formally offered the job as Secretary of State, a purge of Barack Obama's top foreign policy team has begun. The advisers who helped trash the former First Lady's foreign policy credentials on the campaign trail are being brutally shunted aside, as the price of her accepting the job of being the public face of America to the world. In negotiations with Mr Obama this week before agreeing to take the job, she demanded and received assurances that she alone should appoint staff to the State Department. She also got assurances that she will have direct access to the President and will not have to go through his foreign policy advisers on the National Security Council, which is where many of her critics in the Obama team are expected to end up. The first victims of Mrs Clinton's anticipated appointment will be those who defended Mr Obama's flanks on the campaign trail. By mocking Mrs Clinton's claims to have landed under sniper fire in Bosnia or pouring scorn on her much-ballyhooed claim to have visited 80 countries as First Lady they successfully deflected the damaging charge that he is a lightweight on international issues. Foremost among the victims of the purges is her old Yale Law School buddy Greg Craig, a man who more than anyone led the rescue of his presidency starting the very night Kenneth Starr's lurid report into the squalid details of the former president's sex scandal with Monica Lewinsky were published on the internet in 1998. Despite his long and loyal friendship with the Clintons, Mr Craig threw his lot in with Mr Obama at an early stage in the presidential election campaign. As if that betrayal to the cause of the Clinton restoration was not enough, Mr Craig did more to undermine Mrs Clinton's claims to be a foreign policy expert than anyone else in the some of the ugliest exchanges of the battle for the Democratic nomination. Until this week he was poised to be the eminence grise of the State Department, organizing as total revamp of America's troubled foreign policies on Mr Obama's behalf. . . [Clinton] wanted guarantees of direct access to the president - without having to go through his national security adviser. Above all she did not want to end up like Colin Powell who was completely out-maneuvered by the hawkish Vice President Dick Cheney who imposed neo-conservative friends like John Bolton on the State Department and steered the US towards a policy of using torture to achieve its aims. Mr Craig's crime was not so much that he enthusiastically backed Mr Obama for President and helped run his foreign policy advisory panel, it was his lacerating attacks on the putative Secretary of State's claims that she passed the Commander-in-Chief test as a foreign policy expert in the Clinton Administration. In a devastating memo of 11 March last, which he addressed to interested parties, Mr Craig said: There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. The memo went on to say that Mrs Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day. Earlier this week Mr Craig was tapped to become White House counsel, a totally anonymous position, and shunted him out of the line of fire from the Secretary of State. A question remains about the fate of Susan Rice, the public face of Mr Obama's foreign policy throughout the campaign. She too had been expected to take a prominent position at the State department, but in a conference call with reporters during the campaign she ridiculed Mr Clinton's claims to foreign Policy experience. She may now end up as Deputy national Security adviser to the president, in the expectation that she would be frozen out by Mrs Clinton at the State Department, a situation that does not augur well for the future.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:39 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I?m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don't have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. there are many of us here who already filter content here on the basis of common sense and preference. since we are all grown ups here, i vote we continue to do this.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don’t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. But we're all used to you being the bad cop, Rick. I'd do it, but I do not read all the posts and do not want to. Anyone who feels aggrieved will have to report the offending post to the three moderators with an email that has a link in the following format: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 It would have to wait until after we are back from Detroit, so maybe begin on the 8th. Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 11:46 AM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:39 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. I?m giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does, but theoretically, either of you could end it once and for all. I suggest we have a one-month moratorium in honor of the spirit of the holiday season, from November 26th through December 26th, inclusive. No personal attacks, no name-calling will be allowed. Violations will result in the the following: The post will be deleted, which means all members who read FFL at the message page will not even come across the message. The violator will be placed on moderation until December 27th, which means his or her posts will have to be approved before being released to the group. The posts will be deleted rather than be made available to the group if they are also in violation. The moderators will take their time to review these posts. Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don’t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 11:23 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don?t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. But we're all used to you being the bad cop, Rick. I'd do it, but I do not read all the posts and do not want to. Anyone who feels aggrieved will have to report the offending post to the three moderators with an email that has a link in the following format: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 It would have to wait until after we are back from Detroit, so maybe begin on the 8th. I think we're not going to do it. it's too heavy-handed. As someone just pointed out, people can pick and choose among posts, based on the track record of the posters. If some folks want to spend a lot of time writing things that most people won't read, just to indulge their desire to vent, then I guess that's their choice. And it's unfortunate, because most people who do that also make substantive contributions, but they're going to lose a lot of people who don't want to sift through their posts looking for it.
[FairfieldLife] The High and the Mighty: JFK, MPM, LSD and the CIA
http://www.serendipity.li/cia/cia_lsd.html
[FairfieldLife] HDR: High Dynamic Range photography
http://stuckincustoms.com/2006/06/06/548/ An excellent tutorial on High Dynamic Range photography. I recently purchased a digital camera as I wanted to be able to do HDR photography easily and to be able to do HD movies as well. Thanks to tutorials like this it is quite easy to do. It is absolutely amazing the depth you can achieve with this technique. Even if you're not interested in HDR, the photos are worth a gander.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
I think we’re not going to do it. it’s too heavy-handed. It doesn't matter to me, because I block most of the trolls, anyway. Just trying to offer the group an option, which I think they should vote on as a whole. A far as it being heavy-handed, it's what all the other successful forums always do. As someone just pointed out, people can pick and choose among posts, based on the track record of the posters. That someone is a newcomer. Perhaps some of the long-term regulars will weigh in. Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 12:31 PM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gullible fool Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 11:23 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife Would you want to take on this moderation duty, presuming we agreed on it? It would mean reading all the posts, and making a subjective judgment as to their tone, intent, etc. I don?t have the time, the patience, nor the wisdom for it. But we're all used to you being the bad cop, Rick. I'd do it, but I do not read all the posts and do not want to. Anyone who feels aggrieved will have to report the offending post to the three moderators with an email that has a link in the following format: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/199301 It would have to wait until after we are back from Detroit, so maybe begin on the 8th. As someone just pointed out, people can pick and choose among posts, based on the track record of the posters. If some folks want to spend a lot of time writing things that most people won’t read, just to indulge their desire to vent, then I guess that’s their choice. And it’s unfortunate, because most people who do that also make substantive contributions, but they’re going to lose a lot of people who don’t want to sift through their posts looking for it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
Vaj wrote: I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition. It was probably the most impressive basic meditation instruction I've ever witnessed as the teacher was a 30+ year veteran who spoke from his own considerable experience. They operate under the basic assumption that intro meditation is the most difficult to teach so the Shambhala people only authorize their most advanced teachers for the first level. For a weekend starting with an open friday night lecture with breakfast Saturday and Sunday, lunch on Saturday, afternoon tea and a reception gourmet feast on graduation Sunday the course was only 100 dollars. Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog. Lots of time to interview privately with the teacher(s) and small group discussions as well as along with the whole group. My tantric guru did not allow me to teach meditation until I had been with him for 5 years. Imagine if MMY had done that. And the basis for checking is pretty much the same throughout most techniques: don't strain on the mantra. But look at the discussions in the past here that the concepts in checking were unique to TM which is not true at all. I've also mentioned that the seven steps are a little archaic. That may have worked in the 60's and 70's but nowadays most meditation courses are taught in the weekend course like you describe or one on one. With both (particularly the latter) there is plenty of time for interaction between teacher and student. For groups, the weekend courses seem to fit better in modern schedules.
[FairfieldLife] Sex Challenge from a Texas Pastor
To All: It appears that this pastor is trying to grab the headlines for his church coffers. Also, the challenge may not be good for the participants, considering the ayurvedic principle that losing the body's ojas may be detrimental to one's health. ++ GRAPEVINE, Tex. And on the seventh day, there was no rest for married couples. A week after the Rev. Ed Young challenged husbands and wives among his flock of 20,000 to strengthen their unions through Seven Days of Sex, his advice was keep it going. Readers' Comments Share your thoughts. Post a Comment » Read All Comments (108) » Mr. Young, an author, a television host and the pastor of the evangelical Fellowship Church, issued his call for a week of congregational copulation among married couples on Nov. 16, while pacing in front of a large bed. Sometimes he reclined on the paisley coverlet while flipping through a Bible, emphasizing his point that it is time for the church to put God back in the bed. Today we're beginning this sexperiment, seven days of sex, he said, with his characteristic mix of humor, showmanship and Scripture. How to move from whining about the economy to whoopee! On Sunday parishioners at the Grapevine branch watched a prerecorded sermon from Mr. Young and his wife, Lisa, on jumbo screens over a candlelit stage. I know there's been a lot of love going around this week, among the married couples, one of the church musicians said, strumming on a guitar before a crowd of about 3,000. Mrs. Young, dressed in knee-high black boots and jeans, said that after a week of having sex every day, or close to it, some of us are smiling. For others grappling with infidelities, addictions to pornography or other bitter hurts, there's been some pain; hopefully there's been some forgiveness, too. Mr. Young advised the couples to keep on doing what you've been doing this week. We should try to double up the amount of intimacy we have in marriage. And when I say intimacy, I don't mean holding hands in the park or a back rub. Mr. Young, known simply as Ed to his parishioners, and his wife, both 47, have been married for 26 years and have four children, including twins. They have firsthand experience with some of the barriers to an intimate sex life in marriage, including careers, exhaustion, outside commitments, and kids, a word that Mr. Young told church members stands for keeping intimacy at a distance successfully. But if you make the time to have sex, it will bring you closer to your spouse and to God, he has said. You will perform better at work, leave a loving legacy for your children to follow and may even prevent an extramarital affair. If you've said, `I do,' do it, he said. As for single people, I don't know, try eating chocolate cake, he said. The sex-starved marriage has been the topic of at least two recent books, 365 Nights and Just Do It. But Mr. Young's call from the pulpit gave the discussion an added charge. It should not, in his view. This is not a gimmick or a publicity stunt, Mr. Young says. Just look at the sensuousness of the Song of Solomon, or Genesis: two shall become one flesh, or Corinthians: do not deprive each other of sexual relations. For some reason the church has not talked about it, but we need to, he said, speaking by telephone Friday night on his way to South Africa for a mission trip. There is no shame in marital sex, he added, God thought it up, it was his idea. Those who attend Fellowship's location here or one of several satellite churches in the Dallas area and one in Miami are used to Mr. Young's provocative style. (The real f word in the marital boudoir, he says, is forgiveness.) But the sex challenge was a bit much for some of his church members, who sat with arms crossed in uncomfortable silence, he recalls, while many in the audience gave him an enthusiastic applause. One parishioner, Rob Hulsey, 25, said his Baptist relatives raised their eyebrows about it, but he summed up the reaction of many husbands at Fellowship Church when he first heard about the sex challenge Yay! A week later, he and his wife, who are expecting a baby and have two older children, could not stop holding hands during the sermon. His wife, Madeline Hulsey, 32, said she was just as thrilled to spend a week focusing on her husband. Usually, we start to kiss, and it's knock knock knock, Mom! she said. Others found that, like smiling when you are not particularly happy, having sex when they did not feel like it improved their mood. Just eight months into their marriage, Amy and Cody Waddell had not been very amorous since Cody admitted he had had an affair. Intimacy has been a struggle for us, working through all that, Ms. Waddell said. This week really brought us back together, physically and emotionally. It is not always easy to devote time for your spouse, Pastor Young admitted. Just three days into the sex challenge he said he was so tired
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
enlightened_dawn11 wrote:- there are many of us here who already filter content here on the basis of common sense and preference. since we are all grown ups here, i vote we continue to do this. I agree. As I have done before the ones so unhappy with the content of FFL should set up their own Yahoo Group, which is easily done, and they can moderate it all they want. Which should be easy to moderate as they will probably have no members. :-D
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: enlightened_dawn11 wrote:- there are many of us here who already filter content here on the basis of common sense and preference. since we are all grown ups here, i vote we continue to do this. I agree. As I have done before the ones so unhappy with the content of FFL should set up their own Yahoo Group, which is easily done, and they can moderate it all they want. Which should be easy to moderate as they will probably have no members. :-D yep, the club of one- the more freewheeling this place is, the better. and there is the posting limit on here already.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
On Nov 24, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Bhairitu wrote: My tantric guru did not allow me to teach meditation until I had been with him for 5 years. Imagine if MMY had done that. And the basis for checking is pretty much the same throughout most techniques: don't strain on the mantra. But look at the discussions in the past here that the concepts in checking were unique to TM which is not true at all. I've also mentioned that the seven steps are a little archaic. That may have worked in the 60's and 70's but nowadays most meditation courses are taught in the weekend course like you describe or one on one. With both (particularly the latter) there is plenty of time for interaction between teacher and student. For groups, the weekend courses seem to fit better in modern schedules. I enjoyed it so much, I'm going to accompany her on all 5 levels of the Shambhala Training. I'll report back as I go thru all of them. Basically they start with a small field of focus, eyes only partially open and then progress with greater and greater sensory integration, at the same time learning to integrate with activity via walking meditations. Very cool and a pleasant surprise.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Sex Challenge from a Texas Pastor
Also, the challenge may not be good for the participants, considering the ayurvedic principle that losing the body's ojas may be detrimental to one's health. Yet they will probably, on average, live longer and healthier lives than the typical TM sidha who eats almost no protein, avoids activities like going outdoors for a brisk walk in the fresh air and sun lest he unduly raise the metabolism, avoids medical doctors, and has an aloofness in his heart. Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Mon, 11/24/08, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: John [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Sex Challenge from a Texas Pastor To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 12:59 PM To All: It appears that this pastor is trying to grab the headlines for his church coffers. Also, the challenge may not be good for the participants, considering the ayurvedic principle that losing the body's ojas may be detrimental to one's health. ++ GRAPEVINE, Tex. — And on the seventh day, there was no rest for married couples. A week after the Rev. Ed Young challenged husbands and wives among his flock of 20,000 to strengthen their unions through Seven Days of Sex, his advice was — keep it going. Readers' Comments Share your thoughts. Post a Comment » Read All Comments (108) » Mr. Young, an author, a television host and the pastor of the evangelical Fellowship Church, issued his call for a week of congregational copulation among married couples on Nov. 16, while pacing in front of a large bed. Sometimes he reclined on the paisley coverlet while flipping through a Bible, emphasizing his point that it is time for the church to put God back in the bed. Today we're beginning this sexperiment, seven days of sex, he said, with his characteristic mix of humor, showmanship and Scripture. How to move from whining about the economy to whoopee! On Sunday parishioners at the Grapevine branch watched a prerecorded sermon from Mr. Young and his wife, Lisa, on jumbo screens over a candlelit stage. I know there's been a lot of love going around this week, among the married couples, one of the church musicians said, strumming on a guitar before a crowd of about 3,000. Mrs. Young, dressed in knee-high black boots and jeans, said that after a week of having sex every day, or close to it, some of us are smiling. For others grappling with infidelities, addictions to pornography or other bitter hurts, there's been some pain; hopefully there's been some forgiveness, too. Mr. Young advised the couples to keep on doing what you've been doing this week. We should try to double up the amount of intimacy we have in marriage. And when I say intimacy, I don't mean holding hands in the park or a back rub. Mr. Young, known simply as Ed to his parishioners, and his wife, both 47, have been married for 26 years and have four children, including twins. They have firsthand experience with some of the barriers to an intimate sex life in marriage, including careers, exhaustion, outside commitments, and kids, a word that Mr. Young told church members stands for keeping intimacy at a distance successfully. But if you make the time to have sex, it will bring you closer to your spouse and to God, he has said. You will perform better at work, leave a loving legacy for your children to follow and may even prevent an extramarital affair. If you've said, `I do,' do it, he said. As for single people, I don't know, try eating chocolate cake, he said. The sex-starved marriage has been the topic of at least two recent books, 365 Nights and Just Do It. But Mr. Young's call from the pulpit gave the discussion an added charge. It should not, in his view. This is not a gimmick or a publicity stunt, Mr. Young says. Just look at the sensuousness of the Song of Solomon, or Genesis: two shall become one flesh, or Corinthians: do not deprive each other of sexual relations. For some reason the church has not talked about it, but we need to, he said, speaking by telephone Friday night on his way to South Africa for a mission trip. There is no shame in marital sex, he added, God thought it up, it was his idea. Those who attend Fellowship's location here or one of several satellite churches in the Dallas area and one in Miami are used to Mr. Young's provocative style. (The real f word in the marital boudoir, he says, is forgiveness.) But the sex challenge was a bit much for some of his church members, who sat with arms crossed in uncomfortable silence, he recalls, while many in the audience gave him an enthusiastic applause. One parishioner, Rob Hulsey, 25, said his Baptist relatives raised their eyebrows about it, but he summed up the reaction of many husbands at Fellowship Church when he first heard about the sex challenge — Yay! A week later, he and his wife, who are expecting a baby and have two older children, could
[FairfieldLife] O Partha, surrender not to unmanliness.. Gita 2vs3
The essence of the Bhagavad Gita is the warfare between the little ego, (a product of the mind, blinded by the senses), and the Soul, a reflection of the almighty omnipresent God. The battle is waged between the 5 Pandu warriors (the 5 chakras and their powers), and Duryodana, (the 100 'evil' sense mind tendencies, a product of the blind mind or Dhritarashtra). The weapons for the Pandus are the *eight* limbs of Yoga delineated by Patanjali; meditation, self discipline, non violence, chastity and so forth. The practice of all of these limbs simultaneously (MMY Gita) bring about the unfoldment of all the powers of the chakras. The weapons for the enemy are numerous and include; ignorance of our own divine nature, delusion, pride, ego, lust, anger and greed to name a few, 100 to be exact! 20 vices for each of the 5 senses. The battle is waged in the body of man called the Kurushetra, 'kuru' from Sanskrit root 'kri' meaning action, and 'shetra' meaning field. As long as man is blinded by the sense addicted mind (blinded by lack of scriptural insight, discrimination or direct intuition) he is living blithely in ignorance. When the eye of knowledge is opened the war commences and unfolds a veritable Armageddon where the soul ultimately achieves the victory of immortal life and is proclaimed the 'hero' or the God-man. He has regained his lost 'Kingdom of heaven within' (residing 'as' his own soul) figuratively lost upon the commencement of his journey of discovery through the kingdoms of matter. He is now a full 'Knower of Reality' and a Son of God like Jesus himself to go as the Bible says, no more out (no more Reincarnation) Moksha.
[FairfieldLife] Re: American college students and professors interviewed about Canada
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And one wonders why some people don't realize how dumb Sarah Palin is: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=n-M06kWJetofeature=related As one of the comments said: they rounded up the dumbest people they could find. At least as likely: people were flustered at being on camera and weren't thinking straight when they replied. Which, should tell you something about Palin, Palin supporters, etc, as well. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW, I understand that you asked Amma about MMY. Could you share, off the record if necessary, what she said? Vaj asked me this in a private email. I can share on the record. I didn't ask Amma about MMY specifically, but I asked her why so many famous gurus are eventually discovered to have been doing things that are considered unethical even in an ordinary man? Isn't there supposed to be a correlation between higher consciousness and ethical development? Is it that they're not enlightened or is it that it's possible to be enlightened yet undeveloped in some aspects of one's personality? Amma refuses to comment specifically on any guru and is careful not to make general comments that might be construed as applicable to particular gurus, but the first part of her answer was to ask whether I had benefitted from my association with my former guru. I said that I definitely had. She said that if you find a diamond in some excrement, you clean it off and keep it. You fail to appreciate it just because of where you found it. I'll have to think and maybe ask my wife about some of the other details of her answer, and I have to start my day now, but that point was the one that stayed with me most clearly. Seroiusly though, do you think MMY's behavior was truly excremental, or merely less-than-perfect? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 24, 2008, at 8:40 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Unfortunately the movement often pushed meditating when people should have stopped for a while because they were burning out. Stopping would have allowed more progress. A crucial but often missed insight. Also, it is not to be overlooked that the *reason* the only advice the TMO gave was Something good is happening and Keep meditating, or Meditate more is that they had *no other advice to give*. There was no mechanism in place (or even, as far as I could tell) with dealing with issues that commonly arise among meditators. The reason there was no such mechanism is that the dogma promoted about TM (that it was 100% life supporting and could not *possibly* have any neg- ative side effects) made it counter-intuitive to have any remedy when those statements were proven false. And this is the danger of canned meditation checking procedures, they ignore the fact that everything changes. So the minute you set it into stone, it's already on the path to being obsolete. While canned or mechanical learning can often cover a majority of student meditators, there will always be a subset who could miss the correct instruction. Less important when you're teaching just a few people, but vitally important when your goal is to mass-produce meditators who keep meditating. It's also the reason there is an advantage to learning from an experienced meditation master or someone with a lot of experience: they don't need to give pat answers from a memorized list, they give answers based on the road they've already travelled. I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition. It was probably the most impressive basic meditation instruction I've ever witnessed as the teacher was a 30+ year veteran who spoke from his own considerable experience. They operate under the basic assumption that intro meditation is the most difficult to teach so the Shambhala people only authorize their most advanced teachers for the first level. For a weekend starting with an open friday night lecture with breakfast Saturday and Sunday, lunch on Saturday, afternoon tea and a reception gourmet feast on graduation Sunday the course was only 100 dollars. Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog. Lots of time to interview privately with the teacher(s) and small group discussions as well as along with the whole group. Yes, obviously MMY's MacMantra strategy never laid any mportant groundwork for others that came after him... Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] But hands-on policies have their own disadvantages, especially when you're doing mass-production in which most meditators have not begun to practice out of a deep commitment to a spiritual path but are simply looking for a basic tool to enrich their everyday lives. Even more are likely to drop out if they feel pressured, so again it's a bit of a catch-22. It also makes TM more acceptable to a large number of people who aren't interested in spirituality or who believe that their own religious tradition offers a better interpretation of things than TM Theory (TM). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Alan Ginsberg arguing(?) with Maharishi - LIFE: Maharishi Guru (Maharishi Ma
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 23, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Rick Archer wrote: http://images.google.com/hosted/life/f?q=Maharishi+Mahesh+Yogi +source:lifeimgurl=db8de2203c869aa4 Allen spent some time talking to Mahesh to see if he was legit or not. This may be him interviewing Mahesh for his article The Maharishi and Me. http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dg6n6657_59c8ftjw The question arises: is Ginsberg legit or not... and how do you know? Lawson
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sparaig Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 2:14 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY Seroiusly though, do you think MMY's behavior was truly excremental, or merely less-than-perfect? It covered the whole spectrum, and those two choices aren't adequate. Some of it was very saintly and compassionate.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vaj wrote: I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition. It was probably the most impressive basic meditation instruction I've ever witnessed as the teacher was a 30+ year veteran who spoke from his own considerable experience. They operate under the basic assumption that intro meditation is the most difficult to teach so the Shambhala people only authorize their most advanced teachers for the first level. For a weekend starting with an open friday night lecture with breakfast Saturday and Sunday, lunch on Saturday, afternoon tea and a reception gourmet feast on graduation Sunday the course was only 100 dollars. Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog. Lots of time to interview privately with the teacher(s) and small group discussions as well as along with the whole group. My tantric guru did not allow me to teach meditation until I had been with him for 5 years. Imagine if MMY had done that. And the basis for checking is pretty much the same throughout most techniques: don't strain on the mantra. But look at the discussions in the past here that the concepts in checking were unique to TM which is not true at all. I've also mentioned that the seven steps are a little archaic. That may have worked in the 60's and 70's but nowadays most meditation courses are taught in the weekend course like you describe or one on one. With both (particularly the latter) there is plenty of time for interaction between teacher and student. For groups, the weekend courses seem to fit better in modern schedules. AFter all this time, you stil think that the essence of TM is don't strain on the mantra? Sheesh. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sparaig Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 2:14 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY Seroiusly though, do you think MMY's behavior was truly excremental, or merely less-than-perfect? It covered the whole spectrum, and those two choices aren't adequate. Some of it was very saintly and compassionate. IOW, human. I never fully bought into the concept that an elnlightened person is never incapable of making mistakes. My interpretation of that concept was always in terms of one's own spiritual growth: someone who is enlightened doesn't do things to hinder their own growth. AN extension is that someone who is growing past CC has a broader perspective about their own growth, which leads to them being more likely to do things for the sake of others, as well. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: O Partha, surrender not to unmanliness.. Gita 2vs3
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The essence of the Bhagavad Gita is the warfare between the little ego, (a product of the mind, blinded by the senses), and the Soul, a reflection of the almighty omnipresent God. The battle is waged between the 5 Pandu warriors (the 5 chakras and their powers), and Duryodana, (the 100 'evil' sense mind tendencies, a product of the blind mind or Dhritarashtra). The weapons for the Pandus are the *eight* limbs of Yoga delineated by Patanjali; meditation, self discipline, non violence, chastity and so forth. The practice of all of these limbs simultaneously (MMY Gita) bring about the unfoldment of all the powers of the chakras. The weapons for the enemy are numerous and include; ignorance of our own divine nature, delusion, pride, ego, lust, anger and greed to name a few, 100 to be exact! 20 vices for each of the 5 senses. The battle is waged in the body of man called the Kurushetra, 'kuru' from Sanskrit root 'kri' meaning action, and 'shetra' meaning field. As long as man is blinded by the sense addicted mind (blinded by lack of scriptural insight, discrimination or direct intuition) he is living blithely in ignorance. When the eye of knowledge is opened the war commences and unfolds a veritable Armageddon where the soul ultimately achieves the victory of immortal life and is proclaimed the 'hero' or the God-man. He has regained his lost 'Kingdom of heaven within' (residing 'as' his own soul) figuratively lost upon the commencement of his journey of discovery through the kingdoms of matter. He is now a full 'Knower of Reality' and a Son of God like Jesus himself to go as the Bible says, no more out (no more Reincarnation) Moksha. God doesn't love the householder unless he/she is celibate? God doesn't love people who have sex? God doesn't love the natural order of His/Her Creation, BillyG? Yer kidding, right? How do you suppose Arjuna had many sons by different wives, eh? ...multiple Immaculate Conceptions?
[FairfieldLife] Re: O Partha, surrender not to unmanliness.. Gita 2vs3
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: God doesn't love the householder unless he/she is celibate? God doesn't love people who have sex? God doesn't love the natural order of His/Her Creation, BillyG? Yer kidding, right? How do you suppose Arjuna had many sons by different wives, eh? ...multiple Immaculate Conceptions? I'm glad you ask, you seem to fundamentally misunderstand the principles I was putting forth, or perhaps I explained them poorly. Here's the deal, there is a time and place for everything! The *time* for sex is in the Vedic Grahasta (householder) period of life for the purpose of family and procreation. The complete elimination of sex is a red herring used by the ego (even Arjuna) to cleverly distort the issue. No one is asking us to give up sex, only to use it in its proper context in harmony with the laws of nature, as is the case with all of the senses. God didn't give sex to man to use as a tool of enjoyment or entertainment, it is a holy act which product is another human being.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
sparaig wrote: AFter all this time, you stil think that the essence of TM is don't strain on the mantra? Sheesh. Lawson And the connotations that involves. It is the seed basis for effortless meditation. IOW, don't take the phrase literally but instead it's deeper significance. Most problems even with other techniques are usually the result of people straining too much during meditation. But also different from TM checking is if I perceive some medical problem is interfering with the meditation or for that matter the meditation is aggravating a medical condition I can suggest the practitioner stop meditating for the time being.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:45 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You see? There you go again. Sucked into the old Barry/Judy game. Sucked into?? By whom, Rick? Not by me. Agreed. Sucked in by his own habit patterns. *Most* of Barry's Judy-bashing posts are de novo, not in response to anything I've said about him. That's the case with all four of the Judy-bashing posts he's made this morning. Again agreed. I'm giving you a hard time about this because I think you have greater capacity to drop the game than she does If you really think that, you haven't been paying attention. You're both guilty. I get the impression that Barry may be better able to break the cycle, but please prove me wrong. You're well aware that Barry has vowed to stop *innumerable* times but never has. How can you suggest he's better able to break the cycle? We're both guilty of bashing each other, but what you're not getting is how much worse his bashing is than mine. He *initiates* most of the bashes; and the vast, vast majority involve blatant lies and gross distortions. My bashes are largely reactive, consisting of pointing out those lies and distortions. But you don't read them, so you aren't aware of this. Plus which, you don't say a word, again, about his incredibly unfair and simply untrue bash above of enlightened_dawn, who has posted far more original stuff since she's been here than Barry has in that period. Haven't been following that discussion closely. It's not just that discussion, Rick. Barry's saying (in what you snipped) that she's never posted *anything* original here. That's simply false; she's posted quite a bit--more, as I said, than Barry has since she arrived. There's something horribly wrong with your sense of fairness where Barry is concerned. The ratio of his bashing to nonbashing posts--and not just those bashing me--is way higher than anybody else's here. Could be. I don't like the bashing whoever's doing it. Nobody's innocent. I was just looking for a possible way to stop it. Nobody's innocent, but some are guiltier than others. You're correct to direct your attempt at Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; but not on the basis that he's better able to stop. Part of your problem, I think, is that you don't bother to read his or my bashes. That's understandable, but it also means you aren't in any position to evaluate the situation overall. True. In fact, I just snipped a bunch of stuff without reading it, because it was getting too long and I have to get to work. As I said, that's understandable. But then you turn around and suggest that Barry's the one being victimized, and that he should just turn the other cheek, which doesn't address what's actually going on. You don't *know* what's going on. You can't hope to take effective measures if you don't know what you're taking measures *against*. The moratorium notion, with gullible_fool as the ultimate judge, is absurd. He's made it amply clear he loathes me, and he's a huge fan of Barry's. He doesn't read my posts, so he has no idea either how atrociously dishonest Barry's bashes are (and he wouldn't care even if he did). You know damn well what would happen. Barry would post one of his anonymous bashes in which he doesn't actually use names but makes it very clear who he's targeting. gullible_fool would give it a pass because with no names used, it wasn't a personal attack. If I responded to correct the lies and distortions, he'd find me guilty of bashing. He's incapable of being a fair judge. As far as I can see, there's only one way to stop it, and that's for everyone to read both Barry's and my posts, come down hard on whoever they think is being dishonest and unfair, and refuse to interact with that person until they clean up their act. But that's not going to happen, of course. Also, if you think the only bashing that goes on here is that between Barry and me, again, you haven't been paying attention. Plus which, there's baseless bashing just for the sake of bashing (which is what Barry normally does), and there's critical, reasoned commentary in response to what someone has said (which is what I normally do). What you want to stop is the former; if you try to stop the latter too, you'll end up with utter blandness.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sparaig Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 2:14 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Amma on MMY Seroiusly though, do you think MMY's behavior was truly excremental, or merely less-than-perfect? It covered the whole spectrum, and those two choices aren't adequate. Some of it was very saintly and compassionate. IOW, human. I never fully bought into the concept that an elnlightened person is never incapable of making mistakes. My interpretation of that concept was always in terms of one's own spiritual growth: someone who is enlightened doesn't do things to hinder their own growth. AN extension is that someone who is growing past CC has a broader perspective about their own growth, which leads to them being more likely to do things for the sake of others, as well. Lawson i find the whole question enormously amusing- of all the jokes the universe plays on us, this is the best one. it is the universe that compels us to seek enlightenment-- it is a complete set up. so as a result of gaining that state we act in strange undefinable ways, that is precisely what the universe is asking us to do. so the best way to ask about anything associated with enlightenment is ask the universe itself. it will tell you with no hesitation at all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HDR: High Dynamic Range photography
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://stuckincustoms.com/2006/06/06/548/ An excellent tutorial on High Dynamic Range photography. I recently purchased a digital camera as I wanted to be able to do HDR photography easily and to be able to do HD movies as well. Thanks to tutorials like this it is quite easy to do. It is absolutely amazing the depth you can achieve with this technique. Even if you're not interested in HDR, the photos are worth a gander. It's quite easy ? Well, why not post some of your results here using Photomatix, Photoshop or both, that are natural looking and not well above the top ? For better tutorials on hdr go to google video.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You're correct to direct your attempt at Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; but not on the basis that he's better able to stop. OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I presume that you and Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made, but I for one would be more impressed if either of you managed to completely ignore the other's attacks and focus instead on intelligent discussion of other issues. I don't believe something about you merely because Barry said it, and vice versa. It's the overall impression one makes that's important to me, and a tendency to bicker detracts from the positive impressions I've gotten of both of you. I read quite a few posts from both you and Barry, but I immediately delete them if they're an attack on the other. I don't care who's right or who's wrong. Both of you are wrong to continue this game.
[FairfieldLife] Re: O Partha, surrender not to unmanliness.. Gita 2vs3
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: God doesn't love the householder unless he/she is celibate? God doesn't love people who have sex? God doesn't love the natural order of His/Her Creation, BillyG? Yer kidding, right? How do you suppose Arjuna had many sons by different wives, eh? ...multiple Immaculate Conceptions? I'm glad you ask, you seem to fundamentally misunderstand the principles I was putting forth, or perhaps I explained them poorly. Here's the deal, there is a time and place for everything! The *time* for sex is in the Vedic Grahasta (householder) period of life for the purpose of family and procreation. The complete elimination of sex is a red herring used by the ego Uh... didn't you recently claim that you've personally eliminated sex, BillyG? (even Arjuna) to cleverly distort the issue. No one is asking us to give up sex, only to use it in its proper context in harmony with the laws of nature, as is the case with all of the senses. God didn't give sex to man to use as a tool of enjoyment or entertainment, it is a holy act which product is another human being. Are you now a fundy preacher too?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
On Nov 24, 2008, at 3:31 PM, sparaig wrote: My tantric guru did not allow me to teach meditation until I had been with him for 5 years. Imagine if MMY had done that. And the basis for checking is pretty much the same throughout most techniques: don't strain on the mantra. But look at the discussions in the past here that the concepts in checking were unique to TM which is not true at all. I've also mentioned that the seven steps are a little archaic. That may have worked in the 60's and 70's but nowadays most meditation courses are taught in the weekend course like you describe or one on one. With both (particularly the latter) there is plenty of time for interaction between teacher and student. For groups, the weekend courses seem to fit better in modern schedules. AFter all this time, you stil think that the essence of TM is don't strain on the mantra? Actually one of the advanced techniques elaborates on this precise theme, at a subtle, phonetic level.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Clinton critics being purged from Obama administration
On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Vaj wrote: The first victims of Mrs Clinton's anticipated appointment will be those who defended Mr Obama's flanks on the campaign trail. By mocking Mrs Clinton's claims to have landed under sniper fire in Bosnia or pouring scorn on her much-ballyhooed claim to have visited 80 countries as First Lady they successfully deflected the damaging charge that he is a lightweight on international issues. She's starting out her job as Top Diplomat by getting back at various people? Hmmm. Not to mention that those people were completely correct. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What is an enlightenmentaholic?
On Nov 24, 2008, at 3:16 PM, sparaig wrote: And this is the danger of canned meditation checking procedures, they ignore the fact that everything changes. So the minute you set it into stone, it's already on the path to being obsolete. While canned or mechanical learning can often cover a majority of student meditators, there will always be a subset who could miss the correct instruction. Less important when you're teaching just a few people, but vitally important when your goal is to mass-produce meditators who keep meditating. It's also the reason there is an advantage to learning from an experienced meditation master or someone with a lot of experience: they don't need to give pat answers from a memorized list, they give answers based on the road they've already travelled. I recently was invited to attend a weekend basic training in meditation with a close, life-long friend in the Shambhala tradition. It was probably the most impressive basic meditation instruction I've ever witnessed as the teacher was a 30+ year veteran who spoke from his own considerable experience. They operate under the basic assumption that intro meditation is the most difficult to teach so the Shambhala people only authorize their most advanced teachers for the first level. For a weekend starting with an open friday night lecture with breakfast Saturday and Sunday, lunch on Saturday, afternoon tea and a reception gourmet feast on graduation Sunday the course was only 100 dollars. Most interesting was seeing the unity experiences people began having right away, in that short weekend; young college students, college professors, old folks, a blind lady with her guide dog. Lots of time to interview privately with the teacher(s) and small group discussions as well as along with the whole group. Yes, obviously MMY's MacMantra strategy never laid any mportant groundwork for others that came after him... I see very little similarity between Shambhala training and TM initiation. But his McMeditation empire did lay important groundwork for Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has long since surpassed his former employer.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You're correct to direct your attempt at Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; but not on the basis that he's better able to stop. OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I have zero intention of ignoring it when Barry attacks me, or anyone else, with falsehoods and distortions. That's against my ethical principles. Dishonesty and unfairness poison everyone who comes in contact with them. They should not be tolerated among decent people. I presume that you and Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made Like I said, you haven't been paying attention. I don't care who's right or who's wrong. That's obvious. And as long as you don't, you'll never be able to deal with this effectively.
[FairfieldLife] Straw stars twinkle on Fairfield farm
[photo] http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?template=zoomSi\ te=D2Date=20081123Category=ENT01ArtNo=811230307Ref=ARProfile=1046 http://tinyurl.com/6pvvux http://tinyurl.com/6pvvux
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You're correct to direct your attempt at Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; but not on the basis that he's better able to stop. OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I presume that you and Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made, but I for one would be more impressed if either of you managed to completely ignore the other's attacks and focus instead on intelligent discussion of other issues. I don't believe something about you merely because Barry said it, and vice versa. It's the overall impression one makes that's important to me, and a tendency to bicker detracts from the positive impressions I've gotten of both of you. I read quite a few posts from both you and Barry, but I immediately delete them if they're an attack on the other. I don't care who's right or who's wrong. Both of you are wrong to continue this game. I often wonder why two sensible people would carry on like this unless they've been at it. for lifetimes. :-D
[FairfieldLife] Iowa lung cancer mortality rate
http://www.ottumwacourier.com/local/local_story_326231010.html http://www.ottumwacourier.com/local/local_story_326231010.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:06 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife You're correct to direct your attempt at Barry, who is by *far* the worst offender; but not on the basis that he's better able to stop. OK, then show us that you're better able to stop. I presume that you and Barry both defend yourselves against the other's attacks to convince the rest of us that you are innocent of the charges made, but I for one would be more impressed if either of you managed to completely ignore the other's attacks and focus instead on intelligent discussion of other issues. I don't believe something about you merely because Barry said it, and vice versa. It's the overall impression one makes that's important to me, and a tendency to bicker detracts from the positive impressions I've gotten of both of you. I read quite a few posts from both you and Barry, but I immediately delete them if they're an attack on the other. I don't care who's right or who's wrong. Both of you are wrong to continue this game. As far as I can tell, this pointless crap between the two of them has been going on for over a decade going back into alt.meditation.transcendental - maybe even further. I really doubt *anyone* actually pays any attention at all to the petty details anymore - or even wants to see any of it. I sure as hell don't.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:05 PM, do.rflex wrote: As far as I can tell, this pointless crap between the two of them has been going on for over a decade going back into alt.meditation.transcendental - maybe even further. I really doubt *anyone* actually pays any attention at all to the petty details anymore - or even wants to see any of it. I sure as hell don't. However the unfortunate thing is, it isn't just all about Barry as Willy might say. It's really about the fact that a deranged personality will lash out at whoever, i.e. anyone. You certainly are not immune from Judy's vitriolic spew. The plain facts are, personality disordered people are the bane of internet discussion groups and Usenet. I realize this is un-kosher to state openly, and it's certainly not tactful (it's rarely appropriate to make a medical diagnosis via a discussion group), but it does seem to be the consensus among professional I know who've watched her vent her spleen year after year year. Hell, it's probably decade after decade at this point. :-) But as the saying goes, it does take two to tango.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 4:50 PM, Bhairitu wrote: I often wonder why two sensible people would carry on like this unless they've been at it. for lifetimes. :-D I already have Judy's chart, all I would need is Barry's. :-)
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 3:47 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife I don't care who's right or who's wrong. That's obvious. And as long as you don't, you'll never be able to deal with this effectively. Your snip took me out of context. The point I was making is that many see it as wrong that either of you keep this going. It's like the damned Arabs and Israelis. Either could unilaterally end the end the conflict if they handled it correctly.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HDR: High Dynamic Range photography
On Nov 24, 2008, at 4:16 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote: It's quite easy ? Well, why not post some of your results here using Photomatix, Photoshop or both, that are natural looking and not well above the top ? For better tutorials on hdr go to google video. I'd be glad to as I have some I want to share, at this point I'm just a humble student. :-) Thanks for asking Nabby. As it is now we're in the lull between fall and winter here in northern New England, so it's not the most opportune time for taking landscape shots with everything dead or dying. But having said that, the shots I have taken on my property here in Maine (and recently in Penna.) are very promising. Despite the relative deadness, the images come across strangely alive, like the experience of Unity Consciousness. I guess that's what I like about them, it's as if they're internally luminous and inseparably interconnected to the viewer, at least to me. Are you a photography fan as well? I'd love to see your Scandinavian pictures.
[FairfieldLife] Re: O Partha, surrender not to unmanliness.. Gita 2vs3
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh... didn't you recently claim that you've personally eliminated sex, BillyG? Yes, but at age 57 I am, Vedically speaking, in the Vanaprastha ashram (stage) of life where you live in society but are beyond the procreating stage. However, even if I were at the Grahasta stage which is generally between 25 an 50, sex outside of the context of marriage and procreation would be considered sinful or out of harmony with the laws of nature which results in suffering. (Yep, it's all rigged). Are you now a fundy preacher too? Yes, and Judy loves it!! :-) Below-link to the Four ashrams of Life. http://hinduism.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_four_ashrams_or_life_stages
[FairfieldLife] YouTube - Bruce Lee plays ping pong with nunchuck.flv
Anyone know if this is for real? It was done in the days before computer animation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QHslHpK4-Q
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Rick Archer wrote: I don't care who's right or who's wrong. That's obvious. And as long as you don't, you'll never be able to deal with this effectively. Your snip took me out of context. The point I was making is that many see it as “wrong” that either of you keep this going. It’s like the damned Arabs and Israelis. Either could unilaterally end the end the conflict if they handled it correctly. As long as either the Jews or the Muslims continue to hold onto the belief that land can be held by some superior being that is extremely unlikely. And continued conflict only exacerbates the fundamentalist view that my tribal god is what matters. Yours be damned. It's the classic blue- and red-meme samsaric theme: egocentric power-gods and absolutist-domination mythic tribal patterns. Israel is already starting to go green, Islamic countries are not. That means we need to foster a green-meme collective consciousness in Islamic countries. The only way to stop it is to stop warring against the Islamic countries. Only then will they begin to evolve towards a bleeding-edge green-meme, collective and holistic mindset: our god instead of my god. Can't you see the same process here?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:53 PM, Vaj wrote: Israel is already starting to go green, Islamic countries are not. I shouldn't say that. Turkey is is very unusual exception--there may be others that I'm not aware of. About five years ago I carried on a long correspondence with a follower of the Messiah Sabbatai Zevi who was living in Turkey and was a leading example of those who could marry the Lurianic Kabbalah and Islam. It was very universal. It was beginning to seed all over Turkey. So was a universalist Freemasonry, generally considered anathema and heretical in Islamic countries (the Egyptian government sponsored a 33-part series on the evils of Freemasonry throughout the middle east). The moral of that story is--to me anyways--is that we should allow this liberalizing trend to spread from Turkey. The only way for this to happen is to disallow conflict with her neighbors. Favor liberal diplomacy. Look at a map and you'll see how important this is.
[FairfieldLife] Re: O Partha, surrender not to unmanliness.. Gita 2vs3
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Uh... didn't you recently claim that you've personally eliminated sex, BillyG? Yes, but at age 57 I am, Vedically speaking, in the Vanaprastha ashram (stage) of life where you live in society but are beyond the procreating stage. However, even if I were at the Grahasta stage which is generally between 25 an 50, sex outside of the context of marriage and procreation would be considered sinful or out of harmony with the laws of nature which results in suffering. (Yep, it's all rigged). Are you now a fundy preacher too? Yes, and Judy loves it!! :-) Below-link to the Four ashrams of Life. http://hinduism.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_four_ashrams_or_life_stages So you're a traditional Hindu and a fundy preacher too?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:05 PM, do.rflex wrote: As far as I can tell, this pointless crap between the two of them has been going on for over a decade going back into alt.meditation.transcendental - maybe even further. I really doubt *anyone* actually pays any attention at all to the petty details anymore - or even wants to see any of it. I sure as hell don't. However the unfortunate thing is, it isn't just all about Barry as Willy might say. It's really about the fact that a deranged personality will lash out at whoever, i.e. anyone. You certainly are not immune from Judy's vitriolic spew. The plain facts are, personality disordered people are the bane of internet discussion groups and Usenet. I realize this is un-kosher to state openly, and it's certainly not tactful (it's rarely appropriate to make a medical diagnosis via a discussion group), but it does seem to be the consensus among professional I know who've watched her vent her spleen year after year year. Hell, it's probably decade after decade at this point. :-) But as the saying goes, it does take two to tango. it does indeed take two to tango. i'll take as an example what i recently wrote to you and about you, and our respective reactions. yours has been to just carry on business as usual, as i have too. i am not trying to ram anything down your throat nor are you trying to counter what i said to you in a personally offensive or insulting way. this is the way most topics go here. people express themselves, perhaps even disagree a bit, and then they move on. however such is not the case with B. and Judy. he always finds a way to dig at her, and vice versa. so if you are diagnosing her as having a personality disorder, and the only one with whom she has this consistent negative interaction with is B., why can't we assume the same thing about B., that just as judy has a personality disorder, B. too has a personality disorder? i am not asking in order to confirm that B. too has a personality disorder, but it would seem that both of them present the same amount of evidence, as shown by their ten year negative interaction, to reach the same conclusion about both, despite who's side we may take (if at all) for any given disagreement they may have with one another, or other opinions they may have. so if it is in fact accurate to say judy has a personality disorder, it is perfectly logical to say that B. also has a personality disorder, no?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Rick Archer wrote: I don't care who's right or who's wrong. That's obvious. And as long as you don't, you'll never be able to deal with this effectively. Your snip took me out of context. The point I was making is that many see it as wrong that either of you keep this going. It's like the damned Arabs and Israelis. Either could unilaterally end the end the conflict if they handled it correctly. As long as either the Jews or the Muslims continue to hold onto the belief that land can be held by some superior being that is extremely unlikely. And continued conflict only exacerbates the fundamentalist view that my tribal god is what matters. Yours be damned. It's the classic blue- and red-meme samsaric theme: egocentric power-gods and absolutist-domination mythic tribal patterns. Israel is already starting to go green, Islamic countries are not. That means we need to foster a green-meme collective consciousness in Islamic countries. The only way to stop it is to stop warring against the Islamic countries. Only then will they begin to evolve towards a bleeding-edge green-meme, collective and holistic mindset: our god instead of my god. Can't you see the same process here? A peculiar side note: Both Islam and Judaism hold their God to be the -same- God of Abraham.
[FairfieldLife] New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography
A file has been sent to you via the YouSendIt http://www.yousendit.com File Delivery Service. Download the file - M_E BIBLIO SUMMARY Craig Pearson.pdf http://www.yousendit.com/download/TTZueW55SWVVVG14dnc9PQ Your file will expire after 7 days or 100 downloads. Delivered By YouSendIt http://www.yousendit.com - the fast, secure and reliable File Delivery Service for all documents. From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 1:07 PM To: David Orme-Johnson Subject: New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography Dear Colleagues, Attached is a recent summary and complete bibliography of research on the effects of the Transcendental Meditation and TM Sidhi programs on the collective behavior of society, indicating reduced crime, war, and improvement in quality of life in many areas. This is from Dr. Craig Pearson's new book, The Complete Book of Yogic Flying, which is a superb scholarly documentation of the phenomenon. It includes accounts of Yogic Flying throughout history, examples of subjective experiences of how it feels with lots of pictures, theoretical discussions of how it works, documentation of historic projects around the world where it has been implemented to reduce violence and increase harmony, summaries of the extensive scientific research, and a vision of a healthier, more peaceful, creative humanity that is now emerging in the world. It is a truly wonderful book. You can order it from Maharishi University of Management Press. http://mumpress.com/p_c16.html All the best, David David W. Orme-Johnson,Ph.D. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.truthabouttm.com/ www.TruthAboutTM.com www.Orme-JohnsonPaintings.com/ 191 Dalton Dr. Seagrove Beach, FL 32459 850-231-2866 850-231-5012 Fax
Re: [FairfieldLife] New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography
...theoretical discussions of how it works... It doesn't work. Nobody flys. There is no empirical phenomena to explain. How can you have a theoretical discussion about nothing? --- On Mon, 11/24/08, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 6:35 PM A file has been sent to you via the YouSendIt File Delivery Service.Download the file - M_E BIBLIO SUMMARY Craig Pearson.pdf Your file will expire after 7 days or 100 downloads.Delivered By YouSendIt - the fast, secure and reliable File Delivery Service for all documents. From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 1:07 PM To: David Orme-Johnson Subject: New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography Dear Colleagues, Attached is a recent summary and complete bibliography of research on the effects of the Transcendental Meditation and TM Sidhi programs on the collective behavior of society, indicating reduced crime, war, and improvement in quality of life in many areas. This is from Dr. Craig Pearson’s new book, The Complete Book of Yogic Flying, which is a superb scholarly documentation of the phenomenon. It includes accounts of Yogic Flying throughout history, examples of subjective experiences of how it feels with lots of pictures, theoretical discussions of how it works, documentation of historic projects around the world where it has been implemented to reduce violence and increase harmony, summaries of the extensive scientific research, and a vision of a healthier, more peaceful, creative humanity that is now emerging in the world. It is a truly wonderful book. You can order it from Maharishi University of Management Press. http://mumpress.com/p_c16.html All the best, David David W. Orme-Johnson,Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.TruthAboutTM.com www.Orme-JohnsonPaintings.com/ 191 Dalton Dr . Seagrove Beach , FL 32459 850-231-2866 850-231-5012 Fax
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:29 PM, do.rflex wrote: A peculiar side note: Both Islam and Judaism hold their God to be the -same- God of Abraham. Depends on who you ask. Some consider the revelations of Mohammed to be those of a mad man. Others draw a distinction between IHVH/Jehovah and Allah as a descendent of a pagan Arabian moon-god; they're not the same god. Some Kabbalists draw a similar distinction. Yet others consider Allah to be a Vast Face expression of IHVH, thus the insistence on no physical representation--and thus the Islamic fundie insistence on no physical representation of ANY god. The Puranas actually list the rock which exists in Kaabah, the Ruknu Al-Aswad, as an ancient lingam of Shiva.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...theoretical discussions of how it works... It doesn't work. Nobody flys. There is no empirical phenomena to explain. How can you have a theoretical discussion about nothing? You didn't get the memo, it isn't about flying anymore. But it is still about spooky action at a distance. Incredible mellowing waves effect your neighbors, who will either become mellow or become violent, whatever Nature wants.
Re: [FairfieldLife] New summary of the Maharishi Effect research with bibliography
On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:41 PM, Peter wrote: ...theoretical discussions of how it works... It doesn't work. Nobody flys. There is no empirical phenomena to explain. How can you have a theoretical discussion about nothing? It's not about discussion Pete, it is about virally inseminating the web with the mind-virus that the Mahesh Effect is real. Wherever you search, that's the answer you come up with. Must be true. Or at very least the illusion appears true. And that's really all that matters. If you search for meditation and some health problem, what they want is for your search to bring up their name and their brand that they're selling. It must be true. Found it on the web.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Nov 22 00:00:00 2008 End Date (UTC): Sat Nov 29 00:00:00 2008 357 messages as of (UTC) Tue Nov 25 00:02:22 2008 50 authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] 28 TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 27 enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 26 Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24 Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] 21 Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17 Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16 curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14 BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 13 do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10 gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10 Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 Richard Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6 Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 John [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3 I am the eternal [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 tkrystofiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 ultrarishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 test [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Dick Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It? [EMAIL PROTECTED] Posters: 40 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:29 PM, do.rflex wrote: A peculiar side note: Both Islam and Judaism hold their God to be the -same- God of Abraham. Depends on who you ask. Some consider the revelations of Mohammed to be those of a mad man. Others draw a distinction between IHVH/Jehovah and Allah as a descendent of a pagan Arabian moon-god; they're not the same god. Some Kabbalists draw a similar distinction. Yet others consider Allah to be a Vast Face expression of IHVH, thus the insistence on no physical representation--and thus the Islamic fundie insistence on no physical representation of ANY god. The Puranas actually list the rock which exists in Kaabah, the Ruknu Al-Aswad, as an ancient lingam of Shiva. I don't what your sources are Vaj, but: Abraham: The root of three religions http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b1abraham.htm As baby Abraham gave his first lusty cry at being brought into this cold and cruel world, few would have guessed that his influence would be felt down through the ages. Three of today's major religions trace their roots back to him, each viewing him as their founder or at least their forefather. Although Judaism, Christianity, and Islam see Abraham as an important character in their past, each sees him this way for a different reason. Abraham is very important to Judaism. Jews believe that God called Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees (Mesopotamia) in order to make a covenant with him. Through this covenant, God would bless him and give Abraham's descendants a new land. Abraham left his home to become a wandering herdsman because he had faith in God's promise: I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you. (Genesis 12:2-4) God led Abraham through a series of trials in order to test whether or not Abraham really believed God's promise. The most drastic trial Abraham experienced occurred when God told Abraham to sacrifice his only son Isaac through whom the future Messiah (Savior) was promised. Although greatly troubled, Abraham went through with God's request because he reasoned that God would still somehow fulfill his promise. God rewarded Abraham's obedience by sending and angel to stop him from killing Isaac and providing a lamb to take Isaac's place. In essence, without Abraham, Jews would not be the chosen people among the nations through which a Savior would later come. Abraham is indispensable to Christianity, but for a far different reason than he is to Judaism or Islam. Christians hold to the same historical account as the Jews do; but Christians make a further-reaching conclusion. Christians view God's interaction and covenant with Abraham as something leading up to the coming of Jesus Christ. God's love for his creation was so infinite that he determined to somehow bridge the immeasurable gap that man had made when he sinned. To this end God made the first covenant with Abraham which included the promise of a future savior, Jesus, who would come through Abraham's descendants. Any covenant that was made demanded blood to seal the pact. Just as Abraham killed a heifer, a goat, and a ram each three years old, along with a dove and young pigeon, (NIV, Genesis 15:9) to seal the first covenant, Christians believe that Christ's blood, when he died on the cross, sealed the second. Christians draw many parallels between Jesus and Abraham's life. One of the best known examples is the story of Isaac. Isaac was Abrahams dearly loved, only son through whom God had promised the future salvation of the world. Yet God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to see if Abraham's faith extended that far. Just before Abraham was about to plunge the knife into his only son, an angel stopped him and God provided a ram to die in Isaac's stead. Christians see Jesus as God's only son whom he loved infinitely, yet for the sake of mankind God sacrificed his only son. Jesus became the sacrificial lamb so that: Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord [Jesus] will be saved. (NIV, Romans 10:13) In conclusion, although they don't trace their lineage back to Abraham, Christians view themselves as adopted sons because they consider themselves sons of Jesus who was the future promise for Abraham's descendents. Abraham's role in Islam is different from that which he plays in either Christianity or Judaism. Arab Muslims trace their lineage back to Abraham through Ishmael. They also see Ishmael as the one through whom God's covenant would be fulfilled. The Koran says about Ishmael: And mention Ishmael in the Book; surely he was truthful in (his) promise, and he was an apostle, a prophet. And he enjoined on his family prayer and almsgiving, and was one in whom his Lord was well pleased. (Marium 19:54-55). Islam's
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The flavor of FairfieldLife
On Nov 24, 2008, at 6:39 PM, do.rflex wrote: I don't what your sources are Vaj, but: Abraham: The root of three religions http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b1abraham.htm Actually there's no legit evidence that Abraham, or any of the others existed until you get to Solomon. As baby Abraham gave his first lusty cry at being brought into this cold and cruel world, few would have guessed that his influence would be felt down through the ages. Three of today's major religions trace their roots back to him, each viewing him as their founder or at least their forefather. Although Judaism, Christianity, and Islam see Abraham as an important character in their past, each sees him this way for a different reason. Abraham is very important to Judaism. Jews believe that God called Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees (Mesopotamia) in order to make a covenant with him. Through this covenant, God would bless him and give Abraham's descendants a new land. Abraham left his home to become a wandering herdsman because he had faith in God's promise: I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you. (Genesis 12:2-4) God led Abraham through a series of trials in order to test whether or not Abraham really believed God's promise. The most drastic trial Abraham experienced occurred when God told Abraham to sacrifice his only son Isaac through whom the future Messiah (Savior) was promised. Although greatly troubled, Abraham went through with God's request because he reasoned that God would still somehow fulfill his promise. God rewarded Abraham's obedience by sending and angel to stop him from killing Isaac and providing a lamb to take Isaac's place. In essence, without Abraham, Jews would not be the chosen people among the nations through which a Savior would later come. Abraham is indispensable to Christianity, but for a far different reason than he is to Judaism or Islam. Christians hold to the same historical account as the Jews do; but Christians make a further-reaching conclusion. Christians view God's interaction and covenant with Abraham as something leading up to the coming of Jesus Christ. God's love for his creation was so infinite that he determined to somehow bridge the immeasurable gap that man had made when he sinned. To this end God made the first covenant with Abraham which included the promise of a future savior, Jesus, who would come through Abraham's descendants. Any covenant that was made demanded blood to seal the pact. Just as Abraham killed …a heifer, a goat, and a ram each three years old, along with a dove and young pigeon, (NIV, Genesis 15:9) to seal the first covenant, Christians believe that Christ's blood, when he died on the cross, sealed the second. Christians draw many parallels between Jesus and Abraham's life. One of the best known examples is the story of Isaac. Isaac was Abrahams dearly loved, only son through whom God had promised the future salvation of the world. Yet God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to see if Abraham's faith extended that far. Just before Abraham was about to plunge the knife into his only son, an angel stopped him and God provided a ram to die in Isaac's stead. Christians see Jesus as God's only son whom he loved infinitely, yet for the sake of mankind God sacrificed his only son. Jesus became the sacrificial lamb so that: Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord [Jesus] will be saved. (NIV, Romans 10:13) In conclusion, although they don't trace their lineage back to Abraham, Christians view themselves as adopted sons because they consider themselves sons of Jesus who was the future promise for Abraham's descendents. Abraham's role in Islam is different from that which he plays in either Christianity or Judaism. Arab Muslims trace their lineage back to Abraham through Ishmael. Call me Ishmael... Sal
[FairfieldLife] The Hugo Chavez Show - Tue, 11/25 at 9pm on PBS or Watch Online!
2008-11-24
Thread
Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It?
*The Hugo Chavez Show - Tue, 11/25 at 9pm on PBS* FRONTLINE http://www.pbs.org/frontline/ - This Week: The Hugo Chavez Show (90 minutes), November 25th at 9pm on PBS (Check local listings) Earlier this year, veteran FRONTLINE producer Ofra Bikel flew south in search of one of Latin America's most controversial leaders -- a man who's famously denounced George W. Bush as the devil, praised Fidel Castro as a god, and used his country's vast oil wealth to further a revolutionary, often anti-American, agenda. Instead, Bikel found herself confronted with the host of one of the world's most unusual reality shows. In The Hugo Chavez Show, airing this Tuesday night (check local listings), Bikel examines the rise, reign, and peculiar made-for-TV charms of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. I couldn't talk to Chavez, Bikel says. So I had to find another source of getting to him. Since he has his weekly television show -'Hello, President'-- that lasts from five to eight hours at a time, that became my source. I watched hours and hours of them. I feel I got to know him very, very well. I don't think I ever listened to anyone in my life that much. What does Bikel make of this singing, dancing, bullying salesman for 21st century socialism? Why does Chavez conduct the most important business of state live on national television, hiring and firing cabinet ministers one minute, and ordering his generals to invade a neighboring country the next? Will the show go on if Chavez continues to fail to realize any of the revolutionary ideals he sings and dances about on TV? We hope you'll tune in Tuesday night. And meanwhile, check out the full program that's already online -- in English or Spanish -- at http://www.pbs.org/frontline/hugochavez/ *The downfall of both capitalism and communism is inevitable due to their inherent staticity. Both capitalism and communism are on the verge of extinction from this world.*
