[FairfieldLife] Turq the analy retentive Ru ----- was// Letters From

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings 
> wrote:
> >
> > The guy I heard it from was there too.
> > Anyways, with all her money she can't afford plumbers?  .Jeez...
> >
> > I hate it when bosses jump in the shit for a few minutes to show
> > you how great they are at it, Then expect someone else to do it
> > without complaining all the rest of the time. Its like the boss
> > from 'The Office'...Its bullshit.
> >
> > I never saw Maharishi jump in the shit to prove an existential
> > point, with dictatorial/communistic polar opposites as overtones
> > in social structure.
> >
> > Your post makes me feel really fortunate to have been a follower
> > of Maharishi.

Turq. I feel sorry for you. You're playing with the big boys here.
You will loosse. Read on.

> Off obviously *likes* the idea of having a "boss"
> who tells his lessers to do things. God forbid the
> "boss" should ever do any of them himself.>>

You have always been more of a Ru than me Turq.. I do not follow
Maharishi, but your extreme prejudice assumes I do. It is a blindness
you have given yourself. You, like most of the obsessive-compulsive
posters here, are completely driven by hate and fear, like Bush and
Cheney.

And, as I say these words to youyou look deeply into yourself...and
realize ...these words are true.
Then, you try to answer with a shallow and 'witty' retort, but your guts
knot up inside knowing how false you are being to yourself. Either that,
or you fail to respond to this altogether, and try to avoid your
inadequacies in the face of a mind far more attuned to truth than you
can even dream of in your wildest child-like dreams.

You cannot make it up this mountain Turq. It is far bigger than you have
a chance to comprehend. You are falling, hopelessly now, in the
knowldege that you are a real Ru...and I am nothing more than a
humble knower of reality.

You are the slave to convention. On your brightest day, you are barely
able to touch the freedom of mind I have known since birth.

I do not follow convention. You are a child and you are lost, you are
feeling that loneliness more and more, because you do not know how to
deal with the failure of your life. The truth hurts, but you know deep
down that what I say is true.

You will deny it at first.but later you will cry it out on these
boards.

No-one will care...except me.

You are playing with fire now...you have entered a time of life you
never expected. The way is narrow. Be careful where you tread. Your
understanding of me is naive, and you are commiting a self-inflinted
wound, about which you are casual nowbut you know the next corner
you turn is one that will cause that wound to supperate. You know what I
am talking about, and you also know it will eat you up unless you find
aid from the people you hate the most. These are the hard facts of life,
and you know it is true.

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings 
wrote:
>
> The guy I heard it from was there too.
> Anyways, with all her money she can't afford plumbers?  .Jeez...
> 
> I hate it when bosses jump in the shit for a few minutes to show 
> you how great they are at it, Then expect someone else to do it 
> without complaining all the rest of the time. Its like the boss 
> from 'The Office'...Its bullshit.
> 
> I never saw Maharishi jump in the shit to prove an existential 
> point, with dictatorial/communistic polar opposites as overtones 
> in social structure.
> 
> Your post makes me feel really fortunate to have been a follower 
> of Maharishi.

Ruth, here's one answer to your question about
why people keep meditating, at least TM-style:
they *get off* on being considered peons.

Off obviously *likes* the idea of having a "boss"
who tells his lessers to do things. God forbid the 
"boss" should ever do any of them himself.

It's a kind of inverse elitism: "Yes, we may be
peons, but we're the 'best' peons because we do
the grunt work for the 'best' boss."

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 10:29 PM, yifuxero wrote:


---Re: below - Devas still within the pattern of suffering.
 Wrong according to the literature and Gurus allied to Kali, such as
Ramakrishna. Such literature supports the notion that Kali is beyond
the pattern of suffering and as such, exists as & within the
Transcendental realm immune to and beyond the cyclical dissolutions
of the universe.



Uh huh.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,322673,00.html?imw

LINK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/mar/05/india.theobserver

LINK

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" 
 wrote:
>
> "The Secret"  wrote:
> >I'm Johnny on the spot sponsorin this one for PK, giving this one a 
> >prepaid cell phone, taking this one to Iowa City for clothes.  I 
even 
> >have a North American Dialing Plan and Eurozone tollfree number so I 
> >can handle emergencies as they come up amongst the men I have the 
> >funds to help.  Do I mention this to puff myself up?  I hope not.  I 
> >want to be of service and I want to stay quite anonymous.
> >

> I love this.  Small acts of kindness.  If anything is going to change 
> the world, it's small acts of kindness

HaHa. And when someone unstress their brains out they never ever see 
how silly their behaviour seems for others.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[raunchydog]

The BS Meter provides head to toe protection from  light splatter to
spelunking.
Caution: The BS Meter fails in "I'm rubber and you're glue" situations,
but it's idiot proof for launching counter attacks.

"Put on Boots"
Hold your nose and ignore the odor.

"Put on Lifevest"
Wear goggles and start bailing.

"Man the Lifeboat"
Make friends with your shipmates, this sucker is going down.


  [http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/images/bullshit_meter.jpg]


Spice or nice
Use Scoville Units to show appreciation for a writer


  [http://www.eastoftaos.com/i/pics/scoville.jpg]




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool  wrote:
>
>
> Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?
>
> Asking this is like asking both Hannity and Colmes who is the biggest
BSer in the past presidential race. Hannity's reply will surely point to
a Democrat, while Colmes' reply will surely point to a Republican.
>
> So here are my questions...
>
> Who is the biggest BSer of FFL of the true believers? Only true
believers are invited to vote this question.
>
> Who is the biggest BSer of FFL of the members who believe TM is just
another technique and probably weaker than the average spiritual
technique. Only those who fit into this category themselves are invited
to vote this question.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
[mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of nablusoss1008
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:06 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- 
was:
> Letters From an Enlightened Man
> 
>  
> 
> > Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?
> > 
> > OffWorld
> 
> 1) Vaj
> 2) The Turq
> 3) PornoSal
> 
> :-)
> 
> Jeez, Nabby. Does this mean you love me?

No, relax. Though your level of BS does not reach the level of Vaj, 
an impossible task anyway, you could easily fill the nr 3 spot if you 
had been more active. PS occupies this level simply because of her 
massive dedication on a daily basis.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[yifuxero]

---Re: below - Devas still within the pattern of suffering.
  Wrong according to the literature and Gurus allied to Kali, such as 
Ramakrishna. Such literature supports the notion that Kali is beyond 
the pattern of suffering and as such, exists as & within the 
Transcendental realm immune to and beyond the cyclical dissolutions 
of the universe.
 But you would have to be a devotee of Kali to know about such things.
The idea that ALL Devas are alike in regard to "the pattern of 
suffering" and are somehow tending to Realization themselves is some 
type of Vajian Urban Myth.
 Take another example: Buddhas.  By definition, Buddhas are 
supposedly free of the pattern of suffering after bodily death, if 
they have some type of transformation body. For all practical 
purposes, such Buddhas are "Devas" in regard to fulfilling similar 
types of niches.  Examples:  The Earth Store Bodhisattva is actually 
a Buddha who exists in subtle realms helping entities reach 
Buddhahood.
 Similarly, the Medicine Master Buddha can be regarded as a type of 
Deva whose purpose is assisting people in healings and eradicating 
bad karma..
 The Green, White, and Red Taras are types of "Devas" or Yidams (or 
whatever term one wants to use); and it would be the height of 
blasphemy to regard such Entities as "in the pattern of suffering".
 Similarly, certain Devas can be "Buddhas" but still continue with 
some ethereal existence beyond the physical.
 In addition, generalized "Bodhisattvas" (contrary to popular belief 
equated with Vajian mental tamas); are not necessarily entities on 
the path toward Buddhahood; but rather (like Avalokitesvara) 
called "Bodhisattvas" but are akin to Realized Devas although not 
called "Devas".
 Vaj is up to his usual tricks, trying to obfuscate the issues by 
bringing in half-truths and outright falsehoods. It's all due to his 
superficial knowledge of Buddhism.
 

In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:57 PM, off_world_beings wrote:
> 
> > > On Dec 14, 2008, at 11:06 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
> > >
> > > > How is TM a religion if there are Jews, Muslims, Christians,
> > > > Buddhists, Atheists, who all practice the technique together, 
no- 
> > one
> > > > is required to worship a god (unless they feel like it), and 
for
> > > > whom god is an abstract word of little importance.
> > >
> > > TM or in it's more traditional lingo, manasika-japa, mental  
> > repetition
> > > of mantra, is transcendental mental worship of a god or 
goddess,  
> > deva
> > > or devata (or shakti). >>
> > You are wrong again Vaj. Now, let's see you define precisely,  
> > succinctly, in no more than 2 paragraphs, your definition of 
a 'god'  
> > or 'deva'. Go ahead. Define precisely please.
> >
> 
>   A deva is the super-conscious interface for an object that 
exists  
> within the container of consciousness. A devata is that same 
interface  
> experienced energetically. Each typically has it's own personality 
and  
> attributes, which are still within the patterns of suffering that 
the  
> human-world shares with other sentient realms.
> 
> That's also why worshipping gods or goddesses does not move you out 
of  
> suffering. But nonetheless, that's what religions do: enslave 
people  
> in some way--while promising to set them free in some way.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[curtisdeltablues]

> 
> I appreciate your taking the time to ponder this
> and to take responsibility for it, but from my
> perspective, I don't think you're owning all of
> your part in it yet. Several points:
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, a person who aims to be
> fair gets only partial credit if they respond to
> unfairness only when it's directed at them.

This sounds like way too much of a judgmental place for me to live in.
 This place is not my life.  I'm not interested in taking most of the
word wars that go in here that seriously.  This is a big difference
between us.  You see that kind of "correction" as having a real value
outside yourself. For me when I run the "tisk tisk" routine, it is for
my own enjoyment and self-righteousness buzz.  I'm real clear that I
am not doing any real good. But I have noted that you consider the
fact that I have different communication relationships here a lack of
fairness.  I don't see it that way.

> 
> But you're not even consistent along that line.
> It's one thing for you to retaliate in kind in a
> discussion you're having with me. (I very rarely 
> give you a basis for retaliating except when
> we're in the middle of a discussion and I think
> you aren't playing fair with me.)

Consistency in how I interact here is probably not a goal for me.  I
enjoy reacting spontaneously as a sort of a Rorschach test for myself
at any given time to a specific poster.  Sometimes things bug me,
sometimes I shrug them off.  That seems normal.

> 
> In this case, though--and in several others
> recently--you jumped on me because you thought I
> was being unfair *to others*.

Yeah,me being a busybody.  I'm reassessing this behavior.  

> 
> Further, I object to your suggestion of moral
> equivalency. What Vaj and, especially, Barry say
> in their attacks on me and others is far, far
> worse than anything I've ever said to them or to
> anybody else, including to you.

The intention to hurt feelings is the same in my opinion.  That is the
quality that matters to me.  You are more interested in the content. 
You have different styles of expressing your contempt for each other
but the intention is the same. I understand that you believe that what
they say is worse in some way that you can rate.  From outside it
isn't as obvious or maybe I haven't cared enough to judge it that way.
 There is a higher level of drama going on than I can relate to.  I
can get off on "hating" here and am not above it.  But I pick those
battles pretty carefully because I get an unpleasant blowback that I
don't dig.

> 
> I guess I don't understand how you can be so
> sanguine and jolly about your friendship wih Barry
> and Vaj when they're both so vicious and dishonest.

First of all I try to avoid posts that have that vibe from anyone here
when it isn't directed towards me.  That is called minding my own
business.  I am trying to do that more and include you in that rather
than mind their business more.  I judge people by how they treat me. 
This framework is a very limited slice of their lives and I know that.
 Most people are posting with a persona that they would not have in
their real lives.  So the nature of online communication is to amplify
negitive traits.  I accept that with the medium.  I am trying to get
less judgmental, not more.  I am really only interested in how a
person interacts with me for good reason.  I work at bringing my
communication with each poster to a level I can enjoy.  That is my
personal agenda here.

Taking your point of view on them serves no purpose for me.  And
frankly many times I disagree with how you are characterizing them in
the worst possible light.  I think you have a little self-fulfilling
prophesy going on with them.  Your contempt is so unrelenting it
dehumanizes them, and vice versa.  So neither side is encouraged to
show up in a sensitive, appreciative way.  I've been in that place so
I know how it feels.  

> How can you form a genuine friendship with people
> like that, even if they restrain themselves when
> they're interacting with you? To me, that seems
> grossly hypocritical.

Again your judgmentalness is ratcheted up to high for me.  This is not
a friendship in the world, these are all online communications within
a very limited scope. But a guy like Barry who has taken the time to
listen to my music and communicate with me about it and has shared
more about his life onffline in emails with me, has earned more
closeness than someone who has not.  So my perspective on him is not
influenced by how you two relate.

I know you feel victimized by him but I have trouble seeing it that
way.  You have created the relationship with him that you want,and so
have I.  They are not connected.  Judging me as a hypocrite because I
am focusing on a different and vastly more pleasant side of him seems
like a very sour philosophy Judy.  It sounds like a POV that would
make you pissed off a lot at people.  I want no part of that.

> 
> 
> Neither of them
> > have ever taken a personal s

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 9:41 PM, Sal Sunshine wrote:


On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Vaj wrote:

 A deva is the super-conscious interface for an object that exists  
within the container of consciousness. A devata is that same  
interface experienced energetically. Each typically has it's own  
personality and attributes, which are still within the patterns of  
suffering that the human-world shares with other sentient realms.


Man, that is heavy, Vaj--really, really heavy.



That's also why worshipping gods or goddesses does not move you out  
of suffering. But nonetheless, that's what religions do: enslave  
people in some way--while promising to set them free in some way.


And we all know the only thing that will set them free,
other than the truth, of course--
(cue Ex-Lax commercial...)


ROFLOL!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Vaj wrote:

 A deva is the super-conscious interface for an object that exists  
within the container of consciousness. A devata is that same  
interface experienced energetically. Each typically has it's own  
personality and attributes, which are still within the patterns of  
suffering that the human-world shares with other sentient realms.


Man, that is heavy, Vaj--really, really heavy.



That's also why worshipping gods or goddesses does not move you out  
of suffering. But nonetheless, that's what religions do: enslave  
people in some way--while promising to set them free in some way.


And we all know the only thing that will set them free,
other than the truth, of course--
(cue Ex-Lax commercial...)

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 9:37 PM, Vaj wrote:

Also not afraid to turn away from others suffering: the real hero's  
not afraid to see things as they are


...not afraid to not turn away from others suffering: the real hero's  
not afraid to see things as they are.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:59 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote:


"The Secret"  wrote:

I'm Johnny on the spot sponsorin this one for PK, giving this one a
prepaid cell phone, taking this one to Iowa City for clothes.  I even
have a North American Dialing Plan and Eurozone tollfree number so I
can handle emergencies as they come up amongst the men I have the
funds to help.  Do I mention this to puff myself up?  I hope not.  I
want to be of service and I want to stay quite anonymous.


I love this.  Small acts of kindness.  If anything is going to change
the world, it's small acts of kindness



Also not afraid to turn away from others suffering: the real hero's  
not afraid to see things as they are.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:57 PM, off_world_beings wrote:


> On Dec 14, 2008, at 11:06 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> > How is TM a religion if there are Jews, Muslims, Christians,
> > Buddhists, Atheists, who all practice the technique together, no- 
one

> > is required to worship a god (unless they feel like it), and for
> > whom god is an abstract word of little importance.
>
> TM or in it's more traditional lingo, manasika-japa, mental  
repetition
> of mantra, is transcendental mental worship of a god or goddess,  
deva

> or devata (or shakti). >>
You are wrong again Vaj. Now, let's see you define precisely,  
succinctly, in no more than 2 paragraphs, your definition of a 'god'  
or 'deva'. Go ahead. Define precisely please.




 A deva is the super-conscious interface for an object that exists  
within the container of consciousness. A devata is that same interface  
experienced energetically. Each typically has it's own personality and  
attributes, which are still within the patterns of suffering that the  
human-world shares with other sentient realms.


That's also why worshipping gods or goddesses does not move you out of  
suffering. But nonetheless, that's what religions do: enslave people  
in some way--while promising to set them free in some way.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[lurkernomore20002000]

"The Secret"  wrote:
>I'm Johnny on the spot sponsorin this one for PK, giving this one a 
>prepaid cell phone, taking this one to Iowa City for clothes.  I even 
>have a North American Dialing Plan and Eurozone tollfree number so I 
>can handle emergencies as they come up amongst the men I have the 
>funds to help.  Do I mention this to puff myself up?  I hope not.  I 
>want to be of service and I want to stay quite anonymous.
>
I love this.  Small acts of kindness.  If anything is going to change 
the world, it's small acts of kindness

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 14, 2008, at 11:06 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> > How is TM a religion if there are Jews, Muslims, Christians,
> > Buddhists, Atheists, who all practice the technique together, no-one
> > is required to worship a god (unless they feel like it), and for
> > whom god is an abstract word of little importance.
>
> TM or in it's more traditional lingo, manasika-japa, mental repetition
> of mantra, is transcendental mental worship of a god or goddess, deva
> or devata (or shakti). >>
You are wrong again Vaj. Now, let's see you define precisely,
succinctly, in no more than 2 paragraphs, your definition of a 'god' or
'deva'. Go ahead. Define precisely please.

< which is the end-point of the sound of all TM mantras (aka, the
> chandra-bindu). It's more a personal god / gnostic religion presented
> as a scientific procedure set within a group which (often implicitly)
> carries with it a number of traditional Brahmanical religious
> assumptions (e.g. "svargakamo yajeta": "one desirous of heaven/the
> unified-field should perform [or pay for] yagnas.").>>

None of that is religion. Your insertion of the the words 'personal god'
is an oxymoron.

A 'god' that is 'personal' is not a god in the sense of religion IT
IS YOURSELF  !   This is the ANTITHESIS of religion. You are bindng
yourself up in knots Vaj, you need to be more precise in your
definitions.

LOL !...your above and below pragraphs actually prove that TM is NOT a
religion ! ! !  You proved it yourself ! !

You will be quoted forevermore as having stated that TM is NOT a
religion, and proven it clearly in your statement

Try again sunshine...This time try to DEFINE  YOUR  TERMS... (or get an
education before you make a fool of yourself again.)

-- OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
[mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Vaj
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 6:57 AM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
>
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:01 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Think yourself lucky PornoSal.
>
> Ravi Shankar may have tried to make you eat fruit, while you dined out
in
> restaurants in Geneva, but I heard from a follower of hers, that on
Ammaji's
> Ashram they were made to jump in and shovel shit out of the Ashram
cesspool.
> When they showed slight dislike for it, Ammaji jumped in the shitpool
and
> started shoveling the shit herself, and shouting to them how blissful
it was
> to shovel shit ---  for a whole 2 minutes   while they were
expected to
> shovel that human feces for hours on end.
> The follower told me this as if it showed how great she was to jump in
the
> shit (for 2 minutes), and how grateful he was to be able to shovel
shit for
> her for 2 hours. Lol !
>
> True story.
>
> I'm really glad to have been a follower of Maharishi.
>
>
>
> I read this story in Ed Beckley's book
> (http://www.amazon.com/Dance-Rich-Yogi-Ed-Beckley/dp/1403335915
 ). Ed
was
> there. The way he told it, a cesspool at the ashram had become
clogged, and
> because of that, the whole sewage system wasn't working. Unclogging it
> required that some stuff blocking a submerged pipe be removed. Some
people
> were trying, unsuccessfully, to do this with a stick or a pole,
staying as
> far from the stinking pit as possible. Amma saw them and, impatient to
solve
> the problem (and to teach a lesson by example) she jumped in and
started
> unclogging it by hand. She called for buckets and a bucket brigade was
> started, Amma scooping and others carrying the shit away. My wife
formatted
> that book and designed the cover. If anyone wants to hear the whole
story,
> I'll find the text and post it.
>

The guy I heard it from was there too.
Anyways, with all her money she can't afford plumbers?  .Jeez...

I hate it when bosses jump in the shit for a few minutes to show you how
great they are at it, Then expect someone else to do it without
complaining all the rest of the time. Its like the boss from 'The
Office'...Its bullshit.

I never saw Maharishi jump in the shit to prove an existential point,
with dictatorial/communistic polar opposites as overtones in social
structure.

Your post makes me feel really fortunate to have been a follower of
Maharishi.

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hing instead of garlic

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > I just don't understand how you can reconcile your support for 
> > hummous with your support for Israel Shemp.  Even with hing, hummous
> > is a terrorist organization and you shouldn't be making concessions
> > with them by substituting for the garlic as if that balances out 
> their
> > blowing people up.
> 
> 
> 
> Someone in Lebanon is suing Israel for selling hummous as an 
> authentic Israeli food.  Apparently, Greeks had set a precedent a few 
> years earlier by suing some other country for selling a Greek staple 
> without giving Greece credit:
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/4kwtu6

Food fight! http://tinyurl.com/38uac8

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bush and the Flying Shoes: The Real Story

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4iaKVU31N4&fmt=18
> > (high quality)
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4iaKVU31N4&fmt=18
> > (normal quality)
> 
> Duh. Same URL! High quality is the default. Click on
> "Watch in normal quality" underneath the video window
> if your computer chokes.

Bush said it was a size ten and he could see into the guy's sole.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 4:01 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:
> 
> > Found an interesting tidbit to add to my post:
> >
> > "Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication
> > that TM is related to hypnotic susceptibility.  In their study,
> > although only 44% of the non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as
> > highly susceptible, with scores of 10 or higher on the Stanford
> > Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM practitioners received
> > scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale.  Walrath and Hamilton
> > concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to
> > hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient
> > reinforcement in the technique to continue its practice.  Using the
> > Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Field Depth of
> > Hypnosis Inventory to test hypnosis, Van Nuys (1973) also found that
> > hypnotic susceptibility correlated with subjects' initial skill at
> > meditating."
> >
> > From chapter 3, the Physical and Psychological Effects of Meditation,
> > by Murphy and Donovan.  I haven't read the underlying work.
> >
> > My theory is that there are qualities that certain people have that
> > make them more likely to find meditation rewarding.
> 
> 
> Fascinating. I wonder what other meditational traditions would be  
> like. I would think it might be similar, but who knows?
> 
> It has been shown that TMers form a certain personality profile which  
> seem to self-select on the information in the intro lectures (and  
> marketing materials presumably). Their personality type from the  
> Cattell 16 PF Questionaire is Factor M (Autia). This relates to the  
> "tendency to be 'imaginatively enthralled by inner creations',  
> 'charmed by works of the imagination', and 'completely absorbed' in  
> the momentum of their own thoughts, following them 'wherever they  
> lead, for their intrinsic attractiveness and with neglect for  
> realistic considerations' ...and a capacity to dissociate and engage  
> in 'autonomous, self-absorbed relaxation'. High Autia scorers tend to  
> also be unconventional, artsy and interested in spiritual matters and  
> their theory. Also they score high on Sizothymia: cool, detached,  
> critical and "stiff". Emotionally 'flat' and 'cautious'.
> 
> The compendium on TM claims, Meditation: In Search of a Unique Effect  
> has a section on personality traits. Those that felt they benefitted  
> from TM scored high in the "absorption scale" which tests for  
> "primarily a capacity for episodes of absorbed and 'self-altering'  
> attention that is sustained by imaginative and 'enactive'  
> representation." Absorbers correlate strongly with hypnotic  
> susceptibility but good absorbers have a more "flexible attentional  
> style (with) greater mode specific cortical (EEG) patterning during  
> selective attention."
>
I am looking at this too.  What I am curious about is not so much who
starts to meditate, but who keeps meditating. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 4:01 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:


Found an interesting tidbit to add to my post:

"Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication
that TM is related to hypnotic susceptibility.  In their study,
although only 44% of the non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as
highly susceptible, with scores of 10 or higher on the Stanford
Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM practitioners received
scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale.  Walrath and Hamilton
concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to
hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient
reinforcement in the technique to continue its practice.  Using the
Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Field Depth of
Hypnosis Inventory to test hypnosis, Van Nuys (1973) also found that
hypnotic susceptibility correlated with subjects' initial skill at
meditating."

From chapter 3, the Physical and Psychological Effects of Meditation,
by Murphy and Donovan.  I haven't read the underlying work.

My theory is that there are qualities that certain people have that
make them more likely to find meditation rewarding.



Fascinating. I wonder what other meditational traditions would be  
like. I would think it might be similar, but who knows?


It has been shown that TMers form a certain personality profile which  
seem to self-select on the information in the intro lectures (and  
marketing materials presumably). Their personality type from the  
Cattell 16 PF Questionaire is Factor M (Autia). This relates to the  
"tendency to be 'imaginatively enthralled by inner creations',  
'charmed by works of the imagination', and 'completely absorbed' in  
the momentum of their own thoughts, following them 'wherever they  
lead, for their intrinsic attractiveness and with neglect for  
realistic considerations' ...and a capacity to dissociate and engage  
in 'autonomous, self-absorbed relaxation'. High Autia scorers tend to  
also be unconventional, artsy and interested in spiritual matters and  
their theory. Also they score high on Sizothymia: cool, detached,  
critical and "stiff". Emotionally 'flat' and 'cautious'.


The compendium on TM claims, Meditation: In Search of a Unique Effect  
has a section on personality traits. Those that felt they benefitted  
from TM scored high in the "absorption scale" which tests for  
"primarily a capacity for episodes of absorbed and 'self-altering'  
attention that is sustained by imaginative and 'enactive'  
representation." Absorbers correlate strongly with hypnotic  
susceptibility but good absorbers have a more "flexible attentional  
style (with) greater mode specific cortical (EEG) patterning during  
selective attention." 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[gullible fool]

Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?
 
Asking this is like asking both Hannity and Colmes who is the biggest BSer in 
the past presidential race. Hannity's reply will surely point to a Democrat, 
while Colmes' reply will surely point to a Republican.
 
So here are my questions...
 
Who is the biggest BSer of FFL of the true believers? Only true believers are 
invited to vote this question. 
 
Who is the biggest BSer of FFL of the members who believe TM is just another 
technique and probably weaker than the average spiritual technique. Only those 
who fit into this category themselves are invited to vote this question.
 
"Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only 
love." 
 
- Amma  

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Rick Archer  wrote:

From: Rick Archer 
Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: 
Letters From an Enlightened Man
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 5:50 PM










From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of nablusoss1008
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:06 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters 
From an Enlightened Man
 



> Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?
> 
> OffWorld

1) Vaj
2) The Turq
3) PornoSal

:-)
Jeez, Nabby. Does this mean you love me? 


  

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Dec 13 00:00:00 2008
End Date (UTC): Sat Dec 20 00:00:00 2008
423 messages as of (UTC) Mon Dec 15 23:09:24 2008

49 authfriend 
31 raunchydog 
29 nablusoss1008 
25 off_world_beings 
24 I am the eternal 
23 Sal Sunshine 
21 curtisdeltablues 
20 TurquoiseB 
19 Bhairitu 
18 Vaj 
17 shempmcgurk 
17 Peter 
15 Rick Archer 
14 ruthsimplicity 
10 Paul Mason 
10 "do.rflex" 
 9 Nelson 
 9 Marek Reavis 
 8 lurkernomore20002000 
 8 dhamiltony2k5 
 6 gullible fool 
 4 Robert 
 4 Richard M 
 4 "Richard J. Williams" 
 4 "BillyG." 
 3 cardemaister 
 3 bob_brigante 
 3 bettyblue109 
 3 Patrick Gillam 
 3 Hugo 
 2 yifuxero 
 1 sanosh2002 
 1 pranamoocher 
 1 mainstream20016 
 1 guyfawkes91 
 1 ffl...@yahoo.com
 1 amritasyaputra 
 1 The Secret 
 1 John 

Posters: 39
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: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I find your explanation of "dodging questions" to promote the innocent
> > and effortless experience very interesting.  I think there is
> > something to that.   I think that the initiation process puts people
> > in a relaxed and suggestible frame of mind.  The checking process is
> > the same.  Being in that state of mind may make it more likely that TM
> > will be perceived as relaxing and effortless.
> >
> 
> Found an interesting tidbit to add to my post:
> 
> "Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication
> that TM is related to hypnotic susceptibility.  In their study,
> although only 44% of the non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as
> highly susceptible, with scores of 10 or higher on the Stanford
> Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM practitioners received
> scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale.  Walrath and Hamilton
> concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to
> hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient
> reinforcement in the technique to continue its practice.  Using the
> Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Field Depth of
> Hypnosis Inventory to test hypnosis, Van Nuys (1973) also found that
> hypnotic susceptibility correlated with subjects' initial skill at
> meditating."
> 
> From chapter 3, the Physical and Psychological Effects of Meditation,
> by Murphy and Donovan.  I haven't read the underlying work.  
> 
> My theory is that there are qualities that certain people have that
> make them more likely to find meditation rewarding.
>

Well, duh! The ability to "concentrate" (to "do" dhaaraNaa)
effortlessly, of course! :D

- dhaaraNaasu ca yogyataa manasaH -- MaharSi Patañjali

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[pranamoocher]

"HOP"= Pushing off


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "I am the eternal" 
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:21 PM, gullible fool ffl...@... wrote:
> >
> > No hopping? Just fake it. A former Purushnik once told me hopping
was very
> > much "encouraged" when he was on Purusha.
> >
>
> You are aware that there's a kiddie section where the MUM students do
> program with their instructors.  Attendence is taken and it's noted
> whether or not they hop.  I would assume they correlate not hoping
> with not getting enough sleep the night before.
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of nablusoss1008
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:06 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was:
Letters From an Enlightened Man

 

> Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?
> 
> OffWorld

1) Vaj
2) The Turq
3) PornoSal

:-)

Jeez, Nabby. Does this mean you love me?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hing instead of garlic

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
 wrote:
>
> I just don't understand how you can reconcile your support for 
> hummous with your support for Israel Shemp.  Even with hing, hummous
> is a terrorist organization and you shouldn't be making concessions
> with them by substituting for the garlic as if that balances out 
their
> blowing people up.



Someone in Lebanon is suing Israel for selling hummous as an 
authentic Israeli food.  Apparently, Greeks had set a precedent a few 
years earlier by suing some other country for selling a Greek staple 
without giving Greece credit:

http://tinyurl.com/4kwtu6





> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > Hummous an old Greek tune, Shemp.
> > 
> > shempmcgurk wrote:
> > > I love hummous.
> > >
> > > But I always have to watch when I eat it because it can be top-
heavy 
> > > with garlic...and seeing clients with garlic-breath is a no-no.
> > >
> > > I often use hing (asafoetida) as a garlic replacement in 
recipes that 
> > > call for garlic for that reason.  Not that I don't love garlic -
- I 
> > > do -- but solely for the breath consideration do I avoid it at 
times.
> > >
> > > I had never tried using hing when I make hummous because when I 
was a 
> > > student at MIU they often had hummous at lunch and supper time 
and I 
> > > never could stand it.  And I always assumed -- wrongly I now 
> > > discover -- that they used hing instead of garlic.  And I 
> > > figured: "okay, hummous is simply one dish that the hing 
doesn't work 
> > > for" and never tried it in my own recipe when I made hummous.
> > >
> > > Well, I did for the first time this weekend and I am pleased to 
> > > report to you that the old adage about assuming is true: I was 
wrong 
> > > and hing works GREAT in hummous!
> > >
> > > MIU must have been using something else or not using any 
replacement 
> > > for garlic in their hummous.
> > >
> > > I can't say hing hummous is better than garlic hummous; it's 
just 
> > > different...more nutty.  But that's how I'll be making it from 
now on.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management

[authfriend]

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

> There's a high amount of cognitive dissonance 
> I've noticed in addition when you refuse to use 
> common TM-org buzzwords for describing your own 
> experience--which often come with a lot of  
> accumulated baggage and instead use your own 
> words. That's regarded very suspiciously and 
> often with great anger.

Vaj misses the point of the objection completely.

When you use terminology that's peculiar to your 
tradition in speaking to people who aren't 
familiar with that terminology, no information is 
communicated.

If that terminology is all you know, that's one 
thing; the lack of communication can't be helped.
The only way you and the other folks can
communicate is for *both* sides to translate their
jargon into everyday terminology.

But when you're familiar both with your own 
terminology and that of the people you're speaking
with, and refuse to translate from one to the
other, that's a different story entirely. In such
a case, the lack of communication is deliberate
and obviously designed to obfuscate.

 And heaven forbid you  
> were actually trained by an acharya in the same 
> tradition that MMY claims to come from and have 
> some little perspective on things, then a whole 
> host negativity gets aimed at you

As Lawson pointed out, MMY claims to have restored
the original teachings of his tradition. He
believes the current version has been corrupted.
Again, it's like Luther vs. the Catholic Church.
Vaj is disputing with the equivalent of Lutherans
from the perspective of the equivalent to the pope
and finds it surprising that the former don't
accept the "pope's" version.

The "negativity" is inspired by his refusal to
recognize that he needs to address "Luther's" 
version *on its own terms* and show that it's
wrong. Simply invoking the "pope's" version and
claiming that because "Luther's" version isn't
the same, therefore it can't be correct, is a
glaring logical fallacy.

: ad hominems, poisoned well  
> tactics, ambiguation, misdirection, lies--you 
> name it--a long list of logical fallacies--which 
> despite being untenable argumentation, people 
> will often "pile on" to as if honesty in 
> discussion didn't matter!

Funny, that's how we'd describe Vaj's approach.
I just documented one of his huge logical
fallacies above. Vaj's own "untenable
argumentation," complete with all the sins he
lists--including blatant, flat-out lies--has
been documented here over and over.

> Some posters may even claim to be perfectly 
> honest at the same time.

Yeah, except that making such accusations
without bothering to demonstrate that they're 
valid--without addressing them specifically and 
showing that the people you're accusing know 
otherwise--that's a pretty empty claim.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Feminists Just STFU

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "raunchydog"  wrote:
> >
> > Barry moved the goal posts. He has a new 
> > requirement following up his complaint that 
> > women who talk the talk rather than walk the 
> > talk are not "real" feminists. Not only must 
> > "real" feminists prove they have DONE 
> > something in life but provide evidence they 
> > have selflessly helped OTHERS.
>
> Raunchy, your life will be happier if you ignore 
> Turq.  He teases and trolls you.  He has 
> admitted as much.

Is Ruth suggesting Barry didn't mean what he said
in this little go-round? Is she saying he doesn't 
really make the distinction he described between 
"real" and "false" feminists?

Because he seemed to want to be taken *very*
seriously on that point. He even made it quite
clear to Curtis that he wasn't kidding around
when Curtis suggested he was.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>

> I think it helps to realize what people were
> taught ABOUT the things they were taught. They 
> were not merely claims or theories, they were 
> the "highest knowledge." EVERY other teaching by 
> EVERY other spiritual group in history was 
> lesser. And most of the others were just flat-
> out WRONG.

FWIW, that isn't what *I* was taught.

> Therefore if you "do not agree" with something 
> from the "highest teaching," there can only BE 
> one possible reason. You don't understand the 
> teaching "properly." If you did, you couldn't 
> possibly have any doubts about the 
> highestknowledgenessitude of those teachings.

Er, no, wrong.

> Jibes aside, I'm with you, and even more with 
> Curtis on this one. Maharishi's teachings are by
> far the most superficial, repetitive, and non-
> convincing of any I have ever encountered in
> the spiritual smorgasbord. Ever. Think what it 
> says about the mental capacity of someone who 
> considers them profound.

I know people who think Shakespeare is boring,
that opera is just a lot of screeching, and that
anybody could splatter paint on a piece of canvas 
and create a painting as good as anything Jackson 
Pollock ever did.

Here, I'm reminded of nothing so much as an 
occasion on which my best friend's genius husband 
tried to explain the Schroedinger's Cat thought 
experiment to their teenage daughter (herself 
extremely bright).

She was utterly contemptuous: It made no sense
whatsoever, was utterly idiotic, and anybody who 
thought it was of any significance even as a
thought experiment couldn't have much in the way 
of mental capacity.

Her father was very patient and worked at it for
quite awhile--explaining it very clearly, I 
thought--but finally had to give up in the face of
his daughter's scorn. All you could do at that 
point was throw up your hands and laugh helplessly.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings  
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , Vaj  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:01 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
> >
> > > Think yourself lucky PornoSal.
> > >
> > > Ravi Shankar may have tried to make you eat fruit, while you 
dined
> > > out in restaurants in Geneva, but I heard from a follower of 
hers,
> > > that on Ammaji's Ashram they were made to jump in and shovel 
shit
> > > out of the Ashram cesspool. When they showed slight dislike for 
it,
> > > Ammaji jumped in the shitpool and started shoveling the shit
> > > herself, and shouting to them how blissful it was to shovel shit
> > > ---  for a whole 2 minutes   while they were expected to 
shovel
> > > that human feces for hours on end.
> > > The follower told me this as if it showed how great she was to 
jump
> > > in the shit (for 2 minutes), and how grateful he was to be able 
to
> > > shovel shit for her for 2 hours. Lol !
> > >
> > > True story.
> > >
> > > I'm really glad to have been a follower of Maharishi.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, you get to metaphorically shovel shit.>
> 
> That's pretty ironic coming from one of the biggest bullshitters on 
FFL.
> 
> You may not be the biggest, but there should be a vote on it.
> 
> Ok people, who is the biggest BS'r on FFL? (Note to PeterPan in 
Tights,
> PornoSal, Shemp the Sheepshagger, and Lurk the Jurk: Answering with:
> "You", or "OffWorld" is very mildly witty or creative, but 
borderline
> moronic. Besides, OffWorld is exempt, because he is three-headed
> offworlder.)
> 
> Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?
> 
> OffWorld

1) Vaj
2) The Turq
3) PornoSal

:-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Quid pro quo, Oopsy...!

[Richard J. Williams]

> > I don't think they can convict him of anything with
> > regard to the Senate seat given what's been made
> > public so far.
> >
Judy wrote:
> Apparently I'm wrong. The charge is that he "schemed
> to deprive the people of Illinois of the honest
> services of their governor." Another charge is
> conspiracy to commit bribery. In neither case does
> a bribe have to have been consummated for a crime
> to have been committed.
>
"I had no contact with the governor or his office and 
so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening." 
- Barak Obama

"I know he's talked to the governor and there are a 
whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and 
I think he has a fondness for a lot of them." 
- David Axelrod

'Another One Under the Bus...'
Gateway Pundit, Tuesday, December 09, 2008 
http://tinyurl.com/5m7bao

'Obama & Emanuel Are So Close...' 
Gateway Pundit, Wednesday, December 10, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/57rmgz

'Who will fill Obama's senate seat?'
TriState, Wednesday, November 5, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/6lmmbt 

[FairfieldLife] Re: QM explanation of YF?

[bob_brigante]

> Which would work fine if gravity was a force but it's not.



If the EM, weak and strong fields are forces, then gravity is too, and 
the graviton is its force carrier:

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/28353/1/cernsusy3_12-00

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Vaj
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 6:57 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

 

On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:01 AM, off_world_beings wrote:





Think yourself lucky PornoSal. 

Ravi Shankar may have tried to make you eat fruit, while you dined out in
restaurants in Geneva, but I heard from a follower of hers, that on Ammaji's
Ashram they were made to jump in and shovel shit out of the Ashram cesspool.
When they showed slight dislike for it, Ammaji jumped in the shitpool and
started shoveling the shit herself, and shouting to them how blissful it was
to shovel shit ---  for a whole 2 minutes   while they were expected to
shovel that human feces for hours on end. 
The follower told me this as if it showed how great she was to jump in the
shit (for 2 minutes), and how grateful he was to be able to shovel shit for
her for 2 hours. Lol !

True story.

I'm really glad to have been a follower of Maharishi.

 

I read this story in Ed Beckley's book
(http://www.amazon.com/Dance-Rich-Yogi-Ed-Beckley/dp/1403335915). Ed was
there. The way he told it, a cesspool at the ashram had become clogged, and
because of that, the whole sewage system wasn't working. Unclogging it
required that some stuff blocking a submerged pipe be removed. Some people
were trying, unsuccessfully, to do this with a stick or a pole, staying as
far from the stinking pit as possible. Amma saw them and, impatient to solve
the problem (and to teach a lesson by example) she jumped in and started
unclogging it by hand. She called for buckets and a bucket brigade was
started, Amma scooping and others carrying the shit away. My wife formatted
that book and designed the cover. If anyone wants to hear the whole story,
I'll find the text and post it.

[FairfieldLife] Biggest Bullshiter on FFL --- /// --- was: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:01 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> > Think yourself lucky PornoSal.
> >
> > Ravi Shankar may have tried to make you eat fruit, while you dined
> > out in restaurants in Geneva, but I heard from a follower of hers,
> > that on Ammaji's Ashram they were made to jump in and shovel shit
> > out of the Ashram cesspool. When they showed slight dislike for it,
> > Ammaji jumped in the shitpool and started shoveling the shit
> > herself, and shouting to them how blissful it was to shovel shit
> > ---  for a whole 2 minutes   while they were expected to shovel
> > that human feces for hours on end.
> > The follower told me this as if it showed how great she was to jump
> > in the shit (for 2 minutes), and how grateful he was to be able to
> > shovel shit for her for 2 hours. Lol !
> >
> > True story.
> >
> > I'm really glad to have been a follower of Maharishi.
>
>
> Yeah, you get to metaphorically shovel shit.>

That's pretty ironic coming from one of the biggest bullshitters on FFL.

You may not be the biggest, but there should be a vote on it.

Ok people, who is the biggest BS'r on FFL? (Note to PeterPan in Tights,
PornoSal, Shemp the Sheepshagger, and Lurk the Jurk: Answering with:
"You", or "OffWorld" is very mildly witty or creative, but borderline
moronic. Besides, OffWorld is exempt, because he is three-headed
offworlder.)

Who is the biggest BS'r on FFL?

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[curtisdeltablues]

> My theory is that there are qualities that certain people have that
> make them more likely to find meditation rewarding.

This was certainly true in my case.  And once I became very good at
shifting into a meditative state every other thing where my
suggestibility was a plus worked great like the silliest thing I ever
did, Reiki magic hands healing.

I wish there was not such a chasm between the information gained by
people how study hypnosis and meditiation.   There are many
interesting crossovers from my experience of both.  But meditators
continue to insist that what they are doing has NOTHING to do with the
states gained in hypnosis based on them studying one type of hypnosis
which is as bogus as studying one type of meditation and then writing
them all off.

By the time you get to the Age of Enlightenment technique you have
what amounts to an induction with content that loses all the
"innocence" of the earlier TM practice. 

Hypnosis and meditation are both ways to help us understand our minds
better.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I find your explanation of "dodging questions" to promote the innocent
> > and effortless experience very interesting.  I think there is
> > something to that.   I think that the initiation process puts people
> > in a relaxed and suggestible frame of mind.  The checking process is
> > the same.  Being in that state of mind may make it more likely that TM
> > will be perceived as relaxing and effortless.
> >
> 
> Found an interesting tidbit to add to my post:
> 
> "Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication
> that TM is related to hypnotic susceptibility.  In their study,
> although only 44% of the non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as
> highly susceptible, with scores of 10 or higher on the Stanford
> Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM practitioners received
> scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale.  Walrath and Hamilton
> concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to
> hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient
> reinforcement in the technique to continue its practice.  Using the
> Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Field Depth of
> Hypnosis Inventory to test hypnosis, Van Nuys (1973) also found that
> hypnotic susceptibility correlated with subjects' initial skill at
> meditating."
> 
> From chapter 3, the Physical and Psychological Effects of Meditation,
> by Murphy and Donovan.  I haven't read the underlying work.  
> 
> My theory is that there are qualities that certain people have that
> make them more likely to find meditation rewarding.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , Peter 
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 14, 2008, at 6:42 PM, I am the eternal wrote:
>
> > On one AOE course I took,
> > SSRS made everyone eat fruit the whole time, while he
> > got delicious Indian meals.  It might not have been so
> > bad if several of us hadn't been in the house
> > right next to his.
>
> You've got to be kidding me. You go to a course with SSRS and he has
you eating fruit and you resent him because he's not doing the same? You
don't seem to get it.

<

She calls herself 'PornoSal' on some other forums.

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hing instead of garlic

[curtisdeltablues]

I just don't understand how you can reconcile your support for 
hummous with your support for Israel Shemp.  Even with hing, hummous
is a terrorist organization and you shouldn't be making concessions
with them by substituting for the garlic as if that balances out their
blowing people up.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> Hummous an old Greek tune, Shemp.
> 
> shempmcgurk wrote:
> > I love hummous.
> >
> > But I always have to watch when I eat it because it can be top-heavy 
> > with garlic...and seeing clients with garlic-breath is a no-no.
> >
> > I often use hing (asafoetida) as a garlic replacement in recipes that 
> > call for garlic for that reason.  Not that I don't love garlic -- I 
> > do -- but solely for the breath consideration do I avoid it at times.
> >
> > I had never tried using hing when I make hummous because when I was a 
> > student at MIU they often had hummous at lunch and supper time and I 
> > never could stand it.  And I always assumed -- wrongly I now 
> > discover -- that they used hing instead of garlic.  And I 
> > figured: "okay, hummous is simply one dish that the hing doesn't work 
> > for" and never tried it in my own recipe when I made hummous.
> >
> > Well, I did for the first time this weekend and I am pleased to 
> > report to you that the old adage about assuming is true: I was wrong 
> > and hing works GREAT in hummous!
> >
> > MIU must have been using something else or not using any replacement 
> > for garlic in their hummous.
> >
> > I can't say hing hummous is better than garlic hummous; it's just 
> > different...more nutty.  But that's how I'll be making it from now on.
> >
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi: 'Which god you like?' - USA 1959

[ruthsimplicity]

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

> 
> I find your explanation of "dodging questions" to promote the innocent
> and effortless experience very interesting.  I think there is
> something to that.   I think that the initiation process puts people
> in a relaxed and suggestible frame of mind.  The checking process is
> the same.  Being in that state of mind may make it more likely that TM
> will be perceived as relaxing and effortless.
>

Found an interesting tidbit to add to my post:

"Walrath and Hamilton (1975) reported that there is some indication
that TM is related to hypnotic susceptibility.  In their study,
although only 44% of the non-TM volunteer subjects were rated as
highly susceptible, with scores of 10 or higher on the Stanford
Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, 100% of the TM practitioners received
scores of 11 or 12 on the Stanford Scale.  Walrath and Hamilton
concluded that either the practice of TM increases susceptibility to
hypnosis or only highly susceptible subjects find sufficient
reinforcement in the technique to continue its practice.  Using the
Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility and the Field Depth of
Hypnosis Inventory to test hypnosis, Van Nuys (1973) also found that
hypnotic susceptibility correlated with subjects' initial skill at
meditating."

>From chapter 3, the Physical and Psychological Effects of Meditation,
by Murphy and Donovan.  I haven't read the underlying work.  

My theory is that there are qualities that certain people have that
make them more likely to find meditation rewarding.  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Peter wrote:


No, Peter, I'm not "I am the eternal"--I was
responding to
him.  I didn't leave, we simply made trips into town to
get
some real food.  And yes, it was an Art of Living course.

Apart from that, it was a good course and I enjoyed it.
But as I've written here before, on the  third
course I took, the course leaders pulled  fast ones
too, and I dropped out after that.



What did the course leaders do that made you drop-out?


From Post #102249, on 6/20/06:

While I have no real qualms with SSRS himself, his organization, at
least when I was involved (which was only for a little over a year in
the 90s), almost made the TMO look good--and that ain't easy. On the
first course I took, without telling us before hand, they made the
announcement at the first meeting that we would all be on a fruit  
diet,

for the entire course--6 days. Not only was that a dirty trick (IMO of
course--perhaps others liked it) but couldn't that possibly affect
someone's health, if they were diabetic, or had digestive problems? To
make matters worse, I and a number of others were housed in the
building adjacent to his...with the lovely smell of delicious Indian
food wafting over 3 times daily. Try fasting with **that** happening.
Anyway, of course we cheated--why not, he was--and went into town  
where

I and a few others had at least a couple of decent meals. But we sure
didn't appreciate having to shell out yet more $$ after having paid  
for

room and board for the course...the worst part being, IMO, that nobody
had bothered to tell us beforehand--a deliberate omission, because  
they

were afraid nobody would come otherwise? Who knows. Then there were
the meetings themselves, at which any number of people would be
fighting with each other--literally--to sit as close to the front as
possible.

The second course, the one in Pittsburgh, was another classic "Oops,
they did it again..." scenario. This one was so bad it would make a
great plot for a movie where nothing goes right. It wasn't enough that
they put all of us into smoking rooms--so when you turned on the heat
(it was February) you got blasted with enough cigarette smoke to choke
an elephant--they then pulled Trick #2. Into tiny rooms in which we
barely had enough space to walk, those of us on the long part of the
course (6 days) then had to share whatever microscopic amount of free
space was left with the 2-day course participants--I doubt they knew
that was going to happen, and I know we didn't. Add to that that there
were a couple of TM vagrants who hadn't registered and were staying at
the hotel illegally, seriously ticking off the management, and you  
have

the makings for, possibly, the Worst Course Ever.

I have no idea how much of all of this SSRS knew about, but it was his
organization and he does bear some of the responsibility. On a
personal level, I felt he was much warmer and more approachable than
MMY. But after those two disasters, I pretty much gave up on all of
them.


Addendum:  The Pittsburgh course was actually the
third course I took, the second being in Wisconsin, w/o
SSRS.

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hing instead of garlic

[Bhairitu]

Hummous an old Greek tune, Shemp.

shempmcgurk wrote:
> I love hummous.
>
> But I always have to watch when I eat it because it can be top-heavy 
> with garlic...and seeing clients with garlic-breath is a no-no.
>
> I often use hing (asafoetida) as a garlic replacement in recipes that 
> call for garlic for that reason.  Not that I don't love garlic -- I 
> do -- but solely for the breath consideration do I avoid it at times.
>
> I had never tried using hing when I make hummous because when I was a 
> student at MIU they often had hummous at lunch and supper time and I 
> never could stand it.  And I always assumed -- wrongly I now 
> discover -- that they used hing instead of garlic.  And I 
> figured: "okay, hummous is simply one dish that the hing doesn't work 
> for" and never tried it in my own recipe when I made hummous.
>
> Well, I did for the first time this weekend and I am pleased to 
> report to you that the old adage about assuming is true: I was wrong 
> and hing works GREAT in hummous!
>
> MIU must have been using something else or not using any replacement 
> for garlic in their hummous.
>
> I can't say hing hummous is better than garlic hummous; it's just 
> different...more nutty.  But that's how I'll be making it from now on.
>
>
>   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Richard M]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "The Secret"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > No, Peter, I'm not "I am the eternal"--I was responding to
> > him.  
> > Sal
> >
> 
> Sal is definitely not me, I am the Eternal.  Surely you have seen that
> our posting styles are much different.  Sal can cut through bullshit
> with a blazing flourish.  Me, I'm more of a kibitzer here who responds
> with URLs to what I believe are relevant videos from The Onion.
> 
> Perhaps I can kill a few birds with one stone.  To answer the question
> about spies in the Mens Dome.  Well, of course it starts with Jeff,
> the very dark, troubled soul of the Director of Devco.  He's the head
> of Dome Security.  He has people working for him.  Make entries in
> ledgers?  Yes, I guess there are entries made.  But understand that
> you're going to the same place and sitting in the same place for hours
> twice a day.  The dome population is not that big.  After a while you
> get to know everybody's public persona and of course there's a party
> line we all share at a certain level above the gap.  Been there many
> times.  It's where everybody's thoughts pop through from the Absolute.
>  I suspect it's the place we access when performing telepathy.  That's
> available as well.
> 
> The men in the dome are loosely organized into cells or cliques.  TB
> governors give rides to just your ordinary Joes but TBs find and
> gather with each other, average Joes like myself find each other.  Of
> course the average Joes don't tell the TBs that last night we went
> over to Jack's trailer and enjoyed an evening dinner of as close as
> you can get to a proper English breakfast in FF/VC.  So the TBs keep
> tabs on everybody and informally report to Jeff.  The average Joes
> mind their Ps and Qs around the TBs.
> 
> I have the rare privilege of coming to IA with prosperity.  I either
> rent a flat or get a place at the Rukmapura.  Lately I've beem also
> renting flats and/or suites at the Rukmapura for expat IA CPs.  So we
> have off campus places to have dinners, watch and talk about The
> Secret (we are all of us in my group cult followers of The Secret).  I
> have a number of expats on stipend and paid plane fare continuously,
> making up for the cancellation of the foreign stipends in some small
> way.  So I'm constantly kept up on what's going on because I have,
> well, representatives on IA most of the time.
> 
> Is it worth the bullshit?  Is it worth the mind fuck?  Well, yes.  But
> except for a very long stint on CCP some years ago I can't take the
> TMO for very long.  I go to IA for a couple of weeks and even then I'm
> only on campus for rounding.  I don't tell my good friends and
> sponsorees that they are deluded.  I figure that their time for
> understanding has not yet come.
> 
> So how does IA feel?  If you're not suicidally depressed or bizarrely
> manic it feels pretty good.  The atmosphere has changed remarkably
> since last Winter with the advent of the many pundits.  The presence
> of the pundits is especially powerful in VC and staying at the
> Rukmapura is quite a treat.  You can feel this very earthy, phallic
> presence in VC these days.  It's nothing like TM.  Something quite
> different indeed.
> 
> It would seem like program for up to 8 hours at a time would seem like
> forever.  Actually it goes by pretty quickly.  You really are soaking
> in the Absolute and it's a very nice experience.  Sometimes there are
> amongst the expats and a few American Joes like myself one of the old
> waves we experienced decades back.  Waves which go through the dome
> and lift guys up.  Often there's chuckling and laughter during these
> waves, though the TBs pull us aside periodically and tell us Maharishi
> told us to stop this.  Number One experiences are common amongst some
> of the active hoppers including myself.  

I'm sorry - you've lost me here. I thought I knew what "No 1s" and "No
2s" were, but clearly something better is happening here.

> It's really interesting the
> telling to everyone about a Number One experience by a TB, a THP or MD
> and the average Joe.  The experience of the first 3 is always full of
> movement speak.  

"first 3"? What the f* is that?

> Very etherial.  Something you just can't put your
> finger on.  The average Joe (or Jane)'s experiences aren't full of
> jargon.  They are full of heart.  You have these deja vu experiences
> when you hear their recitation.  Of course Dr. BM picks up the
> heartless experiences and declares them to be the sublime ones and
> rags on about them.  
> 
> How very interesting that even on IA there are strata of people,
> strata of experiences.  Of course I'm sold out to the salt of the
> earth in the Domes.  I'm one of them.  And I feel such comradship to
> the rest of the salt of the earth.  I'm Johnny on the spot sponsoring
> this one for PK, giving this one a prepaid cell phone, taking this one
> to Iowa City for clothes.  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Peter]

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Sal Sunshine  wrote:

> From: Sal Sunshine 
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 3:05 PM
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 1:28 PM, Peter wrote:
> > Sal, I'm not condemning you for your reaction;
> I'll withdraw my  
> > first's post implied condemnation! The first AOL
> in residence course  
> > they served us fruit for lunch only. At first I went,
> "What?" but  
> > then I just thought what the hell. It was no big deal.
> But my first  
> > impulse was the one you had. I've had very
> powerful experiences  
> > around SSRS, so I trust him. If the AOL people or SSRS
> are skimping  
> > on meals simply to make money, that'll be their
> bad karma, but I  
> > have a hard time seeing it that way. Did you have
> fruit for dinner  
> > too?
> 
> Peter, *all* we had was FRUIT.  Breakfast?  Fruit.  Lunch? 
> Fruit.
> Dinner?  Fruit.  And, if you weren't totally fruited
> out by then, you
> probably could have gotten some for snacks too.  It was
> like being
> on a 5-day long enema.

It must have been one of the earlier courses because I don't think they have 
fruit for dinner anymore.


> 
> I was kind of kidding about saving $$, I have no idea
> what the reasons were.  But, to me at least, it just seemed
> like more of the same old "Do as I say and not as I
> do"
> bullshit that most of us were trying to get away from.
> And yeah, I do think that SSRS eating delicious Indian
> meals while the rest of us were essentially being forced
> to eat nothing but FRUIT was a dirty trick. Why didn't
> they just tell us
> beforehand, so people could have taken that into
> account when deciding whether or not to go?  Because
> they probably would have gotten about 2 people for the
> course, that's why.

I get your point. As I said before, I would have initially reacted the same way 
as you did, but then i would have said what the hell an seen it as an 
adventure. But of course, informed consent would have been the best.



> 
> Or, they could have given people a choice when they
> applied,
> letting everyone make the decision for themselves.  But
> that's
> not what they did, of course.
> 
> 
> > That would be a little rough on many people. Probably
> good for them,  
> > or at least, most of them, but not an informed choice
> as you note.  
> > How long was the course?
> 
> Way too much of a good thing for a lot of people.  And like
> I said,
> it wasn't even the fruit that was the worst part, it
> was the deception:
> get peoples' $$ and then you can make any idiotic
> decision you want,
> and if they don't like it, they've still paid.  And
> the course leaders  
> knew
> it too, you could have heard a pin drop when they made the
> announcement.
> I thought the guy who made it--Kevin I think his name
> was--looked
> a little smug when he did, but maybe that's just my
> spin.
> 
> Sal

I took my basic course from Kevin. He's an author of children's books, I 
believe, and has a sister in AOL too. I don't know him well enough to comment 
on his personality, although almost all the AOL people I've met in positions of 
leadership are pretty straight ahead and quite the breath of fresh air compared 
to the TMO crew!

> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 1:28 PM, Peter wrote:
> Sal, I'm not condemning you for your reaction; I'll withdraw my  
> first's post implied condemnation! The first AOL in residence course  
> they served us fruit for lunch only. At first I went, "What?" but  
> then I just thought what the hell. It was no big deal. But my first  
> impulse was the one you had. I've had very powerful experiences  
> around SSRS, so I trust him. If the AOL people or SSRS are skimping  
> on meals simply to make money, that'll be their bad karma, but I  
> have a hard time seeing it that way. Did you have fruit for dinner  
> too?

Peter, *all* we had was FRUIT.  Breakfast?  Fruit.  Lunch?  Fruit.
Dinner?  Fruit.  And, if you weren't totally fruited out by then, you
probably could have gotten some for snacks too.  It was like being
on a 5-day long enema.

I was kind of kidding about saving $$, I have no idea
what the reasons were.  But, to me at least, it just seemed
like more of the same old "Do as I say and not as I do"
bullshit that most of us were trying to get away from.
And yeah, I do think that SSRS eating delicious Indian
meals while the rest of us were essentially being forced
to eat nothing but FRUIT was a dirty trick. Why didn't they just tell us
beforehand, so people could have taken that into
account when deciding whether or not to go?  Because
they probably would have gotten about 2 people for the
course, that's why.

Or, they could have given people a choice when they applied,
letting everyone make the decision for themselves.  But that's
not what they did, of course.


> That would be a little rough on many people. Probably good for them,  
> or at least, most of them, but not an informed choice as you note.  
> How long was the course?

Way too much of a good thing for a lot of people.  And like I said,
it wasn't even the fruit that was the worst part, it was the deception:
get peoples' $$ and then you can make any idiotic decision you want,
and if they don't like it, they've still paid.  And the course leaders  
knew
it too, you could have heard a pin drop when they made the announcement.
I thought the guy who made it--Kevin I think his name was--looked
a little smug when he did, but maybe that's just my spin.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> Keep in mind, it appears a lot of the people snagged for TM  
> "research" are Purusha, MD and or hard-core TM/TMSP TB's. They will  
> likely perceive ANYONE outside the TMO questioning them as suspect or  
> tainted. Some of the most interesting TM studies were done on people  
> who were outside the mainstream TB practitioners (e.g. people in  
> Seattle who went to a TM center there).
> 
> Good luck!
>

Yeah, I know.  I know of two Parusha guys who have  participated in
several studies but they won't talk to me. 

[FairfieldLife] Hing instead of garlic

[shempmcgurk]

I love hummous.

But I always have to watch when I eat it because it can be top-heavy 
with garlic...and seeing clients with garlic-breath is a no-no.

I often use hing (asafoetida) as a garlic replacement in recipes that 
call for garlic for that reason.  Not that I don't love garlic -- I 
do -- but solely for the breath consideration do I avoid it at times.

I had never tried using hing when I make hummous because when I was a 
student at MIU they often had hummous at lunch and supper time and I 
never could stand it.  And I always assumed -- wrongly I now 
discover -- that they used hing instead of garlic.  And I 
figured: "okay, hummous is simply one dish that the hing doesn't work 
for" and never tried it in my own recipe when I made hummous.

Well, I did for the first time this weekend and I am pleased to 
report to you that the old adage about assuming is true: I was wrong 
and hing works GREAT in hummous!

MIU must have been using something else or not using any replacement 
for garlic in their hummous.

I can't say hing hummous is better than garlic hummous; it's just 
different...more nutty.  But that's how I'll be making it from now on.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[I am the eternal]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:21 PM, gullible fool  wrote:
>
> No hopping? Just fake it. A former Purushnik once told me hopping was very
> much "encouraged" when he was on Purusha.
>

You are aware that there's a kiddie section where the MUM students do
program with their instructors.  Attendence is taken and it's noted
whether or not they hop.  I would assume they correlate not hoping
with not getting enough sleep the night before.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Peter]

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Sal Sunshine  wrote:

> From: Sal Sunshine 
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 9:47 AM
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:39 AM, Peter wrote:
> 
> > On Dec 14, 2008, at
> 6:42 PM, I am the eternal
> >> wrote:
> 
> > On one AOE course I
> took,
> > SSRS made everyone eat
> fruit the whole time,
> >> while he
> > got delicious Indian
> meals.  It might not have
> >> been so
> > bad if several of us
> hadn't been in the
> >> house
> > right next to his.
> 
>  You've got to be
> kidding me. You go to a
> >> course with SSRS and he
>  has you eating fruit and
> you resent him because
> >> he's not doing the
>  same?
> >>
> >> Yep.  Thank goodness for cars.
> >>
>  You don't seem to get
> it. Your screen name
> >> needs to be changed.
> >>
> >> I definitely don't get it, it
> was dishonest and seemed
> >> more like
> >> a way to save $$ than anything
> else.  What if someone had
> >> had
> >> a medical condition and their
> system couldn't handle
> >> that much fruit?  It was dishonest
> because he didn't
> >> tell us
> >> before we signed up.  It just
> seemed like typical TMO
> >> "Gotcha!"
> >> nonsense.  And my screen name, in
> case you
> >> were wondering, is meant
> ironically.
> >>
> >> Sal
> >
> > Sal, you are also, "I am the
> eternal"? So, you got in your car  
> > and left because you felt, what,
> tricked or something? This was  
> > an Art of Living course, right? You
> say "AOE" but I'm assumming  
> > that's a typo, correct?
> 
> No, Peter, I'm not "I am the eternal"--I was
> responding to
> him.  I didn't leave, we simply made trips into town to
> get
> some real food.  And yes, it was an Art of Living course.
> 
> Apart from that, it was a good course and I enjoyed it.
> But as I've written here before, on the  third
> course I took, the course leaders pulled  fast ones
> too, and I dropped out after that.


What did the course leaders do that made you drop-out?






> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Peter]

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Sal Sunshine  wrote:

> From: Sal Sunshine 
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 9:53 AM
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:39 AM, Peter wrote:
> 
> > Sal, you are also, "I am the eternal"? So,
> you got in your car and  
> > left because you felt, what, tricked or something?
> This was an Art  
> > of Living course, right? You say "AOE" but
> I'm assumming that's a  
> > typo, correct?
> 
> Oh, yeah, and in answer to your question, you bet we
> felt tricked.  Even the course leaders, when they made
> the announcement, admitted it sounded like an
> "unpleasant" prospect.  Nothing like getting
> everyone
> to sign up and then telling them they're basically
> going to be on a starvation diet that few were prepared
> for, either physically or psychologically.  What would
> you call that, Peter--honesty?  Character building?
> Necessary "purification" on the road to E?  What
> bullshit.  And if the TMO had pulled that on you,
> I have no doubt that would be your reaction,
> and it would IMO be the correct one.
> 
> Sal

Sal, I'm not condemning you for your reaction; I'll withdraw my first's post 
implied condemnation! The first AOL in residence course they served us fruit 
for lunch only. At first I went, "What?" but then I just thought what the hell. 
It was no big deal. But my first impulse was the one you had. I've had very 
powerful experiences around SSRS, so I trust him. If the AOL people or SSRS are 
skimping on meals simply to make money, that'll be their bad karma, but I have 
a hard time seeing it that way. Did you have fruit for dinner too? That would 
be a little rough on many people. Probably good for them, or at least ,most of 
them, but not an informed choice as you note. How long was the course? 





> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 1:28 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:


An anesthesiologist told him of the sleep apnea, yes?  (If you don't
breathe for 10 seconds when sleeping, that is apnea.) I haven't read
much of what coldblueice has written, so I don't know all of what he
has described.  In any event, physical causes for his experiences
cannot be ruled out, including the witnessing experiences.  Sleep
apnea effects brain waves as well as having other physical effects, so
he shouldn't be a TM research subject. If I were him, I would have a
sleep study.


He already has.

As I said before, you would (of course) have to rule out any  
incidence of obstructive or central sleep apnea (or other possible  
etiologies) before making any further observations and conclusion.  
They'd have to clear certain Somnological criteria. This is  
especially the case when people are self-selecting in a "anyone who  
witnesses during sleep, please contact us" -type fashion.


The experiential difference between yoganidra--yogic sleep--and the  
"I'm almost awake, I'm almost asleep" limbo quality of sleep in sleep  
apnea is easy to differentiate. In one it's like torture, in the  
other you rest in the bliss-sheath and abide over a calm void. In one  
you wake up groggy or with a headache, in the other you're more  
energized than the deepest of "regular" sleep.


There are other anecdotal reports of TM "night technique"  
practitioners who also experienced the results of that practice as a  
"sleep disturbance".




I have been trying to track down some TM research subjects.  If anyone
knows of any, email me at ruthsimplic...@yahoo.com.  I did talk to one
person who was asked a bunch of questions and then rejected as a
subject.  Still trying to pin that one down. Anyone know an email for
coldblueice?

I have no evil plan, I am just searching for facts.



Keep in mind, it appears a lot of the people snagged for TM  
"research" are Purusha, MD and or hard-core TM/TMSP TB's. They will  
likely perceive ANYONE outside the TMO questioning them as suspect or  
tainted. Some of the most interesting TM studies were done on people  
who were outside the mainstream TB practitioners (e.g. people in  
Seattle who went to a TM center there).


Good luck!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[gullible fool]

 
No hopping? Just fake it. A former Purushnik once told me hopping was very much 
"encouraged" when he was on Purusha.
  
"Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only 
love." 
 
- Amma  

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Sal Sunshine  wrote:

From: Sal Sunshine 
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 1:36 PM

On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:00 PM, I am the eternal wrote:

> Depression?  An amazing amount.  But think about it.  This is self
> selection here.  Until the international stipends were cancelled you
> had pretty much huddled masses from all over the US, (mostly the
> Eurozone) and Canada.  People who find the motivation to give up their
> lives to come to FF and live in a trailer for months at a time trying
> to make a meager stipend last through the month are a special sort.
> There are some having a ball free spirits I admire for their innocence
> and stability then there are the many who appear to have not been
> dealt a full hand in life, the hangers on.  I don't know if the
> clearing I heard about last year has been implemented.  I doubt it.
> There was rumor amongst Dome spies (at least ones suspected to be
> such) that those people who hadn't hopped in years were going to have
> their stipends cancelled.  I feel for these guys.

How does that work?  Is there someone there with a ledger
keeping track of who hops and when, and who doesn't?

Sal




To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

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






  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bush and the Flying Shoes: The Real Story

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4iaKVU31N4&fmt=18
> (high quality)
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4iaKVU31N4&fmt=18
> (normal quality)

Duh. Same URL! High quality is the default. Click on
"Watch in normal quality" underneath the video window
if your computer chokes.

[FairfieldLife] Bush and the Flying Shoes: The Real Story

[authfriend]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4iaKVU31N4&fmt=18
(high quality)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4iaKVU31N4&fmt=18
(normal quality)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[authfriend]

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

> I would add my voice to Ruth's in urging you to 
> continue to post your impressions, because as I've
> said before I think you do it very well. There is
> a kind of Garrison Keillor or Will Rogers compassion
> in the way you say things that I find wonderful.

I agree.

 You
> may say some things that some here don't want said,
> but I have never perceived any meanness or "evil
> intent" in anything you have said.

What some of us find amusing is the salivating and
heavy breathing--maybe some even more interesting
physiological responses--occurring among the most,
shall we say, intense of the TM critics here at the
prospect of ***EVIDENCE*** that TM is harmful.

It's quite a spectacle.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 1:00 PM, I am the eternal wrote:


I'll think on starting a thread about my experiences and those of
others on IA.  I've already received some hostile reception here from
someone who suggested very strongly that I go with going into silence
on IA this time because of my postings.  As in shut up.



Not a good sign (that people want to silence you). What are they  
trying to hide? You've obviously hit a nerve.


I hope you'll have the courage to share your findings and observations!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:00 PM, I am the eternal wrote:

> Depression?  An amazing amount.  But think about it.  This is self
> selection here.  Until the international stipends were cancelled you
> had pretty much huddled masses from all over the US, (mostly the
> Eurozone) and Canada.  People who find the motivation to give up their
> lives to come to FF and live in a trailer for months at a time trying
> to make a meager stipend last through the month are a special sort.
> There are some having a ball free spirits I admire for their innocence
> and stability then there are the many who appear to have not been
> dealt a full hand in life, the hangers on.  I don't know if the
> clearing I heard about last year has been implemented.  I doubt it.
> There was rumor amongst Dome spies (at least ones suspected to be
> such) that those people who hadn't hopped in years were going to have
> their stipends cancelled.  I feel for these guys.

How does that work?  Is there someone there with a ledger
keeping track of who hops and when, and who doesn't?

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
> 
> > Curtis wrote:
> >>> I have a vague memory of him accusing that
> >>> person of being someone else?  I haven't
> >>> followed that closely enough to comment...
> >>>
> > Steve Perino DID NOT have sleep apnea.
> 
> 
> Actually he did.
> 
> And as predicted by Ruth and me: the TMO was cherry-picking "sleep  
> witnessers" and got a sleep apnea patient. In his case probably  
> central sleep apnea, which fits his subjective description to a tee.  
> Actual true sleep witnessing is quite pleasurable, the opposite of  
> his experience! Go figure.
> 
> Surprise, surprise: more phony TM research.
>
An anesthesiologist told him of the sleep apnea, yes?  (If you don't
breathe for 10 seconds when sleeping, that is apnea.) I haven't read
much of what coldblueice has written, so I don't know all of what he
has described.  In any event, physical causes for his experiences
cannot be ruled out, including the witnessing experiences.  Sleep
apnea effects brain waves as well as having other physical effects, so
he shouldn't be a TM research subject. If I were him, I would have a
sleep study. 

I have been trying to track down some TM research subjects.  If anyone
knows of any, email me at ruthsimplic...@yahoo.com.  I did talk to one
person who was asked a bunch of questions and then rejected as a
subject.  Still trying to pin that one down. Anyone know an email for
coldblueice?

I have no evil plan, I am just searching for facts. 

[FairfieldLife] Cows Major Source of Farm Power | Iowa NRCS

[Rick Archer]

This is the source of our milk in Fairfield:
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/news/successstories/Thicke.html 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "I am the eternal"
 wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:29 PM, ruthsimplicity
>  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "I am the eternal"
> >
> > Why don't you start a thread of your stories and experiences?  
> > Please?
> >
> > I have heard from my contacts in FF that many on the IAA seem 
> > to be very depressed, but I can't pry too much for specifics.
> 
> I'll think on starting a thread about my experiences and those of
> others on IA.  I've already received some hostile reception here
> from someone who suggested very strongly that I go with going into 
> silence on IA this time because of my postings.  As in shut up.

Get used to it if you choose to think for yourself.

I would add my voice to Ruth's in urging you to 
continue to post your impressions, because as I've
said before I think you do it very well. There is
a kind of Garrison Keillor or Will Rogers compassion
in the way you say things that I find wonderful. You
may say some things that some here don't want said,
but I have never perceived any meanness or "evil
intent" in anything you have said.

The very fact that you continue to GO on the IA courses
speaks volumes. They obviously have some value for you,
value that transcends all of the "small shit" you must
endure to receive it.

> I guess my recounting of the Israeli antics weren't entirely
> understood. This guy was blasting away the very excited emails 
> for hours a day while in silence. You develop a great deal of 
> pent up emotional energy on IA and the energy blowing off of 
> people is something you can feel as you pass them in the lobby 
> of the dome.

I can certainly identify with this, not from the IA course,
but from large TM residence courses I've been on or taught
in the past. I recently mentioned the old Asilomar Christmas
courses in California. Talk about "emotional energy blowing
off of people!" Marriages ended on those courses. And the
participants were just doing one extra round in the morning
and the evening, no siddhis.

> Depression? An amazing amount. But think about it. This is self
> selection here. Until the international stipends were cancelled 
> you had pretty much huddled masses from all over the US, (mostly 
> the Eurozone) and Canada. People who find the motivation to give 
> up their lives to come to FF and live in a trailer for months at 
> a time trying to make a meager stipend last through the month are 
> a special sort.

See? This is the compassion thang I was talking
about. This is an important point, and one that
you chose to include. That's not "evil intent,"
that's balance.

> There are some having a ball free spirits I admire for their 
> innocence and stability then there are the many who appear to 
> have not been dealt a full hand in life, the hangers on. I 
> don't know if the clearing I heard about last year has been 
> implemented. I doubt it. There was rumor amongst Dome spies 
> (at least ones suspected to be such) that those people who 
> hadn't hopped in years were going to have their stipends 
> cancelled. I feel for these guys.

So do I. I do not share their belief in the TM-
siddhis and their value, but hey!, they paid their
money and they learned just like everyone else. If
the siddhis are not working for them as expected, 
telling them to take a hike sounds a lot like 
removing subjects from a scientific study because 
they're not showing the results they're "supposed 
to."

> Mind you I only know about one dome. Word spreads around the 
> dome in waves that travels almost faster than the speed of sound.

Isn't that amazing? 

Anyway, from my perspective, please keep filling us in
on your perspective. Some of us appreciate hearing it.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer

[I am the eternal]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 4:44 AM, Richard M  wrote:
> It IS a huge seismic shift really. If true, (big "if" maybe) this is
> as big a shock to us geeks as is the collapse of the banks. Both
> represent the end of hubris: On the hand that the days of borrowing
> and boom will never end, and on the other that the computer wizards of
> Google can achieve near perfect "search" given a big enough server
> farm and a clever algorithm.
>

To try to give perspective to those who think of Google as just a
software company, let's try to put the scale of Google's server farms
into perspective.  Google's server farms in the US use more
electricity than all of the TVs in the US.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Quid pro quo, Hillary, Obama, and blogovich

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

> I don't think they can convict him of anything with
> regard to the Senate seat given what's been made
> public so far.

Apparently I'm wrong. The charge is that he "schemed
to deprive the people of Illinois of the honest
services of their governor." Another charge is
conspiracy to commit bribery. In neither case does
a bribe have to have been consummated for a crime
to have been committed.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[I am the eternal]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:29 PM, ruthsimplicity
 wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "I am the eternal"
>
> Why don't you start a thread of your stories and experiences?  Please?
>
> I have heard from my contacts in FF that many on the IAA seem to be
> very depressed, but I can't pry too much for specifics.
>
>

I'll think on starting a thread about my experiences and those of
others on IA.  I've already received some hostile reception here from
someone who suggested very strongly that I go with going into silence
on IA this time because of my postings.  As in shut up.

I guess my recounting of the Israeli antics weren't entirely
understood.  This guy was blasting away the very excited emails for
hours a day while in silence.  You develop a great deal of pent up
emotional energy on IA and the energy blowing off of people is
something you can feel as you pass them in the lobby of the dome.

Depression?  An amazing amount.  But think about it.  This is self
selection here.  Until the international stipends were cancelled you
had pretty much huddled masses from all over the US, (mostly the
Eurozone) and Canada.  People who find the motivation to give up their
lives to come to FF and live in a trailer for months at a time trying
to make a meager stipend last through the month are a special sort.
There are some having a ball free spirits I admire for their innocence
and stability then there are the many who appear to have not been
dealt a full hand in life, the hangers on.  I don't know if the
clearing I heard about last year has been implemented.  I doubt it.
There was rumor amongst Dome spies (at least ones suspected to be
such) that those people who hadn't hopped in years were going to have
their stipends cancelled.  I feel for these guys.

Mind you I only know about one dome.  Word spreads around the dome in
waves that travels almost faster than the speed of sound.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
>  wrote:
> >
> > As I go though the list of how I communicate with people here 
> > I can pretty much group them that way.  Those who have taken 
> > a personal shot in varying degrees of vitriol, and those who 
> > have not.  
> 
> What I have noticed, Curtis (and making this a 
> "generic" rap, not about anyone in particular), is 
> that the personal shots tend to happen immediately 
> after you have presented an idea that causes the 
> "personal shotters" some cognitive dissonance 
> because it conflicts with and challenges an idea 
> that they hold to be true.

You mean, like this?

"Curtis, do you realize how much of the 'TM
mindset' underlies what you are saying above?

"Both you and Stu are going on and on about
the 'burden of proof.' That might be relevant
to New Jim, who is making some silly claims
about 'proof' of reincarnation, but you are
extending it to anyone who happens to quietly
believe in reincarnation and doesn't really
give a rat's ass what you believe.

"We don't owe you 'proof.' We don't owe you
jack shit."

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
 wrote:

For example in this exchange I basically said you are
> lying and you are commenting on me having a double
> standard because I don't write this way to some
> others.  We are communicating in the same personally
> accusing style.  I would not call Barry and Vaj on
> something like this because they don't communicate
> with me that way ever.  I read your posts with this
> filter on, sort of a petty "gotcha" game.  There are
> only a few other writers who I communicate in such a
> petty way.  I'm not blaming you for how I am acting,
> I am trying to understand why I do it, and I think
> this is it.  I'm ready to own my part of what is
> going on.

I appreciate your taking the time to ponder this
and to take responsibility for it, but from my
perspective, I don't think you're owning all of
your part in it yet. Several points:

As far as I'm concerned, a person who aims to be
fair gets only partial credit if they respond to
unfairness only when it's directed at them.

But you're not even consistent along that line.
It's one thing for you to retaliate in kind in a
discussion you're having with me. (I very rarely 
give you a basis for retaliating except when
we're in the middle of a discussion and I think
you aren't playing fair with me.)

In this case, though--and in several others
recently--you jumped on me because you thought I
was being unfair *to others*.

Further, I object to your suggestion of moral
equivalency. What Vaj and, especially, Barry say
in their attacks on me and others is far, far
worse than anything I've ever said to them or to
anybody else, including to you.

I guess I don't understand how you can be so
sanguine and jolly about your friendship wih Barry
and Vaj when they're both so vicious and dishonest.
How can you form a genuine friendship with people
like that, even if they restrain themselves when
they're interacting with you? To me, that seems
grossly hypocritical.


Neither of them
> have ever taken a personal shot at me. We post to
> each other within a bubble of good will and I 
> trust it.

I'm not sure Barry's recent criticism of you for
your purportedly hewing to the "TM mindset" in the
discussion of reincarnation was all that full of
good will, and it seemed awfully personal to me. I
thought it was grossly unfair and off target when
I read it, and I'd have pointed that out if you
hadn't done so yourself.


> I'm sure there are other useful distinctions to make.
> And none of this is about you changing.  It is about
> the choices I am making with how I communicate with
> everyone here and how I want that to look for this
> New Year.

I respect that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
 wrote:
>
> As I go though the list of how I communicate with people here 
> I can pretty much group them that way.  Those who have taken 
> a personal shot in varying degrees of vitriol, and those who 
> have not.  

What I have noticed, Curtis (and making this a 
"generic" rap, not about anyone in particular), is 
that the personal shots tend to happen immediately 
after you have presented an idea that causes the 
"personal shotters" some cognitive dissonance 
because it conflicts with and challenges an idea 
that they hold to be true.

I think I know you well enough to know that most of
the time when you present such ideas, to you they
are Just Ideas. They're an interesting new way of
approaching a subject and looking at it. 

But it's as if a few people here react to them as if
the idea itself *caused them pain*. And in a sense it
did. Cognitive dissonance -- encountering an idea 
that, if true, renders one of your own ideas false
or at the very least not as true -- is perceived by 
some AS pain. 

I think the issue is that we don't perceive these 
ideas that way. To us they're Just Ideas. And after
all this time thinking about and analyzing our exper-
iences with meditation and various follies along the
spiritual path or just life path, the "out of the box"
ideas are Just Another Way Of Looking At Things, no
biggie.

When we think about one of these ideas -- say the 
implicit wrongness of the caste system, or the unden-
iable sexism of a tradition that wouldn't even allow 
women to be near it -- we DON'T tend to feel pain. No 
cognitive dissonance arises at all because we are years 
or decades away from justifying the caste system just 
because Maharishi did, or ignoring the sexism of the 
Shankaracharya tradition because we still identify 
with it and consider ourselves part of it.

But others don't have that distance on things, and when
they encounter ideas that to us are Just Ideas, they
perceive them as ATTACKS, because what they feel inside
when they hear these ideas is pain. We didn't cause the
pain; all we did is present an idea. But to them the
idea ITSELF causes pain, because it causes cognitive
dissonance. So in their mindes we are very definitely 
the "cause" of their pain, because we said the horrible, 
offensive, unforgivable thing that they consider heresy.

If our idea that the caste system is wrong has merit,
then Maharishi's defense of it his entire life may have
less merit, or be actually w...w...w...wrong.

If our idea that Guru Dev and other teachers within the
Shankaracharya tradition just might have been being less
than honest about their desire for the liberation of 
their fellow man by restricting their teachings to...uh...
their fellow MAN, with "no women allowed," then maybe
they weren't the perfect saints they've been portrayed
to be.

I suspect that contemplating either of these ideas doesn't
raise a single hair on your neck or cause you the least
amount of pain. They certainly don't cause me any dis-
comfort in the least. 

But these same ideas cause some people so MUCH pain that
their first impulse -- an impulse that they seemingly
cannot control -- is to lash out and aim a well-placed
personal shot across your bow.

On the whole, I think you've dealt with such cheap shots
better than I have, and with consistent grace and humor.
A great deal more grace and humor than the ones *taking*
the cheap shots have, that's fer damned sure.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> 
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:

> > Steve Perino DID NOT have sleep apnea.
> 
> Actually he did.

Not according to Steve Perino (aka coldbluice).

In April, Vaj asked him if he had ever been
diagnosed with sleep apnea. Here's what he said:

"About 1-1/2 yrs ago by a anathesiologist and a ER
nurse said i had 'sleep apnea'..when i went in the
hospital for a routine minor surgery..The doctors
could not figure out why i did not breath when i
was sleeping."

It's pretty clear from the way he phrases this
that he thought the "diagnosis" was absurd. But
Vaj wants us to believe otherwise:

> And as predicted by Ruth and me: the TMO was cherry-
> picking "sleep witnessers" and got a sleep apnea
> patient. In his case probably central sleep apnea,
> which fits his subjective description to a tee.

But in the very same post, just before he responds
to Vaj's question about sleep apnea, SP says:

-
The study i was involved in was in regards to
"witnessing during sleep"..i told the
researchers that i could from deep sleep control
"autonomic funtions".

Dr. Skip Alexander, PhD "miu"..first interviewed
me for that study-(witnessing deep sleep)..which
i proved conclusively that i was being honest.
Later (in Summer or 1988) i advised Dr. Skip
Alexander, PhD "miu"not use any of my research for
"tmo" federally funded grants.

The scientifically validated control of "autonomic
functions" that i demonstrated i.e.-- g.s.r/core
body temp. & heart rate & breath suspension were
done from deep sleep.

The study's original protocal-,i was to use a pre-
determined "signal"(as series of rapid eye
movements) to indicate to the researchers when i
as "witnessing deep sleep".

Then i suggested that i would signal from
'witnessing sleep" that i was to begin controlled
periods of "breath suspension" & lowered core body
temp & heart rate.

Later the study "evolved" into something completely
different..Dr. Steven La Berge, PhD of Stanford
Univ. (now the with Lucidity Instiute) wanted me to
do all sorts of "things" that the "tmo" did NOT
APPROVE of.. Interestingly, Dr La Berge said at
that time that of the thousands of magnetic sleep
records he examined mine was the "MOST UNIQUE!!"
-

As far as SP is concerned, whether it's true or
not, he was not only intentionally controlling his
breathing while in deep sleep, but was signaling
with eye movements that he was about to suspend
his breathing.

And this is the description that Vaj thinks fits
central sleep apnea "to a tee"??

In his recent post, Vaj goes even further:

"From our conversations, it wasn't he who was
so interested in the breath suspension, other
than to get some understanding of what was going
on. He was lead to believe it was related to his
state of consciousness. Sadly, that was not the
case--he was mislead. It turned out he wasn't in
some 'higher' state of consciousness, but one
suffering from a severe form of sleep apnea. Nor
was he someone who was yogically conscious during
deep sleep."

Again, this is completely contrary to what SP told
Vaj in their April conversation.

The point here isn't whether the TMO boggled or
fudged the research, nor is it whether SP actually
had sleep apnea.

It's that Vaj has attributed to SP things he never
said, when SP in fact (and on the record) said *to
the contrary*.

Maybe SP did have sleep apnea. But Vaj doesn't
*know* that, he's just guessing, despite claiming
a number of times that he did as if it were a
matter of established fact.

And again, SP himself clearly thinks otherwise. He
believes he was able to control his autonomic
functions, including by suspending his breathing,
in a deep sleep state, and believes he proved it
scientifically.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[curtisdeltablues]

> My point is that you let all kinds of crap, flat-out
> lying and gross unfairness, go by with Barry and Vaj
> because, as you told me recently, you have offlist
> contact with them and therefore know them better as
> people.
> 
> But I don't lie, and I do my best not to be unfair,
> and you jump on me when your idea of fairness doesn't
> happen to quite coincide with mine.
> 
> That's the double standard I was talking about.

I gave what you wrote some thought Judy.  I was thinking about how I
relate to different people here and why I would challenge you on what
I perceive to be a falsehood, but I don't approach some other writers
here with that filter on.

Barry and Vaj and many other people here never make personal comments
about me in that personal evaluation style that characterizes so many
of your posts. For example in this exchange I basically said you are
lying and you are commenting on me having a double standard because I
don't write this way to some others.  We are communicating in the same
personally accusing style.  I would not call Barry and Vaj on
something like this because they don't communicate with me that way
ever.  I read your posts with this filter on, sort of a petty "gotcha"
game.  There are only a few other writers who I communicate in such a
petty way.  I'm not blaming you for how I am acting, I am trying to
understand why I do it, and I think this is it.  I'm ready to own my
part of what is going on.

Even though I have respectful interesting discussions with you here, I
am never sure that your next response wont be a personal comment on my
character or just some negitive spin on who I am or how I present
myself here.  So you have not established personal trust in the way
some others have.  Barry and Vaj know that even when I disagree with
them, I will always make sure they understand that it is in the
context of liking them, so it stays very friendly.  Neither of them
have ever taken a personal shot at me. We post to each other within a
bubble of good will and I trust it. 

As I go though the list of how I communicate with people here I can
pretty much group them that way.  Those who have taken a personal shot
in varying degrees of vitriol, and those who have not.  And for anyone
who has, I tend to respond to what they write in a petty way as in
"gotcha."  And the cycle goes on and on.  With you we have plenty of
good exchanges that don't end this way, but when you break the
ceasefire, I feel a bit betrayed.  Perhaps you do too when I make such
a comment on you.  But I am always aware that the next post may be an
unflattering characterization of me and a dismissal of me personally.

I'm sure there are other useful distinctions to make.  And none of
this is about you changing.  It is about the choices I am making with
how I communicate with everyone here and how I want that to look for
this New Year.  



 




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> >  and you don't seem to have any problem with Vaj
> > > making up a story about coldbluice out of whole cloth.
> > 
> > I have a vague memory of him accusing that person of being
> > someone else?  I haven't followed that closely enough to
> > comment.
> 
> I've made at least a half-dozen posts on that, two of
> them containing quotes from the contradictory posts.
> How could you have missed all of them?
> 
> No, it has nothing to do with accusing coldbluice of
> being someone else. It has to do with Vaj having
> blatantly misrepresented what coldbluice had reported
> of his experiences, telling an entirely different
> story, as if from what coldbluice had said, when in
> fact he had said something virtually the opposite.
> 
> > > But if I use the word "tweak" rather than "shot" to
> > > describe one of my posts, that's dishonest and
> > > warrants a long scolding from you.
> > 
> > That got my attention because I read almost all your
> > posts not directed to Barry.
> 
> Except those directed at Vaj, apparently.
> 
>   I thought that you were being unfair by taunting
> > John, and then when he responded in defense, you
> > claimed he STARTED it.
> 
> Well, we never finished that discussion. You didn't
> respond to my last post in it. I think you way 
> exaggerated my "sin" in that instance.
> 
> My point is that you let all kinds of crap, flat-out
> lying and gross unfairness, go by with Barry and Vaj
> because, as you told me recently, you have offlist
> contact with them and therefore know them better as
> people.
> 
> But I don't lie, and I do my best not to be unfair,
> and you jump on me when your idea of fairness doesn't
> happen to quite coincide with mine.
> 
> That's the double standard I was talking about.
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Richard M
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:45 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer

 

It may not be widely publicised - but behind the scenes Google has
been waging a vicious and bloody war against "Black Hat SEO". This
term refers to those very clever and inventive Search Engine Optimizer
experts who are forever trying to trick Google so as to get their
sites to appear high in the "organic" listings. (Rick of course is
"White hat SEO"!). They are to search engines what spammers are to email.

If it's indeed true that Google are planning to plug the weaknesses in
the algorithm with human review, then this suggests that Google could
be raising the white flag and giving in, overwhelmed by the bad guys.
A great shame. (But then the evidence for this in the article seems a
bit weak?)

My understanding is that Google's very smart and well-paid Ph.D.'s are
always doing searches, seeing what comes up, and then tweaking the algorithm
if those results don't effectively fulfill the search queries. But there are
so many web sites and so many search terms that they can't possibly manually
manipulate a significant percentage of search results. Of course, if they
can fairly block a black hat technique, that may sweep many sites off the
SERPS (search engine results pages) in one fell swoop. And they have done
this many times over the years. That's why it's good to stick with white hat
techniques. Go for long-term results, unless you're working with a
throw-away domain.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:


Curtis wrote:

I have a vague memory of him accusing that
person of being someone else?  I haven't
followed that closely enough to comment...


Steve Perino DID NOT have sleep apnea.



Actually he did.

And as predicted by Ruth and me: the TMO was cherry-picking "sleep  
witnessers" and got a sleep apnea patient. In his case probably  
central sleep apnea, which fits his subjective description to a tee.  
Actual true sleep witnessing is quite pleasurable, the opposite of  
his experience! Go figure.


Surprise, surprise: more phony TM research.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Great Auto Bailout Circus

[Nelson]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
 wrote:
>
> Nelson wrote:
> > I had a '67 that was one of the best...
> >
> Point/Counterpoint--Retro Cars:
> http://www.carlustblog.com/
>
  Nice site, thanks.
  There weren't any cars made for three years during the war and, I
remember the novelty of seeing the new '46 Fords.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitive Dissonance As A Good Thing

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  
wrote:

> > If Barry wants to murder my unicorn, fine. 
> 
> Like this. What a drama queen thing to say.
> 
> What could possibly BE more silly and childish
> and petulant? "Murder your unicorn" indeed.
> 
> Every so often you break out of this routine
> and post something real, but it is so seldom
> that it's not really worth wading through your
> "normal" posts to try to find one of these
> "abnormal" (that is, indicating that you still
> have some semblance of humanity left) posts.
> 
> > It doesn't diminish my experience if that is what he
> > wants. What DOES he want? 
> 
> Actually, what he wanted by pointing out the
> sexist nature of the puja you like so much was
> to see if you were *capable* of discussing a
> subject that challenges your assumptions and
> puts you into a state of cognitive dissonance,
> and discuss that subject without freaking out.
> 
> Your responses indicate that you are NOT capable
> of doing this. You can't discuss it PERIOD.
> The only thing you can do is characterize some-
> one presenting a perfectly legitimate view of
> the puja as "murdering your unicorn."

Barry. It doesn't challenge her assumptions or
put her in a state of cognitive dissonance. It's
not even worthy of discussion, it's such an
incredibly dumb idea, such a gigantic, obtuse,
obvious category error. That's what she's pointing
out with her "murder my unicorn" phrase.

To spell it out for you: Your "perfectly
legitimate view of the puja" sees the puja as if
it were a horse and evaluates it according to the
criteria raunchy would apply to it if she also
saw it as a horse.

But she--and many other TM teachers, including
quite a few who no longer teach, and even some
who are now sharp critics of TM/MMY/the TMO--
don't see it as a horse, let alone a horse that
doesn't measure up to the criteria suitable for
judging a horse's quality.

They see and experience it, to use Raunchy's
metaphor, as a unicorn, a magical creature that
lives on the plane of the heart, not that of the
mind.

To judge this creature by horse criteria is
ridiculous. As she says, it doesn't diminish her
experience of the puja as a unicorn. You foolishly
hoped it would, and you were wrong.
 
Maybe you never experienced the puja as a unicorn.
Or maybe you did and have forgotten, or maybe you
haven't forgotten but have to pretend otherwise
in order to take your shot at raunchy.

The whole ploy is as transparent as glass, and
raunchy has seen through it. And you're pissed
because now *you* have to deal with cognitive
dissonance.

[moved from the top]

> What he is poking fun AT is a person who takes
> herself so seriously that she cannot TELL when
> someone is making fun of that seriousness and
> setting her up to embarrass herself with an
> over-the-top, out-of-control tantrum of a 
> reply.

Nope, wrong again...

 He is poking fun of someone who, like
> someone else on this forum, is *compelled* to
> react as expected to such a setup. The two of
> you are like wind-up toys -- press the right
> button, and you react as expected, every time.
> And neither of you ever catches on.

In the first place, we both ignore a lot of the
crap that's directed at us. All you register is
the times when we don't.

In the second place, when we don't ignore the
crap, it's not because we don't "catch on," it's
because we have a point to make about the *nature*
of the crap.

In this case, the point is that when men who aren't
sexist/misogynistic feel the need to make fun of a
woman, *they don't do so by making fun of her AS a
woman*. It doesn't even occur to them. And even if
it did, they'd realize it would make them *look*
sexist/misogynistic, not to mention unoriginal,
trite, banal.

There are umpty-zillion *creative* ways to make
fun of somebody. Telling a woman to take out the
garbage ain't one of them.

When we make this point, you and Vaj and Peter
*have* to portray it as "out of control" and "over
the top," because somewhere in the dim recesses of
your repressed psyches, you recognize the point as
painfully, embarrassingly valid.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:39 AM, Peter wrote:

> Sal, you are also, "I am the eternal"? So, you got in your car and  
> left because you felt, what, tricked or something? This was an Art  
> of Living course, right? You say "AOE" but I'm assumming that's a  
> typo, correct?

Oh, yeah, and in answer to your question, you bet we
felt tricked.  Even the course leaders, when they made
the announcement, admitted it sounded like an
"unpleasant" prospect.  Nothing like getting everyone
to sign up and then telling them they're basically
going to be on a starvation diet that few were prepared
for, either physically or psychologically.  What would
you call that, Peter--honesty?  Character building?
Necessary "purification" on the road to E?  What
bullshit.  And if the TMO had pulled that on you,
I have no doubt that would be your reaction,
and it would IMO be the correct one.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?

[Richard J. Williams]

Curtis wrote:
> > I have a vague memory of him accusing that 
> > person of being someone else?  I haven't 
> > followed that closely enough to comment...
> >
Steve Perino DID NOT have sleep apnea.

Judy wrote:
> That's the double standard I was talking about.
>
The double standard of Vaj, Barry, and Curtis?

"During TM practice he displayed exceptionally high 
ampli-tude alpha spindles across all EEG channels 
and periods of respiratory suspension (Kesterson, 
1985)."

Source:

Psychological Content of "Consciousness" During 
Sleep in a TM Practitioner:
Jayne Gackenbach and William Moorecraft
http://tinyurl.com/6mtkjn

'Conscious Mind, Sleeping Brain'
by J. Gackenbach
Springer, 1988
http://tinyurl.com/59dnne

"Kesterson and Clinch report that the reduction 
in respiration during the breath slowing is not 
due to a reduction in metabolic rate, as was 
previously thought, 2 but rather due to a 
significant drop in the respiratory exchange 
ratio (the ratio of the amount of carbon 
dioxide produced by the body to the amount of 
oxygen consumed)."

Read more:

'The Issue: Isn't transcendental consciousness 
just a metaphysical concept?'
http://tinyurl.com/6pl4xv

'The Physical and Psychological Effects of Meditation'
http://tinyurl.com/5ndtzv

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 8:39 AM, Peter wrote:

> On Dec 14, 2008, at 6:42 PM, I am the eternal
>> wrote:

> On one AOE course I took,
> SSRS made everyone eat fruit the whole time,
>> while he
> got delicious Indian meals.  It might not have
>> been so
> bad if several of us hadn't been in the
>> house
> right next to his.

 You've got to be kidding me. You go to a
>> course with SSRS and he
 has you eating fruit and you resent him because
>> he's not doing the
 same?
>>
>> Yep.  Thank goodness for cars.
>>
 You don't seem to get it. Your screen name
>> needs to be changed.
>>
>> I definitely don't get it, it was dishonest and seemed
>> more like
>> a way to save $$ than anything else.  What if someone had
>> had
>> a medical condition and their system couldn't handle
>> that much fruit?  It was dishonest because he didn't
>> tell us
>> before we signed up.  It just seemed like typical TMO
>> "Gotcha!"
>> nonsense.  And my screen name, in case you
>> were wondering, is meant ironically.
>>
>> Sal
>
> Sal, you are also, "I am the eternal"? So, you got in your car  
> and left because you felt, what, tricked or something? This was  
> an Art of Living course, right? You say "AOE" but I'm assumming  
> that's a typo, correct?

No, Peter, I'm not "I am the eternal"--I was responding to
him.  I didn't leave, we simply made trips into town to get
some real food.  And yes, it was an Art of Living course.

Apart from that, it was a good course and I enjoyed it.
But as I've written here before, on the  third
course I took, the course leaders pulled  fast ones
too, and I dropped out after that.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Great Auto Bailout Circus

[Richard J. Williams]

Nelson wrote:
> I had a '67 that was one of the best...
>
Point/Counterpoint--Retro Cars:
http://www.carlustblog.com/

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Peter]

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Sal Sunshine  wrote:

> From: Sal Sunshine 
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 9:34 AM
> On Dec 14, 2008, at 11:54 PM, Peter wrote:
> 
> >>> On Dec 14, 2008, at 6:42 PM, I am the eternal
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On one AOE course I took,
> >>> SSRS made everyone eat fruit the whole time,
> while he
> >>> got delicious Indian meals.  It might not have
> been so
> >>> bad if several of us hadn't been in the
> house
> >>> right next to his.
> >>
> >> You've got to be kidding me. You go to a
> course with SSRS and he  
> >> has you eating fruit and you resent him because
> he's not doing the  
> >> same?
> 
> Yep.  Thank goodness for cars.
> 
> >> You don't seem to get it. Your screen name
> needs to be changed.
> 
> I definitely don't get it, it was dishonest and seemed
> more like
> a way to save $$ than anything else.  What if someone had
> had
> a medical condition and their system couldn't handle
> that much fruit?  It was dishonest because he didn't
> tell us
> before we signed up.  It just seemed like typical TMO
> "Gotcha!"
> nonsense.  And my screen name, in case you
> were wondering, is meant ironically.
> 
> Sal

Sal, you are also, "I am the eternal"? So, you got in your car and left because 
you felt, what, tricked or something? This was an Art of Living course, right? 
You say "AOE" but I'm assumming that's a typo, correct?




> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 6:57 AM, Vaj wrote:


Think yourself lucky PornoSal.

Ravi Shankar may have tried to make you eat fruit, while you dined  
out in restaurants in Geneva, but I heard from a follower of hers,  
that on Ammaji's Ashram they were made to jump in and shovel shit  
out of the Ashram cesspool. When they showed slight dislike for  
it, Ammaji jumped in the shitpool and started shoveling the shit  
herself, and shouting to them how blissful it was to shovel shit  
---  for a whole 2 minutes   while they were expected to  
shovel that human feces for hours on end.
The follower told me this as if it showed how great she was to  
jump in the shit (for 2 minutes), and how grateful he was to be  
able to shovel shit for her for 2 hours. Lol !


True story.

I'm really glad to have been a follower of Maharishi.



Yeah, you get to metaphorically shovel shit.


Just what I was thinking...and for a heck of a lot longer
than a couple of hours.

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Sal Sunshine]

On Dec 14, 2008, at 11:54 PM, Peter wrote:

>>> On Dec 14, 2008, at 6:42 PM, I am the eternal wrote:
>>
>>> On one AOE course I took,
>>> SSRS made everyone eat fruit the whole time, while he
>>> got delicious Indian meals.  It might not have been so
>>> bad if several of us hadn't been in the house
>>> right next to his.
>>
>> You've got to be kidding me. You go to a course with SSRS and he  
>> has you eating fruit and you resent him because he's not doing the  
>> same?

Yep.  Thank goodness for cars.

>> You don't seem to get it. Your screen name needs to be changed.

I definitely don't get it, it was dishonest and seemed more like
a way to save $$ than anything else.  What if someone had had
a medical condition and their system couldn't handle
that much fruit?  It was dishonest because he didn't tell us
before we signed up.  It just seemed like typical TMO "Gotcha!"
nonsense.  And my screen name, in case you
were wondering, is meant ironically.

Sal

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mothers

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> 
> http://www.funnybytes.net/powerpointfiles/Mothers.pps

Beautiful. I just showed it to my 4 year old granddaughter and she
loved it. Thank you so much.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters From an Enlightened Man

[Vaj]

On Dec 15, 2008, at 12:01 AM, off_world_beings wrote:


Think yourself lucky PornoSal.

Ravi Shankar may have tried to make you eat fruit, while you dined  
out in restaurants in Geneva, but I heard from a follower of hers,  
that on Ammaji's Ashram they were made to jump in and shovel shit  
out of the Ashram cesspool. When they showed slight dislike for it,  
Ammaji jumped in the shitpool and started shoveling the shit  
herself, and shouting to them how blissful it was to shovel shit  
---  for a whole 2 minutes   while they were expected to shovel  
that human feces for hours on end.
The follower told me this as if it showed how great she was to jump  
in the shit (for 2 minutes), and how grateful he was to be able to  
shovel shit for her for 2 hours. Lol !


True story.

I'm really glad to have been a follower of Maharishi.



Yeah, you get to metaphorically shovel shit.

[FairfieldLife] Mothers

[do.rflex]

http://www.funnybytes.net/powerpointfiles/Mothers.pps

[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M"  wrote:
>
> It's all going tits up isn't it? The banks, then the car industry, and
> now Google? Interesting times!

Big brother and the New World Order. What a pair.

[FairfieldLife] Re: QM explanation of YF?

[Hugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "I am the eternal" 
 wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:03 AM, cardemaister 
 wrote:
> >
> > If I got it right, according to recent research, about 95% of
> > the mass of baryons consists of the "movement" of quarks.
> >
> > I think the first part of YF-suutra somehow "eliminates" or
> > "neutralizes" that mass, and the remaining 5% is "neutralized"
> > by the second part of YF-suutra.
> >
> > Naah, just kidding! :D
> >
> 
> Actually, the explanation I heard years ago is simpler.  Remember 
that
> in thermodynamics PV=nRT.  Pressure is a function of the temperature
> of a gas because the gas is exhibiting Brownian motion:  following a
> random walk/random collision trajectory at the molecular level as a
> function of heat energy   All you need is to have is the molecules 
in
> a vibrating solid (solids are locked into place so they don't have 
the
> freedom that gas molecules do) all decide to go in the same 
direction
> at once: voila, the body is moving upward against the force of
> gravity.  When I fly I don't so much feel gravity cut out as much as
> my body being pushed upwards.

Which would work fine if gravity was a force but it's not.
According to Einstein it's a bend in the fabric of space and
time. Everything follows a straight line through spacetime
it's just that near large masses it *appears* otherwise. We
aren't held to the ground by anything we are falling towards 
the centre of a gravity well caused by the Earths mass.

This idea has been tested to be true, during solar eclipses you
can see stars that are behind the sun as being at one side due
to the light curving round the dent the sun makes in spacetime.

According to John Hagelin YF is due to the mind operating at
a level beyond matter and space and influencing the probability 
of atoms at the macro scale of everyday life to behave in a
more predictably Newtonian fashion. It's a nice idea, as long
as consciousness really is the unified field and if, during TM, 
we really were experiencing the ground state of the universe.
 
I think that if events really were that pliable we'd be able to 
do all sorts of amazing things but we seem confined to hopping
about on our backsides which isn't going to convince anyone
of anything. Except that high levels of delusion continue
to exist in the TMO. 

[FairfieldLife] Hey Off!

[cardemaister]

Hope Mad Off is not related to you... :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_L._Madoff

[FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitive Dissonance As A Good Thing

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
> >
> > Barry knows damn well I'm returning fire on Vaj but conveniently
> > snipped Vaj's sexist attack on me. Not that it will make any
> > difference in your dismissive attitude toward me, Peter, but 
> > for the sake of fairness I'll restore the snips in context. 
> 
> Hint, Raunchy: NO ONE CARES about the "context!"
> The "context" is you waiting for something that
> gives you an "excuse" to act like a child.

Context matters. The talking heads on TV always spin stories out of
context as a dissembling tactic to push an agenda, propagandize, and
tell LIES. I care if you or anyone else LIES and no one calls them
out. Whether someone cares that I care about LIARS, well, I don't
care. I was setting the record straight with Peter, not you. LIARS
didn't get ATTENTION as children. It likely explains why you
habitually "push buttons" manipulating people and the truth to edify
your ego and overblown opinion of yourself to get ATTENTION. Button
pushers crave ATTENTION even if it's negative attention, it's better
than being IGNORED, which you often tell people to do to anyone you
don't like. ATTENTION is a need you project on anyone who challenges
you but are never willing to acknowledge how disparately need it. The
ATTENTION you crave is a deep hole no one will ever fill. Pitiful.
 
> Why we are "dismissive" of you is that you are 
> so EASY. Not in the sense of being easy sexually 
> (as far as I know), but in the sense of being so 
> attached to your self and your image of it that 
> you feel that you *have* to respond to Vaj poking 
> a little fun at you. 
> 
> What he is poking fun AT is a person who takes
> herself so seriously that she cannot TELL when
> someone is making fun of that seriousness and
> setting her up to embarrass herself with an
> over-the-top, out-of-control tantrum of a 
> reply. He is poking fun of someone who, like
> someone else on this forum, is *compelled* to
> react as expected to such a setup. The two of
> you are like wind-up toys -- press the right
> button, and you react as expected, every time.
> And neither of you ever catches on.
> 
> > So far as matters of the heart and TM is concerned, it's a 
> > magical PROCESS of purification I thoroughly enjoy. I don't 
> > question the process and don't make a big deal out of it. 
> 
> You also don't seem to care whether it actually 
> WORKS or not. That was the point of my reply. 
> You actually seem to believe that TM and its 
> "magic" is "purifying your heart," but almost 
> without exception, everyone else on this forum 
> perceives you as a screechy, monotopical loon 
> with zero self control and the "heart" of a 
> stone. It's as if you *seek* someone poking 
> minor fun at you *so that* you can turn it 
> into a major incident.
> 
> > If Barry wants to murder my unicorn, fine. 
> 
> Like this. What a drama queen thing to say.
> 
> What could possibly BE more silly and childish
> and petulant? "Murder your unicorn" indeed.
> 
> Every so often you break out of this routine
> and post something real, but it is so seldom
> that it's not really worth wading through your
> "normal" posts to try to find one of these
> "abnormal" (that is, indicating that you still
> have some semblance of humanity left) posts.
> 
> > It doesn't diminish my experience if that is what he
> > wants. What DOES he want? 
> 
> Actually, what he wanted by pointing out the
> sexist nature of the puja you like so much was
> to see if you were *capable* of discussing a
> subject that challenges your assumptions and
> puts you into a state of cognitive dissonance,
> and discuss that subject without freaking out.
> 
> Your responses indicate that you are NOT capable
> of doing this. You can't discuss it PERIOD.
> The only thing you can do is characterize some-
> one presenting a perfectly legitimate view of
> the puja as "murdering your unicorn."
> 
> Another hint: That doesn't make you strong or a 
> laudable feminist heroine; it only makes you 
> boring and predictable. Back you go into the 
> Not Worth Bothering With group.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer

[Richard M]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com]
> > On Behalf Of shempmcgurk
> > Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:11 PM
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Question for Rick Archer
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 2) the next SEVEN results, however, are all commercial sites that 
> are 
> > trying to sell you term insurance; sites such as statefarm.com, 
> > term4sale.com, quickquote.com, etc. It's only until we get to the 
> 9th 
> > entry (the moneyalert.com website) is there another "information" 
> > article about term insurance that is not trying to sell me 
> something.
> > 
> > Question: are those seven results I refer to above coming up at or 
> near 
> > the top of the results because those companies are paying Google to 
> > favor them? In other words, not only would I as, say, a life 
> insurance 
> > company who is interested in selling term insurance pay google for 
> a 
> > sponsored ad to the right or in the shaded yellow area but I could 
> also 
> > pay them to prioritize my site as a result that would come out at 
> the 
> > beginning of the list as the seven I point out above? Is this what 
> I 
> > am seeing?
> > 
> > No one is paying Google to be listed in the free or "organic" 
> results. Some
> > have wondered whether Google might favor sites that also buy 
> advertizing,
> > but that correlation has never been proven. The sites which come up 
> highest
> > in the free listings do so because Google's algorithm detects that 
> those
> > sites are most closely related to the search term. That 
> relationship is
> > determined by both "on-page" criteria - the site content and the 
> way in
> > which site pages have been optimized for various keywords - 
> and "off-site"
> > criteria, namely, link popularity. The latter is especially 
> influenced by
> > keyword-rich links from respected, well-established sites. There's 
> nothing
> > wrong with commercial sites ranking well in the organic listings, 
> since very
> > often, they offer what people are looking for.
> >
> 
> 
> Thanks to both Richard M. and Rick for their answers.  I understand 
> it a lot better as a result.
> 
> Although I'm not 100% convinced that Google isn't doing something 
> with the "organic" listings.  There always seems to be a set of 
> specific sites that come up on the first page and they all seem 
> commercial or ones that Google knows you want to see first (e.g. 
> Wikipedia and/or imdb.com) and then ones that are totally useless but 
> transparently commercial such as linkedin.com and manta.com.  These 
> two sites always seem to come up when I'm looking up someone's name 
> but they are useless sites -- at least to me -- and I can't imagine 
> anyone else using them.  And that's why I assume that Google is being 
> paid to list these kinds of companies first.
> 
> It's a pain because I always have to waste my time on the first page 
> and then get to the next one.
> 
> Another thing I've noticed: it used to be that when I did a search on 
> my own name on Google that about half of the results were Google 
> groups postings.  And then all of a sudden -- about 2 years ago -- 
> that was cleaned up overnight.  So they definitely were playing with 
> the algorithm.
>

I was just about to reply "No really Shemp - you SHOULD be 100%
convinced that Google isn't doing something with the "organic"
listings" when a bit of synchronicity kicked in and I got a link to
this article today:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/12/googlewashing_revisited/

"Google this week admitted that its staff will pick and choose what
appears in its search results. It's a historic statement - and nobody
has yet grasped its significance."

It IS a huge seismic shift really. If true, (big "if" maybe) this is
as big a shock to us geeks as is the collapse of the banks. Both
represent the end of hubris: On the hand that the days of borrowing
and boom will never end, and on the other that the computer wizards of
Google can achieve near perfect "search" given a big enough server
farm and a clever algorithm. 

"If I can operate Google, I can find anything... Google, combined with
Wi-Fi, is a little bit like God. God is wireless, God is everywhere
and God sees and knows everything. Throughout history, people
connected to God without wires. Now, for many questions in the world,
you ask Google, and increasingly, you can do it without wires, too." 
(NYT 2003)

It may not be widely publicised - but behind the scenes Google has
been waging a vicious and bloody war against "Black Hat SEO". This
term refers to those very clever and inventive Search Engine Optimizer
experts who are forever trying to trick Google so as to get their
sites to appear high in the "organic" listings. (Rick of course is
"White hat SEO"!). They are to search engines what spammers are to email.

If

[FairfieldLife] Re: Cognitive Dissonance As A Good Thing

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Barry knows damn well I'm returning fire on Vaj but conveniently
> snipped Vaj's sexist attack on me. Not that it will make any
> difference in your dismissive attitude toward me, Peter, but 
> for the sake of fairness I'll restore the snips in context. 

Hint, Raunchy: NO ONE CARES about the "context!"
The "context" is you waiting for something that
gives you an "excuse" to act like a child.

Why we are "dismissive" of you is that you are 
so EASY. Not in the sense of being easy sexually 
(as far as I know), but in the sense of being so 
attached to your self and your image of it that 
you feel that you *have* to respond to Vaj poking 
a little fun at you. 

What he is poking fun AT is a person who takes
herself so seriously that she cannot TELL when
someone is making fun of that seriousness and
setting her up to embarrass herself with an
over-the-top, out-of-control tantrum of a 
reply. He is poking fun of someone who, like
someone else on this forum, is *compelled* to
react as expected to such a setup. The two of
you are like wind-up toys -- press the right
button, and you react as expected, every time.
And neither of you ever catches on.

> So far as matters of the heart and TM is concerned, it's a 
> magical PROCESS of purification I thoroughly enjoy. I don't 
> question the process and don't make a big deal out of it. 

You also don't seem to care whether it actually 
WORKS or not. That was the point of my reply. 
You actually seem to believe that TM and its 
"magic" is "purifying your heart," but almost 
without exception, everyone else on this forum 
perceives you as a screechy, monotopical loon 
with zero self control and the "heart" of a 
stone. It's as if you *seek* someone poking 
minor fun at you *so that* you can turn it 
into a major incident.

> If Barry wants to murder my unicorn, fine. 

Like this. What a drama queen thing to say.

What could possibly BE more silly and childish
and petulant? "Murder your unicorn" indeed.

Every so often you break out of this routine
and post something real, but it is so seldom
that it's not really worth wading through your
"normal" posts to try to find one of these
"abnormal" (that is, indicating that you still
have some semblance of humanity left) posts.

> It doesn't diminish my experience if that is what he
> wants. What DOES he want? 

Actually, what he wanted by pointing out the
sexist nature of the puja you like so much was
to see if you were *capable* of discussing a
subject that challenges your assumptions and
puts you into a state of cognitive dissonance,
and discuss that subject without freaking out.

Your responses indicate that you are NOT capable
of doing this. You can't discuss it PERIOD.
The only thing you can do is characterize some-
one presenting a perfectly legitimate view of
the puja as "murdering your unicorn."

Another hint: That doesn't make you strong or a 
laudable feminist heroine; it only makes you 
boring and predictable. Back you go into the 
Not Worth Bothering With group.